Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 88
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Appendix D)
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science
Appendix D
Past Recommendations on
Technology for Space Science
ASEB: NASA'S SPACE RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
Five institutional recommendations were made in the ASEB's 1983 report,
NASA's Space Research and Technology Program. They are given in Table D-1.
In addition, 13 recommendations were made regarding the specific technologies
to be pursued. These are given in Table D-2.
Table D-1
REPORT MENU
Institutional Recommendations from the ASEB Report. NASA's Space
NOTICE
Research and Technology Program
MEMBERSHIP
PREFACE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NASA should establish the level of resources (funds, manpower, and
q
CHAPTER 1 facilities) to be allocated to advanced space research and technology
CHAPTER 2 development for the next decade and protect these resources from
CHAPTER 3 the short-term requirements of NASA's major operational programs.
CHAPTER 4 NASA should expand the charter of its space technology advisory
q
ACRONYMS committees, charging industry and university members with the
BIOGRAPHIES
responsibility of helping NASA to plan a technology program that is
BIBLIOGRAPHY
responsive to the needs of the broader space community and not just
APPENDIX A
to NASA's in-house needs.
APPENDIX B
NASA-DOD cooperation in space R&T should grow.
q
APPENDIX C
NASA should develop centers of technological excellence.
q
APPENDIX D
NASA should provide access to space for experimental purposes as
q
APPENDIX E
a natural extension of national aerospace facilities.
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechappendd.htm (1 of 16) [6/18/2004 11:41:02 AM]
OCR for page 89
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Appendix D)
Table D-2
Technological Recommendations from the ASEB R-goon. NASA's Space
Research and Technology Program
Reduce the cost of using space.
q
Advance on-orbit propulsion technology.
q
Enhance technology for large space structures.
q
Develop a database on materials properties in the space
q
environment.
Reduce the time and costs involved in obtaining data from space in
q
usable formats.
Enhance sensor capabilities.
q
Advance space communications technologies.
q
Improve the lifetime, reduce the weight, and increase the energy
q
storage capabilities of space power systems.
Enhance the protection of systems from the space environment.
q
Improve the analytical foundations and engineering techniques for
q
advanced thermal control systems for spacecraft.
Enhance the capabilities and autonomy of space navigation,
q
guidance, and control systems.
Advance the technologies for the support of humans in space.
q
Improve the survivability, self-diagnostic, and self-correction
q
capabilities of spacecraft.
PIONEERING THE SPACE FRONTIER
Three years later, and after the implementation of many of the
recommendations of the 1983 ASEB report, the Paine Commission report,
Pioneering the Space Frontier, delivered a sweeping vision of the nation's future
in space. The report recommended a major augmentation of NASA's technology
base effort. These recommendations are given in Table D-3.
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechappendd.htm (2 of 16) [6/18/2004 11:41:02 AM]
OCR for page 90
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Appendix D)
Table D-3
Recommendations of the Paine Commission Regarding the Technology
Base
The United States must substantially increase its investment in its space
technology base. We recommend: A threefold growth in NASA's base
technology budget to increase this item from two percent to six percent of
NASA's total budget... We also recommend: Special emphasis on intelligent
autonomous systems. We recommend demonstration projects in seven
critical technologies:
Flight research on aerospace plane propulsion and aerodynamics;
q
Advanced rocket vehicles;
q
Aerobraking for orbital transfer;
q
Long-duration closed-ecosystems (including water, air, and food);
q
Electric launch and propulsion systems;
q
Nuclear-electric space power; and
q
Space tethers and artificial gravity.
q
ASEB: SPACE TECHNOLOGY TO MEET FUTURE NEEDS
After the Paine Commission report, NASA requested the ASEB to revisit
its earlier recommendations and to examine them in light of the environment that
existed after the National Commission on Space's efforts and in the aftermath of
the loss of Challenger. This led to the second ASEB report, Space Technology to
Meet Future Needs. The report recommended that no less than seven percent
and as much as 10 percent of the NASA budget should be devoted to advanced
technology R&D. The principal recommendations are given in Table D-4.
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechappendd.htm (3 of 16) [6/18/2004 11:41:02 AM]
OCR for page 91
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Appendix D)
Table D-4
Recommendations of the ASEB Report, Space Technology to Meet Future
Needs
Advanced propulsion
q
Materials and structures
q
- Advanced Earth-to-orbit
engines - Advanced metallic materials
- Reusable cryogenic orbital based on alloy synthesis
transfer vehicles - "Hot" structures to counter reentry
- High-performance orbital heating
transfer systems for sending - "Trainable" control systems for
humans to Mars large flexible structures
- New spacecraft propulsion
systems for solar system
Information and control
q
exploration
- Autonomous on-board computing
Humans in space
q
systems
- High-speed, low-error rate digital
- Radiation protection transmission over long distances
- Closed-cycle life support - Voice/video communications
systems - Spaceborne tracking and data
- Improved EVA equipment relay
- Autonomous system and - Equipment monitoring technology
robotic augmentations for - Ground data handling, storage,
humans distribution, and analysis
- Human factors research
Advanced sensor technology
q
Autonomous systems and robotics
q
- Large aperture optical and quasi-
- Lightweight, limber optical systems
manipulators - Detection devices and systems
- Advanced sensing and control - Cryogenic systems
techniques - In-situ analysis and sample return
- Teleoperators
- Artificial intelligence and
Supporting technologies
q
advanced information processing
systems
- Radiation insensitive
computational systems
Space power supplies
q
- High-precision attitude sensors
and axis transfer systems
- 100 Kw nuclear power source
LEADERSHIP AND AMERICA'S FUTURE IN SPACE
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechappendd.htm (4 of 16) [6/18/2004 11:41:02 AM]
OCR for page 92
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Appendix D)
After the loss of Challenger, and the Rogers Commission report
describing its causes, and with the Paine Commission report in hand, NASA
management asked Dr. Sally Ride to provide NASA's response and a
perspective for the future. This led to the report, Leadership and America's Future
in Space, that has largely formed the manner in which NASA's missions for the
future are categorized. The report defines four bold initiatives: Mission to Planet
Earth (Table D-5), Exploration of the Solar System (Table D-6), Outpost on the
Moon (Table D-7), and Humans to Mars (Table D-8).
Table D-5
Ride Report Statement of the Technology Requirements for the Mission to
Planet Earth
This initiative requires advances in technology to enhance observations, to
handle and deliver the enormous quantities of data, and to ensure a long
operating life. Sophisticated sensors and information systems must be
designed and developed, and advances must be made in automation and
robotics (whether platform servicing is performed by astronauts or robotic
systems).
To achieve its full scope, this initiative requires the operational support of
Earth-to-orbit and space transportation systems to accommodate the
launching of polar and geostationary platforms.
Table D-6
Ride Report Statement of the Technology Requirements for the Exploration
of the Solar System
As it is defined, this initiative places a premium on advanced technology and
enhanced launch capabilities to maximize the scientific return. It requires
aerobraking technology for aerocapture and aeromaneuvering at Mars, and
a high level of sophistication in automation, robotics, and sampling
techniques. Advanced sampling methods are necessary to ensure that
geologically and chemically varied and interesting samples are collected for
analysis.
The Solar System Exploration initiative significantly benefits from improved
launch capability in terms of the science returned from both the Mars and the
Cassini missions.
The Space Shuttle is not required for any of the missions in the initiative. The
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechappendd.htm (5 of 16) [6/18/2004 11:41:02 AM]
OCR for page 93
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Appendix D)
Space Station would not be needed until 1999, when an isolation module
may be used to receive the Martian samples.
Table D-7
Ride Report Statement of the Technology Requirements for the Outpost on
the Moon
This initiative envisions frequent trips to the Moon after the year 2000--trips
that would require a significant investment in technology and in
transportation and orbital facilities in the early 1990s.
The critical technologies for this initiative are those which would make
human presence on the Moon meaningful and productive. They include life-
support system technologies to create a habitable outpost; automation and
expert systems and surface power technologies to make the outpost
functional and its inhabitants productive; and lunar mining and processing
technologies to enable the prospecting for lunar resources.
The transportation system must be capable of regularly transporting the
elements of the lunar outpost, the fuel for the voyage, and the lunar crew to
low-Earth orbit. The Space Station is an essential part of this initiative. As the
lunar outpost evolves, the Space Station would become its operational hub
in low-Earth orbit. Supplies, equipment, and propellants would be marshalled
at the Station for transit to the Moon. It is, therefore, required that the Space
Station evolve to include spaceport facilities.
Table D-8
Ride Report Statement of the Technology Requirements for Humans to Mars
A significant long-term commitment to developing several critical
technologies and to establishing the substantial transportation capabilities
and orbital facilities is essential to the success of the Mars initiative. The
Mars expeditions require the development of a number of technologies,
including aerobraking (which significantly reduces the amount of mass which
must be lifted to low-Earth orbit), efficient interplanetary propulsion,
automation and robotics, storage and transfer of cryogenics in space, fault-
tolerant systems, and advanced medical technology. ...It is clear that a
robust, efficient transportation system, including a heavy-lift launch vehicle,
is required.
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechappendd.htm (6 of 16) [6/18/2004 11:41:02 AM]
OCR for page 94
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Appendix D)
SSB: SPACE SCIENCE IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY
In 1988, the Space Science Board (which became the Space Studies
Board in 1989) of the National Research Council delivered a seven-volume
report, Space Science in the Twenty-First Century: Imperatives for the Decades
1995-2001. This report was the result of a four-year study involving over one
hundred scientists. A summary of the findings of this study, and the technology
needs associated with the recommended courses of action follows.
Overview
The Overview volume of the study includes a section on "Preconditions
and infrastructure" that includes the following technology recommendations:
Advanced programs for detector technology should be established and
q
nurtured.
Computer facilities in the space program must be maintained at state-of-
q
the-art level, with regard to both hardware and software.
There is a need for a sturdy, redundant system of acquiring access to
q
space.
Solar and Space Physics
The scientific objectives of solar and space physics will require missions
to make in situ plasma measurements from near the surface of the Sun to the
interstellar medium, remote sensing instruments for imaging, and active
experiments for probing regions of the atmosphere and magnetosphere. The
missions identified include:
Solar Probe (perihelion distance 4 solar radii).
q
Solar Polar Orbiter (circular solar orbit at 1 AU perpendicular to the
q
ecliptic plane).
Heliosynchronous Orbiter (25-day orbit at 30 solar radii).
q
Interstellar Probe (to reach 100 AU in 5-10 yrs; velocity of 50-100
q
km/sec).
High resolution solar telescopes (0.1 to 0.01 arcsec from UV to X-rays).
q
Magnetospheric imaging instruments (from platforms on the moon, L4,
q
L5, or L1).
Active plasma physics experiments (interactions of plasmas with beams,
q
waves, dust, and gas).
Global Current Mission (approx. 300 probes to measure the electric and
q
magnetic fields and electric currents).
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechappendd.htm (7 of 16) [6/18/2004 11:41:02 AM]
OCR for page 95
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Appendix D)
Orbiters for Mars, Mercury, and Jupiter (aeronomy and magnetosphere
q
studies).
The technology development needed to accomplish these programs includes:
Low-thrust propulsion systems for Solar Probe, Solar Polar Orbiter,
q
Heliosynchronous Orbiter.
Perihelion thruster for Interstellar Probe.
q
Thermal protection for Solar Probe, Interstellar Probe, Mercury Orbiter.
q
High-reflectivity multilayer coatings UV and X-ray mirrors for high-
q
resolution telescopes.
Radiation resistant electronic components for Jupiter Orbiter.
q
Ultra-low-cost spacecraft for the Global Current Mission.
q
Lagrangtan platforms for magnetospheric imaging.
q
Dust protection techniques for Jupiter Orbiter.
q
Techniques and systems for active experiments including radar/lidar, dust
q
and gas injectors, tethered satellites, high-power wave and beam
injectors.
Fundamental Physics and Chemistry
q Improved disturbance compensation systems for enhanced performance in a
laser gravitational radiation observatory including both a reduction in disturbance
level below l0-10/T2g/ Hz-spectral amplitude and extension of this performance
for periods longer than 104s.
q Frequency-stabilized single radial and longitudinal mode lasers of moderate
power (100- to 1000-mW) for use in gravitational wave observations and optical
interferometry.
q The ability to transfer liquid helium in space in order to replenish dewars for
low temperature experiments.
q A spaceworthy hydrogen maser with a long-term stability of better than 10-15
for relativity experiments. The development of trapped ion clocks with stability of
10-17 to 10-18.
Astronomy and Astrophysics
A major new direction for astronomy will be the use of interferometers in
space. The goal is to achieve microarcsecond resolution over a broad
wavelength range (radio to ultraviolet). Technical needs include:
Structural technology - the construction, measurement, and control of
q
large precision structures; the precision of control of pointing and
momentum exchange; vibration minimization and decoupling; metrology
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechappendd.htm (8 of 16) [6/18/2004 11:41:02 AM]
OCR for page 96
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Appendix D)
for high-precision monitoring of structures.
Optical technology - active systems, sensors, fiber optics, and image
q
reconstruction.
Station keeping technology - precision position and attitude control, quiet
q
thrusters, orbital analysis, contamination control.
Life Sciences
The life sciences report is sub-divided into five sections: exobiology,
global biology, space biology, space medicine, and CELSS.
Exobiology
Microchemical techniques for the identification of materials in individual
q
microfossils.
Highly sensitive mass spectrometric techniques for the identification of
q
compounds and isotopes.
RNA synthesizers, similar to those already available for the synthesis of
q
DNA.
Laboratory simulators for use in studying the course of chemical
q
evolution.
Collectors for cosmic dust particles.
q
Rover technology.
q
Technologies for the collection and handling of extraterrestrial samples.
q
Telescopes (such as HST, SIRTF, and LDR) for the study astronomical
q
objects for information about the origin of life.
Global Biology
Spectrometers in the visible and near-it with high spectral and spatial
q
resolution.
Color imagers with high spatial resolution.
q
Laser fluorescence sensors for use in aircraft and spacecraft.
q
Synthetic aperture radar for spacecraft studies of surface water and plant
q
structure.
Polarization photometers.
q
Space Biology
The requirements for this subject concern instrumentation for the Space
q
Station, including: plant growth chambers, animal holding facilities,
sensimotor experiments, centrifuge, an area of very low gravity (10-6g) for
the growth of crystals of proteins and nucleic acids.
Space Medicine
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechappendd.htm (9 of 16) [6/18/2004 11:41:02 AM]
OCR for page 97
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Appendix D)
Noninvasive imaging techniques (e.g., echocardiographs, ultrasound
q
imagers, CAT scanners, NMR techniques).
Physical monitoring and microchemical analysis techniques.
q
Instruments for studies of immunochemistry and antibodies (e.g., laser
q
cytofluorograph).
CELSS
Plant growth chamber.
q
Planetary Science
Low-thrust propulsion for serious study of comets, asteroids, and the
q
outer solar system.
Enhanced power sources for experiments.
q
Cheaper landing technology so that arrays of instruments can be
q
deployed on many bodies - including soft-landing technology, penetrators,
rovers.
Development of robotic or artificial intelligence technology so that
q
spacecraft can make independent decisions.
Radiation-hardened and high-temperature electronics for missions to
q
Jupiter and Venus, respectively.
On-orbit staging, assembly, and fueling for more ambitious missions, such
q
as Mars sample return.
Other
There are a number of other technology issues that have been raised that
are not explicit in the "Twenty-First Century" report. These include:
The need for adequate launch capability to send missions into deep
q
space without enduring very long trip times.
Aerobraking technology.
q
New sensor technology for Earth science missions.
q
NASA CENTER SCIENCE ASSESSMENT REPORT
In 1986, NASA created a team to assess the state-of-the-science
activities in its centers. The team's findings were published in 1988 and are given
below.
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechappendd.htm (10 of 16) [6/18/2004 11:41:02 AM]
OCR for page 98
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Appendix D)
Technology-Related Recommendations
of the NASA Center Science Assessment Team
Interaction of Science & Technology
The Team notes the importance and complexity of establishing and
maintaining close interaction between science and science-related technology at
NASA Centers. The Team recommends that scientists be added to the advisory
committees of the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology (OAST), and that
technologists be added to the advisory committees of the Office of Space
Science and Applications (OSSA). Similar recommendations are offered to the
National Research Council's Space Science Board (SSB) and Aeronautics and
Space Engineering Board (ASEB). The Team also recommends the
establishment of a NASA-wide Council on Science and Technology to exchange
information on activities, needs, and interests in science-related advanced
technology on a regular basis.
Technology Planning & Development
Technology planning for the long-term, for science missions and
applications which are not yet approved programs and whose technical feasibility
may not yet have been established, often requires estimates of user needs a
decade or more before those programs reach the detailed design phase. The
OAST planning process is initiated by systems studies of potential missions to
evaluate feasibility and identify enabling technologies needed to ensure system
success. A set of technology "driver missions" is developed by OAST in
cooperation with user program offices (OSSA for science missions) and agreed
to by the program offices (again, OSSA for science). These driver missions
provide the basis for joint technology plans which lead to a set of action
strategies, joint OAST/OSSA planning workshops or working groups to identify
needs, and identification of research programs for inclusion in the OAST
program.
The Team found that the process does work. An example of a widely
acclaimed successful collaboration between OAST and OSSA in advanced
technology is the Sensor Working Group and the resulting sensor research
program. The process is based on a multi-center, multi-office (OAST/OSSA)
working group (with inter-agency and academic participation) that evaluates
potential sensor research programs. By and large, the funded program is derived
from their recommendations. Current sensor research and development is
balanced between development of detectors, laser and tunable sources,
submillimeter wave devices, and other sensors.
The extent to which the process can accommodate the needs of the
science program is dependent on the needs identified by the OSSA program
managers and on the ability of the OAST budget to respond. OAST updates
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechappendd.htm (11 of 16) [6/18/2004 11:41:02 AM]
OCR for page 99
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Appendix D)
annually in the set of RTOPs (Research and Technology Operating Plans) which
commit funds to the current year of the long range plan. The OAST research
program has a limited budget and a resultant inability to fund many of the
programs recommended by the centers. The situation has been aggravated by
reductions in advanced development budgets in OSSA. To alleviate this problem,
NASA should provide budget support and flight priority for some flight
demonstrations of selected advanced space technology activities. This will also
help to bridge the technology transfer gap between OAST and OSSA (see
below).
As future science missions become more firmly defined and nearer to
approval, OSSA funds likely candidates for advanced systems with a transfer of
technology from the OAST device-level research. Unfortunately, over the last
decade, funding in user programs for supporting research has diminished,
causing increased demands on the OAST advanced research budget which
could not be met. As a result of these budget pressures, the OAST program has
become focused on a more limited set of goals. Furthermore, a gap seems to
have developed between OAST's carrying out work on device-level technology
and the Agency's ability to incorporate such technology into flight systems.
The Team notes with approval that with renewed emphasis on strategic
planning, agency-wide joint planning to identify advanced technology
requirements for future missions is taking place. The Civil Space Technology
Initiative which started in FY 1988 has an active involvement and shared
management of its elements with user program offices. The Pathfinder
technology program, proposed for FY 1989, has involved point planning with user
groups, particularly in the areas associated with the development of technology to
support long-duration missions with humans in space.
The Team found that an excellent level of interaction and transfer of
technology exists between the space science activities and those of the related
advanced technology development organizations at each of the individual
centers. This ability to call on the engineering expertise of the center in the
conduct of the science activities is one of the unique strengths of the NASA
centers and an important factor in the attractiveness to scientists of the
environment for doing science at NASA.
Impediments to Technology Transfer within NASA
While technology transfer seems to take place within a given center, far
less interaction occurs at the center-to-center level. Some positive actions include
the Sensors Working Group and inter-center topical workshops. The Asilomar
Workshops (1982, 1985, and September 1987) on the Large Deployable
Reflector (LDR) brought together science and technology staff members to
identify the enabling and enhancing technologies for the LDR mission and initiate
plans for pursuing these technologies. Personal contacts also play a significant
role at this level.
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechappendd.htm (12 of 16) [6/18/2004 11:41:02 AM]
OCR for page 100
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Appendix D)
The Team noted that several potential impediments to effective
technology transfer and a smooth flow of technology from development to use
exist at the NASA Headquarters level. OAST concentrates on selected enabling
and enhancing technologies for missions a decade or more in the future, while
OSSA has nearer-term instrument and system needs. This difference in
emphasis often results in a funding gap in the development of flight-qualified,
state-of-the-art instruments, with neither office claiming responsibility for flight
demonstrations of prototype hardware. A second possible shortcoming is that
each office uses completely independent advisory groups. Thus, a technology
program responsive to OAST's advisory structure may either not include, or
include at a low priority, technologies that are needed to support the future
science program.
The Team encourages OSSA and OAST to coordinate programs and
development of advanced technology with mutual reviews.
REPORT OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE
FUTURE OF THE U.S. SPACE PROGRAM
The Advisory Committee on the Future of the U.S. Space Program,
chaired by Norman Augustine, expressed concerns regarding the state of
NASA's technology base and recommended a two- to three-times increase in the
space technology budget. Table D-9 gives an excerpt of the report's findings.
AMERICA AT THE THRESHOLD
In 1990, the President requested Lt. Gen. Thomas Stafford (USAF, Ret.)
to lead a group, "The Synthesis Group," to synthesize the inputs from as wide a
sector as possible of approaches to the conduct of the Space Exploration
Initiative (SEI). This group delivered its report, America at the Threshold in 1991.
The report identified seven functional areas in which technology development
was required to support the SEI. They are propulsion, power, extravehicular
activity, life support, planetary surface systems, spacecraft, communications,
control and navigation. Of these, life support systems require both enhanced
scientific understanding and engineering development. Each contributes to space
science and applications programs. Development on planetary surface systems
likewise contributes to space science and applications programs. The remaining
functional areas provide supporting technology that may also contribute to space
science and applications, but in a more indirect sense.
The Synthesis Group identified the development of partially closed
environmental control and life support systems as a critical objective. They would
employ recycled air and water. Their development is a pacing element in the SET
and requires considerable antecedent scientific research. Planetary surface
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechappendd.htm (13 of 16) [6/18/2004 11:41:02 AM]
OCR for page 101
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Appendix D)
technology is required for robotic orbiter and surface precursors, as well as for
rover systems. Table D-10 lists the principal technological requirements identified
by the Synthesis Group.
Table D-9
Technology Findings of the Augustine Committee
Technology Base
Next to talented people and a culture of excellence, the most important
underpinning of the civil space program is its technology base. This base
comprises the effort to develop key building blocks such as engines,
computers, materials, and the like that enable significant new missions to be
successfully undertaken. Unfortunately, this building block effort does not
always compete favorably with the missions themselves in contending for
funds and skilled personnel. Often, fundamental development programs are
less glamorous, less visible, have no organized constituency, and generally
are comprised of a number of small- and medium-size projects.
Nonetheless, the consequences of neglecting the technology base are very
measurable indeed, not only impacting America's competitiveness but
inducing major projects to be undertaken without a sufficient technological
foundation in place. When problems are subsequently encountered, these
projects must be restructured, usually accompanied by an increase in cost.
The result is that major pursuits, with large work forces that cannot afford to
be held in abeyance, siphon money from smaller research projects or from
the technology base itself, and the whole cycle starts anew. It seems clear
that our technology base, including its supporting facilities, must be
revitalized and afforded priority commensurate with its importance if major
new projects are to be pursued on a realistic basis in the decades ahead.
Recommendation 8: That NASA, in concert with the Office of Management
and Budget and appropriate Congressional committees, establish an
augmented and reasonably stable share of NASA's total budget that is
allocated to advanced technology development. A two- to three-fold
enhancement of the current modest budget seems not unreasonable. In
addition, we recommend that an agency-wide technology plan be developed
with inputs from the Associate Administrators responsible for the major
development programs, and that NASA utilize an expert, outside review
process, managed from headquarters, to assist in the allocation of
technology funds.
On a related issue, the Committee is particularly concerned over the low
priority that has been given to the development of the life support
technologies, and to the fundamental medical aspects of long duration space
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechappendd.htm (14 of 16) [6/18/2004 11:41:02 AM]
OCR for page 102
Improving NASA's Technology for Space Science (Appendix D)
flight by humans.
Table D-10
Technology Recommendations of the Synthesis Group Relating to
Planetary Surface Systems
Robotic Orbiter and Surface Precursors
Advanced imaging detectors, including improved charge-coupled
q
device arrays and datahandling subsystems
Compact multispectral imaging radar and Lidar for surface and
q
subsurface characteristics
Compact chemical analysis instrumentation, including gamma and x-
q
ray spectrometers and imaging spectrometers
Telerobotics and telepresence, including control architectures and
q
supervised telerobotics, data handling, storage and virtual reality
techniques
Small spacecraft with gross masses less than 500 kg, including
q
orbital "prospectors" and surface penetrators
Autonomous systems to enhance Mars operation
q
Rover Systems
Efficient regenerative fuel cells (1 Kw-hr/kg) with compact insulated
q
cryogenic storage tanks
Compact, specialized life support systems for short (two- to three-day
q
traverses) duration, and portable radiation protection features
Crew supported telerobotic surface driving systems and telerobotic
q
extension systems with dexterous robotic manipulators
Compact deployable photovoltaic arrays (200 W/kg or better)
q
file:///C|/SSB_old_web/nasatechappendd.htm (15 of 16) [6/18/2004 11:41:02 AM]
