Autonomous Mission Operations

被引:0
|
作者
Frank, Jeremy [1 ]
Spirkovska, Lilijana [1 ]
McCann, Rob [1 ]
Wang, Lui [2 ]
Pohlkamp, Kara [2 ]
Morin, Lee [2 ]
机构
[1] NASA, Ames Res Ctr, Mail Stop N269-1, Moffett Field, CA 94035 USA
[2] NASA, Johnson Space Ctr, Houston, TX 77058 USA
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
V [航空、航天];
学科分类号
08 ; 0825 ;
摘要
NASA's Advanced Exploration Systems Autonomous Mission Operations (AMO) project conducted an empirical investigation of the impact of time delay on today's mission operations, and of the effect of processes and mission support tools designed to mitigate time-delay related impacts. Mission operation scenarios were designed for NASA's Deep Space Habitat (DSH), an analog spacecraft habitat, covering a range of activities including nominal objectives, DSH system failures, and crew medical emergencies. The scenarios were simulated at time delay values representative of Lunar (1.2-5 sec), Near Earth Object (NEO) (50 sec) and Mars (300 sec) missions. Each combination of operational scenario and time delay was tested in a Baseline configuration, designed to reflect present-day operations of the International Space Station, and a Mitigation configuration in which a variety of software tools, information displays, and crew-ground communications protocols were employed to assist both crews and Flight Control Team (FCT) members with the long-delay conditions. Preliminary findings indicate: 1) Workload of both crewmembers and FCT members generally increased along with increasing time delay. 2) Advanced procedure execution viewers, caution and warning tools, and communications protocols such as text messaging decreased the workload of both flight controllers and crew, and decreased the difficulty of coordinating activities. 3) Whereas crew workload ratings increased between 50 sec and 300 sec of time delay in the Baseline configuration, workload ratings decreased (or remained flat) in the Mitigation configuration.
引用
收藏
页数:20
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] The Cluster mission operations
    Ferri, P
    Warhaut, M
    ESA BULLETIN-EUROPEAN SPACE AGENCY, 1995, (84) : 145 - 149
  • [22] STEREO Mission Operations
    Eichstedt, John E.
    Ossing, Daniel A.
    Chiu, George
    Boie, Paul N.
    Krueger, Timothy O.
    Faber, Alan S.
    Coulter, Timothy A.
    Dudley, Owen E.
    Myers, David A.
    JOHNS HOPKINS APL TECHNICAL DIGEST, 2009, 28 (02): : 126 - 144
  • [23] LARES Mission Operations
    Sindoni, Giampiero
    Pavlis, Erricos C.
    2015 IEEE AEROSPACE CONFERENCE, 2015,
  • [24] CLUSTER MISSION OPERATIONS
    P. Ferri
    M. Warhaut
    Space Science Reviews, 1997, 79 : 475 - 485
  • [25] Applying successful near mission operations approaches and refining for contour mission operations
    Holdridge, ME
    ACTA ASTRONAUTICA, 2003, 52 (2-6) : 343 - 352
  • [26] Mission Design and Operations Approach for the HelioSwarm Mission
    D'Ortenzio, Matthew V.
    Bresina, John L.
    Nakamura, Robert H.
    SPACE OPERATIONS, SPACEOPS 2023, 2025, : 29 - 54
  • [27] Mission Design and Concept of Operations for the Lucy Mission
    Olkin, Catherine
    Vincent, Michael
    Adam, Coralie
    Berry, Kevin
    Englander, Jacob
    Gray, Sheila
    Levison, Hal
    Salmon, Julien
    Spencer, John
    Stanbridge, Dale
    Sutter, Brian
    SPACE SCIENCE REVIEWS, 2024, 220 (04)
  • [28] UVOT autonomous operations
    Huckle, HE
    Smith, PJ
    X-RAY AND GAMMA-RAY INSTRUMENTATION FOR ASTRONOMY XIII, 2004, 5165 : 298 - 309
  • [29] NEAR mission and science operations
    Landshof, John A.
    Cheng, Andrew F.
    1995, American Astronautical Soc, San Diego, CA, United States (43):
  • [30] THE ACIR - ITS MISSION AND OPERATIONS
    REEVES, MM
    PUBLIUS-THE JOURNAL OF FEDERALISM, 1984, 14 (03) : 157 - 167