Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (1993) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 3)
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Chapter 3)
Pages 47-63
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 47... ...
The mission statement of the Space Technology Directorate is shown in Table 6. Table 6 OAST'S SPACE RESEARCH AND REPORT MENU NOTICE TECHNOLOGY MISSION STATEMENT MEMBERSHIP PREFACE OAST shall provide technology for future civil space missions and provide a base EXECUTIVE SUMMARY of research and technology capabilities to serve all national space goals.
|
From page 48... ...
Figure 4 shows the management structure of the OAST Space Technology Directorate. Figure 3 The OAST Space Technology Directorate programs.
|
From page 49... ...
Space Program.1 NASA tasked OAST to prepare an integrated technology plan to "serve as a strategic plan for the space research and technology (R&T) program, and as a strategic planning framework for other NASA and national participants in advocating and conducting technology developments that support future U.S.
|
From page 50... ...
Some items were responsive to identical inputs from multiple users, e.g., several users identified a need for advanced data systems. The methodology employed in the development of the ITP was as follows: Step 1: Development of a forecast of future civil space flight programs and their technology needs and priorities.
|
From page 51... ...
Table 7 SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS: ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY FOR AMERICA'S FUTURE IN SPACE, P 4 Overall, the review team believes that Recommendation 8 of the Augustine Committee is well founded. NASA has instituted a sound planning process and the proposed Integrated Technology Plan for the Civil Space Program is a solid basis for responding to the Augustine Committee Recommendations on technology.
|
From page 52... ...
In addition, the review team has the following subsidiary recommendations that arose during the review process: q Continue to Improve the Integrated Technology Plan. NASA should continue to refine the space research and technology planning process, and increase the participation by other government agencies, industry and academia.
|
From page 53... ...
OAST's second principle is also parallel in spirit to OSSA's second principal, with OSSA stressing its service to the scientific community, and OAST stressing technology transfer and responsiveness to customer needs. OAST reaffirms a necessary commitment to the ongoing R&T program as its third guiding principle while OSSA declares its intent to use scientific peer review in all aspects of its program.
|
From page 54... ...
9 Actual System 'Flight Proven' Through Successful Mission Operations OAST defines Levels 1 and 2 in Table 9 as basic technology research, Levels 2 and file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch3.htm (8 of 18)
|
From page 55... ...
The decision rules for the base program are in Table 10, and the rules for the focused programs are in Table 11. Table 10 OAST SPACE RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY BASE DECISION RULES GENERAL RULES q Use external reviews to aid in assuring program technical quality q Provide stability by completing on-going discrete efforts DISCIPLINE RESEARCH q Assure adequate support to maintain high-quality in-house research capabilities in areas critical to future missions -- Provide capabilities for ad hoc support R&T for flight programs q Provide growth in R&T base areas needed for future focused programs -- Coordinate with annual focused program planning q Create annual opportunities for the insertion of new R&T concepts -- Goal: Provide approximately 15-20 percent "roll-over" per year q Support technology push flight experiments where space validation is required IN-STEP FLIGHT PROGRAMS q Maintain competitively selected studies/implementation of in-house and industry/university scale flight experiments, oriented on NASA's technology needs file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch3.htm (9 of 18)
|
From page 56... ...
universities and colleges -- using competitive selection Table 11 OAST FOCUSED PROGRAM DECISION RULES GENERAL q Annually assess and fund projects in order of priority against mission-derived investment criteria -- External review will be used to aid in assuring quality -- Review with user offices will be used to aid in assuring relevance and timeliness q Provide stability by completing on-going discrete efforts q Start a mix of technology projects with short, mid- and long-term objectives each year q Assure balanced investments to support the full range of space R&T users q Fund new technology projects that have passed internal reviews as required (e.g., non-advocate review for major experiments) MAJOR FLIGHT EXPERIMENTS q Support competitively-selected implementation of in-house and industry major technology flight experiments in accordance with mission-derived prioritization criteria q Fund major flight experiments where adequate ground-based R&T is underway or has been completed OAST also has developed a set of criteria to rank the focused program elements with respect to projected missions.
|
From page 57... ...
Based on this prioritization, annual resource allocation decisions will be made. "10 Table 12 OAST FOCUSED PROGRAM MISSION-DRIVEN PRIORITIZATION CRITERIA MISSION NEED Engineering Leverage Performance (Including Reliability)
|
From page 58... ...
The needs and objectives of the civil space community are too diverse to be met by a single set of decision rules and criteria. The focused program decision rules in Table 11 or file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechch3.htm (12 of 18)
|
From page 59... ...
Although the space technology planning cycle in Figure 5 defines the time frame in which inputs must be received and decisions made, the process by which technology development opportunities are sought from the external community is not clear. It is also unclear how differences in judgment between external personnel and organizations are reconciled with NASA's views and its need to maintain a technological capability for future mission support.
|
From page 60... ...
to scientific communities for flight experiments, and evaluates responses regularly. It should be able to perform similarly in the selection of technology to be addressed by its focused space technology program.
|
From page 61... ...
A more realistic mission model is needed. The mission model employed by OSSA and OAST falls between what might be done if there was a national mandate for the civil space program, like that in the 1960s for the Apollo program, and what is probably feasible within pragmatically projected budget ceilings.
|
From page 62... ...
OAST assigns to its R&T base program the primary responsibility for activities designed to create new space capabilities in advance of the expressed needs of users, i.e., technology push. The Committee believes that OAST should take specific measures to search more widely for ideas for technology push efforts and to make its support of space science in the base program more visible to those it aims to serve.
|
From page 63... ...
ITP, p 4-2 8. "Technology push" can be loosely defined as the situation wherein new advances enable new capabilities and, therefore, new mission designs or types of research.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.