Space & Astronomy/Space and Astronomy (October 1993).iso/mac/TEXT/STATION/STFOCT89.NWS

Text File | 1992-09-09 | 30KB | 583 lines

"6_10_8_4.TXT" (56886 bytes) was created on 04-08-90
STATION BREAK, VOL 1, NO. 3, SEPT/OCT, 1989


NRC  Releases  Report  on  Space  Station
Freedom  Engineering  Design  Issues

A National Research Council (NRC) report on space station engineering
design issues, released in August, summarizes the findings of a NRC
November 1988 workshop.

The Office of Space Station (OSS) requested and paid for the intensive
four-and-a-half day review of the engineering and operational aspects of
the planned space station, with some sessions lasting until nearly
midnight.  Briefings on various aspects of the space station program were
presented by personnel from Level I and Level II.  Prior to the workshop,
the committee was supplied with extensive background materials.

The workshop committee's findings focused on general design issues, issues
related to utilization and operations requirements andimpact on space
station design and operation.

Richard Kohrs, director for OSS, said of the report, "We found the NRC's
report on Freedom space station program to be useful and constructive.
Since the time the report was written last November, the Agency has
identified and is working on a number of the same issues identified in the
report.  In other areas, the NRC's findings will help us assess the focus
on important design and utilization issues as the program moves toward its
preliminary design review next year."

Examples of general design issues raised by the committee include concerns
that there are inadequate margins and in some cases actual resource
shortfalls (e.g., power, existing post-Challenger Shuttle payload weight
margins for assembly flights) at this relatively early stage of the
program.  In a similar vein, questions of common measurement standards,
commonality of tools and equipment, etc., do not appear to have been
resolved in a concrete fashion that is consistent with the planned
long-life of the station.

With respect to utilization and operations requirements, the committee is
concerned that the station's design, assembly, and operation may have
become unduly constrained by a number of factors, such as existing
post-Challenger Shuttle performance limitations, certain congressional
directives, and some user requirements.  They believe it is important that
the justifications for each constraint be firmly established and its
impact on the program clearly understood.  Another issue that the
committee believes requires more attention is the compatibility of all
planned/potential uses of Freedom.

Subsystem-related issues raised by the NRC committee include such things
as the potential vulnerability of space station communications, role of
the Flight Telerobotic Servicer, and microbial and toxin control of the
station.

The workshop committee believes that the management structure has
complicated the space station development task.

Among its other management-related findings, the committee thinks that a
Space Station Specification is needed to contractually define the system
and provide a mechanism to effect change discipline and control.

The NRC committee was chaired by Duane McRuer, president, Systems
Technology Inc.

Other committee members were Barry W. Boehm, chief scientist TRW Defense
Systems Group; Daniel B. DeBra, professor of aeronautics and astronautics,
Stanford University; C. Cordell Green, director, Kestrel Institute;
Richard C. Henry, lieutenant general, U.S. Air Force (retired); Paul D.
Maycock, president, PV Energy Systems Inc.; John H. McElroy, dean of
engineering, University of Texas; Chester M. Pierce, professor of
psychiatry, Harvard University; Thomas P. Stafford, lieutenant general,
U.S. Air Force (retired) with Stafford, Burke, and Hecker, Inc.; and
Laurence R. Young, professor of aeronautics and astronautics, and director
of the Man-Vehicle Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Byron K. Lichtenberg, chief scientist, Payload Systems, Inc., was a
technical liaison to the committee.  Richard M. Obermann of the NRC's
Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board served as the study director for
the committee.




Station's 1990 Budget May Be Cut By $395M

The House in July approved a 1990 NASA Space Station Freedom spending bill
that would provide $1.655 billion for the program, $395 million less than
the agency $2.05 billion request.

The House Appropriations Committee for Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban
Development and independent agencies, citing severe budget constraints,
said it had no alternative when it cut nearly $400 million from station's
request.

The Senate Appropriations Subcommittee is expected to mark-up its version
of the budget Sept.11. The full Senate should cast its vote soon
thereafter.  Once the Senate votes on its spending bill, House and Senate
conferees will hammer out differences to reconcile both versions.

While the House version of the station's budget would be less than
requested, it would boost the program's funds by $755 million over the
1989 $900 million appropriation.  The House bill would reduce the
station's development program by $395 million, but it would boost the
flight telerobotic servicer (FTS) budget to $80 million, $65 million more
than NASA requested.#The extra $65 million for FTS would be financed by
taking funds from the 1990 station budget request for:  operations, $25
million; transition definition, $25 million; and the orbital debris radar,
$15 million.  The orbital debris radar, however, could be built with funds
from NASA's construction of facilities budget rather than using space
station money, according to the House bill.

When reducing its station budget, NASA could not cut funding for the polar
platform by anymore than 10 percent of the $107 million requested for
1990, the bill states.

The House bill would provide NASA with an overall budget of $12.263
billion, about $1.011 billion below the agency's request of $13.274
billion.  It would provide $5.2 billion for research and development, a
$548 million reduction; $4.7 billion for space flight, control and data
communications, a $430 million reduction; $384 million for construction of
facilities, an increase of $42 million; $1.95 billion for research and
program management, a $75 million reduction, and; it would level fund the
inspector general at $8 million.

The authorizing committees in both houses, the House Committee on Science,
Space, and Technology and the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation, had given the appropriations committees thumbs up to fully
fund the program.  House and Senate conferees also must mesh their
separate authorization bills before a final vote can be made.

Meanwhile, Headquarters managers in Washington, D.C., have already started
carving out the space station program's 1991 budget request.



Japan's Diet Approves
SS Freedom Program

The Japanese Diet in June gave the official green light for Japan's
long-term participation in the international Space Station Freedom
program.  The Science and Technology Agency of Japan (STA) and the
National Space Development Agency of Japan (NASDA) are now implementing
the international agreements signed with NASA, European Space Agency (ESA)
and Canada.This means that the National Space Development Agency of Japan
(NASDA) can now perform a preliminary requirements review of the Japanese
Experiment Module (JEM) and to select a contractor for its development.
JEM is expected to be launched in the summer of 1997, and it will cost
Japan about $2 billion.

Similar to the United States' laboratory module, the pressurized module of
JEM  will be about  10 meters  (33 cubic feet) long, three meters shorter
than the U.S. module. It will have an internal volume of about 140 cubic
meters (4,942 feet).  Japan's pressurized lab will be able to accommodate
23 equivalent standard racks.  A rack is a modular component that can be
easily removed and replaced as experiments end and begin.

Materials processing and life science experiments will be performed in
JEM.  The pressurized module will have the ability to control and monitor
experiments on its exposed facility.



Bush  Touts  Space  Station  Freedom  as  Vital  Step
to  Return  to  the  Moon,  Move  on  to  Mars

Editor's note:  The following is an excerpt from President George Bush's
speech on July 20, 1989, about the 20th anniversary of the first Apollo
Moon landing on July 20, 1969.  President Bush spoke to several thousand
people from the steps of the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum in the
nation's Capitol.


. . . "In 1961 it took a crisis -- the space race -- to speed things up.
Today we don't have a crisis.  We have an opportunity.

"To seize this opportunity, I'm not proposing a 10-year plan like Apollo.
I'm proposing a long-range, continuing commitment.

"First, for the coming decade -- for the 1990s -- Space Station Freedom --
our critical next step in all our space endeavors.

"And next -- for the new century --  back to the Moon.  Back to the
future.  And this time, back to stay.

"And then -- a journey into tomorrow -- a journey to another planet -- a
manned mission to Mars.

"Each mission should -- and will lay the groundwork for the next.  And the
pathway to the stars begins, as it did 20 years ago, with you -- the
American people.  And it continues just up the street there -- to the
United States Congress -- where the future of the space station -- and our
future as a spacefaring nation -- will be decided.

"And yes, we're at a crossroads.  Hard decisions must be made now as we
prepare to enter the next century.

"As William Jennings Bryan said -- just before the last turn of the
century:  'Destiny is not a matter of chance -- it is a matter of choice.
It is not a thing to be waited for -- it is a thing to be achieved.'

"And to those who may shirk from the challenges ahead -- or who doubt our
chances of success -- let me say this:

"To this day, the only footprintson the Moon are American footprints.  The
only flag on the Moon is an American flag.  And the know-how that
accomplished these feats is American know-how.  What Americans dream --
Americans can do.

"And the space station will also serve as a stepping stone to the most
important planet in the solar system -- Planet Earth.

"As I said in Europe just a few days ago, environmental destruction knows
no borders.  A major national and international initiative is needed to
seek new solutions for ozone depletion, and global warming, and acid rain.
And this initiative -- 'Mission to Planet Earth' - is a critical part of
our space program.  And it reminds us of what the astronauts remember as
Tranquility Base.

"The space station is a first and necessary step for sustained manned
exploration -- one that we're pleased has been endorsed by Senator [John]
Glenn, and Neil Armstrong, and so many veteran astronauts we honor today.
But it's only a first step. . .

"Why the Moon?  Why Mars?  Because it's humanity's destiny to strive, to
seek, to find.  And because it is America's destiny to lead."


OSSA  Selects  First  Attached  Payloads

Space Station Freedom's first complement of attached space science and
applications payloads were chosen by Dr. Lennard Fisk, associate
administrator for Space Science and Applications.

On June 29, Fisk selected 14 investigations for flight on Freedom during
its assembly phase and 13 investigations for conceptual studies leading to
possible flight investigations during the initial or early operational
phase of Freedom.  #OSSA requested proposals for flight and for concept
studies through an Announcement of Opportunity (AO) for Space Station
Attached Payload proposals.

The July 22, 1988, AO was for proposals in astrophysics, space physics,
communications technology, life sciences, and solar system exploration.

The January 1988 AO for the Earth Observing System requested a wide array
of Earth sciences payloads proposals that would fly attached to the
station's manned base or on the polar orbiting platform.  The proposals
received from these AOs were reviewed by scientific and technical peer
review panels, and by subcommittees of the Space Science and Applications
Steering Committee.  Fisk selected the successful proposals following the
review and recommendations of the Space Science and Applications
Steering Committee.

A large superconducting magnet facility and a cosmic dust collection
facility are planned as part of the complement of scientific instruments
for deployment during the assembly phase of the station.

The superconducting magnet facility, called Astromag, will act as a
spectrometer to measure the characteristics of very high energy cosmic
rays, the isotopes of cosmic rays, and to look for unusual forms of
antimatter.

The Cosmic Dust Collection Facility (CDCF) will expose about 10 m2 of
detector area to space.  The facility will detect and trap cosmic dust
particles, which will be returned to Earth for analysis by the principal
investigators and their teams.  Dr. Siegfried Auer and Dr. Robert Walker
will use the CDCF to study the trajectory and characteristics of cosmic
dust particles as they relate to the planets, the interplanetary medium,
and the origin of the solar system.  Dr. Glenn Carle will search for
organic constituents in the cosmic dust trapped by the proposers are
expected to have brought their concepts to a point where they can propose
the investigation in response to future AOs for flight proposals for
Freedom.

The Space Station Attached Payload program is managed in the Office of
Space Science and Applications Flight Systems Division.  Dr. Stanley
Freden of Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., was program
scientist for the attached payload AO.

The 13 proposals selected for concept study cover the entire spectrum of
scientific and technical interests solicited in the AOs.  The selected
proposals will be funded by OSSA for up to three years.


National Microgravity
Research Board
Holds First Meeting

The National Microgravity Research Board (NMRB) discussed microgravity
activities and space flight opportunities for experiments at its first
meeting on May 19 at NASA Headquarters in Washington, D.C.

Aside from presentations on possible low-Earth orbit flight opportunities
being examined by NASA, the board also discussed its charter and what
function the board could play in pushing forward other agencies'
microgravity science interests.

While NASA wants to stress future commercial use, members concurred that
initial expectations for commercial use of the microgravity environment,
as expected in the mid-1980s, were overstated.  Although there are
currently no large-scale commercial microgravity applications awaiting
space flight, NASA does have a young, vigorous program of microgravity
science, centered on basic research.

In discussing the board's role, members agreed that the board can serve as
a conduit of needs and interests from other agencies to NASA, and as a
conduit of information about flight plans and opportunities from NASA to
other agencies.  The NMRB will meet about every six months.  The next
meeting will be in the fall and will feature presentations by other
agencies.  The agenda for the next meeting will be developed by Robert
Rhome, NMRB executive secretary and Office of Space Science and
Applications assistant associate administrator for space station.

The NMRB was established on December 16, 1988, by President Ronald Reagan.
The board's charter is to "stimulate research in microgravity environments
and the commercial application thereof; advise federal agencies on
microgravity research priorities and opportunities;develop policy
recommendations relating to the conduct and nature of microgravity
research; and provide advice on coordinating the microgravity programs of
federal agencies. . ."

The board, who reports to the President via the National Space Council, is
chaired by Dr. Lennard Fisk, NASA's associate administrator for OSSA.  The
board includes representatives from each of the following agencies:  the
National Space Foundation, the Departments of State, Defense, Commerce,
Health and Human Services, Transportation, and Energy, and "any other
officials who from time to time may be designated by the President."


SSSAAS  Conducts  Summer  Workshop

The Space Station Science and Applications Advisory Subcommittee (SSSAAS)
held its second annual Summer Workshop June 26-30 at the National Academy
of Science's Woods Hole Study Center in Massachusetts.

The summer study focused on science accommodations and operations.  The
group of 70 attendees included 12 SSSAAS members, 12 non-NASA U.S.
scientists, 17 internationals, 19 NASA science and program office
personnel, representatives of private industry, and support staff.  Under
the chairmanship of Dr. Robert Bayuzick of Vanderbilt University, this
diverse group hammered out a solid package of recommendations to present
to the Office of Space Science and Applications, the Office of Space
Station, and SSSAAS's parent committee, the NASA Advisory Committee.

The format of the workshop  featured daily meetings, evening sessions, and
a substantial  amount  of brainstorming at the study center.  During the
week, a group of SSSAAS members met with representatives of the
International Forum on Scientific Uses of the Space Station (IFSUSS) to
discuss current international issues and plans for the next IFSUSS
meeting, set for later this year in Japan.  On the last day of the
workshop, a summary presentation was made to the Space Station Advisory
Committee, which Bayuzick is also a member.

Workshop attendees were reminded by SSSAAS Executive Secretary Robert
Rhome, NASA Office of  Space Science and Applications assistant associate
administrator for space station, that the combinations of budget
constraints and the upcoming space policy announcement from the White
House could result in changes to the Space Station Freedom program, and
the science user input will be critical to ensure that the needs of the
science community continued to be served.  Workshop attendees rose to the
challenge, working long hours to produce concise findings and pointed
recommendations for science operations on the space station.  These
findings and recommendations will be published in a report from the
workshop late this summer.

The next SSSAAS meeting is set for December near the Kennedy Space Center,
Fla.


Tanner Retires, Sisson Named Acting
Deputy Director

Dr. William B. Lenoir, associate administrator for the space station,
named Jim Sisson as acting deputy director of the Space Station Freedom
Program and Operations office.

Sisson replaces E. Ray Tanner, deputy director of the program office, who
retired from NASA on July 15 after 29 years of service.  Sisson will serve
as acting deputy director until a permanent appointment to the post is
made.  He currently serves as deputy program manager for the program and
operations office in Reston, Va., a position he has held since November
1986.


ESA  Presents
Progress  Report on
Columbus  in  Italy

The July Columbus international symposium in Naples, Italy,  was sponsored
by the European Space Agency (ESA) to give the current status of its
program.

The Columbus Program represents the ESA's contribution to the
international space station.  ESA will provide a pressurized module for
the manned base, a man-tended free-flyer, and a polar-orbiting platform.

NASA, representing the U.S.; the National Space and Development Agency
(NASDA), representing Japan; and the Canadian Space Agency (CSA), also
presented the status of their programs.  The European industry presented
concepts on the decentralization facilities planned throughout Europe.

ESA, which plans to use ESA astronauts, would like to start planning for
space station growth in addition to planning for the current baseline.
ESA also presented information on their new data relay satellite currently
in development.  The ESA satellite will be able to transmit data at the
rate of 770 megabits per second to the ground.  #The CSA is fairly far
along in its planning for the robotic servicing arm for the station.  The
arm will have one more degree of freedom than the current shuttle arm, and
there will be power and data hookups to the arm so that payloads can
operate while attached to the arm.

The European Observing community was concerned that ESA would not
participate in early station attached payloads.  However, ESA could barter
with the U.S. for attached payloads.  One item for barter may be the use
of ESA's Man-Tended Free-Flyer (MTFF).  The MTFF will have 20 single racks
on board, including freezers, refrigerators and incubators.  The
facilities will be automated and the astronauts will only perform
servicing.

With respect to operations, ESA will have three space vehicle control
centers:  1)  The Columbus Module Control Center (CMCC), located in Italy;
2)  The Hermes Flight Control Center (HFCC), location not yet selected,
and ; 3)  The Man-Tended Free-Flyer Control Center, located in
Germany.There are currently three regional operations centers, although
more may evolve into more regional centers as ESA plans to move to a
decentralized concept for operations.  The three centers are:  1)  The
Microgravity Advanced Research and User Support Center (MARS);  2)  The
Center for Applied Space Technology and Microgravity Research (ZARM), and;
3)  The Microgravity Utilization Support Center (MUSC).

Roundtable discussions during the symposium focused on international
cooperation for space station use, including two on-going  utilizations
studies: the Multilateral Utilization Study (MUS) and the Joint Science
Utilization Study (JSUS).  In the MUS study, the international partners do
not assume they will share payloads and in the JSUS study they do.  The
preliminary results of these studies were discussed illustrating the
benefits of sharing resources on the station.  Final results will be ready
in the fall.


Supporting  Space  Industry  Through  Use  of
Space  for  Technology  Development

On April 3, 1984, the NASA Administrator issued a memorandum to all the
centers and headquarters program offices stating that "In technology areas
where we have unique facilities and expertise to offer, it will be NASA's
policy to support the DOD [Department of Defense] and the space industry
through cooperative R & T programs, just as we do in Aeronautics. . ."

The Administrator then goes on to state, that  ". . . There is one area we
can be particularly effective in establishing closer ties with industry
and in technology development and that is in the use of Shuttle to provide
access for in-space experiments.  Furthermore, such activities will
establish a way of doing business that leads quite naturally into use of
the space station as a research center in space for technology and
engineering development in zero gravity . . ."

The Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology (OAST) was tasked with the
implementation of this policy.  As a first step toward implementation,
OAST initiated the In-Space Technology Experiments Program (IN-STEP) and
issued a request for proposals to industry and universities for definition
or development of experiments that were needed to obtain data that could
not be obtained on the ground by computation or simulation, or to validate
technologies in order to minimize risk to spacecraft projects.

The industrial and university space engineering community made 231
proposals.  Becausea large percentage of the proposals were of high
quality, the decision was difficult.  Eventually, 36 were selected for
definition, and five for development.  Of those accepted for development,
two:  the Tank Pressure Control (TPC) experiment proposed by Boeing
Aerospace, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Middeck
0-Gravity Dynamics Experiment (MODE) have already completed Non-Advocate
Review, have passed into Phase C/D, and are manifested to be flown on
Shuttle in 1991-92.

The 36 experiments, which are currently completing the experiment
definition phase, and any additional industry / university experiments
that have completed feasibility studies, technical requirements
definition, and flight experiment definition, will be given the
opportunity to compete in an announcement of opportunity (AO) for design,
fabrication, and space testing of advanced space technologies.  This AO is
expected to be released in early October.

A progress review involving all principal investigators was presented to
the aerospace community at the IN-STEP 88 Workshop in December 1988 in
Atlanta.  This workshop also identified key technology areas to be
emphasized in the future.  As a part of the continuing process enabling
industry and universities to develop space technology, OAST has formed the
Industry/University Experiments Selection Advisory Committee, chaired by
the Director for Space with membership representing the headquarters
program offices and the centers.  This committee is in the process of
selecting the most critical areas of technology that the next group of
experiments should address.  A second AO based on that selection, and
seeking proposals for experiment definition using Shuttle Shuttle, ELV's
or Space Station Freedom as the space facility, is expected to be released
in December.

For more information, contact Jon S. Pyle, Code RX, NASA Headquarters, 600
Independence Ave. SW, Washington, D.C. 20024, [phone].



Space Station Evolution Workshop Helps
Define Advanced Development Program

Space Station Freedom represents a unique, new concept in spacecraft
design.  It will be designed to stay on orbit for at least 30 years and
not only will be maintained, but will be improved and upgraded over time
as on-board activities mature and change.  The space station design must
therefore allow for evolution to include:

*  expanding capability,
*  increasing efficiency, and
*  adding new functions.

It is expected that these requirements often will be met by on-orbit
replacement of systems, subsystems, or components of advanced technology.
Therefore, technology development is a key process to ensure the
continuing successful operation of the facilities.

Advanced technology has played an important role in the space station
program from its beginning.  While the Space Station Task Force and the
Concept Development Group (CDG) were evolving the conceptual design of the
space station, the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology (OAST) was
selecting technologies from its ongoing program that might benefit the
design by increasing its lifetime, or reducing cost.  These technologies
were then transitioned to the Space Station Advanced Development Program
which, over its three-year duration, enabled the program to make informed
technology choices for the preliminary design.

Much of the same process is envisioned for the benefit of space station
evolution.  In order to start the process of planning such a program, the
OAST in collaboration with the Office of Space Station (OSS), is planning
a conference and workshop to:

* identify Space Station Freedom evolution requirements; and
* identify technologies that might best meet these requirements.

The Technology for Evolution Space Station Workshop is an important step
toward planning a technology program that will serve the needs of space
station evolution.  It will serve to collect and clarify Space Station
Freedom technology requirements for evolution, and describe technologies
that can potentially fill those requirements.  The output of the
conference will serve as the data base for OAST and OSS for technology
planning purposes.

The conference is being planned for January 1990.  For more information,
contact Judith Ambrus at [phone] or Roger Breckenridge at (804)
864-1936.


LaRC Creates Evolutionary Freedom Configurations

A primary objective of NASA's Space Station Freedom program is the design
and development of a system that can evolve to support changing user needs
and national priorities, as well as incorporate new technologies.

To ensure that this objective is met, the Langley Research Center's (LaRC)
Evolutionary Definition Office, under the auspices of the Headquarters
Level I Strategic Plans & Programs Division, leads an agency-wide effort
to define probable evolutionary growth configurations  for the station.
Current configurations under consideration are an enhanced
multi-disciplinary research and development station and a transportation
node facility to support manned exploration of the solar system.  The
challenge is to keep open the option of expanding  the baseline station to
support these future missions.

Two recent space station node concepts were provided by LaRC to NASA's
Office of Exploration Assistant Administrator Dr. Franklin Martin, who
told Congress what infrastructure is necessary in low Earth orbit to
support manned exploration of the Moon and Mars.

A transportation node's uses include the capability to support Space
Transportation Vehicle (STV) system technology development and
demonstration, STV processing, including assembly, servicing and
refurbishment.

While support to a Mars mission will generally entail provision of more
resources of the station nodes than for a Lunar scenario station node,
both cases require more structure, more habitation volume, and increased
power above the baseline design.  Both transportation nodes feature
advanced automation and robotics to perform vehicle processing.