Lunar National Aeronautics and Exploration Space Administration www.nasa.gov Constellation Systems Division
Introduction The Constellation Program was formed to achieve the objectives of maintaining American presence in low Earth orbit, returning to the Moon for purposes of establishing an outpost, and exploring Mars and beyond in the first half of the 21st century. Early emphasis within the Constellation Program has focused on developing Orion and Ares I, the systems required to fly humans into Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and to the International Space Station. At the same time, elements of the program have been engaged in understanding how those elements, combined with additional hardware can be used to extend human presence out of LEO, initially to the Moon. 2
Lunar Exploration NASA has performed many studies on extending human presence past low Earth orbit The Vision for Space Exploration defined by President Bush in 2004, followed by subsequent law to implement the plan, established the framework for current activity NASA has developed a transportation architecture capable of meeting ISS needs and enabling human spaceflight to the moon and beyond (the Constellation Program) The Lunar Surface Systems office was established inside the Constellation Program to define options and requirements for human activities on the moon and to ensure transportation capabilities are adequate for human lunar activities.
Constellation Program Ares V - Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle Earth Departure Stage Orion - Crew Exploration Vehicle Lunar Lander Ares I - Crew Launch Vehicle 4
Lunar Exploration Background Since the initial Vision for Space Exploration, NASA has spent considerable time considering architectures to meet the goals Original ESAS study focused on the basic transportation system architecture Global Exploration Strategy (GES) activity (in 2006) with 13 other countries began the process of identifying objectives NASA has performed multiple rounds of architecture work to develop concepts and approaches for establishing a lunar capability
LAT-1 summary The first Lunar Architecture Team (LAT-1) used the GES objectives and the ESAS results to start the process of identifying components to a lunar strategy An initial emphasis on an Outpost was recommended because it met a broad variety of objectives for future Mars exploration as well as facilitating a wide variety of science objectives on the moon. A polar location was recommended because of it s low delta-v requirements, potential science interest, and expected availability of sunlight for solar power 6
LAT-2 summary The second Lunar Architecture Team (LAT-2) considered a broader range of objectives and concepts and defined more complete mission sequences Clearly identified the need for a cargo lander Increased emphasis on mobility on the lunar surface as critical to meeting many science and Mars forward objectives Began considering come Operational concerns like cargo unloading, crew EVA, power infrastructure, and communications with Earth
Pre-LCCR architecture work Following LAT-2, Constellation focused on increasing the fidelity of the lunar transportation concepts (Ares V & Altair) while keeping the full suite of lunar objectives in mind Considered ramifications of performance variations across the transportation architecture Reviewed a specific surface architecture approach in more detail to understand impact on transportation system Resulted in first major Lunar milestone, the Lunar Capabilities Concept Review (LCCR) in June 2008
Lunar Capabilities Concept Review Established Lunar Transportation Architecture Point of Departure: Provides crew & cargo delivery to & from the moon Provides capacity and capabilities consistent with candidate surface architectures Provides sufficient performance margins Remains within programmatic constraints Results in acceptable levels of risk Establish Lunar Surface Architectures Strategies which: Satisfy NASA NGO s to acceptable degree within acceptable schedule Are consistent with capacity and capabilities of the transportation systems Include set of options for various prioritizations of cost, schedule & risk 9
LCCR surface work For LCCR, three specific surface scenarios were considered: Rapid development of full outpost Deliver as much outpost capability as soon as transportation system permits Full-up outpost based on the recommendations from LAT-2. Substantial robustness through element duplication Initial Mobility Emphasis Temper outpost build-up based on affordability with initial emphasis on mobility capabilities Final outpost has less volume and limited eclipse operating capability Robustness achieved through functional reallocation Assumed water scavenging Initial Habitation Emphasis Temper outpost build-up based on affordability with initial emphasis on core habitation & exploration capabilities Final outpost has less volume and limited eclipse operating capability Robustness achieved through functional reallocation Assumed water scavenging 10
Lunar Surface Scenarios Families Scenario Description 1 Full Outpost Assembly from LCCR (Trade Set 1) 2 Mobility oriented Outpost from LCCR (Trade Set 2) 3 Habitation oriented Outpost from LCCR (Trade Set 3) 4 Rebuild of LCCR scenarios increasing crew flights to at least 2 per year 5 Nuclear power based scenarios Use a fission reactor as the primary power source 6 Power beaming scenarios Consider ways to beam power from orbit or surface to systems 7 Recyclable lander Scenarios that make massive reuse of lander components to build up the Outpost and surface infrastructure 8 Extreme mobility Scenarios that deploy Small Pressurized Rovers early and use them as primary habitation 10 Refuelable lander Scenarios that support a lander designed for multiple flights to and from LLO 11 Mars Centric Scenarios that optimize Mars exploration ties 12 Combination of the best elements of Scenarios 4, 5, and 8 13 Sensitivity analysis with varying cargo lander payload capacities
Measuring the architecture Once a scenario is created, it s important to measure how well that scenario meets the various objectives that define our goals for lunar exploration Typically, a scenario meets multiple objectives, over time, to differing extents and possibly in multiple ways NASA has defined Figures of Merit (FOMs) for the objectives and developed approaches for measuring the FOMs for a given scenario
Example Objective Satisfaction Evaluation Output As part of the analysis of each scenario, an evaluation of Objective Benefit Indicators is performed Scarce resources are allocated with respect to Objective priority Levels of Objective satisfaction are presented by Theme and by priority through distinct phases of the campaign Page 13
Sample assessment of some FOMS for a specific lunar scenario - Crewed Mission - Cargo Mission Objective 100% Satisfied Mission Crew Duration Campaign Extensibility & Experience Objective Satisfaction 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 7 7 14 14 14 30 60 85 90 180 180 180 180 180 Objective 50% Satisfied Objective 0% Satisfied Knowledge will continue to accrue after nominal objective is satisfied Key Elements Lab ISRU Ops Repair EVA Mobility Habitat Health Power Demonstrate curation and contamination control Demonstrate In-Situ Science Capabilities Understand the impact of pres. and O2 conc. on health Understand the effects of the space env. on crew health Demonstrate long-term remote health care Provide a safe and enduring habitat Demonstrate assembly of habitat elements Demonstrate MMOD protection Demonstrate dust mitigation techniques Demonstrate fire detection and suppression Demo/test radiation shielding Demonstrate closed loop life support systems Demo closed laundry/hygiene Demo thermal protection from night/day extremes Demo a long-distance, pressurized mobility capability Demo mobility for unloading and movement of elements Demo long-distance surface navigation Demo surface communications capability Demo a high performance EVA suit Demo sustained EVA schedules Demo long-distance EVA Navigation Demonstrate suit durability/repair activities Demo high use airlock or suitlock Demo robots which supplement astronaut's activities Understand MTBF of equipment Test equipment repair techniques Demo commonality and scavenging of spares Demo remote training systems Demo teleoperations capabilities Learn how to best perform basic working tasks Demo production of ISRU Consumables Demo production of ISRU Propellant Demo ISRU excavation processes Demonstrate Solar Power System Demonstrate Nuclear Power System Cryo Fluid Storage and Distribution Page 14
Common Themes The results of the architecture work to date suggest that human lunar activities should start with a focus on: Pervasive Mobility; the ability to explore an extended range (up to hundreds of kilometers) around landing sites Solar power with sufficient energy storage to keep assets alive between human visits Habitation to support 14 30 day stays; Emphasis on understanding the lunar environment and it s applicability to human exploration objectives Developing & testing science protocols Testing planetary protection approaches Improving reliability and functionality of EVA & life support systems Testing systematic approaches for resolving complex problems such as dust mitigation and radiation protection Providing opportunity for global cooperation and integration of capabilities from multiple partners Providing these capabilities may be facilitated by a permanent infrastructure, but the architecture does NOT require one
Multiple Options In the course of creating multiple lunar architectures, NASA has identified many, many different approaches towards starting and sustaining Lunar exploration All our scenario work is based on the belief that we (NASA) must do more than put boot prints on the moon to meet our future exploration goals and to satisfy both US and partner objectives However, many options allow for a pay as you go approach, building up lunar capability as funding becomes available or as partners are ready to engage Within the context of the transportation system capabilities being considered, as little as one cargo mission can deliver a very robust Lunar exploration capability that both advances key science interests and satisfies key development objectives for future human exploration Existing technology activities and field exercise work within the agency are already demonstrating ways to significantly reduce the cost and risk associated with enabling human activities beyond LEO. Guiding these investments with realistic goals and mission architectures is an important part of Constellation s lunar program.
International Agency Engagement Under the leadership of ESMD, the International Space Exploration Coordination Group (ISECG) has formed a subgroup of interested agencies to discuss human lunar exploration scenarios Intent is to identify and advance standards that promote robustness of an exploration architecture Also serves as exchange of information on individual agency lunar exploration objectives and plans Results to date Identified 3 scenarios to serve as a framework Sortie Extended Stay Polar Outpost Agreed to develop a global reference lunar architecture by summer 2010 Elements and campaigns Work of ISECG informs decision making of individual agencies NASA Lunar Surface Concept Review (LSCR) milestone in summer 2010 will be informed by ISECG work 17