Launching Science Science Opportunities Provided by NASA's Constellation System (2009) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
1 The Constellation System and Opportunities for Science
1 The Constellation System and Opportunities for Science
Pages 9-19
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 9... ...
Chapter 1 provides introductory and background information and a discussion of potential costs and benefits of Constellation science missions. Chapter 2 consists of summaries and evaluations of 12 different science mission concepts reviewed by the committee.
|
From page 10... ...
The committee notes that expensive space science programs will place a great strain on the space science budget, which has been essentially flat for several years and is already under strain from an ambitious slate of 85 flight missions. To estimate the costs of potential, large space science missions, the committee used NASA's Advanced Missions Cost Model and estimated the costs of three new-design planetary science missions representing the three NASA's science program as of Spring 2008 consisted of 94 flight missions -- 53 in operation plus 41 in development (Alan Stern, NASA Science Mission Directorate, presentation to the Space Studies Board, March 10, 2008)
|
From page 11... ...
The committee was not provided cost estimates of either the Ares I or the Ares V launch vehicle, but Ares V can be expected to be more expensive than even the largest Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) currently in the U.S.
|
From page 12... ...
The 16-meter telescope identified in the ATLAST proposal would take advantage of the added capabilities of the Ares V to increase the scientific capability of the mission, whereas the DALI mission and Exploration of Near Earth Objects via the Crew Exploration Vehicle could only be accomplished with the Ares V system. The variety of ways in which the scientific teams that developed the mission concepts took advantage of the Ares V calls into question the long-held belief that increased payload capability leads to larger payloads resulting in higher mission costs.
|
From page 13... ...
The testing of this proposition by means of a comprehensive, systems-engineering-based analysis merits NASA's attention. Recommendation: NASA should conduct a comprehensive systems-engineering-based analysis to assess the possibility that the relaxation of weight and volume constraints enabled by Ares V for some space science missions might make feasible a significantly different approach to science mission design, development, assembly, integration, and testing, resulting in a relative decrease in the cost of space science missions.
|
From page 14... ...
There are several reasons for this, but one primary explanation is that astronomers are always interested in larger-aperture telescopes and therefore ready for larger launch vehicles, whereas planetary science missions are more tightly constrained not only by payload shrouds but also by the energy required to reach distant targets. The planetary scientists at NASA's Ares V Solar System Science Workshop discussed ideas that generally split into two different themes: (1)
|
From page 15... ...
A proposed NASA workshop on the Constellation System and Earth science was canceled due to lack of interest, and only the most basic ideas about using Constellation for Earth science were discussed at the Ares V Solar System Science Workshop. The majority of the mission concepts evaluated in this study are the result of NASA's Vision Mission effort, which did not include Earth science because at that time Earth science was separated organizationally within NASA from space science.
|
From page 16... ...
Ariane V launch vehicle. Similarly, both the Interstellar Probe and the Solar Polar Imager correspond to missions that are under study by the ESA.
|
From page 17... ...
However, there is anecdotal evidence from NASA's own past about the pitfalls of designing large science missions to fit on large launch vehicles. See Boxes 1.1 and 1.2.
|
From page 18... ...
, not counting the additional estimated $5 billion for the launch system.1 This $21 billion for a single solar system exploration mission presumably did not include the development costs for the nuclear reactor and associated systems, which would have been developed to support the Prometheus-1 demonstration mission. Prometheus serves as an example of the risks associated with pursuing ambitious, expensive space science missions.
|
From page 19... ...
THE CONSTELLATION SYSTEM AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR SCIENCE 19 FIGURE 1.2.1 Artist's conception of the Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter spacecraft. SOURCE: Courtesy of NASA.
|
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.