Fact Sheet UPP UPC Payloads Project EJECTABLE EXTRACTABLE FIXED Ø*DWHZD\ WR WKH &RQVWHOODWLRQ 3URJUDP IRU 8QSUHVVXUL]HG &DUJRÙ Three Payload Congurations: THE UPC PAYLOADS PROJE

$Page 1: Fact Sheet UPP UPC Payloads Project EJECTABLE EXTRACTABLE FIXED Ø*DWHZD\ WR WKH &RQVWHOODWLRQ 3URJUDP IRU 8QSUHVVXUL]HG &DUJRÙ Three Payload Congurations: THE UPC PAYLOADS PROJE$

November 2009

Exploration Systems ProjectsCode 455

Goddard Space Flight Center301.614.5255

http://explorationatgoddard.gsfc.nasa.gov

UPC

Payl

oads

Pro

ject

Orion UPC Concept Study ReportInitial Distribution 11.18.2009

Fact Sheet

UPPUPC Payloads Project

EJECTABLE

EXTRACTABLE

FIXED

“Gateway to the Constellation Program for Unpressurized Cargo”

Three Payload Con�gurations:

THE UPC PAYLOADS PROJECT• Provides low-cost access to space for world-class

scientific missions, technology validation, and cargo transportation.

• Leverages the nation’s investment in human spaceflight to serve national needs.

• Reduces cost through commonality in architecture, process and expertise.

• Ensures adherence to safety requirements and vehicle interface specifications.

• Guides payload organizations through mission design, integration, and test.

THE ORION UPC CARRIER• Provides a standard structure and support services

for Orion payloads including: - power - communications - data - thermal • Flexible design preserves common interfaces for a

variety of missions.

The Orion UPC Carrier can deploy an Ejectable Satellite...

...or carry an Extractable payload or cargo to the International Space Station (ISS)...

...or carry Fixed Payloads docked to ISS for up to 6 Months

Parameter CapabilityOrbit LEO, 52°; ~350 kmDuration of Flight 180 daysVolume 160 ft3(4.5m3)Mass 425.8 lbs (193 kg) Power ≤400W peakData Rate ~100 mbps Thermal Passive/ActiveField of View Zenith or NadirPayload sites 0ne-Four

Fixed Payload Accommodations

Ejectable Satellite Accommodations

Parameter CapabilityOrbit LEO, 52°; ~350 kmDuration of Flight 180 days Volume 148 ft3(4.2m3)Mass 691.4 lbs (313.6 kg) Power 1.25-3.0 kWData Rate 1.55 – 100 MbpsField of View Zenith or Nadir

Extractable Payload/Cargo Accommodations(ISS Attached Payload)

Parameter CapabilityOrbit Ejected into LEO, 52°; ~350 km Duration of Flight Varies Volume 160 ft3(4.5m3) Mass 1054.9 lbs (478.5kg)Power 400 W peak Data Rate 20 kpbs

Initial Distribution 11.18.2009

Extractable

APOLLO PROGRAM

Ejectable

Attached

SPARTANEjectable

Sub-Satellite

ShuttleCargo Bay

SIMBay

ALSEPDeployed Cargoon Lunar Surface

Lunar Lander

HITCHHIKERFixed CargoGAS

Fixed Cargo

Fixed Cargo EjectableSub-Satellite

SHUTTLE PROGRAM

UPPUPC-Payloads Project

PI

S&MA

Payload MissionSystems Engineering

Launch SupportIntegration and TestCarrier Design

and Development

Payload MissionIntegration

Ground System

CM

ConstellationProgram O�ce

Operations and Test,Integration Orion Project

SCHEDULE & COST

11/2010

CY 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

(includes Non-Recurring Engineering Costs)UPP MISSION 1

$41 M

PDR

8/2011

CDR

6/2012

PER

7/2013

Ship

4/2014

9/2011

Delta CDR

7/2012

PER

2/2014

Ship

11/2014

3/2012

Delta CDR

9/2012

PER

8/2014

Ship

5/2015

2010

5/20163/20169/2015

Orion-5Orion-4Orion-3

UPP MISSION 2$17.8 M

UPP MISSION 3$16.6 M

ORGANIZATIONALCHART

UPC Payloads Project (UPP) - 2 -

The UPP draws from a rich legacy of programs which maximize the capabilities and value of NASA’s human space�ight vehicles.

The UPP builds upon a strong history of

JSC-GSFC partnership in similar missions.

The project organiza-tion facilitates

communication to maximize science value

while ensuring that Orion’s resources and

safety arenot impacted.

Hitching a Ride to SpaceCost Comparison

Unit

Cost (recurring)

Mass Capacity

Cost per pound

Volume Capacity

Cost per cubic foot

UPC-Orion

$16.6 M

1,055 lbs.

$15,735

160 ft3

$103,750

Pegasus

$55 M

751 lbs.

$73,236

70.6 ft3

$779,037

Taurus

$114 M

2,829 lbs.

$40,297

178 ft3

$640,449

- ESMD Constellation - GSFC Exploration Systems Projects


iii

UPC Payloads Project (UPP)

PROPRIETARY INFORMATION Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 CONTEXT AND BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1-11.1 The Opportunity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-11.2 The Value of the UPC Payloads Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-11.3 The Legacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-21.4 The Customers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-3

1.4.1 World Class Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-31.4.2 Technology Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-41.4.3 Partnerships and Outreach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-51.4.4 Cargo Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-5

1.5 The UPC Payloads Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-6

2.0 CARRIER REQUIREMENTS AND INTERFACES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2-12.1 Carrier Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-12.2 Payload Configurations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-2

3.0 ORION UNPRESSURIZED CARGO (UPC) CARRIER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-13.1 UPC Carrier Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-13.2 Design Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-13.3 UPC Carrier Subsystems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-3

3.3.1 Structural and Mechanical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-33.3.2 Power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-63.3.3 Avionics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-73.3.4 UPC Communication and Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-113.3.5 Thermal System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-113.3.6 Mission Operations/Ground Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-13

3.4 Contamination Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-143.5 Safety & Mission Assurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-143.6 UPC Integration and Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-15

3.6.1 UPC Carrier Subsystem I&T . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-153.6.2 UPC Carrier System I&T . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-163.6.3 Launch Site Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-16

4.0 UPC PAYLOADS PROJECT MANAGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-14.1 Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1

4.1.1 UPP Organization Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-24.1.2 Key Roles and Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-24.1.3 Management Approach, Processes, and Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-34.1.4 Configuration Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-44.1.5 Risk and Risk Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-44.1.6 Reserve Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-54.1.7 Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-54.1.8 Reviews and Documentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-6

5.0 COST SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5-15.1 Cost Estimating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-3

5.1.1 Work Breakdown Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-35.1.2 Basis of Estimate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-35.1.3 Grassroots Estimating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-35.1.4 Analogous Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-35.1.5 Parametric Estimation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-3


iv



APPENDICES

A – AUTHORIZATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1B – COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-1C – PROGRAMMATIC INFRASTRUCTURE SURROUNDING THE UPP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-1D – RELEVANT HISTORY AND HERITAGE HARDWARE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D-1E – UPC ORION CUSTOMERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E-1F – UPP PROJECT HISTORY AND REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-1G – ACRONYMS AND TERMINOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G-1


ES-1



NASA’s two previous human spaceflight pro-grams, Apollo and the Space Transportation System (STS or Space Shuttle) established a long, successful history of delivering secondary pay-loads to space, thereby maximizing the nation’s investment in human spaceflight. They proved the value of a common carrier and payload sup-port organization to share technology and exper-tise across payloads.

The Constellation Program is the newest hu-man space flight initiative, created to replace the Space Shuttle and to position NASA for future space exploration. Several of the program’s ar-chitectural elements offer opportunities to fur-ther the tradition of providing access to space via secondary payloads. The UPC Payloads Project (UPP) leverages these opportunities to fill a gap in service offerings that address low cost access to space for scientific missions, technology demon-strations, student experiments, and cargo trans-portation.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle is the first element of the Constellation Architecture. Orion’s Service Module (SM) can accommo-date payloads up to the size of a Small Explorer (SMEX) Class mission, with the capability to in-sert spacecraft into low earth orbit, transport pay-loads or cargo to the ISS, and carry fixed experi-ments. (See Figures ES-1 and ES-2). The UPP provides Orion with a “trunk” to carry at least 1,322 lbs. (600 kg) and 160.0 ft³ (4.5 m³) of un-pressurized cargo (UPC) and its Carrier.

The UPP leverages the management approach and established GSFC-JSC partnership which were fundamental to the successful Space Shuttle secondary payload programs. GSFC-provided UPP services guide and support Principal Inves-tigators (PIs) to ensure safety and streamline inte-gration, enabling the JSC Orion project to focus on its primary mission: human spaceflight. In addition to building the recurring hardware for each mission, the UPP provides the infrastructure needed to manage and integrate the payloads.

Figure ES-1: The Orion SM can be utilized to deliver world-class science payloads, technology demonstrations, and cargo.


ES-2



The use of a common carrier provides reuse in technology as well as expertise across missions to reduce cost and maximize the value of this service.

Because of GSFC’s extensive and successful ex-perience flying small payloads on NASA’s human rated systems, ESMD charged GSFC with the responsibility of leading UPC payload services development on Constellation vehicles, starting with Orion[3]. Beginning with that assignment in 2007, GSFC collaborated with Constellation’s Operations Test and Integration (OTI) Level 2 office at JSC and the Orion Service Module (SM) team at GRC to develop requirements and imple-mentation strategies for Orion UPC.

Based on the design presented in this report, the estimated cost of the first mission (which includes all non-recurring engineering costs) is

$41M. Subsequent Orion flights (potentially two flights per year, starting in 2015) can deliver un-pressurized cargo to space for as low as $16.6M per flight, which is less than half the cost of any ex-isting launch vehicle. This plan is compliant with the Orion vehicle re quirements to accommodate and fly unpressurized cargo. It is extendable and scalable to all Constellation vehicles (Ares V and Altair). The flight-proven concepts, designs, and capabilities that comprise this plan are applicable to both NASA and com mercial launch services.

The Augustine Committee has charged NASA to “explore to deliver the greatest benefit to the nation.” The UPP enables NASA to capitalize on its exploration investments to serve national needs, including expansion of scientific knowl-edge, driving technological innovation, and con-tributing to key national objectives.

UPC20

Earth Orbit

Free�yer Deployment(e.g. lunar, L1 orLibration Point) Extractable

ISS SM Expanded

Fixed palletconsumed on re-entry

Earth

Orion Docked for6 months

Landing

Free�yerDeployment

(LEO)Ares

Figure ES-2: UPC Orion provides flexible options for satellites, cargo, and fixed payloads.


1-1



1.0 CONTEXT AND BACKGROUND

1.1 The OpportunityNASA has begun development of its most am-

bitious program for human space exploration to date. The Constellation Program architecture preserves the United States’ access to low earth orbit (LEO), provides a platform for a return to the Moon, and promises a foundation for human exploration of Mars and beyond. Orion, which is designed to safely carry crew to the ISS and beyond starting in 2015, presents an opportunity for science and technology payloads to “catch a ride” to space. The UPP vision is to provide af-fordable access to space by maximizing the na-tion’s investment in the Constellation Program. Initially, the UPC Payloads Project’s focus will be on providing needed access to space through the Orion spacecraft’s capability to deliver unpressur-ized payloads to LEO, including deliveries to the International Space Station (ISS) (see Executive Summary Figure ES-1).

Frequent, inexpensive access to space for small to mid-size payloads is needed to demonstrate the potential of a long list of innovative instruments and research. The UPC Payloads Project (UPP), which utilizes the Orion’s capability to accom-modate substantial payloads (see Table 1.1-1 and Figure 1.1-3), fills this gap (see Figure 1.1-2).

Orion has the capability to launch 1,322 lbs (600 kg) of unpressurized cargo (UPC) and Carrier into Low Earth Orbit (LEO) from its Service Module (SM) (see Figure 1.1-1). By leveraging the opportunity to carry UPC on Orion, NASA offers additional access to space for small to mid-size payloads, with minimal additional cost. Through the UPP, Orion has the ability to trans-port world-class scientific missions and ground-breaking technology.

The NASA community is enthusiastic about Orion’s UPC capability. Potential Principal Inves-tigators (PIs) who would utilize Orion UPC for highly valued scientific missions have been iden-tified, as have technology validation projects that could take place within the space environment. In addition to transporting cargo, Orion UPC

can also provide access to space for student exper-iments and the small business sector. Because of its three modes of payload accommodation (see Table 1.1-2, Executive Summary Figure ES-2, and Foldout 2), Orion UPC can support a wide variety of applications.

1.2 The Value of the UPC Payloads Project

As the gateway between PIs interested in this access to space and the Orion project, the UPP provides essential services to both:

• Optimized payload accommodations through the UPC Carrier design, which maximizes payload capacity in terms of mass, volume, and services without impacting the vehicle.

• Payload management including established, repeatable programmatic interfaces, expertise, and processes.

The UPC Payloads Project (UPP) leverages invest-ments in human spaceflight to provide low-cost access to space for scientific missions, technology demonstrations, and cargo transportation.

Table 1.1-1: UPC Orion’s capabilities accommodate a wide variety of payloads.

Parameter Capability Comments

Orbit LEO, 52° inclination; 249 mi. (~400 km)

Eject spacecraft into transitional orbit

Duration of Flight

At least 6 months For fixed payloads

Volume 160 ft3 (4.5 m3) Extended volume

Mass ≥1,322 lbs (600 kg) Includes payload carrier/support hardware

Power 400 W peak While attached to Orion SM

Data Rate 20 kbps For ejectable/extractable

Field of View Zenith through Nadir Varies on payload location/configuration for fixed payloads

UPC42

Launch AbortSystem

Crew Module

Service Module

Spacecraft Adapter

Figure 1.1-1: The UPC Orion can transport at least 600kg of cargo or scientific payload into Low Earth Orbit (LEO), or to the International Space Station (ISS).


1-2



• Reduced technical and programmatic risk through management of a consistent provider-to-carrier interface.

• Consistent management of safety, integration, and mission operations interfaces for the pay-load and carrier.

• Standard payload services, including power, thermal, and data recording and transfer to a mission operations center for full mission support, data receipt, and data distribution.

1.3 The Legacy

NASA’s two previous human spaceflight programs, Apollo and the Space Transportation

System (STS) (or Space Shuttle), were leveraged to provide access to space for the United States and its partners. These programs established a long, successful history of delivering small payloads to orbit, and thereby enabled significant scientific missions and introduced groundbreak-ing technology that has since become widely used in NASA missions.

UPC19

Payload ClassAccess

to SpacePayloadMass*

Heavy Lift ELV

Small ELV

UPCExplorationCarriersSub-orbitalParabolic FlightBalloons

Numbers of Flights * Payload mass ranges are approximate and in lbs to low-Earth orbit

Class A

Class A/B

Class C

Class C/D

$$$$

$$$

$$

$

6000+

1000-6000

0-1300

0-500

Figure 1.1-2: UPC Orion fills a gap in affordable access to space for missions which are vital to the Nation’s space program.

Table 1.1-2: UPC Orion supports three payload con-figurations.

UPC Mode Mode Capabilities Mode Applications

Fixed Similar to Shuttle’s Hitchhiker ProgramCan carry several ‘fixed’ experiments to the space environment for a duration of up to 6 months

Technology validationStudent experimentsShort-term scientific measurements

Ejectable ‘Eject’ a spacecraft (e.g., Venture or SMEX class, up to 1322.0 lbs (600kg))Alternate transportation to space

Scientific, technology and educational missions

Extractable ‘Extract’ cargo to deliver it to ISS

ISS cargo transportScientific missions aboard ISSStudent experiments aboard ISS

Figure 1.1-3: In comparison with expendable launch vehicles, UPC Orion has enough volume for excellent science and technology missions at a fraction of the cost.

UPC17

054.00 in[137.2 cm]

620.3 in[157.5 cm]

2.16 in[5.5 cm]

2.28 in[5.8 cm]

SeparationPlane

045.39 in[115.3 cm]

055.31 in[140.5 cm]

PEGASUS XL

TAURUS 63”

62.03 in[157.6 cm]

UPCCylindricalVolume

UPCCylindricalVolume

160 ft3

[4.5m3]

178.34 ft3

[5.04m3]70.63 ft3

[2.3m3]


1-3



The UPC Payloads Project (UPP) builds upon this rich history. The Apollo Scientific Instrument Module (SIM) Bay was located on the Apollo Service Module and flew on the Apollo J missions (Apollo 15, 16, and 17). It carried 11 scientific and exploratory experiments designed for opera-tion in Lunar orbit, including two different types of film cameras and numerous spectrometers used for characterizing the lunar surface. The SIM Bay on both Apollo 15 and 16 also ejected a 78-pound sub-satellite, which carried three scientific experi-ments into Lunar orbit (see Figure 1.3-1). Ex-periments on the ejected spacecraft included a laser altimeter to measure the heights of lunar surface features as well as instruments to measure variations in the Moon’s gravitational acceleration and the structure of the upper layers of the lunar crust. Apollo SIM Bay provided the opportunity to gain important science advances that directly benefited future missions to, and study of, the Lunar surface.

As a JSC/GSFC partnership, the Shuttle Small Payloads Project (SSPP) continued this tradition into the STS era. Two specific types of payload experiment opportunities (Hitchhiker and Get

Away Special (GAS)) were used on the Space Shut-tle, beginning with STS-4 in 1982. These projects provided the scientific and engineering commu-nity with quick reaction space mission capability for a low cost through a standardized, repeatable process. SSPP provided end-to-end engineering and management services for customers, enabling PIs to focus on their instrumentation and science.

Between 1985 and 1998, the Spartan Project at GSFC launched 9 reusable free-flyer spacecraft from the Space Shuttle. The Spartan Project was programmatically separate from SSPP but shared the same engineering organization and institutional management at GSFC within the Special Payloads Division. Many of the engineers and managers worked both projects during this time period.

Within the SSPP, Hitchhiker project provided opportunities for experiments to fly in the Shuttle payload bay. The modular carrier system used by Hitchhiker increased flexibility for potential pay-loads while maintaining standardized mechanical and electrical interfaces. Experimenters could also rely on astronaut support, such as performing spe-cific shuttle maneuvers or astronaut participation during experiment operations, to carry out their objectives.

Space Shuttle Get Away Special (GAS) payloads were similar to Hitchhiker missions, but did not rely on shuttle power and required only minimal astronaut intervention for successful completion. These were typically small, self-contained experi-ments housed in standard sized containers and loaded into the Shuttle payload bay.

SSPP took advantage of the significant capabil-ity offered by the STS program to provide quick, reliable, and affordable access to space for small payloads. This program enabled hundreds of payloads to fly in space at a relatively low cost. Hitchhiker and GAS projects enabled 76 differ-ent instruments on 26 flights. JSC/GSFC estab-lished a smooth, successful process to integrate, fly, and operate these payloads (see Figure 1.3-2).

1.4 The Customers

1.4.1 World Class Science

The UPP team conducted a customer study to identify potential uses for UPC Orion[18]. The study included numerous interviews with poten-tial PIs and decision makers in the NASA and

UPC21

Photograph of Lunar SubsatellitePost Deployed in Lunar Orbit

Apollo SIM Bay

Figure 1.3-1: Maximizing the use of space flight assets originated with the Apollo program.


1-4



industry management chains; the ideas brought forward were extensive. History has demonstrat-ed that engineers and scientists will find creative strategies to maximize use of access to space, so additional applications beyond those already identified are inevitable. The results of the cus-tomer study are summarized below by science theme and further detailed in Foldout 1.

Heliophysics: UPC Orion’s payload mass and volume requirements are an excellent fit for Heliophysics instruments, which are typically small and low power. The achievable orbits are ideal for many Heliophysics missions. UPC Orion’s orbits would easily support ionosphere missions included in the Decadal Survey in addi-tion to congressionally-mandated space weather monitors that will be sent to libration points to collect early warning information.

Earth Science: Several missions, including mis-sions for ozone monitoring, ground light surveys, volcano monitoring, biomass studies, and ocean studies, could use UPC Orion accommodations for primary earth science or technology develop-ment.

Planetary: Lunar orbiting missions with a 110.2 lb (50 kg) instrument payload are possi-ble with UPC Orion. Planets must be addressed on a case-by-case basis, with orbital dynamics as the limiting factor. Technology development for future large planetary missions is possible using UPC Orion capabilities.

Astrophysics: The recently-selected SMEX mis-sion, Gravity and Extreme Magnetism SMEX

(GEMS), for example, fits within the UPC vol-ume and mass limitations. Other comparable Astrophysics missions, including Astrophysics technology development and pathfinder mis-sions, are possible using UPC Orion capabilities.

1.4.2 Technology Validation

As was proven through the Shuttle’s Hitchhiker program, vehicles for human spaceflight can provide the perfect environment for testing un-proven technology. One example is the Shuttle Laser Altimeter (SLA), which used access to vali-date active laser sensing technology in space. Once proven, this technology showed the Earth science community that it was possible to do ecological research remotely from space. The current genera-tion of laser altimeters flying on Mars Reconnais-sance Orbiter (MRO) and Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) evolved from these initial experi-ments aboard the Shuttle.

Some experiments require the unique environ-ment of space for proper testing. For example, from the late-1980s through the mid-1990s, GSFC was developing a two-phase loop heat pipe technology for advanced thermal control. Because the technology involved fluids with both liquid and vapor components, extended testing in a zero-gravity environment was required prior to acceptance by the designated flight program (Terra). The two-phase loop heat pipe team con-ducted several Hitchhiker experiments over mul-tiple flights to fully develop and demonstrate this technology. In one instance, to address a concern, it was necessary to modify and re-fly a test article within eighteen months. This would have been almost impossible without the regular access to space provided by the Hitchhiker program. Based on this successful technology development effort, enabled by critical Hitchhiker flights, the two-phase loop heat pipe technology was perfected and is now flying on numerous NASA spacecraft (e.g., Terra, HST/SM3, GLAST, Aura, Swift, etc.) as the primary thermal control system. The Department of Defense (DOD) and commer-cial industry have also made extensive use of this technology.

The need for in-space validation of new tech-nology is greater today than ever before. The New Millennium Program was put on hold due to lack inexpensive access to space. The budget was dominated by launch costs as the EELV pro-gram started and the Delta II launch vehicle and

UPC22

Shuttle Small Payloads504540353025201510

50

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1996

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

Paylo

ads P

er Ye

ar

Figure 1.3-2: The Space Shuttle was heavily utilized to bring nearly 300 additional payloads to space. UPC Orion will fill this same niche.


1-5



Athena programs were phased out. UPC Orion is a cost-effective way to fly technology demonstra-tion missions. For example, UPC Orion can be used to fly Optical Communication pathfinders for ScAN and small operational satellites.

1.4.3 Partnerships and Outreach

DOD Payloads: The Department of Defense currently has a prioritized list of ~70 payloads awaiting flight. Each year the Space Experiment Review Board (SERB) assesses the value of each payload to DOD and prioritizes them. Due to the lack of access to space in 2008, only 5% of the allocated budget was spent flying SERB payloads. Many of these payloads have common research goals with NASA, and UPC could open up op-portunities for collaboration and flight of these payloads. The payloads, which would be funded by the home organizations, come from NRL, AFRL, APL, Lincoln Labs, DARPA, and other DOD organizations.

Student Experiment Objectives: Over the past several years, numerous student programs have been affected by the lack of launch opportunities. Some examples are the University Explorer Pro-gram (UNEX), Starshine, and the Navy’s Mid-star Program. The UNEX program is on hold, Milstar has had limited launch opportunities, Starshine 4/5 has been build manifested twice on STS but not flown, and both the West Point Military academy and the Air Force Academy are interested in access for student programs.

A new outstanding training opportunity for the next generation of engineers is fabrication of cubesats: small inexpensive satellites quickly built by students. The National Space Grant College and Fellowship Grant Program (Space Grant), authorized by the US Congress and managed by NASA’s Office of Education, focuses on training the next generation of US aerospace professionals in all fields of aerospace science and engineering. One of its signature programs, the Space Grant Student Satellite Program, emphasizes training undergraduates in interdisciplinary, hands-on, flight hardware-building projects that directly prepare them for careers in US aerospace indus-try and government. Students execute the entire mission lifecycle, but are mentored at all stages by

technical professionals from their universities and NASA. This program also needs low cost access to space.

International Payloads: The international com-munity faces the same issues in locating viable ways to launch payloads. NASA could use UPC Orion as a way to exchange access to space for scientific data or flight of instruments on foreign satellites. This model has worked successfully in the past on collaborations with numerous coun-tries. This is a viable way to meet scientific goals at a lower cost, and NASA’s international partners have expressed interest in utilizing Orion UPC capabilities.

1.4.4 Cargo Transportation

ISS Cargo, Instrument, and ORU Transportation: ISS is nearing completion and its mission life will likely be extended. Consequently, the ISS pro-gram will require Attached Payload Transporta-tion for various science instruments and Orbital Replacement Unit (ORU) transportation. Many resupply missions are also a reality. Control Mo-ment Gyroscope (CMG) ORU (see Figure 1.4-1) has been studied extensively as an enveloping case for smaller ORUs. Although Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) is baselined for ORU transportation to ISS and many ORUs are currently stored on orbit, UPC provides an excel-lent way to transport unanticipated maintenance items to the ISS along with the crew.

UPC43

View ofthe top

UPC Front

Looking Forward

Figure 1.4-1: The CMG and many other ISS ORUs or instruments early fit into the UPC volume and mass allocations.


1-6



1.5 The UPC Payloads Project

The UPC Payloads Project (UPP) provides a unique national asset, building on a successful NASA legacy of utilizing available human space-flight program performance capabilities to achieve additional scientific and engineering objectives. By building upon the heritage of the Apollo SIM Bay and Space Shuttle Hitchhiker and Get Away Special projects, UPP utilizes Orion’s excess capacity to keep the frontier of space open for critical science and technology experiments that require access to space.

UPP provides the management and techni-cal infrastructure and expertise to safely and efficiently utilize the space access opportunities inherent in the Constellation program. UPP maximizes NASA’s investment in Constellation, without impact to Constellation’s risk profile or core missions.

UPP’s initial emphasis is payloads riding on the Orion spacecraft during its primary LEO/ISS missions. Future opportunities will track with the evolution of the Constellation Program toward Lunar and Martian capabilities. UPP will become a valued source of payload services for scientific and technology customers looking to leverage this next generation of access to space.

A viable plan for design, development, testing, and provision of a standard UPC Carrier within the Orion vehicle, including the associated recur-ring and non-recurring costs, is provided in this report. The process for integrating and testing each payload has been considered, and is fully consistent with the rigorous reliability and safety requirements of human space flight. The ap-proach maximizes reuse of design, components, and processes across payloads to reduce costs and ensure consistent verification and validation prior to launch. The UPC payload capability fills a niche for low cost access to space for science, technology, and education payloads.

This plan is compliant with the Orion vehicle re-quirements to accommodate and fly unpressurized cargo. It is extendable and scalable to all Constella-tion vehicles (Ares V and Altair). The flight-proven concepts, designs, and capabilities that comprise this plan are applicable to both NASA and com-mercial launch services.


Pote

ntia

l Mis

sion

Sum

mar

yM

issio

nSc

ienc

e The

me

Nam

eOr

gani

zatio

n

Small

Spin

ning S

atell

ites

Vario

usAn

drew

Nich

olas

Navy

ESTE

C Tec

hnolo

gy Pa

yload

sVa

rious

Ralp

h Eng

elhar

dtES

A

Star

shin

e 4 an

d 5LE

O Sa

tellit

e Orb

ital D

ecay

Stud

iesGi

ll Moo

reRe

tired

60 D

oD pa

yload

sVa

rious

Col. S

teph

en D.

Har

gisUS

AF, D

oD Sp

ace T

est P

rogr

am

Dual

Toph

at Io

n Neu

tral M

ass S

pect

Dual

Toph

at Io

n Neu

tral M

ass S

pect

Edwa

rd C.

Sittl

er

GSFC

, Heli

ophy

sics

Envir

onm

enta

l Mon

itorin

g Pkg

for

Ionos

pher

ic Irr

egula

rities

Envir

onm

enta

l Mon

itorin

g Pkg

for

Ionos

pher

ic Irr

egula

rities

MS F

C, He

lioph

ysics

High

-reso

lutio

n Cor

onal

Imag

erHi

gh-re

solu

tion C

oron

al Im

ager

Jona

than

Cirta

inM

SFC,

Helio

phys

ics

Ionos

pher

e-Th

erm

osph

ere S

pace

Wea

ther

Ar

ray

Ionos

pher

e-Th

erm

osph

ere S

pace

W

eath

er Ar

ray

GSFC

, Heli

ophy

sics

L1 M

onito

r Rep

lacem

ent M

ission

L1 M

onito

r Rep

lacem

ent M

ission

Adam

Szab

oGS

FC, H

eliop

hysic

s

Luna

r-Sola

r Int

erac

tion E

xplor

er (L

uSIE)

Luna

r-Sola

r Int

erac

tion E

xplor

er

(LuSIE

)W

illiam

Farre

llGS

FC, H

eliop

hysic

s

Mini

-Infra

red D

ust A

bsor

ption

Sp

ectro

met

er (M

IDAS

) for

Luna

r Glob

al Du

st

Luna

r Sur

face

Solar

Orig

ins E

xplor

er

(Luna

SSOX

)Jo

hn F.

Coop

erGS

FC, H

eliop

hysic

s

Luna

r Sur

face

Solar

Orig

ins E

xplor

er

(Luna

SSOX

)M

ini-I

nfra

red D

ust A

bsor

ption

Sp

ectro

met

er (M

IDAS

) for

Luna

r Glob

al Du

st

Mian

M. A

bbas

MSF

C, He

lioph

ysics

Solar

Ener

getic

Parti

cle Sp

ectro

met

er

(SEP

S)So

lar En

erge

tic Pa

rticle

Spec

trom

eter

(S

EPS)

Jam

es H

. Ada

ms

MSF

C, He

lioph

ysics

Solar

Win

d Com

posit

ion Sp

ectro

met

er

(HEL

IX)

Solar

Win

d Com

posit

ion Sp

ectro

met

er

(HEL

IX)

Jam

es Sp

ann

MSF

C, He

lioph

ysics

Mul

tiple

Proje

cts

US co

ordin

ated

proje

cts

John

Gre

gory

Spac

e Gra

nt Co

nsor

tium

Optic

al Co

mm

unica

tions

Dem

oCx

P Lun

ar N

etwo

rk Ap

plica

bility

for

Lase

r Com

mun

icatio

nsHa

rry Sh

awGS

FC, C

onste

llatio

n

Luna

r Nav

igatio

n for

Cons

tella

tion

Prog

ram

CxP L

unar

Nav

igatio

nDa

vid Q

uinn

GSFC

, Con

stella

tion

Vario

usEa

rth Sc

ience

Miss

ions

Robe

rt Co

nner

ton

GSFC

, Ear

th Sc

ience

Vario

usNO

AA M

ission

s Spa

ce W

eath

erGe

orge

Khaz

anov

GSFC

, NOA

A

CIELO

Earth

quak

e inv

estig

ation

, mag

netic

pertu

rbat

ions i

n the

iono

sphe

re-

mag

neto

sphe

re re

gion

Vitto

rio Sg

rigna

Prof

esso

r of G

eoph

ysics

(U

niv.

of Ro

me)

Plane

tary

Scien

ce an

d Tec

hnolo

gy

Miss

ions

Jam

es G

reen

NASA

HQ

Wo

rld

Cla

ss S

cie

nc

e, T

ech

no

log

y V

alid

atio

n, a

nd

Car

go

Tr

ansp

ort

atio

n

Vario

us

Victo

ria Co

�ey

Robe

rt Pf

a�

UPC

Tec

hnol

ogy

Dem

onst

rati

ons

L1 S

pace

Wea

ther

Mon

itor R

epla

cem

ent

UPC

Stu

dent

Ex

peri

men

ts

UPC

Sci

ence

Mis

sion

sO

ptic

al C

omm

unic

atio

n

Star

shin

e

UPC

Inte

rnat

iona

lM

issi

ons

UPC

Inte

rnat

iona

l Flig

htO

ppor

tuni

ties

in e

xcha

nge

for S

cien

ce D

ata

(eg.

CIE

LO It

alia

n m

issi

on)

UPC

Mis

sion

s to

insp

ire th

e ne

xt g

ener

atio

n of

exp

lore

rs

Scie

nce

Tech

nolo

gy E

ngin

eerin

g an

d M

ath

(STE

M) l

earn

ing

oppo

rtun

ities

for k

inde

rgar

ten

thro

ugh

grad

uate

sch

ool.

UPC4

7

View

from

North

Eclip

tic Po

le

L1 Lib

ration

Orbit

Insert

ionMo

on’s O

rbit

Transf

er Orb

it

Gravit

y Assi

st to

Align

Plan

es

L1

Mob

ile O

ptica

l Arra

y

GEO

Optic

al Ar

ray

Ante

nna

Arra

ySix

Small

Sata

in2 O

rbit

Plane

User

s• C

onste

llatio

n Lun

ar Su

rface

Syste

ms

• Con

stella

tion O

rion/

Alta

it• L

unar

Scien

ce M

ission

s

SCaN

µwa

veSC

an O

ptica

lSu

rface

Net

work

New

Sci

enti�

c In

stru

men

ts

Fast

Elect

ron A

nalyz

er (F

EA)

Sola

r Ene

rget

ic Pa

rticle

Sp

ectro

met

er (S

EPS)

Sola

r Win

d Com

posit

ion

Spec

trom

eter

(HEL

IX)

Elect

ron D

etec

tor f

or

Iono

sphe

ric M

onito

ring

LWSI

D Pr

otot

ype I

nstru

men

tFa

st Io

n Com

posit

ion

Anal

yzer

(FIC

A)

Orion UPC Potential CustomersUPP Foldout 1U

PC

Pay

load

s P

roje

ct


2-1



2.0 CARRIER REQUIREMENTS AND INTERFACES

The GSFC UPC Payloads Project (UPP), in support of NASA ESMD Oct 30, 2007 assign-ments (see Figure 2.0-1), analyzed both the ESMD EARD[2] and Constellation CARD[19]. Using these key documents, the UPP team de-veloped and delivered an integrated set of UPC Payload requirements supporting the Constella-tion Systems Engineering & Integration (SE&I), the Constellation Operations & Test Integration (OTI), and the Constellation Service Module Program Office organizations. These integrated requirements resulted in establishment and base-lining of three UPC configurations: Ejectable, Extractable, and Fixed. These configurations are compliant with EARD and CARD requirements, as described in Table 2.0-1.

2.1 Carrier Requirements

The Orion SM was specified to accommodate

The Orion UPC Carrier is compliant with the NASA Exploration Architecture Requirements Document (EARD)[2] and the Constellation Architecture Re-quirements Document (CARD)[19].

UPC for the ISS Design Reference Mission (DRM), as allocated in the CARD. These resource allocations served as the basis for the Carrier de-signs detailed in this report. Additional require-ments, constraints, and assumptions were derived based on the Control Movement Gyroscope (CMG) reference study[22], GSFC UPC study[9], and technical interchange meetings with the SM Project Office.

Mass AccommodationsThe CARD allocates at least 1322 lbs (600 kg)

to UPC. After subtracting the mass of the Carrier with 30% contingency, the mass available for any ejected payload is 1,054 lbs (478.5 kg).

Volume AccommodationsThe current Orion SM propulsion tank bay

provides a total available volume of 132 ft³ (3.7 m³). The UPC common Payload Adapter Fitting occupies 31 ft³ (0.9 m³) of this volume. This results in two available volumes for payloads in the UPC Carrier (see Figure 2.1-1). The stan-dard volume is defined as the remaining volume inside the Orion SM bay after the carrier is ac-counted for and is 101.0 ft³ (2.9 m³). The ex-tended volume increases the standard volume to within 2.0 in (5.08 cm) of the Orion SM fairing dynamic envelope; this provides a total volume of 160.0 ft³ (4.5 m³).

This volume configuration preserves CMG ORU transfer and maximizes UPC payload ac-commodations. It is anticipated that portions of the UPC payload will protrude through the UPC bay opening. A minimum 2.0 in (5.08 cm) clear-ance was maintained for UPC Ejectable space-craft and Extractable payloads to avoid dynamic/static clearances until the Orion SM design and models mature.

Data Rate AccommodationsThe UPC Carrier easily accommodates the

minimum required data rate enroute for all (Eject-able, Extractable, and Fixed) configurations, as shown in Table 2.1-1. Maximum UPC data rates capabilities are dependent upon individual mis-sion and Orion design constraints.

Power AccommodationsThe UPC Carrier accommodates the required

power enroute for all (Ejectable, Extractable, and Fixed) configurations, as shown in Table 2.1-2. In addition, for Fixed payloads, up to 400 W is made available while Orion is docked to ISS.

ESMD assigned GSFC to provide the end-to-end capability of analyzing, formulating, defining, and synthesizing the requirements for UPC Payload Carrier implementation. Per the announcement of October 30, 2007[3], GSFC is directed to:

✔ Lead program requirements for unpressurized cargo carriers

✔ Lead Orion unpressurized cargo carrier

• Support lunar architecture work for Constellation Program system engineer

• Subsystem lead for lunar lander avionics

• Support lunar surface systems avionics and surface element communications

• Provide extravehicular activity tools and equipment

Figure 2.0-1: The check marks signify the UPC related constellation work assignments for GSFC.


2-2



2.2 Payload Configurations

Foldout 2 shows approximate payload accommodations, which will vary from mission to mission based on payload configuration and requirements and ISS External Attach Payload facilities.

Ejectable Spacecraft: Stowed Ejectable spacecraft must fit into the Orion SM allocated envelope. The Orion SM envelope is slightly constrained from the maximum value to enable safe ejection from the SM with adequate clearances between the satellite pathway, the SM structure, and de-ployed appendages. The Ejectable spacecraft is at-tached to the UPC Carrier with a previous flown release mechanism that provides an accurate and safe ejection into Low Earth Orbit (LEO) (see Section 3.2.1).

Fixed Payload: The UPC fixed payload Carrier is a flexible modular carrier that can accommodate up to four small or one to three larger payloads (see Section 3.1.1). The fixed payload remains per-manently attached to the SM while it is docked to the ISS for an estimated 180 days. The payload is in the “off” mode, except for survival power, until Orion is docked to ISS. Once docked to ISS, op-erational power (~400 W), and C&DH services are provided until Orion’s departure/return to Earth. The fixed carrier and payload are thermally decoupled from the SM, and each provides it’s own active thermal control system. Upon Orion CEV re-entry, the entire SM, including the UPC fixed carrier and payload, is consumed.

Field of views (FOV) are dependent upon the mission-specific ISS-Orion docking node and its clocking position relative to the ISS. Earth (nadir) views are typical, but space (zenith) views are also possible. Mission-payload specific FOV analysis is conducted based on CEV clocking positions and ISS structure obstructions.

UPC27

Standard Envelope(101.0 ft3)

Extended Envelope(160 ft3)

Figure 2.1-1: In addition to the standard envelope provided in the Orion SM, an extended envelope can be provided to payloads, if needed.

Table 2.0-1: CxP requirements define the science requirements and the need for three cargo configurations: Ejectable, Extractable, and Fixed.

Source Requirement Rational

EARD[2] The Exploration Architecture shall deliver crew and cargo to the ISS and return them safely to Earth. [Ex-0001]

Establishes the top-level Architecture requirement for missions to safely ferry crews between the Earth and the ISS, as well as providing a capability to ferry cargo to/from the ISS. Planned implementation approaches are commercial service providers and Constellation Systems. Some cargo return may require conditioning, such as cold stowage or vacuum seal. Some cargo may need to be deployed or released..

CARD[19] The Constellation Architecture shall deliver crew and cargo to the ISS and return them safely to Earth. [CA0892-PO]

Establishes the top level Architecture requirement for ISS mission to safely ferry crews and cargo between Earth and the ISS.

EARD[2] The Constellation Architecture shall transport crew and cargo as specified in the Constellation Architecture Crew and Cargo Capacity Table. [Ex-0010]

Cargo Delivery and Return: This requirement establishes cargo masses and volumes for accomplishing ISS objectives. The delivery of cargo is needed to support ISS operations and research. (See EARD Table 4.1-1)


2-3



Extractable Payload or Cargo: Extractable pay-load interfaces are similar to those for Ejectable spacecraft (Section 3.2). Extractable payloads are remotely removed from the SM via the Space Sta-tion’s RMS or “arm,” and placed onto a predeter-mined external ISS payload site. There are several ISS external payload attachment sites designed to accommodate payloads (see Figure 2.2-1); these sites provide power, commanding, and data han-dling. For additional details about ISS external sites and services, refer to the Overview of At-tached Payload Accommodation and Environments on the International Space Station[20].

Figure 2.2-1: There are several ISS external payload attachment sites designed to accommodate payloads.

UPC25

U.S-provided ExpressLogistics Carrier (ELC)

S3 Site P3 Site

Columbus-EPF (ExternalPayload Facilities) Japanese Experiment Module-

Exposed Facility (JEMEF)

Table 2.1-1: Robust telemetry data rates are provided to UPC payloads during transit via Orion.Mode Enroute At ISS Notes

Ejectable TLM - 20kbsCMD - 2 kpsScience - N/A

N/A(No Ops planned at ISS; spacecraft is ejected prior to ISS arrival.)

Health/Safety TLM; functional check prior to ejection

Extractable and Fixed

TLM - 20kbsCMD - 2 kpsScience - N/A

TBD Pre-conditioning prior to extraction

Table 2.1-2: Power provided to UPC payloads during transit can accommodate Ejectable spacecraft, Extractable payloads destined for the ISS, and Fixed payloads that remain with the SM.

Mode Enroute At ISS Notes

Ejectable 111 W (30 heaters+81 Avionics) N/A (No Ops planned at ISS Sub-satellite would be ejected prior to ISS arrival.)

Battery trickle charge; functional check prior to ejection

Extractable and Fixed

20 W TBD Pre-conditioning prior to extraction


Eart

h

Ares

Eart

h Or

bit

ORIO

N

Free

�yer

Dep

loym

ent (

e.g.

luna

r)

Free

�yer

Dep

loym

ent (

e.g.

LEO)

Extr

acta

ble

ISS A

ttac

hed

Payl

oad

or Ca

rgo

ISS

Fixe

d pa

yloa

dco

nsum

ed on

re-e

ntry

SM Ex

tend

ed

Land

ing

Fixe

d Pa

yloa

dDo

cked

for 6

mon

ths

ORIO

N to

ISS

Laun

chOR

ION

Dock

s to I

SSCr

ew Ea

rth Re

turn

UPC T

rans

fer t

o ISS

Ejecta

ble S

atell

iteOR

ION

Depa

rts IS

SSM

Re-e

ntry

UPC O

rion p

rovid

es �

exib

le op

tions

for s

atel

lites

, car

go, a

nd �

xed p

aylo

ads.

Ejec

tabl

eEx

trac

tabl

eFi

xed

Orion UPC AccommodationsUPP Foldout 2U

PC

Pay

load

s P

roje

ctW

or

ld c

lass

Sc

ien

ce,

Tec

hn

olo

gy

Val

idat

ion

, an

d C

arg

o T

ran

spo

rtat

ion

T

hr

ee P

aylo

ad C

on

fig

ur

atio

ns

Para

met

er

Capa

bilit

y Co

mm

ents

Orbit

LE

O, 52

°; ~

350 k

m

ISS or

bitDu

ratio

n of F

light

180

days

Do

cked

to IS

SVo

lume

160 f

t3 (4.5m

3 )

Max

paylo

adM

ass

425.8

lbs (

193 k

g)

mult

i-pay

loads

Po

wer

≤40

0W pe

ak

Via O

rion S

M w

hen d

ocke

d to I

SSDa

ta Ra

te

~10

0 mbp

s M

ission

spec

i�c p

er O

rion,

min

TLM

of

20kb

s & CM

D of

2kps

.Th

erm

al Pa

ssive

/Acti

ve

Inte

gral

UPC H

eatp

ipe Ra

diato

rFie

ld of

View

Ze

nith o

r Nad

ir De

pend

s on O

rion-

ISS lo

catio

n/co

n�gu

ratio

nPa

yload

site

s 0n

e-Fo

ur

Mult

iple p

ayloa

ds op

erat

ed se

quen

tially

Fixe

d Pa

yloa

d Ac

com

mod

atio

nsEj

ecta

ble S

atel

lite A

ccom

mod

atio

ns

Para

met

er

Capa

bilit

y Co

mm

ents

Orbit

LE

O, 52

°; ~

350 k

m

ISS or

bit

Dura

tion o

f Flig

ht 1

80 da

ys

Volum

e 14

8 ft3 (4

.2m3 )

M

ax pa

yload

Mas

s 69

1.4 lb

s (31

3.6 kg

) M

ax pa

yload

Po

wer

1.25-

3.0 kW

Va

ries o

n ISS

Paylo

ad At

tach

Site

*Da

ta Ra

te

1.55 –

100 M

bps

Varie

s on I

SS Pa

yload

Atta

ch Si

te*

Field

of Vi

ew

Zenit

h or N

adir

Varie

s on I

SS Pa

yload

Atta

ch Si

te*

Extr

acta

ble P

aylo

ad/C

argo

Acc

omm

odat

ions

(ISS A

ttach

ed Pa

yload

)

*NAS

A/TP

–200

7–21

4768

“Ove

rview

of At

tach

Paylo

ad Ac

com

mod

ation

s &

Envir

onm

ents

on th

e Int

erna

tiona

l Spa

ce St

ation

”

The O

rion U

PC Ca

rrier

can d

eplo

y an E

ject

able

Sate

llite

...

...or

carry

an Ex

tract

able

paylo

ad or

carg

o to t

he

Inte

rnat

iona

l Spa

ce St

atio

n

(ISS)

...

...or

carry

Fixed

Paylo

ads

dock

ed to

ISS f

or

up to

6 M

onth

s

Para

met

er

Capa

bility

Co

mm

ents

Orbit

Eje

cted i

nto L

EO,

Subs

atell

ite ca

n pro

vide

52

°; ~

350 k

m

onbo

ard p

ropu

lsion

Du

ratio

n of F

light

Var

ies

Depe

nds o

n sat

ellite

surfa

ce ar

ea,

pr

opuls

ion &

mas

sVo

lume

160 f

t3 (4.5m

3 )

Max

paylo

adM

ass

1054

.9 lbs

(478

.5kg)

Max

paylo

adPo

wer

400 W

peak

30

W su

rviva

l pow

er

Data

Rate

20

kpbs

M

ission

spec

i�c p

er O

rion,

min

TLM

20kb

s & CM

D 2k

ps.


3-1



3.0 ORION UNPRESSURIZED CARGO (UPC) CARRIER

3.1 UPC Carrier Design

Implementation of the UPC Carrier for the Orion vehicle maximizes a common, re-config-urable, modular design, with consistent validated processes across all UPC missions to reduce costs and ensure safety and mission success. The UPC Carrier is comprised of three key elements:

• Carrier Structure• Separation System• Payload Interface Avionics Box

The Carrier Structure is the primary structural attachment hardware that mounts to the Orion Service Module’s (SM) horizontal forward bulk-head. Since Orion’s lunar tanks are omitted for ISS-bound missions, the UPC Carrier mounts to Orion via these existing tank mounts. These mounting provisions are always available in the baseline SM design, and enable Carrier integra-tion. A key feature of the UPC Carrier is its mod-ularity and flexibility to accommodate a wide range of payload configurations with minimal modifications.

The primary interface to all UPC cargo/pay-loads is through an active non-pyro, low shock Separation System, which is an electro-mechani-cal clamp band similar to those flown on Shuttle and many ELVs. The Separation System provides positive structural attachment to the payload element while providing power/data through a breakaway connection. The release feature of the Separation System allows for ease of ground in-tegration. The payload is horizontally integrated into the UPC cargo bay, while the release fea-ture safely enables release or ejection of the pay-load on-orbit. Additional details are provided in Section 3.3.1.

The Payload Interface Avionics Box provides an integrated power and data interface between the

The UPC Carrier accommodates payload require-ments and maintains a standardized interface with the Orion Service Module (SM).

Orion-supplied UPC power/data services and the UPC Carrier with its payload. The interface avi-onics box enables basic payload command/telem-etry to be passed through the Orion 1G Ethernet command and data handling system, thus assur-ing safe and positive control of the cargo and pay-load functions. Additional details are provided in Section 3.3.

A mass summary for each of the payload configurations is provided in Table 3.1-1. Sev-eral Carrier components constitute a common structure attachment for all three configurations (Ejectable, Extractable, Fixed).

Typical UPC Mission ProfileThe UPC Carrier is designed to accommodate

UPC mission event profiles (see Table 3.1-2) for payload ejection to LEO or extraction to the ISS.

3.2 Design Assumptions

Initial UPC Carrier design requirements were taken directly from the Constellation Archi-tecture Requirements Document (CARD)[19] Rev C and only the ISS DRM parameters were used. These requirements are at level 2 in terms of functionality and performance. In some in-stances, requirements had to be derived to prop-erly define UPC carrier design elements and SM interfaces. Missing or insufficient requirements were coordinated with the Orion Service Module (SM) Project Office and appropriately delegated to the responsible engineering discipline. Other requirements were taken from the ISS Attached Payloads document[20]. Requirements were also derived from the Orion UPC implementation instructions per ERB-09-0420[21]. Top-level UPC requirements and key mission parameters are pro-vided in Section 2.1.

Scope and requirements include:

• The Carrier system includes the Separation System and interface avionics flight hardware as well as GSE mechanical and avionics simula-tors.

• The design includes 30% margins per GSFC Golden Rules for pre-Phase A designs.

• The Carrier does not include any portions of an Ejectable Satellite, Extractable or Fixed Pay-load or requirements uniquely levied by a single payload.

• The Carrier is designed to accommodate mul-tiple payloads through reconfiguration.

The Carrier design maximizes Orion’s unpressur-ized cargo capability, and uses heritage from simi-lar carrier systems to safely and reliably deliver services to a wide variety of payloads.


3-2



Table 3.1-2: Mission specific event profiles will be closely coordinated with the Orion project, and docu-mented in ICDs and mission flight plans.

Ejectable Satellite

Pre-launch: Payload Battery trickle charge via UPC Interface AvionicsLaunch: UPC Avionics Power OFF

Orbit Insertion (Ares-I Separation): UPC Avionics Power ON; UPC ESS - battery top charge

Pre-Ejection: Perform functional status check. Telemetry and Commanding thru Orion

Eject from SM: Separation System Release of Autonomous Payload

Post-Ejection: UPC Avionics Power OFF – thru SM De-orbit

Fixed Payloads

Pre-Launch - Launch: UPC Avionics Power OFF

Payload Activation: Orion bus power available. Carrier power on

Orbit Science Instrument Operation: Operations allowed to the Orion limits of power, thermal, and data limits

ISS Docking: Science operations discontinued during docking maneuvers

ISS Science Operations: Operations allowed to the ISS via Orion limits of power, thermal, and data limits

ISS Undocking: Science operation discontinued during undocking maneuvers

Post ISS Science Operations: Operations allowed to post ISS Orion limits of power, thermal, and data limits. Fixed payload is consumed on SM Re-Entry

Extractable Payload or Cargo

Pre-Launch - Launch: UPC Avionics Power OFF

Orbit Insertion – ISS Rendezvous/Docking: UPC Avionics Power ON; UPC ESS – Survival Mode (keep alive heaters)

Prior to SSRMS Removal: UPC Avionics Power ON – Payload Thermal Pre-conditioning as required

SSRMS Removal: UPC Avionics Power OFF

ISS Departure-De-orbit: UPC Avionics Power OFF

Fixed ModeFixed Experiment Enclosure

162

Common Carrier Structure 65.7

Thermal with Radiator (heatpipe)

40.98

Avionics 8.75

Harness 24

Subtotal 301.43 90.43 (391.86)

Heritage Separation System (ground use only)

(15)

FixedPayload Accommodations

193.14(425.8 lbs.)

Table 3.1-1: Mass SummaryMass (Kg)

Margin 30%

Totals

Orion Allocation to UPC 600

Ejectable ModeCommon Carrier:

– Carrier Structure 65.7

– Avionics 3.72

– Harness 6.5

– Thermal (MLI / Heaters)

6

Subtotal 81.92 24.58 (106.5)

Heritage Separation System

(15)

Ejectable Payload Accommodations

478.5(1054.9 lbs.)

Extractable ModeExtractable Payload Pallet 34

Common Carrier 81.92

Subtotal 115.92 34.78 (150.7)

Heritage Separation System

(15)

Heritage FRAM (120.7)

ExtractablePayload Accommodations

313.6(691.4 lbs.)


3-3



• Flight hardware is classified as “series hardware” but not reusable. A common carrier and avion-ics design is used for all mission modes (Fixed, Ejectable, Extractable).

• The Carrier is designed as a Class C mission; it is single string with selective redundancy as necessary to meet mission lifetime or as re-quired to meet flight safety requirements.

• All components and systems are planned to be TRL level of 8 or higher by the proposed launch date of 2015.

Key technical constraints driving the design are:• Remain within the defined volume, mass, and

power requirements defined in the CARD.• Utilize the mechanical attachment location,

CG envelope, seven-panel radiator UPC bay opening, and clearances as detailed in the Orion PDR System and Module Review (SMR)[21] and the CMG Reference Study[22] .

• Planned EVA to release or service UPC is not included. Any EVA activities would be on an unplanned, contingency basis only.

• Orion will not provide direct (crew) command-ing/control or data storage for UPC.

• UPC is responsible for thermal control (active/passive) and will not impose additional envi-ronmental conditions onto Orion components.

• There will not be routine physical access to UPC after integration into SM; this includes faring close-out and no access up to 90 days before launch.

Additional technical assumptions are:• The Orion (RCS) can accommodate an ejected

satellite.• An extended volume beyond the radiator mold-

line and up to the fairing is available.• A safety-qualified Separation System will be ap-

proved for flight on Orion.• Battery trickle charging will extend through

T-0 (or as late as feasible prior to closeout).• Ejected satellite chemical propulsion (with ade-

quate safeguards) is acceptable for both ground processing and flight.

• The UPC bay opening will be Zenith or Nadir pointing when docked on ISS.

• The UPC Carrier does not include SM struc-tural mass associated to accommodate UPC (carrier and its cargo).

• The Carrier design will ensure static/dynamic clearance of 2.00 in (5 cm) from the SM struc-ture.

• Nominal spacecraft ejection will be performed prior to the ISS rendezvous and docking phase.

• Orion will not have satellite or attached pay-load retrieval or Return-to-Earth capabilities.

• Orion will generate and manage UPC related critical commanding through UPC interface avionics.

3.3 UPC Carrier Subsystems3.3.1 Structural and Mechanical

Orion Service Module (SM) provides structural attachment points to accommodate a common UPC. A standardized or common UPC will be provided to attach payloads to the SM. The Carrier consists of a mounting disk that attaches to the for-ward propulsion bulkhead, a lateral plate that sup-ports a Separation System, and a lower mounting plate that replaces the aft propulsion tank bulk-head. This structure was chosen to provide the least impact to the SM structure and requires no modifications to Orion’s SM structure. Because of this standardized structure, payloads can be fully tested and flight qualified off line and integrated to the SM at any time during vehicle build-up.

The UPP team performed a preliminary struc-tural analysis of the design for the carrier and Separation System. Conservative loads were used in the analysis to ensure that the UPC interface loads at the Orion propulsion tank interface are lower than those predicted for a fully loaded Orion propulsion tank. The model was con-strained at the attachment points to the SM. Pre-liminary analysis shows a fundamental frequency of 50 hertz, using a rigid payload with the most extreme center of gravity and payload mass. This analysis shows that the carrier will accommodate all potential payload configurations. The struc-tural analysis model is provided in Figure 3.3-1.

A common UPC Carrier is used for all payload configurations: Fixed, Extractable, and Ejectable. The Carrier mounts to the SM at the forward pro-pulsion tank deck by utilizing the same mount-ing holes that mount the propulsion tank to the deck. The Carrier also has attachments to the SM at the fittings that attach the aft propulsion deck (see Figure 3.3-2). The Carrier also incorporates a Separation System to interface with the payload (Figure 3.3-3).

Unpressurized Cargo Carrier ComponentsThe UPC Carrier’s structural and mechanical

components fit within the structural accommo-dations provided by the Orion SM and meet all requirements for cargo transport and deployment.


3-4



The Carrier Structure is comprised of three major components. These are the Upper Mount-ing Deck, the Lateral Deck and Support Arms, and the Lower Mounting Deck. The Upper Mounting Deck consists of a circular machined aluminum alloy plate that mounts in the open-ing of the existing forward propulsion deck plate. Radial holes are provided that match the exist-ing hole pattern in the forward propulsion deck. Pockets are machined to accommodate the lateral deck and support arms. These decks are attached with shear pins and shear bolts.

The Lateral Deck and Support Arms consist of composite skin/aluminum alloy core honey-comb panels with machined aluminum alloy inserts. The lateral deck has an access hole and machined inserts to attach the Separation System. The lateral deck and support arms are attached to each other with shear bolts. The lateral deck and support arms are attached to the upper mounting deck with shear pins and shear bolts.

The Lower Mounting Deck consists of a com-posite skin/aluminum alloy core honeycomb panel that replaces the aft propulsion deck. It attaches to the SM through the same mounting brackets as the aft propulsion deck using hard-ware provided by the SM. It is also attached to the lateral deck and support arms.

The Separation System is fabricated in confor-mance with high reliability, Class A space flight hardware standards. It is a non-pyro, low-shock system with proven space flight heritage (TRL 9). The Separation System baselined in this report is the 38.1” Motorized LightBand by Planetary Systems, MD. The 38.1” Motorized LightBand

UPC33

Lateral Deck

Carrier Side

Upper Deck

Support Arms

Lower DeckAvionics Enclosure

Payload Side

Carrier Side

Separation System

Figure 3.3-3: A common UPC Carrier and set of components is used for all payload configurations.

UPC32

ForwardPropulsion Deck

AftPropulsion Deck

Mounts

Figure 3.3-2: UPC Carrier Mounting to SM.

UPC59

Rigid PayloadSEPARATION SYSTEMINTERFACE

LOWERMOUNTING DECK(aft propulsiontank mount)

UPPERMOUNTING DECK(forward propulsiontank mount)

Figure 3.3-1: Structural Analysis Model


3-5



has flown successfully on TACSAT 2, 3, and 4, IBEX AQUILA, and ORS-1 (Figure 3.3-4). Similar Separation Systems (23” and 19” diam-eters) were flown on Shuttle ejectables, including CAPE on STS-116 and most recently ANDE-2 on STS-127 (see Figure 3.3-5). The 38.1” Motorized LightBand user’s manual is avail-able at: http://www.planetarysystemscorp.com/download/2000785A_UserManual.pdf.

The Carrier side of the Separation System in-cludes the motor assembly, electrical, and data connectors. This mounts to the lateral deck. The mating ring on the payload side attaches to the payload and has mating data and electrical con-nectors.

Separation is controlled by varying the num-ber of separation springs. The separation tip-off rate is less than or equal to 1.0 degree/second/axis. Separation velocity may also be adjusted for mission requirements.

The Payload Interface Avionics Box is detailed in Section 3.1.3.

SM Extraction EnvelopeThe Orion SM provides an “extraction enve-

lope” or opening to extract or eject payloads/cargo on-orbit (Figure 3.3-6).

The payload envelope is defined using a 2.00 inch (5.08 cm) clearance. The limit in the payload Y-axis defines the two envelopes described in Section 2.0. The Standard Envelope is re-stricted to within 2.00” (5.08 cm) of the SM ra-diator, which provides a usable volume of 101 ft³ (2.9 m³). The Extended Envelope is restricted to within 2.00” (5.08 cm) of the SM fairing, which provides a usable volume of 160 ft³ (4.5 m³).

This extended envelope preserves CMG ORU transfer and maximizes UPC payload accommo-dations. A 2.0” (5.08 cm) clearance was main-tained for UPC Ejectable and Fixed Payloads to avoid any possible dynamic/static clearances until Orion SM design and models mature.

Typical Payload ConfigurationsThe Carrier structural and mechanical design

enables three distinct payload configurations. These are Ejectable Satellite, Extractable Payload or Cargo, and Fixed Payload configurations (see Foldout 3).

2.10 in[5.3 cm] 2.00 in

[5.1 cm]

2.03 in[5.2 cm]

AA

2.28 in[5.8 cm]

2.00 in[5.1 cm]

2.22 in[5.6 cm]

1.98 in[5 cm]

2.04 in[5.2 cm]

UPC34

Figure 3.3-6: The UPC envelope clearance is adequate to extract a payload on-orbit.

UPC58

Figure 3.3-4: 38.1” Motorized LightBand Separation System

UPC56

Figure 3.3-5: The ANDE-2 Pollux spherical spacecraft was deployed from Space Shuttle Endeavour on July 30, 2009, by the Internal Cargo Unit.


3-6



Ejectable Satellite

The Ejectable Satellite is a complete, self-con-tained spacecraft. At an agreed upon time in the mission schedule timeline, it is ejected into orbit, from which it can begin its autonomous mission. Deployment is through the Separation System and initiated by Orion through the UPC inter-face avionics. The Separation System retracts and kick-off springs separate the payload from the SM. Kick-off rates for the Separation System are expected to be less than 1.0 degree/second/axis. The payload envelope for this configuration has been calculated to allow for this kick-off rate.

Extractable Payload or CargoThe Extractable Payload or Cargo mounts to a

deck that has a Separation System interface. The Extractable Payload provides a mechanical inter-face to a human (EVA) or robotic handling (IVA) connection. Once on station at the ISS, the pay-load may be attached to the ISS with either the Separation System interface or other attachment hardware. The extractable deck has the capability to mount the passive side of a Flight Releasable Attachment Mechanism (FRAM) to accommo-date FRAM-designed payloads.

Fixed PayloadThe mechanical design for the UPC Fixed

configuration provides a flexible approach that can accommodate up to four instruments or any combinations thereof. A light weight modular en-closure design interfaces with the common UPC Carrier through the Separation System. This me-chanical connection also provides electrical and data connections for the fixed experiment pack-age. The modular instrument enclosure design and the attachment through the Separation Sys-tem simplifies integration and enables off line in-strument qualification as a single unit. Note: The Separation System is disabled during flight in the Fixed Mode. Each shelf incorporates a ther-mal radiator. Additional radiator area is available just below the UPC volume opening. Bays #2 and #3 can be configured as single bays or combined into one large bay configuration.

Mechanical Ground Support Equipment (MGSE)MGSE design and planning is based on

GSFC’s extensive experience with the Shuttle Small Payloads Project. This experience includes Get Away Specials, HitchHiker, and Spartan mis-sions. MGSE has been planned for construction prior to the first Orion mission and will be used

for all subsequent missions. There may be some usage overlap, but for this planning stage, dual sets of MGSE were not planned (unless specifi-cally stated).

The MGSE includes:

• A High Fidelity SM Bay Model to enable Carrier-SM integration and testing. The model is also used to aid in payload integration and testing. The model simulates all mechanical, electrical, and data interfaces and also duplicates SM thruster locations to enable interference studies. It may also be used for crew training and access studies.

• The UPC Carrier Flight Spare/Engineering Test Unit (ETU), which consists of two fully qualified and tested Carriers with Separation System. One ETU will undergo full proto-flight qualification testing and may be used for mate/demate tests with payloads. This ETU is also used to perform installation procedures, fit checks, mate/demate, and functional testing with the SM. The second ETU is mounted in the hi-fidelity SM bay for tests, including 1g training with the SM Bay model and payloads.

• Two Payload Integration Carts used to in-tegrate the payload with the Carrier once the Carrier is inside the SM bay. One cart is used at the assembly I&T facility and the other cart is used at the vehicle or SM integration facility.

• A Mass Model of Max Payload that is fabri-cated and used for carrier loads, center of grav-ity, and environmental testing.

• Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL) models fabricat-ed for the UPC and max payload configuration. These models can be used in a Zero-g simulator for robotic rehearsal or astronaut training.

• A Carrier Shipping Container is provided. This air/land shipping container is sized to ac-commodate a UPC Carrier, the avionics en-closure, and associated harnessing. Since the Carrier may ship several months in advance of the payload, the payload will provide its own shipping container.

3.3.2 PowerThe UPP plans for the UPC Carrier to be un-

powered at launch; it typically requires power for heaters and avionics soon after launch. Each Carrier mission type (Ejectable Spacecraft, Extractable Payload or Cargo, and Fixed Payloads) and each individual mission will have unique power re-quirements, to be less than the 400 Watts specified for the UPC interface. Ejectable, Extractable, and


3-7



Fixed UPC power profiles for a notional payload are provided in Figures 3.3-7, 3.3-8, and 3.3-9. Per the Orion PDR, the SM provides 120v DC to the UPC Carrier interface via a Power Data Unit (PDU). Ejectable and Extractable mission release is performed by the Separation System. Separa-tion does not require pyro circuits.

The assumed Service Module launch sequence and UPC Carrier events schedule is provided in Table 3.3-1. For Ejectable spacecraft missions, the Carrier requires power from 120 minutes to about 250 minutes on the mission schedule. For Extractable Payloads, the Carrier requires power from about 120 minutes on the schedule until ISS docking and then for ISS redeployment. For Fixed Payloads, the Carrier requires power from about 120 minutes on the schedule until depar-ture. Fixed Payload providers will be informed if their cargo should be designed to survive periods of power outages for Orion-ISS docking and un-docking maneuvers.

3.3.3 Avionics

The UPC Carrier Avionics consists of two designs. The first avionics design is used for the Ejectable and the Extractable Payload configura-tions, and provides the necessary fault-tolerance for inadvertent release of the Separation System. The second avionics design is for the Fixed Pay-load configuration which supports and manages up to 4 independent instruments or experiments.

Extractable/Ejectable PayloadThe Avionics designed for the Extractable and

Ejectable Payloads is an Interface (I/F) Avionics system using a field-programmable gate array (FPGA) which passes commands and telemetry from the Orion SM to the carrier Separation Sys-tem and heaters, and the associated UPC pay-loads or cargo prior to deployment/removal.

The I/F Avionics consist of a two (2) cards in-stalled in a 200 mils aluminum box for protection of space radiation exposure. The cards are a DC/DC Converter Board and a Digital I/O (DIO) Board. Communications between the cards are by a RS-422 signals. The I/F Avionics system receives switched 120 Volts power and 1-Gbit Ethernet data link from the Orion Service Module. The 1-Gbit Ethernet data link is used for telemetry and commanding from the ground via Orion Ser-vice Module. Low-level power is sent to the DIO card from the DC/DC converter card.

The DC/DC Converter Board has several DC/DC converters for 3.3vDC, 3.5vDC, 5v, and ± 12vDC power to the carrier components, and provides as standard 28vDC to the UPC payload. An optional 120vDC is also available to the UPC payload as a pass through from the SM power system. The Separation System receives 26.5 +/- vDC, 28 +/- vDC, and 16 +/-1 vDC

Figure 3.3-7: Notional Ejectable Payload Power Profile.

UPC29

Time (Minutes)

50

40

30

20

10

0

Powe

r (W

atts)

UPC Spacecraft in Service Module: Ejectable Spacecraft

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240

3.00

2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00

Amp H

ours

Used

Instrument #1CommunicationsACSAvionics

TotalPropulsionAmpHour Used

ThermalHarnessSAD

Figure 3.3-8: Notional Extractable Payload Power Profile.

Instrument #1Thermal

HarnessTotal

CommunicationsAvionics UPC30

Time (Minutes)

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Powe

r (W

atts)

UPC Spacecraft in Service Module to ISS: Extractable Spacecraft

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240

Figure 3.3-9: Notional Fixed Payload Power Profile.

Time (Minutes)

120

90

60

30

0

Powe

r (W

atts)

UPC Spacecraft in Service Module: Fixed Carrier

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240

UPC31

ThermalCommunicationsAvionics

Instrument #3Instrument #4Total

HarnessInstrument #1Instrument #2


3-8



power from the Avionics System for stowing, deployment, and flight configuration, respective-ly, as command modes via Orion. An additional safety inhibit feature (latching relay), will be re-quired to be commanded by Orion, to preclude inadvertent Separation System release.

The DIO board passes commands and teleme-try from the Orion SM to the payload via the Sep-aration System break-away connectors which can be MIL-STD-1553, 1Gbit Ethernet or RS-422, depending on the payload architecture. The DIO Board sends and receives digital signal to thermis-tors on the heaters. The DIO Boards also receives signals from the Separation Systems for house-keeping telemetry, specifically to verify a stowed or released configuration to Orion.

This FPGA design will provide a capable, safe, and low-cost avionics approach but it will have limitations. Specifically, if more complex pay-loads are to be flown that require hazardous safing or commanding, or if Orion safety requirements require more inhibits or active monitoring, fault detection and safing, a C3I compliant redun-dant processor will most likely be required. Since at this time, exact safety requirements and pay-

load hazards are not well defined, such an option would require additional study during Phase A.

A block diagram of the I/F Avionics System can be seen on Figure 3.3-10. The I/F Avionics System estimated average power is 7 watts and the estimated peak power is 10 watts, as shown on Table 3.3-2. The I/F Avionics System mass is estimated to be 3.72 kg (8.20 lbs) and the esti-mated chassis size 185 mm (7.283 inches) height, 250 mm (9.843 inches) depth and 66 mm (2.59 inches) length.

Fixed PayloadThe Fixed Avionics is designed to support

up to four instruments with 50 thermistors on the Thermistor Card and a total of 50 ana-log and digital signals on the Analog Card. The 50 thermistors and analog signals are collected on the Multi-Channel Analog Acquisition Card and processed on the Single Board Computer (SBC) for telemetry downlink. The digital signals are collected on the DIO card and are also pro-cessed on the Single Board Computer (SBC) for telemetry downlink. The Fixed avionics chassis is designed with 200 mils aluminum to protect the electronics from radiation exposure.

The Carrier Avionics interfaces Orion to the SBC for command and telemetry via 1 GBit eth-ernet interface. The Command and Data Han-dling (C&DH) SBC card is designed to receive instrument data at a rate not less than 30 Mbits/sec. This is accomplished using SpaceWire in-terfaced between the instruments and the DIO Card. A compression chip is included on the DIO Card to provide instrument data compression ca-pabilities and the Data Storage Card is included to provide compressed data storage. SpaceWire is on the backplane to provide a high data rate transfer between cards.

The Orion provides a switched 120vDC power interface to the Fixed Output Module card, which distributes 28v to the four instruments and the Fixed Low-Voltage Power Converter (LVPC). The LVPC converts 28V input to 3.3V, 5V, 15V, and +/-12V. The converted voltages are distrib-uted to the cards.

A block diagram of the Fixed Avionics is provid-ed in Figure 3.3-11. The Fixed Avionics estimated average power is 36 watts and the estimated peak power is 45 watts, as shown in Table 3.3-3. The Fixed Avionics mass is estimated to be 19.26 lbs

Table 3.3-1: The UPC Carrier will enable the payload to utilize power supplied by the Orion SM.

Time (Min)

Time (Hours)

Event Log

1 0.02 Launch – Carrier Power OFF

2 0.03 First Stage Separation/ Upper Stage Ignition

3 0.05 Service Module Jettison then LAS Jettison

9 0.15 Upper Stage Engine Shutdown

10 0.17 Second Stage Separation then Second Stage separation Burn

15 0.25 Maneuver to Circularize Burn Attitude

24 0.40 Circularization Burn

29 0.48 Orion Solar Array Deploy

44 0.73 Orion High Gain Antenna Deploy

120 2.00 Orion Bus Power available. Carrier Power ON

250 4.17 UPC Spacecraft Ejection

2820 47.00 Orion ISS Docking Complete

3780 63.00 UPC Payload Extracted and Placed on ISS Truss.


3-9



(8.74 kg) and the estimated chassis size 7.28 inches (185 mm) height, 9.84 inches (250 mm) depth and 5.78 inches (147 mm) length.

Fixed Payload Avionics Flight SoftwareThe flight software (FSW) will be developed

in compliance with NPR 7150.2 using GSFC Code 582’s CMMI-compliant processes. Ap-proximately 60% of the flight software will be re-used from NASA/GSFC projects such as LRO and SDO. The FSW has many built-in capa-bilities that simplify adapting heritage code to

Figure 3.3-10: Orion UPC Carrier I/F Avionics Block Diagram for Ejectable/Extractable

DC/DC Converter Board

• Receives 120 v from the Orion SM, conditions and sends : – 28v to the I/F Avionics Heaters – 120v and 28 v to the Payload – 16.0 +/- 1 Vdc to the separation system for Flight mode – 28 +/- 4 Vdc to the separation system for Deploy mode – 26.5 +/- 0.5 Vdc to the separation system for Stow mode – Low level voltages( for example: +/-12v, 5v, 3.5v, 3.3v) to

the DIO – Communicates with the DIO Board via the RS-422 I/F – Receives a safety inhibit signal from the Orion SM for the

stow, flight and deploy modes of the Separation system

DIO Board

• Receives thermistor signals from the heater thermocouple to monitor H/K information.

• Sends thermistor signal to the heater thermocouples to turn the heaters on/off

• Receives low level voltage from the DC/DC Converter Board• Communicates with the DC/DC Converter Board via the RS-422 I/F• Interfaces to Orion SM via 1-Gbit Ethernet for tlm and cmd• Interfaces to the payload via 1-Gbit Ethernet, MIL-STD-1553 or RS-422

for tlm and cmd• Routes all commands from the Orion SM to the Payload (and I/F Avionics)

via 1 Gbit Ethernet, MIL-STD-1553 or RS-422• Routes all telemetry from the Payload (and I/F avionics) to Orion SM via

1-Gbit Ethernet, MIL-STD-1553 or RS-422

Table 3.3-2: Orion UPC Carrier I/F Avionics Power Estimates

Assembly # of cards

Avg Pwr

Total Avg Pwr

Peak Pwr

Output Module (DC/DC converter)

1 3 3 4

Digital Input/Output(DIO) 1 4 4 6

Total 7 10

UPC38

26.5 +/-.5V dc for Stow

28 +/-4V dc for Deploy

16+/-1V dc for Flight

28/120 voltsfor Payload

28/120 volts

MIL-Std-1553, 1 Gbitor RS-422

RS-422

Power

cmdtlm

MIL-Std-1553,1 Gbit or RS-422

28 volts

tlm

cmd

1 Gbit Ethernet

UPC Avionics

UPC Carrier

120 volts

Orion SM

UPC Payload

Separation System (SS)

DIOBoard

DC/DCConverter

RS-422power1 Gbit EthernetDiscrete signal for thermistorsMIL-STD-1553, 1 Gbit Ethernet or RS-422Discrete signals from separation systemPower modes/commands to operate theseparation system

LEGEND

Safety inhibit signal


3-10



support wide range of mission architectures. It is highly table-driven and supports memory and table uploads. Stored command processing and limit checker provide mission fault management. The FSW is based on GSFC Core Flight Software System (CFS) and has four major components: a small runtime Core Flight Executive (cFE), an expandable catalog/library of reusable software

components, a process for configuration man-agement and controlled reuse, and an Integrated Development Environment (IDE). The CFS (see Figure 3.3-12) is designed to allow components to be selected, configured, and deployed into run-ning systems with all the process artifacts, which can reduce aspects of the development cycle from years to months. The CFS is particularly suitable to UPC. It standardizes Application Program-mer Interfaces (API), software services, and the development environment for flight software ap-plication developers and supports flight software design, implementation, integration, test, and maintenance.

The flight software interfaces with Orion SM via a Honeywell -developed Time Triggered Giga-bit Ethernet (TT-GbE) interface card with a stat-ic Media Access Control (MAC) address assigned by the Orion project. The command and date protocol comply with C3I standards. The UPC telemetry and command definitions are written in Extensible Markup Language (XML). The UPC Data Exchange Message (DEM) is encapsu-lated within rate constraint Universal Datagram Protocol (UDP) and delivered via Internet Proto-col Version 4 (IPv4) over the Ethernet, as shown in Figure 3.3-13.

Table 3.3-3: Fixed Avionics Power Consumption (watts)

Assembly # of cards

Avg Pwr

Total Avg Pwr

Peak Pwr

Single Board Computer 1 8 8 15

Data Storage 1 9 9 10

LVPC 1 7 7 8

Multichannel Analog/HK/Thermistors

1 3 3 3

Backplane 1 0 0 0

Chassis 0 0 0 0

Output Module 1 5 5 5

Digital Input/Output(DIO)/HK 1 4 4 4

Total 36 45

Fixed Avionics Block Diagram

Single Board Computer

Multi-Channel Analog Acquisition Card \ HK (thermistors)

Data Storage Board (12GBytes) 18 Gbytes with EDAC

Low Voltage Power Converter

DIO and Compression \ HK

Output Module

Instrument 3

Instrument 4

Instrument 2

Instrument 1

Separation System 1 Gbyte Ethernet tlm/cmd

Digital Signals

Analog / Thermistors Signals

SpW

120V input 28 V Distributed

28V input

C&DH

SpaceWire

pwr

LEGENDSpaceWire Analog Power Digital

Orion S/C

1 Gbyte Ethernet 120V

UPC55

Figure 3.3-11: Fixed Avionics Block Diagram


3-11



3.3.4 UPC Communication and DataOrion will provide communications and data

interfaces to UPC Carrier flight avionics system in order to provide heater power, operation of the Separation System, and payload power and mon-itoring as required. Data rates vary on the type and phase of mission. For the Ejectable and Ex-tractable Payloads, the UPC Carrier Avionics will pass commands and telemetry from the Orion to the Carrier Separation System and to the payload via the Separation System break-away connectors.

The UPC Avionics will function as a data translation bridge between the payload and Orion similar to a Remote Interface Unit (RIU). In this mode the UPC Carrier will contain the Orion 1-GbE interface and a separate payload in-terface, which can be MIL-STD-1553, 1GbE or RS-422, depending on the payload architecture. The Carrier will accept commands addressed to it, in the same way as a Orion PDU, and would pro-vide data in a similar manner. The payload non-critical commands and data will not be defined within Orion but will be sent via Orion ground systems. The UPC Avionics in this configuration will not be able to provide any status of the pay-load to Orion onboard systems. The UPC non-critical commands will be sent, and telemetry will be monitored by the UPC MOC at JSC.

Due to the safety critical nature of the ejec-tion mechanisms it is assumed that the C&DH software in the Orion DCM (Display Control

Module) flight computer will control the ejection command sequence as well as the thermal moni-toring. The UPC Carrier itself will have a limited command and data set with command and moni-toring of its functions available through the Orion DCM. These will include the UPC power on/off; separation system stow and deploy commands with their associated safety inhibits and status telemetry. The low rate command and status te-lemetry interface will require a static allocation in the DCM I/O schedule table that will not vary mission to mission. This implementation allows for complete control of all safety related functions from Orion’s fault tolerant flight computers. Note that power to and monitoring of non-critical pay-load thermostatically controlled survival heaters will be provided in the UPC Avionics.

For Fixed Payloads, a more capable Avionics system will be able to manage, storage data and control up to four instruments or experiments. In all cases, impact to Orion communication sys-tem will be minimized yet allow Orion full con-trol of all critical commands to UPC systems.

Carrier data interfaces to and from the Orion SM and UPC payload will be defined via ap-proved Interface Control Documents (ICDs). Descriptions for the data structure, cabling and connectors, and data flow paths necessary to ful-fill communications requirements will be includ-ed in the various ICDs between the UPC Carrier, UPC payload, and Orion.

UPC Carrier Avionics testing requires simulated Orion communication and data interfaces. These services are provided for UPC tests including:

• Component self testing• Bench unit testing• Carrier integration testing without the UPC

payload• System testing using the high-fidelity Orion

SM mechanical mockup and the payload and ground simulators

• Testing with the Orion SM simulator• Flight Carrier to Orion SM local testing with

the UPC payload simulator (without the Carrier or UPC MOCs)

• Carrier to payload testing using the Orion SM mockup and a ground simulator

3.3.5 Thermal SystemThe UPC Carrier thermal system is designed to

maintain the thermal environment of the Carrier

UPC60

SWComponents

HWComponents

MessagingMiddleware

cFE Services

OS Abstraction

Operating Systems

Device Driverscontrol & data

Executive Services

Time, Events, Tables

Device Abstraction

OS 1 • • • OS n

Figure 3.3-12: Core Flight Software System Architecture

UPC61

DEM UDP IP v4 Ethernet

Figure 3.3-13: UPC Carrier Telemetry and Command Format


3-12



Structure, Avionics, and Separation System. The UPC Carrier is primarily a passive thermal sys-tem incorporating thermostatically-controlled film strip heaters. For the Fixed configuration, the UPC Carrier provides an external radiator for the instrument enclosure. The Carrier does not provide heatpipes or other active cooling systems for the Ejected and Extractable configurations. For these configurations, the specific payload is responsible for its thermal control. The Carrier Avionics and Structure are blanketed for all mis-sion configurations (Ejectable, Extractable, and Fixed Payload). Further thermal analysis is re-quired to determine if the SM cavity may need to be blanketed with multi-layer insulation (MLI).

Thermal control of the Avionics is through a white paint radiator that can reject the expected 12 watts (assuming a 25° C environment) of power dissipation that radiates inside the Carrier bay cavity. As the SM design matures, future analysis will be conducted to verify this Avionics concept. Cho-seal is used as the interface material between the Avionics baseplate and mount inter-face plate. Avionics box and Separation System motor operating and survival limits are provided in Table 3.3-4. The allocated heater is estimat-ed to be ~20 Watts. Thermostatically-controlled heaters maintain survival temperatures for Avion-ics and the Separation System motors. Flight te-lemetry is used to monitor the Avionics box and the Separation System.

The thermal hardware consists of commonly-flown TRL 9 items, including: kapton film heat-ers, cho-seal interface material, thermistors, ther-mostats, Multi-layer Insulation (MLI) blankets, thermal paints (such as NS43G white paint), and/or various thermal adhesive-type tapes. The required thermal materials will be further defined in Phase A.

Space EnvironmentsDetailed environmental data for the UPC

Carrier is provided by the SM. To conduct the integrated analysis required to predict UPC

temperatures during each mission phase, the GSFC UPP team generates an integrated thermal model of the Carrier in the SM bay.

Prelaunch EnvironmentsThe UPC Carrier thermal environment is

maintained by the SM during ground transport and hoist onto the Launch Vehicle (LV). After SM fairing installation, the UPC payload bay thermal environment is controlled by the SM, which pro-vides conditioning capabilities during pre-launch conditions. The prelaunch environmental param-eters will be further defined in Phase A.

Flight EnvironmentsThe ISS Orbital Parameters are defined in

Foldout 2. The driving beta angles are provided in Figure 3.3-14. These parameters were used to calculate the extreme environmental loads the UPC carrier will experience. The UPC flight en-vironment during transit to the ISS will be fur-ther defined in Phase A.

Worst case hot environmental constants are provided in Table 3.3-5 and worst case cold envi-ronmental constants in Table 3.3-6.

The solar zenith angle correction is:

SZA = cos -1 (cos (b)*cos (n))

where b is the beta angle and n is the true anomaly.

The worst hot and cold conditions for the UPC Carrier for Extractable, Ejectable, and Fixed Pay-load missions will be defined in detail in the UPC Orion Thermal ICD. This document bounds the flight conditions the Carrier is exposed to while in transit to the ISS.

Table 3.3-4: UPC Carrier operating temperatures are well within system limits.

Carrier Components

Operating Temperature Limits

Survival Temperature

Limits

Avionics 0 to 40°C -10 to 50°C

SS Motors -25 to 90°C -50 to 100ºC

Table 3.3-6: Cold Case Environmental Constants for ISSSolar Constant 419.5 BTU/Hr/ft2 (1322 W/m2)

Albedo 0.17 + SZA Correction

OLR 68.9 BTU/Hr/ft2 (217 W/m2)

Table 3.3-5: Hot Case Environmental Constants for ISSSolar Constant 448.6 BTU/Hr/ft2 (1414 W/m2)

Albedo 0.28 + SZA Correction

OLR 81.9 BTU/Hr/ft2 (258 W/m2)


3-13



Test RequirementsTo verify the thermal design system in a ther-

mal balance test and to qualify the system dur-ing thermal vacuum testing, UPC Carrier test requirements will be defined in a detailed test plan and test verification matrix. Top-level test requirements are defined in Section 3.6.

3.3.6 Mission Operations/Ground Systems

UPC Carrier Mission Operations and Ground Systems include limited support of the Carrier at Johnson Space Center (JSC). The UPP uses an engineering backroom approach at a JSC location to send commands and receive telemetry. There are three ground elements:

• UPC Carrier Mission Operations Control (MOC): The UPC Carrier MOC is located at JSC and provides limited functionality (e.g., Avionics commanding, real-time telemetry monitoring, and standard voice loops) to sup-port UPC Mission Operations. A small obser-vation area is allocated for engineering teams.

• UPC Science Operations Center (SOC): The

UPP manages or negotiates all telemetry and command interfaces with the host SOC. The UPC SOC provides science data processing and is a depository for PI-processed data. The SOC interfaces with the UPC Carrier MOC and provides observer support, observation planning, and data displays.

• The Ground Data System (GDS): The GDS is a basic Telemetry and Command system. The same GDS is used during I&T and Mis-sion Operations to provide upward compatibil-ity benefits and ensure a smooth transition to mission operations. The GDS is comprised of CPUs, monitors, and printers.

Pre-mission operations include Mission Readi-ness Tests (MRTs) and reviews as well as end-to-end simulations. Operations Implementation tasks include:

• Support launch and early orbit operations• Support UPC activation• Support avionics commanding and telemetry

monitoring• Perform mission planning/re-planning

Figure 3.3-14: Driving beta angles based on ISS orbital parameters.

UPC28

Passive ThermalISS Cold Case AtS(a)

Passive ThermalHeater Power

For Power Sizing

Passive ThermalHeater Sizing &Channelization

Active ThermalISS Cold Case NF

Lower Power LoadHigh Power Load

Solar Array Sizing Active ThermalISS Hot Case - NF

Active ThermalISS Hot Case - DtISS

Active ThermalLunar Hot CasesAtS, NF, TN, NN

Active ThermalISS Hot Case - AtS

Passive ThermalHot Cases

β=75° Full Sun 225 km

Active ThermalISS Max Water UseAtS, NF, TN

Active ThermalISS Hot Case - TN

β=68.8° Full Sun 460 kmActive ThermalISS Cold Case AtS(b)

β=60°β=56°

β=40°

β=75°

β=15°

β=10°

β=0°

475

450

425

400

375

350

325

300

275

250

225

200

175 50 25 0

475

450

425

400

375

350

325

300

275

250

225

200

17550

250

475

450

425

400

375

350

325

300

275

250

225

200

175

50

250

ISS Op

erat

ional

Altit

ude

Luna

r Miss

ion Ea

rth

R

ande

vous

Orbit In

serti

on

Apog

ee


3-14



• Provide status reports to Project• Support sustaining engineering• Document/resolve anomalies• Support monitored and autonomous opera-

tions based on mission science requirements, schedule, and ground station contact scenarios

3.4 Contamination Engineering

Payloads are minimally cleaned to visibly clean, highly sensitive classification per JSC-SN-C-0005 prior to integration to Orion, and are processed in an ISO Class 8 or better cleanroom per ISO-14644-1 (Class 100,000 per FED STD 209E) during final assembly. Hardware bake-outs are performed as necessary to meet imposed outgas-sing and deposition requirements. All materials are screened in accordance with NASA Reference Publication 1124, Outgassing Data for Selecting Spacecraft Materials.

The UPP generates a payload Contamination Control Plan for each mission. This plan estab-lishes mission specific contamination require-ments and describes the methods and procedures used to measure and maintain the levels of clean-liness required during each phase. Contamina-tion interfaces between Orion and the payload are also documented in the plan.

After encapsulation, it is anticipated that little or no processing is required on the launch pad, how-ever, some payloads may be contamination sensi-tive and therefore may require a purge or condi-tioned air while on the launch pad prior to launch.

3.5 Safety & Mission Assurance

The GSFC S&MA group provides required Safety and Quality Assurance support and over-sight for all aspects of UPC to be flown onboard Orion, including the Carrier and each payload. Safety assessments cover all mission phases, in-cluding ground processing at the launch site. This organization independently reports to GSFC management through S&MA channels outside of project management and engineering. UPC Safe-ty will ensure the proper level of safety compli-ance has been implemented by the payload orga-nization by providing a UPC Carrier-to-payload

integrated hazard analysis to the Orion Systems Safety organization. The UPC safety process will be further detailed in related documents to clear-ly specify safety requirements, practices, and the processes required to achieve flight certification.

Ejected SatelliteAll Orion UPC configurations implement all

available S&MA approaches to eliminate or con-trol hazards, including: fault-tolerance, designing for minimum risk, incorporating safety devices, and implementing hazard mitigation special procedures. CxP requirements to mitigate haz-ards permit use of fault tolerance (i.e., additional methods rather than design redundancy to miti-gate hazards may be provided, such as operational workarounds). The primary methods for hazard mitigation for UPC are fault/failure tolerance and designing for minimum risk. EVA is not being considered as a method for hazard mitigation.

Unique, Generic, and Integrated Hazards: The UPP has defined a set of generic and integra-tion hazards as part of the overall hazard analysis process. This generic integrated hazard approach effectively satisfies CxP safety requirements and establishes a systematic method to ensure safe integration and operation of UPC Ejectable, Ex-tractable and Fixed configurations. A preliminary list of hazards is provided in Table 3.5-1.

The UPC approach is based on GSFC’s exten-sive experience with and lessons learned from sys-tem safety processes implemented for the Shuttle Small Payloads Project, Hitchhiker, and Get-Away Special payloads.

Extractable and Fixed PayloadsTo eliminate and/or control hazards, the Extract-

able and Fixed Payload configurations implement the same S&MA approach as the Ejectable con-figurations, including: fault-tolerance, designing for minimum risk, incorporating safety devices, and implementing hazard mitigation special pro-cedures. Compliance with additional International Space Station safety requirements is the respon-sibility of the payload organization and the UPP. The UPP has processes and procedures in place to address all ISS-related S&MA requirements.


3-15



3.6 UPC Integration and Test

UPC Integration and Test (I&T) includes pro-cesses for UPC development, integration, qualifi-cation/acceptance, and functional testing, as well as integration of the payload to the Carrier. The UPC Carrier has its own I&T program, distinct from that of the individual payload elements, which may or may not be tested and integrated at GSFC.

Figure 3.6-1 is a summary of the verification testing required for the UPC Carrier.

As with most I&T programs, Carrier I&T in-cludes two distinct phases:

• Individual subsystem integration, functional test, and environmental qualification;

• Carrier system-level integration, functional test, and environmental testing.

3.6.1 UPC Carrier Subsystem I&TThe I&T sequence for individual Carrier sub-

systems (e.g., an electronics assembly) is summa-rized in Foldout 4.

Table 3.5-1: The preliminary UPC Orion Hazards list is part of the hazard analysis process which effectively satisfies CxP safety require ments and establishes a systematic method to en sure safe integration and operation.

Hazard Title Configuration Phase

Ejectable Extractable Ground Flight

Personnel Exposure to Excessive Levels of Ionizing or Non–Ionizing Radiation x x x

Structural Failure of Support Structures and Handling Equipment x x x

Collision During Handling x x x

Loss of Habitable/Breathable Atmosphere x x x

Flammable Materials and Flame Propagation Paths x x x x

Structural Failure x x x x

Sealed Container Rupture x x x x

Element Temperature Extremes x x x x

Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV)/Service Module Incompatible Operations x x x x

Ignition of Flammable Atmosphere/Material x x x x

Electrical Damage/Failure x x x x

Use of Hazardous/Incompatible Materials x x x x

Inadvertent Deployment of Appendages x x x x

Inadvertent Activation of Hazardous Devices x x x x

Elements Degrade Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) Critical Functions x x x

Excessive Ionizing Radiation x x x

Excessive Radiated Non–Ionizing Emissions x x x

Excessive Conducted Emissions x x x

Structural Damage (Carrier, Payloads, Free-Flyer) x x x

Premature/Inadvertent Release or Separation x x x

Partial/Incomplete Release or Separation (“Hang-Fire”) x x x

Collision/Contact with Orion x x x

Pressure System Explosion/Rupture (Propulsion, or other) x x x

Hazardous Venting/Pressure Release x x x

Inadvertent Release of Corrosive, Toxic, Flammable, Cryogenic Fluids, or Propellants x x x

Post-Separation On-Orbit Collision/Recontact x x


3-16



Electrical integration includes harness routing, measurements, and voltage checks. Closeout in-cludes any staking and coating applications not possible during Carrier-level integration. EMI/EMC may include radiated and conducted emis-sions and susceptibility testing. Vibration testing includes sine sweep and random vibe. Thermal-vacuum testing for each subsystem assembly covers eight cycles.

3.6.2 UPC Carrier System I&T

The UPC Carrier system I&T sequence is sum-marized in Foldout 4.

Electrical integration during Carrier I&T is similar in process to subsystem I&T, with har-ness routing, measurements, and voltage checks. Functional testing at the Carrier level includes in-tegrated performance testing.

In addition to three-axis sine and random vi-bration testing, acoustic and shock testing is typi-cally performed at this level, using a payload mass simulator. Functional tests are performed follow-ing each major vibration test. Mass properties may be performed at any stage in the flow, based on facility availability.

Thermal balance tests are performed at worst-case hot and cold conditions. Proper operation of the thermal control system is verified and thermal models are validated.

Because the Carrier is considered series hard-ware, only an acceptance test program is required

for follow-on missions. This primarily involves acceptance-level vibration and thermal-vacuum testing (no thermal-balance testing required).

If the payload is developed or delivered to GSFC prior to shipment to KSC (e.g., for Fixed Payloads), then payload-to-Carrier mechanical integration is performed at GSFC. If the payload requires power or C&DH with the Carrier, electrical integration with the Carrier is also performed. Systems-level functional testing is then conducted to ensure the integrated UPC payload is operating properly. If the payload is developed at the payload developer’s facility and delivered to KSC separate from the Carrier, then fit-checks and interface testing is per-formed at the developer’s facility using high fidelity simulators and engineering units.

Upon completion of Carrier-level I&T, the UPC Carrier and payload is de-integrated and shipped separately. The hardware and GSE is then packed and shipped to KSC for prelaunch integration and test.

3.6.3 Launch Site Operations

The UPC Carrier and payload are delivered to KSC at an offline support area, anticipated to be in the Operations and Checkout (O&C) Build-ing. Postship offline operations are summarized in Foldout 4.

Offline operations include receiving/inspec-tion, unpacking, and any post-ship functional testing and payload servicing, if required. Also performed are any sharp-edge or other flight-crew inspections required. If payload-Carrier integra-tion is required for offline testing, then post-test deintegration is necessary to support sequential integration with the vehicle. This is necessitated due to Orion SM-bay dimensional and SM-UPC Carrier assembly timeline constraints.

UPC-to-Orion I&T and test operations are summarized in Foldout 4. UPC integration with the Orion SM is performed at the O&C Build-ing by KSC personnel with GSFC support. Once the Carrier is integrated and interfaces to the SM are verified, the payload is installed onto the SM. Any Carrier-to-Carrier (or -payload) interfaces (i.e., those not involving direct SM connections), are performed by GSFC. The interface verifica-tion test to verify copper-path electrical connec-tions is the primary powered test between the payload and vehicle.

UPC40

UPC Carrier AssemblyUPC Carrier AvionicsStructureThermal ComponentsElectrical Harness

Load

s Tes

t (1)

Work’

Ship

Vibe (

2)Ra

ndom

Vibr

ation

Sine V

ibrati

on (3

)Ac

ousti

cs/Sh

ock (

4)We

ight/M

ass P

rops (

4)EM

I/EMC

(4)

Therm

al Va

c (5)

Therm

al Ba

lance

(4)

Bake

out

Fcn’l/

Perfo

rm. Te

sts

USS

SCC

UUSS

USS

SS

SUS

CC

UUSS

ITEMDESCRIPTION

Abbreviations:U = UPC Carrier-levelS = Subsystem assy-levelC = Component-level

Notes:(1) Loads test sine burst for subassembly level(2) For follow-on (post-Mission 1) units(3) Sine sweep for launch event input & low-level sine sweep for frequency determination(4) Not required for follow-on (post-Mission 1)(5) 8 cycles at S/S I&T, 4 at carrier I&T

Figure 3.6-1: UPC Carrier Verification Matrix


3-17



For Ejectable spacecraft payloads, propellant loading is performed following transfer from the O&C. It is anticipated this will be performed at the Multi-Payload Processing Facility (MPPF), which is a designated hazardous operations fa-cility. If required, payload servicing (e.g., purg-ing, battery charging) may also be performed if feasible with respect to schedule and access. Pay-load closeouts, to be performed by GSFC, may include red-tag/green-tag items, such as removing aperture covers. Late/continuous servicing of the payload (e.g., for purge or trickle-charge), is pro-vided through a SM umbilical or access panel.

UPC Carrier Summary

The use of the common UPC Carrier will en-sure safety and save cost through reuse of technol-ogy and expertise across missions. The Carrier is designed to optimize payload capacity and servic-es within Orion constraints. The design presented in this section reflects Goddard’s rich experience and lessons learned from similar flight missions, as detailed in Appendix D.


Orion UPC Carrier DesignUPP Foldout 3U

PC

Pay

load

s P

roje

ctW

or

ld C

lass

Sc

ien

ce,

Tec

hn

olo

gy

Val

idat

ion

, an

d C

arg

o T

ran

spo

rtat

ion

The c

omm

on U

PC ca

rrier

inco

rpor

ates

a lo

w sh

ock,

non p

yro s

epar

atio

n sys

tem

for s

afe,

prec

ise or

bit i

nser

tion.

The c

omm

on U

PC ca

rrier

can b

e rec

on�g

ured

to tr

ansp

ort &

safe

ly tra

nsfe

r a va

riety

of pa

yload

s or c

argo

to th

e Int

erna

tiona

l Spa

ce St

atio

n

Desig

n for

the U

PC ca

rrier

is ad

apta

ble t

o acco

mm

odat

e up t

o fou

r �xe

d ins

trum

ents

or ex

perim

ents

while

dock

ed to

the I

SS fo

r up t

o 6 m

onth

s

Ejectable Extractable Fixed

Free

-�yin

g sat

ellit

e

UPC C

arrie

r

Stow

ed sa

telli

te

Sate

llite

ej

ectio

n

Oper

atio

nal (

depl

oyed

) sat

ellit

e

Stow

ed pa

yload

UPC p

assiv

e FRA

M ca

rrier

SPDM

in

terfa

ce

Paylo

ad at

tach

ed to

activ

e FRA

M

Paylo

ad in

depl

oyed

mod

eUP

C pay

load

extra

ctio

n via

SSRM

S/SP

DM

Paylo

ad at

tach

ed to

ELC o

n ISS

Fixed

instr

umen

t enc

losu

re

UPC C

arrie

r

Up to

four

�xe

d ins

trum

ents

Instr

umen

t 1

Heat

pipe

radi

ator

Instr

umen

t 2

Instr

umen

t 3

Instr

umen

t 4


Godd

ard S

pace

Flig

ht Ce

nter

In

tegr

atio

n and

Test

Facil

ities

supp

ort

end-

to-e

nd qu

ali�

catio

n and

ac

cept

ance

testi

ng of

�ig

ht sy

stem

s.

Kenn

edy S

pace

Cent

er la

unch

facil

ities

su

ppor

t pos

t-shi

p pay

load

testi

ng, v

ehicl

e in

tegr

atio

n, an

d lau

nch.

Subs

yste

mFu

nctio

nal T

est

& Clo

seou

t

Electr

ical

Suba

ssem

bly &

Harn

ess I

nteg

ratio

n

Mec

hanic

alSu

basse

mbly

Inte

grat

ion

EMI/E

MC

Testi

ng

Subs

yste

m In

tegr

atio

n and

Test

Ther

mal

Vacu

umTe

sting

Post-

Vibra

tion

Func

tiona

l Tes

tVib

ratio

nTe

sting

Post-

Ther

mal

Func

tiona

lTe

st

Func

tiona

l Tes

t&

Close

out

Electr

ical

Inte

grat

ionM

echa

nical

Inte

grat

ion

EMI/E

MC

Testi

ng

Carri

er &

Syste

m In

tegr

atio

n & Te

st

Ther

mal-

Balan

ce/V

acTe

sting

Mas

sPr

oper

ties

Vibra

tion/

Acou

stic/

Shoc

k Tes

ting

Post-

Envir

onm

enta

lFu

nctio

nal T

est

Prep

& Sh

ip to

KSC

Post-

Ship

Func

tiona

l Tes

tRe

ceivi

ng&

Insp

ectio

n

O�in

e Int

egra

tion a

nd Te

st

Shar

p-Ed

ge In

spec

tions

,Cr

ew Fa

m (i

f req

’d)Pr

ep &

Pack

for

Vehic

le In

tegr

ation

Carri

er El

ectri

cal

Inte

grat

ion w

/Orio

n/SM

Carri

er M

echa

nical

Inte

grat

ion w

/Orio

n/SM

Paylo

ad M

echa

nical

Inte

grat

ion w

/carri

er

Vehi

cle In

tegr

atio

n and

Test

Paylo

ad to

-Ca

rrier

-to-O

rion

IVT

Carri

er-P

ayloa

dClo

seou

tPr

elaun

chSe

rvici

ng (i

f req

’d)La

unch

Paylo

ad to

Carri

erFit

& Fu

nctio

nal C

heck

Orion UPC Integration & TestUPP Foldout 4U

PC

Pay

load

s P

roje

ctT

he

UPC

car

rie

r a

nd

pay

load

s w

ill

un

der

go

a c

om

preh

ensi

ve

pro

gr

am

of

inte

gr

atio

n a

nd

tes

tin

g (

I&T

) to

pr

epar

e fo

r f

lig

ht.


4-1



4.0 UPC PAYLOADS PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The UPP management plan draws from Goddard’s rich experience in end-to-end engineer-ing and management of similar programs which maximize the capabilities and value of NASA’s human spaceflight vehicles. The UPC Payloads Project (UPP) is located within the Exploration Systems Projects (ESP) Division, Code 455, at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) and is structured to enable flow of communica-tion internally within GSFC management and team members and eternally with the Constella-tion management and the payload organization. Externally, the UPP interfaces with the Opera-tions and Test Integration (OTI) office, and with Orion under Level 2 Constellation Office man-agement. Figure 4.0-1 shows UPP external in-terfaces. The UPP organization is modeled after GSFC’s Shuttle Small Payloads Project (SSPP) and is designed to accommodate NASA, NASA-affiliated payloads, and non-NASA payloads.

For the purpose of planning and cost estima-tion, a hypothetical mission profile was selected. Three sample UPP missions based on the two payload configurations have been selected for cost estimation and schedule planning. These missions are described below:

Mission 1: Ejectable Spacecraft. This mission plan includes non-recurring engineering costs, includ-ing the development of simulators and spares and

an ETU for avionics development. Proto-flight testing and qualification is also costed for this mission scenario.

Mission 2: Extractable Payload for off-loading to the ISS. This scenario includes proto-flight test-ing and mechanical qualification only.

Mission 3: Build-to-print of Payload 1 (Ejectable Spacecraft). This mission includes acceptance level testing only.

The schedule assumes two development teams that work on alternating missions. Each team has a full-time Mission Integration Manager. The funded management reserve is 6 weeks per year. The schedule supports the UPC on Orion-3, with the first mission development starting in FY10. All dates and durations given are relative to the start date. A delay in the start date causes a cor-responding delay in all other dates.

4.1 Management

The UPC Payloads Project (UPP) management team leverages the attributes and capabilities of GSFC’s successful Hitchhiker Program. The Hitchhiker program was implemented within the Shuttle Small Payloads Project (SSPP) as a suc-cessful GSFC-JSC partnership. The Hitchhiker program developed, launched, and operated over 100 payloads spanning two decades. The UPP management structure is designed to emulate the successful Hitchhiker program, yet is enhanced to be adaptable to the Orion organization for efficiency and ease of communication.

SSPP was staffed with GSFC in-house engi-neers and the carriers (Hitchhiker, Get Away Special) were products of GSFC in-house en-gineering designs and development efforts. Through these historical programs, GSFC and JSC developed a highly successful partnership whereby human spaceflight vehicles were lever-aged to benefit science and technology, without impact to the human spaceflight program. Confi-dent that SSPP accomplishments can be repeated, the UPP proposes to emulate this successful SSPP Carrier design and development program for the UPC-Orion payloads Carrier.

Figure 4.0-1: The UPP is structured to enable unhindered communication with Constellation and GSFC management.

UPC16

ConstellationProgram O�ce

Operations and Test,Integration Orion Project

UPC PayloadsProject (UPP)

The UPC Payloads Project (UPP) management team leverages the attributes and capabilities of GSFC’s successful Hitchhiker Program.

The UPP management plan draws from Goddard’s rich experience in end-to-end engineering and management of similar programs which maximize the capabilities and value of NASA’s human space-flight vehicles.


4-2



4.1.1 UPP Organization Structure

The UPP is under the management of the GSFC’s Flight Projects Directorate and is struc-tured to support payload customers during design and development phases, as well as pay-load integration with the Carrier and the final verification for flight. The UPP support to the payload organization will include consultation on the interface design of the payload with the Carrier, interface requirements interpretation and implementation, and preparation of required Cx documents for submittal. The UPP will en-sure payload design is in full compliance with Cx requirements with emphasis on flight safety and payload design and operation faults are isolated from the SM. Working through the UPP team, customer payloads will be integrated seamlessly into the Orion Project processes.

The UPP is organized to provide efficient com-munication both internally and externally. Ex-ternally, the UPP interfaces with the Operations

and Test, and Integration (OTI) of the Constella-tion Program Office. Internally, the UPP is in the Exploration Systems Projects, Code 455, which is one of the major flight projects divisions at GSFC. The project organization provides clear lines of communication and authority (Figure 4.1-1) both internally and externally.

The UPP manager reports to Exploration Systems Projects Division management, and is responsible for overall success of the UPC-Orion payload Carrier development, testing, integration with the payload, and final integration with the Orion Service Module for flight and operation. The Payload Mission Systems Engineer (PMSE) provides technical oversight and coordination for interfaces with the Orion Servicing Module and the payload. The Mission Integration Manager (MIM) is responsible for overall integration of the Carrier with the payload and the Orion Ser-vicing Module. The MIM interfaces with Orion launch personnel for UPC payload final integra-tion and flight.

4.1.2 Key Roles and Responsibilities

The UPP Project Manager (PM) is responsible for the overall success of the Orion UPC Carrier development, delivery, integration, validation/

UPC01

ConstellationsM&S/DSILCAS

ConstellationsSystems Eng. & Integ.

Constellation-L2S&MA

UPPProject Manager

PI

S&MA

Payload MissionSystems Engineering

(PMSE)

Launch SupportIntegration and TestCarrier Design

and Development

UPC Orion PayloadMission Integration

Ground System

System Design and Interface Speci�cationCarrier System EngineeringRisk Management

MIM 1MIM 2MIM 3

Structure/MechanicalAvionicsThermal

Carrier I&TCarrier to Vehicle I&TCarrier to Payload I&T

MOCGround System Dev

Exploration Systems Projects, Code 455

CM

Figure 4.1-1: The UPP organizational struc ture provides clear lines of communication and authority.

The UPP office will support payload customers throughout the lifecycle to ensure adherence to requirements and interfaces without impact to the Orion vehicle.


4-3



verification, as well as overall system integration with the payload and final integration to the Ori-on Service Module for flight and operation. This includes day-to-day management of the overall technical, cost, and schedule elements of the proj-ect. The UPP PM verifies the final performance verification tracking log (VTL) and he/she signs the Certification for Flight Readiness.

The Payload Mission Systems Engineer (PMSE) is responsible for assuring technical requirements and interfaces between the UPC Carrier, the payload, and the Orion Service Module are suc-cessfully defined, controlled, implemented, and verified. The PMSE works closely with the UPC-Orion Payloads team, the payload organization, and the Orion SM team for developing require-ments and implementation approach. The PMSE works with the Carrier systems engineer and dis-cipline engineers to develop flow-down require-ments and controls interfaces between the Carrier and the payload, as well as between the Orion SM and the Carrier system.

The Mission Integration Manager (MIM) is re-sponsible for ensuring Carrier and payload inter-face requirements are successfully implemented for integration with the Orion Servicing Module (SM). The MIM acts as an interface between the UPC Orion Carrier Payload system and Orion. The MIM defines and coordinates all interface ac-tivities required for UPC Orion payload launch and operation. This includes developing and coordinating required Orion interface control documentation, safety documentation, interface reviews, and safety reviews.

4.1.3 Management Approach, Processes, and Plans

UPP management approach and processes are based on GSFC’s rich history of managing, in-tegrating and operating small payloads on the Space Shuttle and other launch vehicles. GSFC’s experience base includes the Hitchhiker Program and numerous Space Shuttle payload programs for Carrier development and human/robotic ser-vicing. The UPP team draws upon this extensive experience and employs the same approach and processes that made the Shuttle Small Payloads Project a huge success. The UPP project will be fully compliant with the requirements specified in NPR 7120.5D, NASA Program and Project Man-agement Processes and Requirements, and will rely heavily on a rigorous and thorough systems engineering approach.

The UPP maintains UPC Carrier develop-ment and integration cost and schedule control through proven heritage management processes/procedures and tools, heritage Carrier designs, flight-qualified components, rigorous risk man-agement, and effective and efficient interface management. The UPC Carrier focus is to maxi-mize reuse of design, technology, and expertise across systems and launch vehicles.

Organizational Interfaces and Reporting: Re-porting and communication interfaces within ESP and UPP and externally to other organiza-tion are established at several levels. These report-ing and communications processes help ensure timely communication between the PI organiza-tion and Orion and contribute to overall success. These processes include weekly team meetings, monthly/quarterly status reporting to Center management, and regular communications with the PI and PI organization.

Decision Making Process: Decision-making au-thority flows down from the UPP Manager, who is ultimately responsible for the mission. The UPP manager reports status of technical development, interfaces, schedule, resource allocations, and re-serves weekly to GSFC management and noti-fies Orion management if any risk item has the potential to impact mission success. This ensures that programmatic decisions are timely and based upon accurate information. The UPP manager, in consultation with the ESP manager, make deci-sions that affect Carrier performance, cost, and schedule. Using management reserve, schedule margin, and system-level technical margins re-quires a recommendation from the UPP manager and concurrence from the ESP manager. Within this context, the UPP manager has the authority to make technical, financial, and schedule deci-sions concerning Carrier development, consistent with the mission requirements and within pro-grammatic constraints. The PMSE has author-ity to make technical decisions that cut across all mission segments provided they do not cause the system to exceed its allocated resources. Changes are formally managed and must be approved by a Change Control Board (CCB).

Interface Management: Interfaces between the Carrier and the payload are established in Carrier/Payload Interface Requirements Docu-ments (IRDs) and Carrier/Payload Interface Control Documents (ICDs). Interfaces between the Carrier and the Orion Servicing Module


4-4



(SM) are established in SM IRDs and ICDs. These documents are approved and controlled by both ESP and Orion.

Work Breakdown Structure: The UPP Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and a complete WBS dictionary are provided in the Appendix B. This WBS is “product-oriented” and compliant with NASA NPR 7120.5D. The WBS provides a sound basis for planning, costing, and reporting the effort. Work elements are clearly delineated and mapped back into the organization chart. This WBS was used to generate the cost estimate for this proposal and will carry forward into UPC Carrier implementation.

4.1.4 Configuration Management

The Configuration Control Manager (CCM) is responsible for all hardware, software, and docu-mentation configuration control and develops a CM plan that meets UPP requirements. Decisions that affect cost, schedule, or performance are ad-dressed via the Change Control Board (CCB) and change management process. The change process controls the Carrier baseline and tracks any tech-nical or programmatic changes. The CCB is es-tablished and chaired by the UPP manager; CCB members include the PMSE, Carrier systems en-gineer, MIM, SAM, Business Manager (BM), and technical element leads. The CCB will include a

representative PI for payload to Carrier interface decisions. The CCB meets monthly (at a mini-mum) to review Change Requests (CRs) and their impact to mission risk, cost, schedule, and perfor-mance. The PMSE manages any technical chang-es that do not impact the UPC Carrier baseline.

4.1.5 Risk and Risk Management

The UPP risk assessment and management in-clude the Carrier and the payload. The identified risks and their mitigations in this document are only for the Carrier, as the payload is not addressed in this document. As illustrated in the Table 4.1.1, the UPC Carrier development top risks are all low (green) and the risk mitigations can be accom-plished without impacting the program cost and schedule. Assessment of the top three risks and as-sociated mitigations are provided in Table 4.1-1, and in a 5x5 matrix in Figure 4.1-2.

The UPP implements continuous, iterative, and proactive risk management process to identify, mitigate, and control technical and programmatic risks for both the Carrier and the payload. The

Table 4.1-1: UPC Carrier Top Risks.Risk

IDRank Risk Description Mitigation Plan

9801 1 Interfaces: IF system interfaces between the Carrier and the Science Payload, and between the Carrier and the Orion SM are inadequately defined, THEN hardware may need to be modified at or after starting system integration, possibly causing the mission to miss its launch opportunity.

1. Early definition of interface requirement.

2. Frequent interchange meetings and communications.

3. Orion-to-UPC interface definition agreement and control.

4. Hi-Fi mech and avionics simulator used during development.

9802 2 Safety Review Process: Orion has not yet defined the safety review process for UPC payload. IF the safety review process is incompatible with the Orion safety requirements, THEN the UPP development and review schedule may be impacted.

1. Identification of the Orion UPC safety review process and requirements in Phase A for implementation.

2. Conduct safety technical interchange meetings prior to safety review meetings for proper interpretation of Orion/ISS safety requirements.

9803 3 Schedule Incompatibility: The latest Orion schedule requires Carrier delivery at L-9 months. IF the Carrier is required to implement this schedule, THEN interface verification between the Carrier and the science payload can only be performed at the launch site and interface incompatibility may not be fixable, resulting in science failure.

1. Well-defined interfaces early in the design and development phase.

2. Frequent interchange meetings and communications.

3. Orion-to-UPC interface definition agreement and control.

4. Hi-Fi mech and avionics simulator used during development.

5. Build a flight unit payload mass model for each payload.

UPP risk management encompasses both the carrier and the payload. The UPP will identify and mitigate interface risks of the SM to the integrated carrier and payload.


4-5



process consists of six distinct activities: risk iden-tification, analysis, planning, tracking, control, communication, and documentation.

The PMSE leads the risk management effort and the team fully participates in risk identification, assessment, and mitigation efforts. Monthly risk meetings are used to identify new risks and to assess the status of existing risks. These monthly risk meetings include participation of the payload organization personnel for the payload risk iden-tification and status reporting. Any risks that af-fect interfaces with the payload or the Orion SM are forwarded to the PI/Cargo organization and Orion, respectively. The UPP manager and UPC payload manager review and approve risk mitiga-tion plans requiring resource allocation. The re-sidual integrated UPC Carrier and payload risks will be forwarded to the Cx’s OTI for integrating into the Cx’s Integrated Risk Management Ap-plication (IRMA) for system level risk assessment.

No Impact to Orion

In addition to management of the Carrier it-self in compliance with all Orion safety require-ments, the UPP will mitigate payload risks in a way which is transparent to the Orion project.

Technical Risks: Technical payload risks will be identified and mitigated uniquely for each mis-sion. The UPP will advise and assist the payload organization in risk identification and mitigation. This risk assessment activity includes payload in-terface risk assessment for potential risk propa-gation to the Carrier and to the SM. Risks that could potentially be propagated cross the inter-faces will be contained within the payload inter-

face to the Carrier. The UPP will conduct a full safety audit of each mission prior to delivery.

Schedule Risks: The UPP will maintain a queue of payloads which are ready for flight, so that if a particular mission experiences a schedule de-lay another mission can be substituted. Carrier design and standardized interfaces will facilitate this ability to exchange missions. In addition, an appropriately sized flight unit payload mass model will be available as a backup. The Orion manifest schedule will never be impacted by a payload delay.

4.1.6 Reserve Management

Robust reserves for the UPP include 25% on cost (including funded management reserve) and 25% on mass, power, and data. There is a funded management reserve of 90 days for development and I&T. Cost is discussed in Section 5.

The UPP manager establishes the process for control, allocation, and release of technical, cost, and schedule reserves and margins. Disburse-ment of cost contingency, schedule reserves, and system-level technical margins requires CCB ap-proval and concurrence by the ESP manager.

4.1.7 Schedule

Figure 4.1-3 shows the UPP Integrated Mas-ter Schedule (IMS), including all mission phases and mission milestones. The IMS provides the framework for time phasing and coordination of all project activities. The schedule includes one month of funded management reserve per year. The reserves provide flexibility to accommodate minor delays or anomalies. The schedule has been developed to be compatible with the Orion-3 Initial Operational Capability (IOC) schedule.

The UPP schedule management approach le-verages best practices from the NASA Schedule Management Handbook to ensure valid schedule data. The UPP IMS is vertically and horizontally integrated with the Orion schedule. Schedule risks are identified and schedule impact shall be defined for, as examples, inaccurate duration esti-mation, change in scope, task definition changes and delivery slip. Prior to approving the schedule baseline, correlation of the Statement of Work, Work Breakdown Structure, Organizational Breakdown Structure, and Schedule are per-formed. This approach provides the project with

Figure 4.1-2: Risk Matrix.

UPC18

5

4

3

2

1

1 2 3 54

LIKELIHOOD

CONSEQUENCES

ApproachM - MitigateW - WatchA - AcceptR - Research

MedHigh

Low

Criticality

Decreasing (Improving)

Increasing(Worsening)

Unchanged

New sincelast month

L x C Trend

12

3


4-6



the capability to plan, track, assess, and analyze accomplishments and variances to the project’s baseline. The critical path will be clearly identi-fiable, monitored and analyzed to ensure timely completion of the project.

4.1.8 Reviews and Documentation

The UPC Carrier undergoes a full review pro-cess. Reviews are consistent with NPR 7120.5D and Constellation program requirements. The independent and integrated review plan outlines reviews for the Carrier development and imple-mentation, including appropriate safety reviews. GSFC reviews are chaired by Code 300; the re-view board is composed of independent review-ers. Safety reviews adhere to Constellation safety review requirements. Timeframe for reviews are shown in Figure 4.1-3.

The UPC Carrier User’s Guide will be prepared and provided to potential payload developers. This document will focus on the payload inter-face design and will be in compliance with the SM interface requirements. Consistent with the SM interface requirements, SM to the Carrier in-terface control documents will be prepared and submitted to the OTI for review and approval. Additionally, the payload operations document and the integrated Carrier description document that include the payload will be provided.

At each design phase, the integrated safety data packages that address hazards of the Carrier, the payload, and integrated hazards will be prepared and submitted to the OTI for review and approv-al.

Table 4.1-2 lists the standard documents that the UPP will prepare and provide to the Constellation Program office and to the payload developers.

Table 4.1-2: The UPP will deliver documentation needed to communicate interfaces and procedures to the Operations and Test Integration (OTI) office, and documentation needed to direct payload development and integration to each PI.

Document Name Provided To

SM to the Carrier ICD OTI

Payload Operations OTI

Carrier User’s Guide Payload Organization

Safety Data Packages (Phase I to IV)- OTI

Carrier and Payload Description OTI

Carrier to Payload ICD Payload Organization

Integrated Carrier residual risks OTI

Final performance verification tracking log (VTL) OTI

Certification for Flight Readiness OTI


4-7



Figu

re 4

.1-3

: The

UPP

Inte

grat

ed M

aster

Sch

edul

e (IM

S) p

rovid

es th

e fra

mew

ork f

or ti

me p

hasin

g an

d co

ordi

natio

n of

all p

roje

ct ac

tiviti

es.

UPC52

FY10

FY11

FY12

FY13

FY14

FY15

FY16

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

SO

ND

JF

MA

MJ

JA

SO

ND

JF

MA

MJ

JA

SO

ND

JF

MA

MJ

JA

SO

ND

JF

MA

MJ

JA

SO

ND

JF

MA

MJ

JA

SO

ND

JF

MA

MJ

JA

SO

ND

JF

MA

MJ

JA

SO

UPC O

rion C

ontro

l M

ilesto

nes

Miss

ion 1

Ejecta

ble

Miss

ion 2

Extra

ctable

Miss

ion 3

Ejecta

ble (B

uild t

o Pr

int M

ission

1)

2/8

Orion

CDR

9/1Or

ion 3

(IOC)

3/1Or

ion 4

(FOC)

9/1Or

ion 5

11/2

Proje

ctSt

art

KDP A

Ph-0

S.R.

Carri

er MCR

Publi

shUs

er's

Guide

KDP B9/17

SRR

Ph 1

S.R.

Carri

er PDR

8/29 KD

P C

Ph 2

S.R.

Carri

er

6/26

CDR

Ph 2

Inte

g.S.R

.

1/24 KD

P D

7/17

PER

Ph 3

Int.

S.R.

Orion

/ISS

PSR4/

18

Early

Ship

8/26

Late

Ship 9/10

Carri

erIn

tegr

ation

11/2

0Pa

yload

Inte

grat

ion

9/9

Custo

mer

Cons

ultat

ion

Proje

ctSt

art

3/6

Ph 0/

1 Pay

load

S.R.

ISS

6/29

Delta

CDR

8/22

KDP C

Ph 2

Int.

S.R.

Orion

/ISS

11/1

9 KDP D

2/19

PER

Ph 3

Int.

S.R.

Orion

/ISS

PSR11

/18

Early

Ship

3/31

Late

Ship 4/14

Carri

er

Inte

grat

ion

6/4

Paylo

ad In

tegr

ation

Custo

mer

Cons

ultat

ion3/

6

Proje

ctSt

art

8/23

Ph 0/

1Pa

yload

S.R.

ISS

Delta

CDR

2/15

KDP C

8/22

Ph 2

Int.

S.R.

Orion

/ISS

5/13 KD

P D

8/8

PER

Ph 3

Int.

S.R.

Orion

/ISS

PSR5/

12

Early

Ship

9/18

Late

Ship 10

/2Ca

rrier

Inte

grat

ion

11/2

5Pa

yload

Inte

grat

ion

Fund

ed M

gmt R

eser

ve 90

Day

s

Fund

ed M

gmt R

eser

ve 90

Day

s

Fund

ed M

gmt R

eser

ve 90

Day

s


A-1



Appendix A - Authorization

and theConstellation Program Operations and Test Integration Office

Purpose: The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is to documentthe roles, responsibilities, and management interfaces necessary for the project planningand implementation of the Constellation Program's Unpressurized Cargo capability onthe Block I Orion vehicle.

Authority: This MOU is entered into agreement under the roles and responsibilitiesassigned by the Constellation Program.

References and Applicable Documents:1. "Exploration Systems Mission Directorate Work Assignments", dated 30 October

2007.2. Exploration Architecture Requirements Document (EARD), current and approved

document.3. Constellation Architecture Requirements Document (CARD), current and approved

document.4. Constellation Design Reference Missions and Operational Concepts Document,

current and approved document.5. UPC Orion Science & Technology Payload Capabilities Summary Report,

GSFC/455, dated 15 October 2008

Background: The unpressurized payload capability of Exploration Carriers has its rootsin both the Apollo and Shuttle programs. The Apollo-era Scientific Instrument Module(SIM) Bay offered the capability to carry spectrometers, cameras, altimeters, and otherdevices into orbit. In addition, it even provided ejection capabilities for satellites from theservice module. As the space program evolved towards the Shuttle-era, the Orbiter'spayload bay accommodated attached UPC, providing increased access to a more diversegroup of payloads. Ejections of some payloads occurred from the orbiter cargo bay aswell. This evolution demonstrates this Agency's commitment to maximizing thecapabilities of the systems it delivers while maintaining safety in its operationalendeavors. This maximizes value for the American taxpayer, provides alternative access


A-2



to space pathways for the Agency, and increases viable options for retiring ESMDacquisition risk. The UPC Exploration Project located at Goddard Spaceflight Center(GSFC), working in concert with the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) Orion Project,will continue the heritage of these two programs as the Agency maintains the ISS andreturns humans to the moon and beyond.

The Constellation Program, located at Johnson Space Center, is responsible for theacquisition of the new architecture necessary to realize the goals associated with theVision for Space Exploration. This includes project-level responsibility for the CEV -Orion flight system.

Scope: This MOU assigns responsibility for the management, representation,engineering assessment, and preliminary safety assessment ofunpressurized payloads tothe UPC Exploration Project on behalf of the CEV Orion Project for all UPC ExplorationProject Carriers. For the purposes of this MOU, all cargo and payloads identified fordelivery via the Service Module (SM) will be deemed "unpressurized cargo". Duration ofthis MOU is from the signature of this document to the completion of the last flight of theOrion Block I series spacecraft for all UPC Exploration Project Carriers. The agreementmay be restructured by mutual agreement of all the parties. UPC on Orion Block II willbe addressed at a later date.

Management Approach: The parties will work to ensure that the delivery capability ofthe Orion vehicle can accommodate customer cargo with standardized carrier hardware,"smart" scarring, or mission kits. The results of this activity will be documented in theUnpressurized Cargo - Orion Functional Interface Requirements Document, UniversalInterface Agreement, or similar plan or document as agreed by the parties and sanctionedby the Constellation Program.

The Glenn Research Center (GRC) Service Module Office (SMa) is responsible for thedefinition of the SM interface requirements and serves as the technical planning,reviewing, and integrating team for the development, design, and integration of the OrionVehicle SM. Given this responsibility, the GRC SMa will be the primary interface withthe UPC Exploration Project during the development of the UPC interface requirementsand design implementations. For example, given the criticality of Preliminary DesignReview and Critical Design Review (CDR) execution, it is essential that the GRC SMamanage the Orion Prime Contractors scope and priorities relative to SM. Therefore,interactions between the UPC Exploration Project and the Orion Prime Contractor will becoordinated through the GRC SMa through CDR. After CDR, the UPC ExplorationProject will interface directly with the Orion Prime contractor as a System Product Teamas NASA's agent for this interface with direction and oversight from the ConstellationOperations and Test Integrations Office and insight from CEV Orion as required.


A-3



Points of Contact:Mark Geyer, Project ManagerCrew Exploration Vehicle-Orion ProjectNASAlJSCJSC-ZVHouston, TX 77058Mark.S. [email protected]: 281.244.7441

Robert E. Castle, DirectorOperations and Test IntegrationConstellation ProgramNASAlJSCJSC-ZDll1Houston, TX 77058Robert.E. [email protected] 281.483.0780

Kathleen E. Schubert, Service ModuleManagerNASAlGRCCleveland,OH 44135Phone 216.433.5331

Bruce Milam, Project ManagerUPC Exploration ProjectNASAlGSFCCode 455Greenbelt, MD [email protected]: 301.286.0429

1. Shall recognize the UPC Exploration Project as the focal point for representing thevehicle unpressurized delivery capability to stakeholder customers for UPCExploration Project Carriers.

2. Shall incorporate agreed upon flight hardware with smart scaring and/or mission kits,as appropriate, to facilitate the flight ofUPC payloads in a standardized interface thatpermits definition of the necessary interface as early as possible but permit definitionof the payload to be flown as late as possible.

3. Shall define the vehicle interface to UPC to include, but not limited to, the provisionof interface control documentation, procedures, and mechanical bolt pattern for UPCattachment points, and electrical connectors for power and data, interface verificationplans, Orion SM thermal, structural and electrical models as needed to support thecustomer mission.

1. Shall define the SM interface requirements and serve as the technical planning,reviewing, and integrating team for the development, design, and integration of the OrionVehicle SM.2. Shall be the primary interface with the UPC Exploration Project during thedevelopment of the UPC interface requirements and design implementations. Interactionsbetween the UPC Exploration Project and the Orion Prime Contractor will be coordinatedthrough the GRC SMO through CDR.


A-4



1. Shall author, maintain, and deliver upon request a current Unpressurized CargoFunctional Interface Requirements Document detailing the unpressurized cargocapability and interface requirements

2. Shall author and maintain the UPC Exploration Project plan in accordance with NPR7120.5

3. Shall be the point of contact for UPC customers, both internal and external to NASA.4. Shall coordinate the provision of Orion Project baseline documentation, technical

support, and operations plans to UPC customers.5. Shall coordinate the UPC interface with the UPC customers on behalf of the

Constellation Operations and Test Integration Office to include, but not limited to, theprovision of documentation, common hardware, common software, common GSE,procedures, manifest requests, safety packages, interface verification, plans andfinancials, payload operations procedures, ejection system hardware, carrierhardware, level 0 data archiving, UPC thermal, UPC electrical and UPC structuralmodels and other items as needed to support the Orion and the customer's mission.

6. Shall be responsible for support to the UPC customer.7. Shall use common hardware/heritage hardware, software and documentation

whenever feasible in order to minimize resources necessary to integrate and executeUPC missions.

8. Shall formulate and host an Orion UPC Integrated Product Team (IPT).9. Shall be responsible to the Constellation Mission Integrated Product Team to generate

products directed by the Constellation Mission Manager to satisfy the MissionIntegration Production Template.

1. Shall manage the Constellation Mission (IPT) and be responsible for oversight of allproducts and services required in the Mission Integration Production Template

2. Shall provide funding of the UPC project required for manifested unpressurized cargoproducts and services

3. Shall provide Orion UPC project with technical assistance in support ofUPC projectrequirements/design reviews, UPC IPTs/Technical Interchange Meetings andoperations & Assembly, Integration and Test plans, as needed/requested.

This agreement is in effect immediately and remains in effect until changed via writtenagreement of the undersigned organizations.

~~MaTkGe)Te;,~ectManageTCrew Exploration Vehicle, Orion Project Office

7!7(o :;Date

D~


A-5



~~Robert E. Cas e, DirectorOperations and Test Integration, Constellation Program

m{~~Bruce Milam, Proj ect ManagerOrion UPC Exploration Project


A-6



http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/constellation/main/

Exploration Systems Mission Directorate Work Assignments

10.30.07

The Exploration Systems Mission Directorate, known as ESMD, at NASA Headquarters in Washington oversees the Constellation, human research, exploration technology development and lunar precursor robotic programs as well as the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services Project. The Constellation Program oversees work performed at a variety of NASA centers, prime contractors and sub-contractors located around the country. This work includes the Orion crew exploration vehicle, the Ares I launch vehicle, ground operations, mission operations and extravehicular activity systems.

Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, Maryland ESMD: Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Project management and integration Constellation: Program integration: Support for safety, reliability and quality assurance; system engineering and integration; and test and evaluation Orion: Communications and tracking support Constellation work announced Oct. 30, 2007: Lead program requirements for unpressurized cargo carriers Lead Orion unpressurized cargo carrier Support lunar architecture work for Constellation Program system engineer Subsystem lead for lunar lander avionics Support lunar surface systems avionics and surface element communications Provide extravehicular activity tools and equipment


B-1



Appendix B - Cost

Table of ContentsCost Charts

Cost Summary Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-3Workforce Summary Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-4WBS Breakout Table - Mission 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-5WBS Breakout Table - Mission 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-6WBS Breakout Table - Mission 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-7Parametric Mission 1 S-Curve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-9Parametric Mission 1 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-10

Master Equipment Lists

Structures and MGSE, Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-12Power, Thermal, C&DH, and I&T . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-13

Work Breakdown Structure

WBS Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-15WBS Dictionary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-16


B-11



Master Equipment List


B-12



UPC Carrier Master Equipment List (MEL)

COMPONENT QTY. MASS TRLStructures & MGSE

Upper Mounting Deck 1 38.1 8

Aft Propulsion Deck Mount 1 2.7 8

Lateral Plate Deck 1 10.4 8

Support Arm 1 14.5 8

Extractable Payload Pallet 1 34 8

Fixed Experiment Enclosure 1 162 8

Shear Pins a/r 4 8

Shear Bolts a/r 6 8

High-Fi SM Bay Model (GSE) 1 1600 N/A

Payload Integration Cart (GSE) 2 3750 N/A

Mass Model of Max.P/L (GSE) 1 1102 N/A

NBL Model of UPCC (GSE) 1 150 N/A

NBL Model of Max.P/L (GSE) 1 40 N/A

Lifting Slings (GSE) 3 a/r N/A

Shipping Container (GSE) 1 1800 N/A

Mechanisms

Separation System 2 15 9

FRAM (extractable only) 2 118 9


B-13



UPC Carrier Master Equipment List (MEL) (Continued)

COMPONENT QTY. MASS TRLPower

Power Harness 1 10.5 8

Ground Strap 2 – 8

Power supply (GSE) 1 N/A

Thermal

Avionics Heater 1 – 8

Thermostat 8 – 8

Thermistor 10 – 8

Separation System Motor Heater 3 – 8

MLI Blankets a/r 5 8

Avionics Radiator Plate 1 1 8

Thermal-Vac Shroud (GSE) 1 N/A

Thermcouples (GSE) a/r N/A

Total 6

C&DH

DC/DC Converter 1 0.8 8

Digital I/O Board 1 0.8 8

Data Harness 1 – 8

Chassis 1 2.12 8

I&T

Test Workstation 1 – N/A

ETU Cables a/r – N/A


B-14



Work Breakdown Structure


B-15



–5.1 Structure/Mechanical–5.2 Avionics–5.3 Thermal–5.4 PAC I&T–5.5 RMSS

UPC02

UPPWork Breakdown Structure

1.0 Project Management

2.0 Mission Systems Engineering

3.0 Safety and Mission Assurance

5.0 Carrier and Payload Services

–1.1 Mission Mgmt–1.2 Resource Mgmt–1.3 Planning and Schedule–1.4 Con�guration Control–1.5 Reviews–1.6 Logistics–1.7 Reserves

– 2.1 Sys Eng Management– 2.2 Systems Design– 2.3 Technical Evaluation– 2.4 Sofware Sys Engineering– 2.5 Mission Design Support– 2.6 Risk Management– 2.7 Contamination Control

–3.1 S&MA Mgmt–3.2 Safety–3.3 QA–3.4 Materials–3.5 Parts–3.6 Reliability–3.7 Contamination Control

7.0 Mission Operations

– 10.1 Integration– 10.2 Environ Testing

10.0 System Integration & Test


B-16



WBS Dictionary:WBS Title Definition

1 ProjectManagement

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs for the management of the mission, ground operations, data reduction and archiving, and launch vehicle interface management. These costs should include any indirect costs (“costs of doing business”) and mission insurance as required by the contract.

1.1 Mission Management Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to design, manufacture, integrate and test the observatory including launch plus the stated mission life time with reserves for contingency operations.

1.2 Resources Management

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials, and other direct costs for budget development and implementation, cost control, financial analysis and performance measurements. This includes costs for GSFC, its partners and contractors alike.

1.3 Schedule Management Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to develop, maintain and analyze start-to-finish program schedules.

1.4 Configuration Management

Includes all subcontracts, labor, material, and other direct costs for configuration control of drawings, specifications, documentation and hardware configurations. This should also include the cost of maintaining control boards (such as Risk Management Board and Project Anomaly Review Board (PARB)), action item lists, and change request documentation.

1.5 External Reviews Includes all subcontracts, labor, material, and other direct costs for program reviews (such as FRR, MOR, FOR, IRR, pre-ship reviews, pre-environmental reviews, etc.). These costs should include the preparation, reproduction of review packages, facilities, and the processing of request for actions (action items). Included are PDR, CDR, SRR, and any other applicable reviews.

1.6 Travel Includes all subcontracts, labor, material, and other direct costs for tracking and reporting the cost of travel for the project management area during the program’s lifetime. Includes GSFC, other government personnel, and contractors and subcontractor expenses.

1.7 Contract and Procurement Management

Includes all subcontracts, labor, material, and other direct costs for managing and maintaining external contracts and subcontracts with venders, suppliers and team members. This should include cost of performance measurements, progress tracking and status reporting. This will not include cost relating to resource management for contract/subcontracts.

1.8 Training Includes all subcontracts, labor, material, and other direct costs for training government and contractor personnel to perform tasks required by the program. These costs may include proficiency training, new technology development and operational training.

1.9 Logistics Includes all subcontracts, labor, material, and other direct costs for transportation, lodging, teleconferencing, video conferencing, information management systems and distribution of program related information.

1.9.1 Instrument transportation

Includes all subcontracts, labor, material, and other direct costs for transporting the instrument from the development facilities to testing and calibration sites, to the instrument platform integrators facilities and to the observatory integrators facilities.

1.9.2 Bus transportation Includes all subcontracts, labor, material, and other direct costs for transporting the spacecraft bus from the development facilities to testing and calibration sites and to the observatory integrators facilities.

1.9.3 Observatory transport to launch site

Includes all subcontracts, labor, material, and other direct costs for transporting the observatory from the integrators facility to the launch site.

1.10 Formulation Includes all subcontracts, labor, material, and other direct costs for formulation studies, developing a formulation plan for the nominal program, a reduced scope program to support cost reductions and development of an expense plan that includes budget reserves and possible contingency actions.

1.11 Technology Development

Includes all subcontracts, labor, material, and other direct costs for full developing new technology applicable to the program, implementation of new technology to an existing process / operations and maturation of a technology to a risk level commensurate with the program risk level.

1.12 Management Reserves Unallocated reserve funding to address unforeseen and unanticipated cost growth required to mitigate risk throughout the entire project.


B-17



WBS Title Definition

2 Mission System Engineering

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to provide mission level systems engineering services. These costs include mission level support to ensure the (1) bus, (2) instrument(s), (3) ground system and (4) launch vehicle are integrated to support the mission. This category includes the generation/ maintenance/ verification of technical requirements, allocations, budgets and analyses.

2.1 Systems Engineering Management

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to manage the systems engineering process and personnel necessary to support the mission.

2.1.1 Systems Engineering Planning

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to: plan, schedule, implement and track progress of the systems engineering processes for each of the four mission elements.

2.1.2 Status and Reviews Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to prepare for and hold regularly scheduled reviews. These costs include work necessary to coordinate subsystem level peer reviews, track and respond to request for actions, and support the Systems Requirements Review.

2.2 Systems Design Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to design and implement system level design documentation at the element level. These costs include internal ICD management, subsystem interactions and effects.

2.2.1 Requirements Definition

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to collect, define, review and manage the mission requirements. These costs include work on external Interface Control Documents (ICD) such as bus to instrument ICD, bus to launch vehicle ICD, and observatory to ground system ICD. Management of technical budgets/allocations such as mass, power, sensitivity to jitter, systematic errors, pointing and alignment errors and control system induced errors.

2.2.2 Solution Definition (e.g. Specification Documentation)

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to capture the specifications necessary to meet mission requirements. These costs include of generating, tracking, implementing direct and derived requirements, and managing the effort.

2.3 Technical Evaluation

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs necessary to establish a technical evaluation of the specifications to meet requirements in a cost-effective manner.

2.3.1 Systems Analysis Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to establish the system level interactions between mission elements. These costs include defining interaction between the observatory and the ground system, for handling Fault Detection and Correction (FDC) between the bus’s subsystems, and FDC issues involving the bus and instrument(s).

2.3.2 Requirements Validation

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to develop a requirements database to track requirements, changes in requirements and the analysis necessary to ensure the requirements meet mission goals.

2.3.3 System Verification Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to develop and maintain a mission wide, verification process of system interactions and a process to ensure that mission requirements are met.

2.3.4 IV&V Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to develop independent verification and validation processes for the onboard software and firmware. These processes may include the cost of using the NASA IV&V test facility, program specific facilities or independent contracts.

2.4 Software Systems Engineering

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to maintain Flight Software Interface Control Documentation between the subsystems on the bus, between the bus and instrumentation, and between the observatory and the ground system.

2.4.1 Flight Software Systems Management

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to provide end-to-end flight software systems oversight and leadership during concept development, requirements definition, implementation, validation, integration, launch readiness and long term maintenance preparations of the full complement of mission flight software, plus flight software test beds and tools. May include system level interaction studies, data flow analyses, timing studies and system level requirements verification test. Includes coordination of the technical content of Flight Software Interface Control documentation between the subsystems on the bus, between the bus and instrumentation, and between the observatory and the ground system. Focus of this element is on flight software risk management across the entire mission.


B-18




2.4.2 Ground Software Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to develop the interactions between the observatory and elements of the ground system and between the mission operations center and the science operations center. These costs include development of system level data communication documentation. It may identify interfaces, formats, communications rates, compression techniques and error detection & correction techniques.

2.4.3 Firmware Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to provide oversight of the processes and product developments of those mission specific firmware products which are developed using techniques similar to the complexity of software logic. These costs may also include system level interaction studies, timing studies, and requirements for system level firmware verifications.

2.5 Mission Design Support Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to design, develop, and implement system level tests that reflect the interaction of mission elements. The cost includes developing mission and mission element system level tests to verify mission requirements and tracking verification tests.

2.6 Risk Management NEW

2.7 Contamination Control NEW


B-19




3 Safety & Mission Assurance

Includes all labor, material, and other direct costs for Mission Assurance. This includes the cost of mission risks versus costs trade studies. This cost should include special studies such as orbital debris assessment as well as environmental assessments.

3.1 SMA Management Includes all subcontracts, labor, material, and other direct costs for establishing and maintaining a mission level Quality Assurance Program. This includes the cost of monitoring EEE part alerts, coupon testing, defective parts analysis, monitoring subcontractor and Quality Assurance Programs The cost of maintaining a failure review board may be captured here.

3.2 Quality Assurance Includes all subcontracts, labor, material, and other direct costs for establishing and maintaining a mission level Quality Assurance Program. This includes the cost of reviewing and monitoring subcontractor QA reports and on-site inspections.

3. Safety Includes all labor, material, and other direct costs for personnel and hardware safety. This includes the cost for maintaining safety records, and personnel safety training at contractor and government facilities including the launch site. It may also include special costs of hazardous waste disposal.

3.4 Materials/ Processes Includes all subcontracts, labor, material, and other direct costs for establishing, maintaining and monitoring the Materials and Processes Control Program at the mission level. This includes establishing selection criteria for EEE parts, material manufacturing process guidelines, and monitoring subcontractor compliance to the control program.

3.5 Parts Engineering Includes all labor, material, and other direct costs for parts engineering. This includes the cost for maintaining records related to parts design and production at contractor and government facilities. In addition, this cost includes reviewing, monitoring and maintaining parts and material certification records.

3.6 Software Assurance/ IV&V

Includes all subcontracts, labor, material, and other direct costs for implementing an independent software quality assurance program and to provide for an Independent Validation and Verification program of the flight software.

3.7 Reliability Analysis Includes all subcontracts, labor, material, and other direct costs for a mission level Failure Modes Effects Analysis and Single Point Failure Analysis to establish the probability of meeting mission requirements.

3.8 Payload Performance Assurance

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to implement the requirements of the mission’s performance assurance plan on the payload. These costs may include parts evaluation, screening, upgrading or redesign.

3.8.1 Reliability Analysis & Safety

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to document, test and analyze the elements of the payload design for reliability and flight safety. These costs should include data gathering on parts, mechanism and software. These costs may include special test and part screening for lifetime assessment and failure processes.

3.8.2 Quality Assurance Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to document and certify that the processes, procedures and tests performed during design and manufacturing were followed according to the mission’s quality assurance standards.

3.8.3 Materials/ Processes Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to document and certify that the materials and processes used during design and manufacturing met the mission’s quality assurance standards.

3.8.4 Electronic Parts & Screening

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to document and certify that the electronic parts used in the manufacturing of payload hardware met the mission’s quality assurance standards. These costs may include screening of parts to meet mission requirements.

3.8.5 Software Assurance Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to develop and implement a software assurance program that meets the mission requirements. These costs may include standards, documentation definition development, revision tracking tools, and source code inspection.

3.9 Spacecraft Performance Assurance

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to implement the requirements of the mission’s performance assurance plan on the spacecraft. These costs may include parts evaluation, screening, upgrading or redesign.

3.9.1 Reliability Analysis & Safety

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to document, test and analyze the elements of the spacecraft design for reliability and flight safety. These costs should include data gathering on parts, mechanism and software. Cost may also include testing and screening.

3.9.2 Quality Assurance Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to document and certify that the processes, procedures and tests performed during design and manufacturing were followed according to the mission’s quality assurance standards.


B-20




3.9.3 Materials/ Processes Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to document and certify that the materials and processes used during design and manufacturing met the mission’s quality assurance standards.

3.9.4 Electronic Parts & Screening

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to document and certify that the electronic parts used during in the manufacturing of spacecraft hardware met the mission’s quality assurance standards. These costs may include screening of parts to meet mission requirements.

3.9.5 Software Assurance Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to develop and implement a software assurance program that meets the mission requirements. These cost may include standards, documentation definition development, revision tracking tools, and source code inspection.


B-21




4 Science and Technology

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs for instrument definitions and science oversight. These costs include mission level support to ensure the science requirements are integrated across all elements in support of the mission. This category includes the generation and verification of science requirements matrixed to mission elements.

4.1 Science Oversight Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs for science oversight. These costs include mission level support to ensure the science requirements are met during the life of the mission.

4.2 PI Science Activities Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to support Principal Investigator science activities. These costs include mission level support to ensure the PI investigation and data analysis requirements are met during the life of the mission.

4.3 Co-I Science Activities Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to support Co-principal Investigator science activities. These costs include mission level support to ensure the Co-I investigation and data analysis requirements are met during the life of the mission.

4.4 Instrument Scientists Activities

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to support the instrument scientist’s activities. These costs include mission level support to ensure that the instrument satisfies the science requirements of the mission.

4.4.1 Instrument Characterization

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to identify the instrument’s characteristics. These costs may include testing, experimentation and analysis in support of determining the instruments operational characteristics. In addition these costs may include field campaigns to test the instrument in remote locations or at government testing facilities.

4.4.2 Instrument Calibration

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to identify the steps necessary to calibrate the instrument. The costs of addressing calibration issues over the life of the mission may be included. These costs may include testing, experimentation and analysis.

4.5 Algorithm Development

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to develop the algorithms necessary to process and analyze the measurements taken from the mission’s instrument suite. These costs may include operational support for the life of the mission.

4.6 Science Operations Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to develop comprehensive and efficient operational processes needed to perform science data processing, product generation, data distribution, data archival and data analysis.

4.6.1 Science Planning & Analysis

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs required to develop and prioritize science observation plans and analysis of the collected data

4.6.2 Science Data Processing

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to develop operational processes needed to perform science data processing including raw data ingest from NASA’s Space Network, Ground Network, Deep Space Network (or commercial sources), frame synchronization, data decoding, error detection and correction, data sorting, data management, data reprocessing, etc.

4.6.3 Data Distribution and Archival

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to provide data product distribution and storage of raw data and resulting data products to meet mission requirements. Distribution may take the form of electronic delivery or physical media.

4.6.4 Science Investigators Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to develop and maintain the science team network for collaborative projects and documentation and presentation of analysis results.

4.6.5 Guest Investigator Program

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to develop and maintain a program to provide for guest investigator campaigns.

4.7 Science/Data Operations Center

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to configure a Science/Data Operations Center for the duration of the mission. This includes the detailed design, hardware procurement, software procurement or development, system integration, operational procedures development, integration testing, and simulation support for the Science/Data Operations Center.

4.7.1 Science Data Processing

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to configure a Science Data Processing Facility for the duration of the mission. This includes the detailed design, hardware procurement, software procurement or development, system integration, operational procedures development, integration testing, and simulation support for the Science Data Processing Facility.


B-22




4.7.2 Science Data Validation

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to configure a Science Data Processing Facility for the duration of the mission. This includes the detailed design, hardware procurement, software procurement or development, system integration, operational procedures development, integration testing, and simulation support for the Science Data Processing Facility.

4.8 Data Distribution and Archival

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to configure a Data Distribution and Archival Facility for the duration of the mission. This includes the detailed design, hardware procurement, software procurement or development, system integration, operational procedures development, integration testing, and simulation support for the Data Distribution and Archival Facility.


B-23




5 UPC Carrier and Payload Services

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to design, develop, integrate, test, and ship the payload and ground support equipment to the observatory integration facility.

5.1 Management Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to manage the design, development, manufacturing and delivery of the payload for the life of the mission.

5.1.1 Resources Management

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to monitor and assess resource allocations and utilization in support of the payload development. Resources may include personnel, manufacturing and test facilities, and material supplies.

5.1.2 Schedule Management

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to ensure proper scheduling of resources to design, develop and produce the payload. The cost of long range forecasting and corrective actions may be included as necessary.

5.1.3 Configuration Management

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to maintain configuration control of all drawings and documentation necessary to ensure the proper design, production and operation of the payload. These costs may include archiving and long-term storage of information necessary for payload development and operations.

5.1.4 External Reviews Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to prepare, conduct and respond to request for actions associated with external reviews. These reviews may include the confirmation review, preliminary design review, specifications or systems requirements review, conceptual design review, pre-environmental and pre-ship review, and the two to four reviews associated with the launch activities.

5.1.5 Travel Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs for travel in support of payload-level management activities. This may include costs for visiting supplier sites, meetings with government organizations, travel to external reviews.

5.1.6 Contract and Procurement Management

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to establish a contracting process with outside vendors. These costs include maintaining procurement processes that track delivery, inspection and stocking of parts and equipment necessary to deliver the payload to the observatory integration facility.

5.2 Systems Engineering

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs for the design and development of systems architecture of the payload. These costs should include the design and development of internal and external interfaces between payload elements and the spacecraft bus.

5.2.1 Systems Engineering Management

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to manage the engineering resources necessary to complete the payload systems engineering functions. These costs include personnel management, coordination between subsystems and carrying out of operational activities.

5.2.2 Systems Design Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to design the payload systems interfaces. These costs include maintaining payload resource allocations such as mass, power, jitter, bandwidth and stability requirements. Costs may include tracking and projecting metrics for achieving mission goals; trade studies for performance versus cost implementation.

5.2.3 Technical Evaluation

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to perform a systems-level technical evaluation of the payload design using simulations, models, prototypes, and test beds of the various subsystems.

5.2.4 IV&V Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs necessary to perform payload level Independent Verification and Validation of the design. These costs might include preparation, reproduction and delivery of design documentation, support for internal peer level IV&V, and external independent reviews.

5.3 Operations Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to design, document and implement the payload operational procedures, scripts, databases and operational processes to satisfy the mission requirements. The cost of running simulations and tests to support payload development may be included in this category. This may include costs for coordination with the spacecraft and ground systems.


B-24




7 Operations Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to provide command and control of the spacecraft bus and payload, maintain spacecraft health and safety, and to provide science data to the end-users during the mission lifetime. This may also include pre-launch preparations.

7.1 Mission Operations Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to develop and maintain a support team to provide the following functions: commanding and monitoring the spacecraft subsystems, mission planning activities, mission requirements analysis, operational procedures development/maintenance, spacecraft trend analysis, anomaly resolution and external reviews.

7.1.1 Systems Engineering

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to analyze new/updated mission requirements, and to develop and/or modify operational activities to meet the requirements.

7.1.2 Sustaining Engineering

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to maintain the mission operations system to meet current mission requirements.

7.1.3 Operations Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs for commanding and monitoring the spacecraft subsystems, mission planning activities, operational procedures, spacecraft trend analysis and anomaly resolution.

7.2 Communications Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs required to maintain the capability to communicate with the spacecraft and coordinate the various operational ground elements to support communication with the spacecraft to maximize the science return of the mission.

7.2.1 Systems Engineering

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to analyze new/updated mission requirements, and to develop and/or modify the control center hardware, software and/or operational processes to meet the requirements.

7.2.2 Sustaining Engineering

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to maintain control center equipment, software and operational procedures to support spacecraft communication to meet current requirements.

7.2.3 Quality Assurance Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to develop, maintain and implement a quality assurance plan to certify spacecraft communication processes.

7.2.4 Operations Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to trend, analyze and troubleshoot spacecraft communication issues, including network scheduling, conflict resolution, link margins and transmitter power.

7.3 Flight Software Sustaining Engineering

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to support the flight operations team in regards to flight software behavior, to analyze mission anomalies in the context of flight software behavior analysis and to recommend flight software options to maintain mission performance following flight hardware problems. Includes development, validation and support of on-orbit installation of approved changes to the flight software load.

7.3.1 Spacecraft and Components Flight Software Systems

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to provide engineering support to the flight operations team in regards to flight software behavior. Includes analysis of mission anomalies in the context of flight software behavior and recommendations of flight software options to maintain mission performance following spacecraft subsystem flight hardware problems. Includes development, validation and support of the on-orbit installation of approved changes to the spacecraft bus flight software loads.

7.3.2 Instrument Flight Software (for each instrument)

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to to provide engineering support to the flight operations team in regards to flight software behavior. Includes analysis of mission anomalies in the context of flight software behavior and recommendations of flight software options to maintain mission performance following instrument subsystem flight hardware problems. Includes development, validation and support of on-orbit installation of approved changes to the instrument flight software loads.

7.4 Ground Software Sustaining Engineering

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to maintain the ground system software components to meet current requirements, including design, development and testing.

7.5 Operations Services Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to provide additional operational services to meet mission requirements.

7.5.1 Tracking Network Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to monitor and evaluate the quality of tracking data and determine radio frequency biases or drifts.

7.5.2 Flight Dynamics Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to provide navigation support for the mission. This includes trajectory design, orbit determination and control, attitude determination and control, attitude sensor modeling and calibration, launch vehicle trajectory monitoring, and associated pre-launch preparations and simulations.


B-25




10 Systems Integration & Testing

10.1 Payload Integration, Test & Verification

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to document, integrate and test the elements of the payload. These costs may include subsystem integration, interface testing, development of Safe To Mate procedures, operational procedures, and development of operational techniques. The cost of verifying that payload level requirements are met may be included.

10.1.1 Mechanical/ Environmental

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to design, analyze, document and implement environmental tests on the payload. Costs may include test facilities, supplies, consumables and personnel resources. These costs may include development of system interaction tests, deployment tests, and full motion tests. In addition, these costs may include jitter and vibration responses from payload mechanisms.

10.1.2 Electrical Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to design, analyze, document and implement a comprehensive performance test to validate payload electrical operations. The cost of running these tests before, during and after the systems tests may be included. These costs may include performance measurements of power consumption, data communication efficiency and rate, and general performance measurements.

10.1.3 Optical Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to design, analyze, document and implement optical test to validate payload alignments, stability and performance operations. The cost of running these tests before, during and after the systems level tests may be included in this category. These costs may include performance measurements, system stability and susceptibility to external disturbances.

10.2 Environmental Integration, Test & Verification

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to document, integrate and test the observatory. These costs may include subsystem integration, interface testing, development of Safe-To-Mate procedures, operational procedures, and development of operational techniques. The cost of verifying that observatory level requirements are met may be included.

10.2.1 System Assembly and Integration

Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to document and integrate each of the subsystems onto the mechanical bus structure. The cost for developing liveness tests, system level functional tests, and comprehensive performance tests may be included.

10.2.2 System Test Includes all labor, subcontracts, materials and other direct costs to design, analyze, document and implement environmental tests on the observatory. Costs may include test facilities, supplies, consumables and personnel resources. These costs may include development of system interaction tests.


C-1



Payload Selection and Priority

No doubt there will be a unique selection and funding process for the development of Orion cargo/payloads executed by each of the various NASA HQ sponsoring organizations. For in-stance, NASA SMD has already made official policy that there will be no set aside monies for an Orion specific AO; rather Orion based science investigations will compete with other Missions Of Opportunity science investigations. Other Mission Directorates may approach funding Orion based science in a different manner. Each sponsoring organization will develop their inter-nal priority list of Orion based cargo/payloads.

Eventually there must be the establishment of fair and equitable prioritization process that develops an integrated Orion cargo/payload priority list. This process will also establish the criteria used for prioritization. This integrated priority list may take into account NASA priorities in the form of a queuing system. For example: Orion based SMD science investigations may be offered an opportunity for every other queue slot, whereas the ISS Program may only be afforded an oppor-tunity for every 6th queue slot. This queue system is very similar to the queue system successfully used to prioritize the manifesting of small second-ary payloads aboard the STS. Entering the queue will require an “approved for flight” equivalent to the form 1628 ‘Request for Flight Assignment’ required of STS payloads.

It is recommended that the ESMD establish a working group to define the scope, function, and owner of the HQ Level 1 prioritization process, the prioritization criteria as well as an Orion 1628 equivalent.

Orion Manifesting and Mission Integration

It is expected that all early flights of Orion will be to the International Space Station (ISS). There are already existing ISS processes and procedures

NASA will establish processes and procedures to optimize the utilization of this highly val-ued access to space for payloads and cargo.

Appendix C - Programmatic Infrastructure Surrounding the UPP

in place to support the development of inte-grated priority lists. There are also processes for ISS-based research, ISS payload integration, and issue resolution across the full lifecycle. It is rec-ommended that the Orion-sponsored research be folded into these existing processes.

For Orion flights that are not traveling to the ISS, new manifesting and mission integration proce-dures must be created. At the appropriate time, it is recommended that the ESMD establish a mani-fest working group whose charter is the manifest-ing of all internal and external Orion cargo/pay-loads. It is recommended that this ‘Exploration Flight Assignment Working Group (eFAWG) be created as a HQ Level 1 Office that is directly accountable to the ESMD Associate Administra-tor. In the long term, the eFAWG would expand to include cargo/payload resources on other Cx vehicles and systems that might accommodate payloads or cargo. The eFAWG would function in a manner similar to the STS FAWG and ISS manifest working groups. It is within the eFAWG that the Orion form 1628 equivalents would be approved or rejected and actual flight assignments made.

It is recommended that ESMD establish a work-ing group composed of individuals with expe-rience in STS and/or ISS: manifesting, cargo/payload development, carrier operations, cargo/payload integration, and others who have a stake in the Orion manifesting processes to create the scope, functions, members, and processes of the eFAWG.

Payload User Support

The ISS program established a suite of Re-search Program Office’s, each designed to pro-vide the ‘front door’ interface to ISS for research-ers seeking flight opportunities on the ISS. The RPO’s, HQ Level 2 Offices provide prospective ISS researchers with payload accommodations information, interface with the ISS Payloads Of-fice to execute special accommodations studies on behalf of their researchers, negotiate with the ISS Program and HQ funding organizations on any special accommodations costs, and interface with the STS FAWG and ISS Manifest working group to support the HQ mission directorates


C-2



in the generation of AO’s for ISS research. The RPO’s also play an advocacy role in reaching out to potential researchers via their advisory boards, science planning boards, etc. alerting and educat-ing them on the resources and accommodations available to ISS based researchers.

Insofar as the Orion cargo/payload resources are not as expansive, either in quantity or scope, as those available to ISS researchers and there are costs associated with standing up any new Level 2 Office, it is recommended that ESMD assign the equivalent ISS RPO functions for Orion into the UPP Office. This recommended arrangement mirrors the successful RPO type functions that were successfully performed by the various Level 3 STS Carrier Organizations, such as USMP, Space Lab, Space Lab Pallet, Hitchhiker, and Get Away Specials.

As the fleet of Cx vehicles/systems expand, the UPC Office role may be easily expanded to in-clude RPO and carrier integration functions for researchers desiring flight on these vehicles/systems.




D-1

D.1 RELEVANT HISTORYNASA’s two previous human spaceflight programs, Apollo and the Space Transportation System

(STS or Space Shuttle), provided access to space for scientific missions, technology validation, and student experiments. These programs established a long, successful history of delivering secondary payloads to orbit, thereby maximizing the nation’s investment in human spaceflight (see Figure D-1). They also proved the value of using a common carrier and payload support organization to reuse tech-nology and expertise across payloads.

The Apollo missions carried fixed cargo in the SIM Bay and ejected Sub-Satellites into orbit. Simi-larly, the STS made extensive use of the Hitchhiker program to carry fixed cargo and to eject satellites. STS utilized the Missions Peculiar Equipment Support Structure (MPESS) carrier to carry fixed scien-tific missions and ejectable satellites, and all Hubble Space Telescope (HST) servicing missions utilized a standard carrier within the shuttle bay. The STS Get-Away Special (GAS) and Space Experiments Module (SEM) programs also carried fixed cargo using standardized carriers and processes.

Appendix D - Relevant History and Heritage Hardware

Figure D-1: The UPP draws from a rich legacy of programs which maximizes the capabilities and value of NASA’s human spaceflight vehicles.

UPC62

Extractable

APOLLO PROGRAM

Ejectable

Attached

SPARTANEjectable

Sub-Satellite

ShuttleCargo Bay

SIMBay

ALSEPDeployed Cargoon Lunar Surface

Lunar Lander

HITCHHIKERFixed CargoGAS

Fixed Cargo

Fixed Cargo EjectableSub-Satellite

SHUTTLE PROGRAM




D-2

Apollo Program

Service Module Science Instrument Module (SIM) Bay

The SIM Bay carried numerous scientific payloads during Apollo 15, 16, and 17 including:

• Particles & Fields Subsatellite• Gamma-Ray Spectrometer• Mass Spectrometer• Alpha & X-Ray Spectrometer• Lunar Sounder Experiment (CSAR)• UV Spectrometer• Lunar Sounder Experiment• Optical Recorder• IR Scanning Radiometer

Dates Used: 1971-1972

Specifications: (SM) 24ft 9in long, 12ft 10in diameter; SIM Bay in Sector 1 (50°)

Services: Power, Command & Data Handling, Ground Telemetry, EVA was utilized to collect film

Ejectable Sub-Satellite

The Apollo 15 & 16 sub-satellites (PFS-1/2) were small satellites released into lunar orbit from the Apollo SM. The main objectives were to study the plasma, particle, and magnetic field environment of the Moon and map the lunar gravity field. Specifically, they measured plasma and energetic particle intensities and vector magnetic fields, and facilitated tracking of the satellite velocity to high precision. The Moon’s roughly circular orbit about the Earth at ~380000 km (60 Earth radii) carried the sub-satellites into both interplanetary space and various regions of the Earth’s magnetosphere.

Dates Used: 1972

Specifications: Hexagonal cylinder 78 cm in length and approximately 36 cm across opposite corners of the hexagon with a mass of 36.3 kg. Three equally-spaced 1.5-meter-long deployable booms were hinged to one of the end platforms.

Services: Power, Command & Data Handling, Ground Telemetry




D-3

Space Transportation System (STS)

Spacelab Pallets and Mission Peculiar Experiment Support Structure (MPESS)

Over 750 experiments were flown on 25 missions, including:

• Office of Aeronautical and Space Technology (OAST-1) to demonstrate and obtain dynamics data for large, deployable solar array panel.

• Office of Space and Terrestrial Applications (OSTA-2), sponsored jointly by NASA/MSFC and the West German Ministry for Research and Technology, carrying two main sets of experiments to investigate materials processing in the low gravity environment of space.

• Spartan deployable free-flying satellite to explore the Sun’s corona (STS-56, 64, 69).

Dates Used: 1978 - 2003

Specifications: Pallet: 14’(y) x 10’(x); MPESS: 14’(y) x 2.5’(x) x 2’(z) & 5,695 lbs

Services: Power, Data, Crew Command/Telemetry, Ground Command/Telemetry

Shuttle Small Payloads Project (SSPP) Get-Away Special (GAS) & Space Experiments Module (SEM)

The GAS program flew 167 canisters and seven cross-bay bridges, which primarily contained student experiments. Fourteen of those canisters (with 140 modules total) were allocated to SEM experiments. In addition to GAS cans, three in-cabin SEM “satchels” were flown on the ISS.

Dates Used: 1976 - 2003

Specifications: GAS Canister: 5 cu. ft., 19.8” diameter; 200 (sidemount), 400 lbs (cross-bay mount); SEM: Each canister contained 10 modules; Modules: 300 cu. in./15”x7”x3.25”, or w/22 3”x1”dia. Vials (Module mounting: 6 lbs; Total Capsule Contents: 2.5 lbs); Satchels: approx. 6” x 10” w/ 20 vials each

Services: Power, Limited Crew Commanding, Automated Sequencing




D-4

Hubble Space Telescope (HST) Servicing Missions

All HST Servicing Missions utilized a common carrier, including:

• Orbital Replacement Unit Carrier (ORUC)• Super Lightweight Interchangeable Carrier (SLIC)• Multi-Use Logistics Equipment Carrier (MULE)

Seven instruments and over 37 ORUs were transported over the five servicing missions.

Mission(s): HST SM1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Dimensions: ORUC: 14’(y) x 10’(x); SLIC: 14’(y) x 8.7’(z); MULE: 14’(y) x 12’(x)

Mass Capabilities: ORUC: 7557 lbs; SLIC: 5775 lb; MULE: 2754 lb.

Services: Power, Command & Data Handling (Crew & Ground), EVA Support




D-5

Spartan ProjectThe Spartan Project was a low-cost reusable Shuttle borne free-flyer that carried space science instruments and technology experiments on LEO missions. 5 Spartan spacecraft were built and 9 missions were flown , the last being Spartan 201-05 on STS-95.

Dates Used: 1985 - 1995

Specifications: Mission duration: 40-50 hours free-flying during a STS mission.Deployed mass: up to 1136 kg (3000 lb.)Length: 2.29 m (90 inches) (typical maximum dimension)Attitude control: 3-axis stabilized, cold-gas thrusters, maximum slew rate of 1 degree/secThermal control: Active and passive (electronics limited to 0 C to 50 C)Data storage: Onboard recorder, up to 3 Gbit availablePower: Ag-Zn batteries (1000 AH)Communication: Limited S-Band on later flightsASE: MPESS bridge with Release/Engage Mechanism (REM), PGSE (Laptop), Standard Switch Panel (SSP). Deployed/Retrieved using Shuttle Remote Manipulator System (RMS).

Services: Fine-pointed autonomous sub-satellite




D-6

Shuttle Small Payloads Project (SSPP) Hitchhiker

Via the Hitchhiker program, 69 experiments were flown on 28 payloads, including nine ejectable satellites.

A summary of the accomplishments and discoveries made possible by this program is provided on the following section.

Dates Used: 1986 - 2003

Specifications: User mounting dims: sideplates: 25” x 39”, direct sidemount: 20” x 40”; HH pallets: 33” wide x 27”/57” long, Canisters: 19.8” dia. x 28.3” (5 cu. ft.); User mass capability: sideplates: 250-300 lbs, Direct sidemount: 700 lbs; HH pallets: 600 lbs, Canisters: 200-400 lbs

Services: Power, Command & Data Handling (Crew & Ground)




D-7

Hitchhiker Payload Experiment HistoryAccomplishments and Discoveries

PayloadName

Mission,Launch Date

Experiments (Customers)

ResearchDisciplines

Experiment Accomplishments and Discoveries

HH-G1 STS-61CJan. 12, 1986

CPL(GSFC)

Thermal Engineering,Heatpipe Technology

Characterized microgravity operation of multi-power capillary pumped-loop heat transfer system

PACS(USAF)

OrbitalContamination

Observed far-field emissions from stellar groupings, Earth-limb airglow, and metropolitan areas; provided on-orbit contaminant data to help assess impact on remote sensing from shuttle

SEECM (NASA/PE) Optics,Contamination

Demonstrated improved reflectivity of precontaminated mirrors due to atomic oxygen

BBXRT STS-35Dec. 2, 1990

BBXRT(GSFC)

X-ray Astronomy First focusing X-ray telescope operating over a broad energy range (0.3-12 keV) with moderate energy resolution; resolved Iron K-line in 2 binary stars, detected evidence of line broadening in NGC-4151, and studied cooling flow in clusters; obtained data on 82 X-ray sources from 157 observations over 185,000 seconds

STP-1 STS-39Apr. 28, 1991

ALFE (MDAC/AFAL) Propellant Management Characterized technology and techniques required for on-orbit propellant management, with application to advanced spacecraft feed systems

APM(USAF)

Ascent Particulates Measured particulates in shuttle payload bay during ascent

DSE(GSFC)

Computer Engineering Tested advanced data management concepts

SKIRT-CVF (GSFC/USAF)

IR Glow Science,Sensor Technology

First IR measurements to identify molecular species of shuttle glow; demonstrated use of cryogenic IR sensors

UVLIM (NRL/USAF) Atmospheric Science Collected UV observations of atmosphere at the Earth limb

ASP STS-52Oct. 22, 1992

ASP(U.Trieste)

Sensor Technology, Attitude Determination

Tested three independent new sensors for application on future spacecraft

GCP STS-53Dec. 2, 1992

CryoHP (GSFC/USAF) Thermal Engineering, Heatpipe Technology

First flight demonstration of cryogenic-oxygen heatpipe technology; first flight data of operation below 100K

GLO-1(U. AZ)

IR Glow Science, Atmospheric Physics

First simultaneous optical detection of Mg and its ion in a common volume of the ionosphere, helping in the identification of active chemical pathways; observed up/down motion of Earth’s diurnal electric field, providing data on dawn/dusk asymmetry in ionospheric metal ion distribution

DXS STS-54Jan. 13, 1993

DXS(U.WI)

X-ray Astronomy Obtained first-ever spectra of the diffuse soft x-ray background in the energy band 0.15-0.284 keV (42-84 Å), the first direct evidence that a bubble of million-degree gas surrounds the solar system




D-8

PayloadName

Mission,Launch Date


ResearchDisciplines


SHOOT STS-57June 21, 1993

SHOOT(GSFC)

Cryogenic Fluid Transfer Technology

First flight demonstration of cryogenic fluid transfer in space (liquid He at 720 l/hr); characterized operation of cryogenic technology components in a microgravity environment

COB STS-60Feb. 3, 1994

CAPL(GSFC)

Thermal Engineering, Heatpipe Technology

First microgravity demonstration of advanced capillary pumped-loop thermal control system

ODERACS (JSC/USAF) Orbital Debris,Radar Tracking

(Ejected) Allowed ground-based detection of small objects in orbit to help calibrate radar systems used to monitor orbital debris; calibrated the principle polarization response of ground-based radar and the data processing system

BremSat(U.Bremen)

OrbitalContamination

(Ejected) Characterized on-orbit atomic oxygen environment and electric charges produced by micrometeoroids

OAST-2 STS-62Mar. 4, 1994

ECT(MSFC)

Emulsion Chamber Technology

Characterized space radiation for spacecraft and human shielding applications

CryoTP (GSFC/USAF) Thermal Engineering,Heatpipe Technology

First flight demonstration of cryogenic nitrogen heat-pipe technology and 120K phase-change thermal storage device for electronics applications

SAMPIE(LeRC)

Solar Array Technology,Plasma Science

First retrievable high-voltage space plasma interaction experiment; first flight characterization of ISS and advanced photovoltaic cells; measured effects of oxygen/nitrogen plasma interaction on shuttle

TES-1/2(LeRC)

Thermal Energy Storage Obtained first data on long-duration microgravity behavior of thermal storage fluoride salts, for solar dynamic power applications; confirmed predicted salt void behavior

EISG/SKIRT (GSFC/JSC)

IR Glow Science Measured effects of temperature on spacecraft glow from oxygen/nitrogen plasma interaction; confirmed that shuttle IR glow phenomenon peaks strongly in ram direction, is zero in anti-ram, and is suppressed by venting nitrogen

ROMPS STS-64Sept. 9, 1994

ROMPS (GSFC) Materials Processing, Robotics

Demonstrated commercial methods of rapid thermal processing of 100 thin-film semiconductor materials in microgravity; demonstrated robot control using capaciflector proximity sensor




D-9

PayloadName

Mission,Launch Date


ResearchDisciplines


CGP/O2 STS-63Feb. 3, 1995

CSE (JPL/Hughes) Cryogenics Validated and characterized on-orbit performance of 2 technologies that comprise a hybrid cryogenic system, to support design of future cryogenic systems for NASA and military space flight

GLO-2(U. AZ)


Collected data on ionospheric metal ion clouds, allowing better understanding of ionospheric electric fields

ICBC (JSC/IMAX) Mission Photography Photographed Mir rendezvous operations for motion picture “Mission to Mir,” which premiered at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum on May 21, 1997, and since viewed by millions

ODERACS-2 (JSC/USAF)

Orbital Debris,Radar Tracking

(Ejected) Verified the optical data analysis process leading to debris piece sizes; calibrated the orthogonal polarization response of ground-based radar relative to the principle polarization response

IEH-1 STS-69Sept. 7, 1995

UVSTAR (U.AZ/ESA) Ultraviolet Astronomy Acquired stellar UV spectra, demonstrating use of UVSTAR instrument for shuttle and space station

SEH(USC)

Solar Astronomy, Solar Physics

Measured difficult-to-measure absolute solar EUV flux, important as calibration data for other instruments

GLO-3(U. AZ)


Observed ionospheric metal ion cloud build-up as function of time of day, providing insight into evolution of metal ion upwelling by Earth’s electric fields

CONCAP-IV/03 (UAH) Materials Science Characterized organic thin-film growth for electro-optics applications; obtained diffusion-controlled transport; confirmed thin-film growth in microgravity is typically very robust and uniform, allowing production of single-crystalline films; contributed to film growth modeling

CAPL-2 STS-69Sept. 7, 1995

CAPL-2(GSFC)

Thermal Engineering, Heatpipe Technology

Flight demonstration of advanced capillary pumped-loop thermal control system incorporating modified starter pump

GPP STS-74Nov. 11, 1995

GLO-4(U.AZ)


Provided data to further understand altitude-dependent metal-ion density in Earth’s electric field

PASDE(LaRC)

Structural Dynamics, Photogrammetry

Characterized MIR solar array dynamics; established low-cost, passive photogrammetry for application to ISS appendage structural response and verification

SLA-1 STS-72Jan. 11, 1996

SLA-1(GSFC)

Laser Altimetry, Tracking Technology

First substantive altimetry of Earth from space, collecting 2.7 million laser measurements of land, ocean, & clouds; first flight demonstration of 2nd-generation, diode-pumped Nd:YAG lasers; demonstrated surface lidar methods and dramatic improvements in laser altimetry data processing




D-10

PayloadName

Mission,Launch Date


ResearchDisciplines


TEAMS STS-77May 16, 1996

GANE(JSC)

Navigation, Attitude Determination

Demonstrated use of GPS for on-orbit attitude determination with application to ISS

LMTE(USAF)

Thermal Engineering First flight demonstration of liquid-metal heat-pipe operation, with 550C temperature gradient

PAMS(GSFC)

Spacecraft Stabilization Technology

(Ejected) Tested a passive aerodynamic stabilization and magnetic damping system; verified proof-of-concept of propellant-free, aerodynamic stabilization for satellites

VTRE(LeRC)

Tanking/Refueling Technology

First flight demonstration of an autonomous fluid transfer system; verified ability of vane propellant management devices to separate liquid and gas in microgravity

CryoFD STS-83Apr. 4, 1997

CryoFD (GSFC/USAF) Thermal Engineering Demonstrated the first American-made loop heat pipe, and the highest capacity cryogenic (70-150K) oxygen heat pipes ever developed, with applications for space-based IR sensors

CryoFD-R STS-94July 1, 1997

CryoFD (GSFC/USAF) Thermal Engineering Obtained reflight data for operation of cryogenic flexible-diode heat pipe in microgravity; verified operation of composite wick design

IEH-2 STS-85July 17, 1997

UVSTAR (U.AZ/ESA) UV Astronomy Collected data on H-Lyman intensity and water dissociation rate for Comet Hale-Bopp; obtained first evidence of high-velocity stellar winds in two unpredicted ionization stages for three subdwarf O-stars

SEH(USC)

Solar Astronomy, Solar Physics

Provided solar flux data, such as that required for interpretation of Jovian EUV/FUV data obtained by UVSTAR

GLO-5/6(U.AZ)


Extended altitude range for measurements of ionospheric metal ions, helping to characterize the time-of-day vs. latitude model of Earth’s electric field

DATA-CHASER (U.CO) Solar Astronomy, Data Systems Technology

Demonstrated integrated advanced data system tools and technologies for improving space payload operations; established interactive human/automated payload control, distributed to remote users; measured the full-disk solar UV and soft X-ray irradiance, and imaged the sun in Lyman-Alpha, allowing correlation of solar activity with radiation flux and associated Lyman-Alpha fluxes with individual active regions




D-11

PayloadName

Mission,Launch Date


ResearchDisciplines


TAS-1 STS-85July 17, 1997

CFE(USAF)

Thermal Engineering Demonstrated J-T cycle cryocooler operation, designed to provide two stages of cooling, for future space applications

CVX(LeRC)

Fluid Viscometry Most accurate measurement of critical exponent for xenon viscosity; first measurement of viscoelasticity near the critical point of xenon

ISIR(GSFC)

Remote Sensing,Atmospheric Science

Obtained high-resolution thermal IR imagery of clouds at 8.5 µm, with application for cloud particle discrimination; demonstrated feasibility of uncooled IR detector for remote sensing

SLA-2(GSFC)

Laser Altimetry Performed laser ranging from all major Earth surface types, allowing derivation of near-global sampling of land-cover elevation; extended SLA-1 dense-grid topography data to 57 degrees

SOLCON/SOVA(RMI-Belgium)

Solar Physics Collected solar irradiance data required to better understand global climate change

TPF(GSFC)

Thermal Engineering First flight demonstration of capillary vapor-flow activation device; confirmed theories of multi-evaporator operation for thermal control systems

LHP-NaSBE

STS-87Nov. 19, 1997

LHPFX(Texas A&M, Dynatherm)

Thermal Engineering Demonstrated and characterized loop heat-pipe technology for spacecraft thermal management applications

NaSBE (USAF/NRL) Battery Technology Demonstrated microgravity operation of a battery with liquid electrodes and solid electrolyte; characterized microgravity effects on mass transport and reactions at solid-electrolyte interface

SOLSE-1 STS-87Nov. 19, 1997

SOLSE(GSFC)

Remote Sensing, Atmospheric Science

First UV spectrometry of scattered radiation from Earth’s limb; solved problems of tangent height registration and scattered light; demonstrated use of limb scattering to derive high-resolution ozone profile, 15-50 km; verified viewing orientation for ozone retrieval and CCD-array technology for UV imaging

LORE(GSFC)

Remote Sensing, Atmospheric Science

Demonstrated that vertical profiles of ozone can be measured with high resolution using sunlight scattered in the atmospheric limb; extended SOLSE’s knowledge of the limb down to 10 km above Earth’s surface




D-12

PayloadName

Mission,Launch Date


ResearchDisciplines


IEH-3 STS-95Oct. 29, 1998

UVSTAR (U.AZ/ESA) UV Astronomy Obtained first 0.1-nm resolution spectrum for 50- 125 nm region; obtained first spectrally resolved images of Jovian system in 500-1250Å range, including Io plasma torus; performed line identification, flux calibration, classical atmospheric model comparison, and flux-variability measurements; obtained far-UV spectra of several galactic and stellar sources

SEH(USC)

Solar Astronomy Produced excellent full-disk, absolute solar extreme-UV flux data for flux incident on Jovian system to help understand the EUV dynamics of the Io plasma torus; collected data from a major solar flare, yielding insight into spectral and energy changes in solar EUV and soft X-rays; (in conjunction with UVSTAR) demonstrated tight coupling between solar EUV input and planetary system output

SOLCON-2(RMI-Belgium)

Solar Physics Measured total solar irradiance; provided data to help calibrate and verify effects of aging on long-term solar radiometers

STARLITE (U.AZ) IR Imaging Demonstrated on-orbit performance of a composite-structure telescope and UV imaging spectrometer in the space environment

PANSAT(NPS/STP)

Radio Communications (Ejected) Provided global spread-spectrum signals for amateur radio; provided students with experience in communications satellite design, development, integration, test, and mission ops

CryoTSU STS-95Oct. 29, 1998

CryoTSU (GSFC/USAF)

Thermal Engineering First flight demonstration of a cryogenic capillary pumped loop and a 60K phase-change thermal storage device with a superconducting bolometer; demonstrated 3000J of energy storage

MightySat-SAC-A

STS-88Dec. 4, 1998

SAC-A (CONAE, Argentina)

Remote Sensing, Solar Cell Technology

(Ejected) First flight demonstration of remote sensing for whale tracking; characterized new solar cell technology

MightySat-1 (USAF/AFRL)

Solar Cells, Microelectronics, Composites

(Ejected) Flight demonstration of advanced composite structure, microelectronics and packaging; characterized advanced solar cells; demonstrated shape-memory alloy release device with many times less shock than conventional pyrotechnic devices

STARSHINE STS-96May 17, 1999

STARSHINE-1 (NRL/Starshine)

Orbital Physics, Student Outreach

(Ejected) Facilitated understanding of relationship between upper atmosphere and solar activity; allowed determination of effects of solar extreme-UV radiation on satellite orbital decay; enabled teacher/student participation in small satellite development & on-orbit tracking

HEAT STS-105Aug. 10, 2001

SimpleSat (GSFC) GPS Attitude Control/Pointing

(Ejected) No contact with satellite post-deploy

ACE(GSFC)

Flight Avionics Successfully demonstrated new modular carrier avionics subsystem




D-13

PayloadName

Mission,Launch Date


ResearchDisciplines


MACH-1 STS-108Nov. 29, 2001

CAPL-3 (GSFC/NRL) Thermal Engineering Demonstrated multiple evaporator pumped-loop thermal control system, with reliable startup and continuous operation, for wide range of operating conditions; demonstrated 50% heat load sharing; established higher system confidence for use in future satellite thermal control systems

PSRD(JSC, ETH-Zurich)

High-Energy Astrophysics Measured cosmic background radiation; tested and calibrated Synchrotron Radiation Detector technology before its application on a 3-year ISS mission; characterized instrument’s response to both ISS and undocked space environments

STARSHINE-2 (NRL/Starshine)

Orbital Physics, Student Outreach

(Ejected) Allowed more accurate predictions of the orbital decay of other satellites due to solar activity and UV radiation

FREESTAR STS-107Jan. 16, 2003

MEIDEX (ISA/Israel, Tel Aviv Univ)

Atmospheric Science Proved transient luminous events emit in near-IR, & correlation with thunderstorms; discovered synchronicity of lightning activity; demonstrated determination of desert aerosol height distribution from space via multispectral data; showed effects of desert dust on cloud precipitation production and terrestrial temperatures; proved theory that forest fire smoke inhibits cloud development and rain

CVX-2(GRC)

Fluid Viscometry First measurement of shear thinning in a simple atomic fluid, enabling enhanced thinning techniques for products that use liquids (e.g., oil, plastics)

SOLCON-3 (RMI-Belgium)

Solar Physics Collected solar irradiance data required to better understand global climate change

LPT/CANDOS (GSFC) IP Communication Technology, Navigation

First flight demo of IP ops via NASCOM/TDRSS, software-defined radio, and onboard navigation via GPS Enhanced Onboard Navigation System (GEONS)

SOLSE-2/LORE (GSFC) Remote Sensing, Atmospheric Science

Measured limb-scattered radiance to allow determination of high-resolution profile of stratospheric ozone




D-14

D.2 HERITAGE HARDWARE

The UPC Carrier’s heritage hardware includes the Lightband Separation System and components of the avionics system.

Lightband Separation System

The UPC Carrier’s Lightband Separation System has been used on many launch vehicles and missions. The Shuttle has flown a 19” and 23” lightband on STS-116 and 127 for CAPE and ANDE. Every Lightband launched has worked successfully on orbit.

Athena Minotaur II Delta II Delta IV Atlas V Shuttle Minotaur II Falcon 1*

Starshine-32001

XSS-112005

MITEX2006

Nanosat-22004

STP-12007

CAPE/ICU2008

TacSat-22008

Demo-Flight-22007

25.0 18.25 18.2518.25

18 hexagonal Four 15 inchLightbands

23.2515.8

38.8 38.8

Original Standard Standard Original Standard and MkI MkI MkII MkI

LockheedNASA

LockheedAFRL

Orbital

OrbitalLockheed

NRLBoeing

BoeingAFRL

BoeingUSAFLANL

AeroastroSSTL

STPMEINRL

Oceaneering

STPAFRLMSI

Orbital

SpaceXDARPA

No Lightband has ever failed to work on orbit. The Lightband has �ight heritage on many launch vehicle from Shuttle to Athena.Flight History

LaunchVehicle

*Launch vehicle failed. ** The original had �exures. The standard had hinged leaf and a thermal knife. The MKI used electric motors on the inside. The MkII uses electric motors on the outside.

Mission

LightbandDiameter [in]Lightbandtype**Organization

Flight History (as of May 2008)




D-15

Avionics

The UPC Carrier Avionics heritage traces to numerous missions including GLAST and LRO. All of these missions have functioned flawlessly since launch:

GLAST ➤ June 2008LRO ➤ June 2009

LRO Avionics


E-1



Initial Mission Concepts

The GSFC team has identified several initial candidate missions that can be accommodated as Orion UPC payloads. These payload concepts are already being planned to perform a variety of Earth and space science, technology, operational, and DOD missions. As UPC payloads, these mis-sions have additional value to NASA because they have the potential to perform cost-effective, sig-nificant science and technology studies and test the Orion UPC concept. Orion UPC can begin transporting payloads as early as 2015.

GSFC has a long history of working with a variety of small payload customers through the Space Shuttle Get Away Special and Hitchhiker Programs, as well as through GSFC management for Expendable Launch Vehicle primary and sec-ondary payloads. These payload customers have included NASA and other civil US Government agencies, foreign and domestic universities, the DOD agencies, commercial companies, and even private citizens. Foldout 1 details several initial candidate missions for Orion UPC. These cus-tomers are committed to the UPC Orion idea and represent potential value to NASA for science and technology missions.

Further details are provided for several poten-tial early Orion UPC missions including:

• Space validation of optical communications technology

• A mission to study the effects of magnetic storms in the Ionosphere-Thermosphere

• A mission to replace the L1 space weather monitoring functions currently performed by ACE and SOHO

• The Italian CIELO mission to study the earth’s magnetosphere in relation to seismic events

• Starshine educational outreach missions

Starshine 4 and 5

These payloads are designed and built to study variations in the rate of satellite orbit decay in low Earth orbit caused by upper atmospheric response

to solar Extreme Ultraviolet radiation during the solar cycle. The reflectors were fabricated by stu-dents at numerous elementary and middle schools. The hardware has been fabricated and is currently in storage at the Planetary Systems, Inc. facility in Silver Spring, MD (see Figure E-1). Similar hardware has previously been flown twice on the Space Shuttle and once on a Lockheed Martin Athena I ELV. These payloads weigh approxi-mately 90 pounds and are 18 inches in diameter, so they could be co-manifested with other UPC Orion payloads. On Orion UPC, the Starshine Missions would fly as ejectable spacecraft. These payloads only require 4 W of power and a separa-tion command utilizing the Orion UPC 8-inch light band separation system. Both payloads can be ready for launch as early as 2015. The Starshine team is working to identify a sponsor to provide the payload integration costs required to fly as an Orion UPC payload. The point of contact for this mission is Mr. Gil Moore of Monument, CO.

Lunar Optical Communications DemonstrationThe Lunar Optical Communications (OC)

Demonstration Mission will demonstrate two-way high rate optical communications between Earth and a small spacecraft in lunar orbit for a minimum of one year. The OC Mission would demonstrate a 1.2 gbps optical downlink from the spacecraft in lunar orbit and a 20 mbps up-link from Earth to the Moon. A 250 mbps RF S-Band link would also be accommodated (see Figure E-2). This mission will demonstrate rou-tine flight operations with reliable data trans-fer protocols from a single spacecraft to a single

UPC44

Figure E-1: NASA must continue to inspire America’s youth with educational missions.

Appendix E - UPC Orion Customers


E-2



ground station using the optical communications link. The OC Mission could potentially accom-modate a high data rate science instrument that could be used to demonstrate high volume data transmission using the optical communications link. The mission could also improve Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) for spacecraft systems and space and ground terminals using the high data rate optical link. On Orion UPC, the OC Mission would fly as an ejectable spacecraft. This payload could be ready for launch as a pathfinder mission in 2015. The point of contact for this mission is Mr. Harry Shaw of GSFC.

Ionosphere-Thermosphere Space Weather ArrayThe Ionosphere-Thermosphere Space Weather

Array Mission consists of an array of four to eight spacecraft to be inserted into low Earth orbits in pairs of 2. This mission provides a systematic ex-ploration of the ionosphere and thermosphere at mid and low latitudes, with an emphasis on study-ing magnetic storms. This mission would satisfy the Living With a Star Study’s recommenda-tion for flying Ionosphere-Thermosphere Storm Probes (see Figure E-3). Each spacecraft requires 30-40 W of power, 50-70 kg of instrument mass, and science telemetry rate of 50-200 kbps. On Orion UPC, this mission would fly as an eject-able spacecraft. The array of spacecraft would be planned for a series of launches in 2015-2018. The point of contact for this mission is Dr. Robert Pfaff of GSFC.

L1 Monitor Replacement MissionThe L1 Monitor Replacement Mission is

planned to provide a replacement for the L1 space weather monitoring capability currently per-formed by the ACE and SOHO Missions. This

mission will provide solar wind input measure-ments for geo-space science and 1 AU near-Earth solar wind measurements for inner and outer he-liospheric missions for at least a year. The space-craft requires 60 W of power, 50 kg of instrument mass, and a science telemetry rate of 7 kbps. On Orion UPC, this mission would fly as an eject-able spacecraft and use an electric propulsion sys-tem to transfer from low Earth orbit to L1 (see Figure E-4). The mission is planned for launch as soon as possible. The point of contact for this mission is Dr. Adam Szabo of GSFC.

CIELO MissionThe CIELO Mission objectives include earth-

quake investigations, monitoring and mapping the Earth’s magnetic field, ionospheric plasma, perturbations in the ionosphere-magnetosphere region produced by TLE and LGF phenomena associated with thunderstorms, and seismo-asso-ciated effects (see Figure E-5). Mission funding is planned to be provided by the Italian Space Agency, with NASA providing the ride to space on Orion UPC in exchange for full access to the science data. On Orion UPC, this mission would fly as an ejectable spacecraft. The launch date re-mains to be determined. The point of contact for this mission is Dr. Vittorio Sgrigna of the Univer-sity of Rome.

Figure E-2: ORION UPC is a means to develop exciting new communication technologies.UPC45

Optical RF (S-band)KEY


E-3



UPC48

Figure E-5: UPC launch capability can be exchanged for access to science and technology data with international partners (CIELO Mission).

UPC46

60° InclinationMagnetic Latitude (Dipole)

Verti

cal T

EC Es

timat

e 1016

el/m

2 )

350.0

300.0

250.0

200.0

150.0

100.0

50.0

0.0-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60

Elevation angle >40

22:04 UT

Ground TEC 21:43 UT20:32 UT20:12 UT

19:00 UT

18:40 UT

-180 -90 0

80

0

-80

Figure E-3: Orion UPC is an excellent way to launch 2 satellites for the Ionosphere-Thermosphere Space Weather Array.

UPC47

L1

L1 Libration Orbit View from North Ecliptic PoleL1 Libration Orbit

InsertionMoon’s Orbit

Transfer Orbit

Gravity Assist toAlign Planes

L1

Figure E-4: Orion UPC is a cost-effective way to fly the congressionally-mandated L1 monitor replacement missions.


E-4



Letters of Support


E-5



National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Goddard Space Flight Center

Greenbelt, Maryland

20771

September 9, 2009 To: NASA/GSFC, UPC Orion Formulation Manager, Code 455, Bruce Milam From: NASA/GSFC Code 674, Robert Pfaff Subject: Letter of Support for UPC Orion Capability I am writing to express my strong support for the development of the Unpressurized Cargo (UPC) capability for scientific payloads on the new Orion vehicle, and particularly for Ionosphere-Thermosphere research. The orbit and payload capability of the UPC Orion would be extremely well-suited for the Ionosphere-Thermosphere Storm Probe (ITSP) mission which is an exciting future research tool of NASA’s Living With a Star program. As formulated by NASA’s LWS Definition Team for Geospace in 2002, such a mission would consist of array of space weather satellites to carry out systematic exploration of ionosphere and thermosphere at mid and low latitudes. These identical satellites would gather comprehensive measurements of neutral and plasma gas properties, electrodynamics, plasma density profiles, and energetic particles, providing an unprecedented picture of how the mid and low latitude upper atmosphere “works” as a system. The anticipated data base would provide: (1) fundamental, new knowledge concerning the Ionosphere/Thermosphere, (2) physical understanding of critical micro and macro scale processes in the earth’s upper atmosphere, and (3) vital input for sophisticated models that are essential to advancing nation’s space weather objectives and for which the data is not available by any other means. As a member of the LWS Geospace Mission Definition Team and as the former GSFC Study Scientist for the LWS Ionosphere/Thermosphere mission component, I would be very pleased to work with your engineering team to examine the detailed feasibility of the implementation of the ITSP mission using the UPC Orion capability. Sincerely,

Robert F. Pfaff, Jr.


E-6



National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, MD 20771

Reply to Attn of: 695 October 15, 2009

Mr. Bruce Milam

UPC Orion Formulation Manager

Code 455

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

Re: Letter of Support for UPC Orion Capability

Dear Bruce,

I wanted to pass along a word of thank and also my strong support the development of

the UPC capability on Orion. UPC Orion if developed may be used to fly a package like the

Lunar –Solar Interaction Explorer (LuSIE, PI-G. Delory, UC Berkeley) to study the radiation

and plasma connection between the Sun and the Moon. As you know, the Moon is not really

in a vacuum, but immersed in the harsh space environment. It is constantly bombarded by

micro-meteoroids, high energy radiation, and solar wind. These drivers create a response at

the lunar interface, eroding the surface and forming ejecta via processes like impact

vaporization, sputtering, and desorption. This activity ultimately creates a neutral gas

exosphere, ionized gas ionosphere, trailing plasma wake, and particulates ejecta region about

the Moon. LuSIE is specifically designed to study the response of the Moon to these

environmental drivers. This science fits into the 2009 Planetary Division ‘Lunar Roadmap’

(http://www.lpi.usra.edu/leag/ler_draft.shtml) and 2007 ‘Heliophysics Science and the Moon’

strategic plans.

We recognize that any actual flight of this science is dependent on securing a funding

source which is likely a competitive process that is not guaranteed. However, in a recent

SMEX competition, Delory’s LuSIE proposal was rated a catagory-1 proposal. If you have

any further questions, please feel free to call me (301-286-4446) or Greg Delory (510-643-

1991).

Regards,

Dr. William M. Farrell

Planetary Scientist

NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center


E-7




E-8



NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, Maryland, U.S.A.

TO: NASA/GSFC, UPC Orion Formulation Manager, Code 455, Bruce Milam

FROM: John F. Cooper, Code 672, NASA/GSFC

SUBJECT: Letter of Support for UPC Orion Capability.

I support the development of the UPC capability on Orion. UPC Orion if developed may be used to fly the Dust in the Solar Wind Explorer (DUSWEX) to study the dynamics and origins of the solar wind from lunar orbit. A unique feature of the lunar orbit achievable would be high-sensitivity measurements of the solar upper corona and interplanetary dust via occultation of the solar disk by the lunar limb. This science would support upcoming heliophysics missions including Solar Orbiter and Solar Probe Plus within the context of the NASA Heliophysics Roadmap.

The actual flight of this science is dependant on securing a funding source which is likely a competitive process that is not guaranteed.

John F. Cooper, Ph.D. August 1, 2009

Heliospheric Physics Laboratory, Code 672 NASA Goddard Space Flight Center 8800 Greenbelt Road Greenbelt, MD 20771 Phone: 301-286-1193 Cell: 301-768-3305 Fax: 301-286-1617 E-mail: [email protected]


E-9



September 4, 2009

To: Mr. Bruce Milam

NASA/GSFC, UPC Orion Formulation Manager, Code 455

From: Dr. John C. Gregory

Professor and Director, Alabama Space Grant Consortium

The University of Alabama in Huntsville

Subject: Letter of Support for UPC Orion Capability

I support the development of the UPC capability on Orion. We envision flying one

or more experiments built by students at U.S. universities. We plan that these experiments

shall come from some of the nearly 600 universities in NASA’s Space Grant program.

Students in Space Grant build space flight hardware under the guidance of faculty mentors

expert in the fields of science supported by NASA. This science will fit into the near or far

term road maps for science at NASA.

The actual flight of this science is dependant on securing a funding source which is

likely a competitive process that is not guaranteed.

Best wishes,

John C. Gregory

cc: Dr. George Khazanov

Dr. N. Frank Six


E-10




F-1



Because of GSFC’s extensive and successful ex-perience flying small payloads on NASA’s human rated systems, ESMD delegated the responsibility to GSFC to lead the development of UPC pay-load services on Constellation vehicles, starting with Orion. Beginning with that assignment in 2007, GSFC has collaborated with Constellation’s Operations Test and Integration (OTI) Level 2

office at JSC, and the Orion Service Module (SM) team at GRC to develop requirements and imple-mentation strategies for Orion UPC. Table F-1 shows the chronology of events leading up to the development of this UPP Concept Study Report. Each of these documents can be furnished upon request.

Appendix F - UPP Project History and References

Table F-1: Chronology of events leading to the development of the UPP Concept Study Report mapped to reference documents.

Date Event Ref. Document

6/2006 ESP formed . email Robert Menrad March 1, 2006

9/2006 Initial Study with first MDL* run . 1 “UPC Orion Mission Design Laboratory Study 1” UPC MDL 0706

1/2007 Level 1 requirements development. 2 “Exploration Science Mission Directorate Exploration Architectural Requirements Document” ESMD-EARD, Rev C

10/2007 Delegation letter released by ESMD. 3 “NASA - Exploration Systems Mission Directorate Work Assignments“ Letter ESMD 103007

4/2008 Study commissioned by GRC. 4 “UPC Summit at GRC” GRC-GSFC-TIM 042508

5/2008 CxCB directive (pre-PDR) not to scar the SM for UPC accommodations.

5 “Evaluation of Multiple UPC Options (May 2008 CPCB)” JSC-GSFC-CPCB-050608

5/2008 Second MDL* run. 6 “UPC Orion Mission Design Laboratory Study 2” UPC MDL 0527-3008

6/2008 Presentation to NRC Committee on the Utilization of CxP Infrastructure for Science .

7 “Science Opportunities Enabled by NASA’s Constellation System-Interim Report (2008)” UPC NRC 061108

6/2008 Third MDL* run. 8 “UPC Orion Mission Design Laboratory Study 3” UPC MDL 062308

10/2008 Study Report complete . 9 “Exploration Carriers InitiativeUPC Orion Science & Technology PayloadCapabilities Summary Report” 455-UPC-0-1001

11/2008 Study report presentation. 10 “Exploration Carriers InitiativeUPC Orion Science & Technology Payload Capabilities Study Presentation”GRC-GSFC-TIM-111308

6/2008– present

Developed the payload customer base and customer study.

11 “UPC Potential Customers and Driving Requirements July 7, 2009”JSC-GSFC-070709

1/2009 Presented the payload concepts to Orion VICB and Orion CPCB.

12 “UPC-Orion The next era in providing Rapid Access to Space” JSC-GSFC-0109

1/2009 UPC Orion Funded through CxP OTI . 13 “Internal Task Agreement Number 12447” ITA 12447

2/2009 EARD revised to reflect the current UPC design including ejectable payloads.

2 “Exploration Science Mission Directorate Exploration Architectural Requirements Document” ESMD-EARD

5/2009 Cargo Operations Concept Draft document complete. 14 “Cargo Operational Concept Document”


F-2



Table F-1: Chronology of events leading to the development of the UPP Concept Study Report mapped to reference documents. (Continued)

Date Event Ref. Document

5/2009 Cx Orion preliminary design completed per the 606F vehicle configuration to show UPC vehicle preliminary design required minimal scarring mass.

15 “Design Analysis Cycle 3” DAC-3

7/2009 TDS CEVLM-01-1033 completed an LM ERB on to review the change to the UPC mounting design.

16 “Unpressurized Cargo Plan” TDS CEVLM-01-1033

7/2009 UPC MOU signed with Orion Project, OTI and GRC SM assigning GSFC/ESP the responsibility for providing the UPC carrier and payload integration services.

17 “Memorandum of Understanding Orion UPC Project” MOU-Orion UPC Project 070709

7/2009 CxCB directive (post-PDR) to scar the SM to accommodate UPC, and update to CARD to reflect volume, mass, and power allocations .

18 “UPC Potential Customers and Driving Requirements July 29, 2009”JSC-GSFC-072909

10/2009 UPC Payloads Project partially funded by CxP through OTI for a FY2010 project start.

13 “Internal Task Agreement Number 12447” ITA 12447

19 “Constellation Architecture Requirements Document”(CARD, CxP7200), Rev C

20 “Overview of Attached Payloads Accommodation and Environments on the International Space Station”NASA/TP-2007-214768

21 Orion PDR System Module Review (SMR), UPC Presentation, July 2009

22 “Control Momentum Gyroscope (CMG) Reference StudyCEVLM-01-1027

*MDL is GSFC’s Mission Design Lab, a facility dedicated to rapid (usually one week turnaround) mission design. MDL is staffed with veteran engineers from each discipline who collaborate in the state-of-the art facility for rapid trade studies and end-to-end mission analysis.


G-1



Appendix G - Acronyms and Abbreviations

AFRL ........Air Force Research LabALSEP ......Apollo Lunar Surface Experiments PackageAPI ...........Application Programmer InterfaceBM ...........Business ManagerCCB .........Change Control BoardCCM ........Configuration Control ManagerCCSDS.....Consultative Committee for Space Data

SystemsC&DH ......Command & Data HandlingCDR .........Critical Design ReviewCEV ..........Crew Exploration VehiclecFE ...........Core Flight ExecutiveCFS ..........Core Flight SoftwareCM ...........Configuration ManagementCMB.........Control Mo ment GyroscopeCMD ........CommandCOTS .......Commercial Orbital Transportation

ServicesCR ............Change RequestCx ............ConstellationCxP ..........Constellation ProgramDARPA .....Defence Applied Research Projects AgencyDEM .........Digtal Exchange MessageDIO...........Digital Input/OutputDOD .........Department of DefenseDMS.........Data Multiplex SystemDRM.........Design Reference MisisonDSILCAS ..Distributed System Integrated Lab Com-

munications Adapter SetCARD .......Constellation Architecture Requirements

DocumentEARD........Exploration Architecture Requirements

DocumentEELV .........Evolved Expendable Launch VehicleELC ..........Express Logistics CarrierELV ...........Expendable Launch VehicleEMI ..........Electromagnetic InterferenceEMC .........Electromagnetic CompatibilityEPF ..........External Payload FacilitiesES ............Executive Summary

ESP ..........Exploration Systems ProjectsETU ..........Engineering Test UnitEVA ..........ExtraVehicular ActivityFOC..........Full Operational CapabilityFOV ..........Field of ViewFRAM .......Flight Releasable Attachment MechanismFSW .........Flight SoftwareGAS..........Get Away SpecialGEMS.......Gravity and Extreme Magnetism SMEXGLAST......Gamma-ray Large Area Space TelescopeGRC .........Glen Research CenterGSE ..........Ground Support EquipmentGSFC .......Goddard Space Flight CenterHK ............HousekeepingHST ..........Hubble Space TelescopeHST/SM ...HST Servicing MissionIBEX .........Interstellar Boundary ExplorerICD...........Interface Control DocumentIDE ...........Integrated Development EnvironmentI/F ............InterfaceI/O ............Input/OutputIMS ..........Integrated Master ScheduleIOC...........Initial Operational CapabilityIPv4..........Internet Protocol Version 4IRD ...........Interface Requirements DocumentIRMA ........Integrated Risk Management Ap plicationISS ...........International Space StationI&T ...........Integration & TestIVT ...........Integration Verification TestIVA ...........IntraVehicular ActivityJEMEF......Japanese Experiment Module- Exposed

FacilityJSC ..........John Space CenterKDP..........Key Decision PointKSC..........Kennedy Space CenterL1,L2,L3...Level 1, Level 2, Level 3LEO ..........Low Earth OrbitLRO ..........Lunar Reconnaissance OrbiterLV .............Launch VehicleLVPC ........Low Voltage Power Converter


G-2



MAC.........Media Access ControlMGSE.......Mechanical Ground Support EquipmentMIM .........Mission Integration ManagerMLI ..........Multi-layer InsulationMOC ........Mission Operations CenterMPESS.....Missions Peculiar Equipment Support

StructureMPPF .......Multi-Payload Processing FacilityMRO.........Mars Reconnaissance OrbiterMRT .........Mission Readiness TestsM&S ........Modeling & SimulationNBL ..........Neutral Buoyancy LabNASA .......National Aeronautics and Space

AdministrationNRL ..........Naval Research LabOAST........Office of Aeronautical and Space

TechnologyO&C .........Operations and CheckoutOLR ..........outer Lindblad resonance orbitOTI ...........Operations & Test IntegrationORS..........Operationally Responsive SpaceORU .........Orbital Replacement UnitOSTA ........Office of Space and Terrestrial ApplicationsPAF ..........Payload Attach FittingPDR..........Preliminary Design ReviewPDS..........Power Distribution SystemPDU .........Power Data UnitPER ..........Pre Environmental ReviewPI .............Principal InvestigatorPM ...........Project ManagerPMSE .......Payload Mission Systems EngineerRCS..........Reaction Control System

RMS .........Remote Manipulator SystemSAM .........Safety Assurance ManagerSBC..........Single Board ComputerS/C...........SpacecraftSE&I.........Systems Engineering & IntegrationSEM .........Space Experiments ModuleSERB ........Space Experiment Review BoardSCaN........Space Communication and NavigationSIM Bay ...Scientific Instrument Module BaySLA ..........Shuttle Laser AltimeterSM ...........Service ModuleS&MA ......Safety & Mission AssuranceSMEX .......Small ExplorerSPDM ......Special Purpose Dexterous ManipulatorSRR ..........Systems Requirements ReviewSSRMS ....Space Station Remote Manipulator SystemSSPP........Shuttle Small Payloads PRojectSTS ..........Space Transportation SystemSZA ..........Solar Zenith AngleTDRS........Telemetry Data Relay SatelliteTLM .........TelemetryTT-GbE .....Time Triggered Gigabit EthernetUDP .........Universal Datagram ProtocolUNEX .......University ExplorerUPC .........Unpressurized CargoUPP..........UPC Payloads ProjectUS ............United StatesV ..............VoltVTL ..........Verification Tracking LogWBS .........Work Breakdown StructureXML .........Extensible Markup LanguageW .............Watt
