对于ST8任务来说,这是一种务实的进入太空的方法

P. R. Turner, L. Herrell
{"title":"对于ST8任务来说,这是一种务实的进入太空的方法","authors":"P. R. Turner, L. Herrell","doi":"10.1109/AERO.2005.1559372","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"NASA the new millennium program (NMP) approach to space flight validation of advanced technologies is to alternate between subsystem and system flight validations. Candidates for each NMP project (subsystem or system) are competed through a NASA research announcement process, and proposal selection is determined by NASA headquarters. Space technology 8 (ST8) is the second NMP subsystem project. It includes technology experiments selected from four technology capability areas. The forecast for launch is 2008. The key distinguishing feature between the first subsystem project (ST6) and ST8 is the approach for access to space (ATS). The ST6 Project was initiated in 1999 - a time of great expectations for an expanded launch industry and potential for a great deal of 'ride-sharing' to space. Anticipating an environment rich with partnering possibilities, the ST6 competing teams sought and found a variety of accommodations for ATS (e.g., as payloads on other spacecraft, or as a payload on the shuttle's HitchHiker Program). Lessons learned from ST6 include the loss of partnerships or 'rideshares' in a time of decreasing launch availability, cancellation of a partner's project, and loss of the space shuttle (as of this writing) as a host platform. The ST8 mission was initiated in 2003, after the 'crash' of the launch industry, and the NMP approach for access to space changed. NMP planned to provide a launch vehicle and carrier spacecraft that would accommodate the selection of subsystem technologies. Because of the competitive element of NMP, however, the technologies to be flown would not be known until a year after the start of the competition and that valuable time could be used to prepare for the spacecraft requirements, and align the spacecraft acquisition to coincide with the down-selection of the technology payload. NMP was confronted with a ('chicken-or-the-egg') dilemma: Since the technology payload has not been chosen, how do we scope the NMP carrier requirements? If we wait to begin work on the spacecraft requirements until after NASA selects the technology payloads, we could lose a year or more toward enabling future space science missions. This paper tells the story of the evolution of the access to space approach for the ST8 Project, with some insights and comments on the benefits and risks of this approach.","PeriodicalId":117223,"journal":{"name":"2005 IEEE Aerospace Conference","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A pragmatic access to space approach for the ST8 mission\",\"authors\":\"P. R. Turner, L. Herrell\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/AERO.2005.1559372\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"NASA the new millennium program (NMP) approach to space flight validation of advanced technologies is to alternate between subsystem and system flight validations. Candidates for each NMP project (subsystem or system) are competed through a NASA research announcement process, and proposal selection is determined by NASA headquarters. Space technology 8 (ST8) is the second NMP subsystem project. It includes technology experiments selected from four technology capability areas. The forecast for launch is 2008. The key distinguishing feature between the first subsystem project (ST6) and ST8 is the approach for access to space (ATS). The ST6 Project was initiated in 1999 - a time of great expectations for an expanded launch industry and potential for a great deal of 'ride-sharing' to space. Anticipating an environment rich with partnering possibilities, the ST6 competing teams sought and found a variety of accommodations for ATS (e.g., as payloads on other spacecraft, or as a payload on the shuttle's HitchHiker Program). Lessons learned from ST6 include the loss of partnerships or 'rideshares' in a time of decreasing launch availability, cancellation of a partner's project, and loss of the space shuttle (as of this writing) as a host platform. The ST8 mission was initiated in 2003, after the 'crash' of the launch industry, and the NMP approach for access to space changed. NMP planned to provide a launch vehicle and carrier spacecraft that would accommodate the selection of subsystem technologies. Because of the competitive element of NMP, however, the technologies to be flown would not be known until a year after the start of the competition and that valuable time could be used to prepare for the spacecraft requirements, and align the spacecraft acquisition to coincide with the down-selection of the technology payload. NMP was confronted with a ('chicken-or-the-egg') dilemma: Since the technology payload has not been chosen, how do we scope the NMP carrier requirements? If we wait to begin work on the spacecraft requirements until after NASA selects the technology payloads, we could lose a year or more toward enabling future space science missions. This paper tells the story of the evolution of the access to space approach for the ST8 Project, with some insights and comments on the benefits and risks of this approach.\",\"PeriodicalId\":117223,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2005 IEEE Aerospace Conference\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2005-03-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2005 IEEE Aerospace Conference\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/AERO.2005.1559372\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2005 IEEE Aerospace Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/AERO.2005.1559372","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

NASA新千年计划(NMP)对先进技术的太空飞行验证方法是在子系统和系统飞行验证之间交替进行。每个NMP项目(子系统或系统)的候选人通过NASA研究公告程序进行竞争,提案选择由NASA总部决定。空间技术8号(ST8)是第二个NMP子系统项目。它包括从四个技术能力领域中选择的技术实验。预计发射时间是2008年。第一个子系统项目(ST6)和ST8之间的关键区别在于进入空间的方法(ATS)。ST6项目启动于1999年,当时人们对扩大发射行业寄予厚望,并有可能实现大量的太空“拼车”。由于预期环境中有丰富的合作可能性,ST6竞争团队为ATS寻找并找到了各种各样的住处(例如,作为其他航天器的有效载荷,或者作为航天飞机的有效载荷)。从ST6中吸取的教训包括在发射可用性下降的情况下失去合作伙伴或“拼车”,取消合作伙伴的项目,以及失去航天飞机作为托管平台(截至撰写本文)。ST8任务于2003年启动,在发射行业“崩溃”之后,NMP进入太空的方法发生了变化。NMP计划提供一种运载火箭和运载飞船,以适应子系统技术的选择。然而,由于NMP的竞争因素,要飞行的技术直到竞争开始一年后才会知道,这段宝贵的时间可以用来准备航天器要求,并使航天器采买与技术有效载荷的下降选择相一致。NMP面临着一个“先有鸡还是先有蛋”的困境:由于技术有效载荷尚未选择,我们如何确定NMP载体需求的范围?如果我们等到NASA选择了技术有效载荷之后才开始研究航天器的要求,我们可能会在未来的空间科学任务上损失一年或更长时间。本文讲述了ST8项目进入太空方法的演变过程,并对这种方法的好处和风险进行了一些见解和评论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A pragmatic access to space approach for the ST8 mission
NASA the new millennium program (NMP) approach to space flight validation of advanced technologies is to alternate between subsystem and system flight validations. Candidates for each NMP project (subsystem or system) are competed through a NASA research announcement process, and proposal selection is determined by NASA headquarters. Space technology 8 (ST8) is the second NMP subsystem project. It includes technology experiments selected from four technology capability areas. The forecast for launch is 2008. The key distinguishing feature between the first subsystem project (ST6) and ST8 is the approach for access to space (ATS). The ST6 Project was initiated in 1999 - a time of great expectations for an expanded launch industry and potential for a great deal of 'ride-sharing' to space. Anticipating an environment rich with partnering possibilities, the ST6 competing teams sought and found a variety of accommodations for ATS (e.g., as payloads on other spacecraft, or as a payload on the shuttle's HitchHiker Program). Lessons learned from ST6 include the loss of partnerships or 'rideshares' in a time of decreasing launch availability, cancellation of a partner's project, and loss of the space shuttle (as of this writing) as a host platform. The ST8 mission was initiated in 2003, after the 'crash' of the launch industry, and the NMP approach for access to space changed. NMP planned to provide a launch vehicle and carrier spacecraft that would accommodate the selection of subsystem technologies. Because of the competitive element of NMP, however, the technologies to be flown would not be known until a year after the start of the competition and that valuable time could be used to prepare for the spacecraft requirements, and align the spacecraft acquisition to coincide with the down-selection of the technology payload. NMP was confronted with a ('chicken-or-the-egg') dilemma: Since the technology payload has not been chosen, how do we scope the NMP carrier requirements? If we wait to begin work on the spacecraft requirements until after NASA selects the technology payloads, we could lose a year or more toward enabling future space science missions. This paper tells the story of the evolution of the access to space approach for the ST8 Project, with some insights and comments on the benefits and risks of this approach.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信