of your state, but no longer have sufficient controllability. Therefore, he believes the focus should be on more sensors and location knowledge at high altitudes. He believes that a tipping-point technology is robust modular GN&C algorithms, where these can move from mission to mission without software holding up the development. He believes a game-changing technology to be aeroshells with high lift. Echoing many other presenters, Bishop also emphasized the need to instrument EDL missions. Overall, Bishop believes that the draft roadmap needs a strong GN&C focus.

Jean Muylaert, von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics, began his presentation with general comments with regard to the draft roadmap. First, he believes that the link between industry, academia, and NASA is important. Second, he believes in the need to return to a vigorous ground and flight test program (but how?). Third, he emphasized the importance of physical model validation with testing (and the need for upgrading ground-based test facilities), risk analysis, and qualification at the integrated EDL level. Muylaert then discussed the in-flight experimentation strategy carried out in Europe. He believes that in-flight research test-beds should be emphasized more— in Europe, this is done on cheap launches, suborbital flights, etc., in order to bridge the gap between ground-based tests and flight data. EXPERT is one example of an in-flight test bed that he discussed in his presentation.

Tayfun Tezduyar, Rice University, focus was on parachutes and, in particular, on fluid-structure interaction modeling. This is one of the most difficult problems to test, Tezduyar explained: because parachutes are so light, many of the classical fluid-structure interaction techniques do not work, although much progress has been made over the past several years. Tezduyar discussed a set of methods developed at Rice University that have produced good results thus far. He also emphasized the need for flight test data in order to benchmark computational modeling.

In the question and answer session that followed the Panel D presentations, Muylaert was asked about ESA’s EXPERT program and how NASA could fund similar technology-dedicated missions. Muylaert discussed how ESA has a technology directorate and a program directorate—in getting EXPERT funded, they included the programs directorate in the discussion, which he claims helped tremendously. Essentially, it created a new vision/strategy with regard to in-flight research.

The panelists were then asked about their view on game-changing technologies. Tezduyar answered that there needs to be a bigger role for computational modeling in the overall process (particularly fluid-structure interaction). Bishop believes that developing GN&C technology to do a pinpoint landing at Mars would be game-changing. However, without a technology demonstration mission, vehicles with more lift will not be utilized.

Finally, there was discussion with regard to education, and how to link products from graduate students to NASA.


Brady, T., and Paschall, S. 2010. The challenge of safe lunar landing. IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, Montana, March 6-13, 2010. Available at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/.

Brady, T., Paschall, S., Zimpfer, D., Epp, C., and Robertson, E. 2009. Hazard detection methods for lunar landing. IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, Montana, March 7-14, 2009. Available at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/.

Brady, T., Paschall, S., and Crain, T. 2010. GN&C development for future lunar landing missions. AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, August 2-5, 2010. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, Va.

Grantz, A.C., Experimental Systems Group, Boeing Company. 2011. “TA-09 Entry, Descent, and Landing Panel Discussion,” presentation at the National Research Council NASA Technology Roadmaps Panel 6 Workshop, Irvine, Calif., March 23, 2011. National Research Council, Washington, D.C.

Justh, H.L., Justus, C.G., and Ramey, H.S. 2011. Improving the precision of MARS-GRAM. Fourth International Workshop on the Mars Atmosphere: Modelling and Observation, February 8-11, 2011, Paris, France. Available at http://www-mars.lmd.jussieu.fr/paris2011/abstracts/justh_paris2011.pdf.

Justus, C.G., Duvall, A., and Keller, V.W. 2005. Mars aerocapture and validation of MARSGRAM with TES data. 53rd Joint Army-Navy-NASA-Air Force (JANNAF) Propulsion Meeting, December 5-8, 2005. Available at http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa .gov/20060005595_2006003663.pdf.

Mavris, D.N., and DeLaurentis, D.A. 2000. Methodology for examining the simultaneous impact of requirements, vehicle characteristics, and technologies on military aircraft design. 22nd Congress of the International Council on the Aeronautical Sciences (ICAS), Harrogate, England, August 27-31, 2000. Paper ICAS-2000-1.4.5. Available at http://www.icas-proceedings.net.

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement