-
#440 by zubenelgenubi on 28 Mar, 2015 04:36
-
ARM may have been originally conceived as a clever way to do "a mission to an asteroid" but I'll readily acknowledge that's probably not a valid way of describing it. It's a technology and training mission with a really cool planetary defense bonus.
No, ARM was based on the KISS Asteroid Retrieval study, which was explicitly about bringing back a large asteroid sample both for science and ISRU development. NASA latched onto that as an asteroid mission they could afford early in the 2020s, but the concept wasn't created as some attempt to fill a politician's arbitrary goal.
~Jon
Okay sorry. I know a little bit about the Keck study but not much. I don't know exactly what the genesis of the whole idea was. If I remember though, the administration picked up on it really quickly, like before it had much of a chance to bounce around the community. I suspect the administration thought it solved a whole bunch of problems for them.
I remember Rob Landis co-wrote a feasibility study regarding human spaceflight to a near-Earth asteroid--link to Acta Astronautica article abstract below.
I recall there was press mention then of asteroid 2000 SG344 as the destination. The press coverage was from 2008. Also, I remember hearing that some Constellation supporters were upset with the publicity surrounding the study, as they felt such a mission would take Constellation's focus from returning to the Moon. All this was going on during the 2008 election and the opening months of the Obama administration.
Maybe there's an old NSF forum thread or threads that discussed this?
Zubenelgenubi
EDIT: Found and added the 2008 AA article abstract below the 2009 AA article abstract
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094576509002513
Acta Astronautica
Volume 65, Issues 11–12, December 2009, Pages 1689–1697
Piloted operations at a near-Earth object (NEO)
Rob R. Landis
Paul A. Abell
David J. Korsmeyer
Thomas D. Jones
Daniel R. Adamo
Received 3 February 2009, Accepted 19 April 2009, Available online 9 June 2009
Abstract
In late 2006, NASA's Constellation Program sponsored a study to examine the feasibility of sending a piloted Orion spacecraft to a near-Earth object. NEOs are asteroids or comets that have perihelion distances less than or equal to 1.3 astronomical units, and can have orbits that cross that of the Earth. Therefore, the most suitable targets for the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) are those NEOs in heliocentric orbits similar to Earth's (i.e. low inclination and low eccentricity). One of the significant advantages of this type of mission is that it strengthens and validates the foundational infrastructure of the United States Space Exploration Policy and is highly complementary to NASA's planned lunar sortie and outpost missions circa 2020. A human expedition to a NEO would not only underline the broad utility of the Orion CEV and Ares launch systems, but would also be the first human expedition to an interplanetary body beyond the Earth–Moon system. These deep space operations will present unique challenges not present in lunar missions for the onboard crew, spacecraft systems, and mission control team. Executing several piloted NEO missions will enable NASA to gain crucial deep space operational experience, which will be necessary prerequisites for the eventual human missions to Mars.
Our NEO team will present and discuss the following:
•new mission trajectories and concepts;
•operational command and control considerations;
•expected science, operational, resource utilization, and impact mitigation returns; and
•continued exploration momentum and future Mars exploration benefits.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094576507003451
Acta Astronautica
Volume 63, Issues 1–4, July–August 2008, Pages 213–220
Touching Humanity - Space for Improving Quality of Life. Selected Proceedings of the 58th International Astronautical Federation Congress, Hyderabad, India, 24-28 September 2007
Into the beyond: A crewed mission to a near-Earth object
David J. Korsmeyer
Rob R. Landis
Paul A. Abell
Abstract
Aside from the exploration of Mars, the objects that most capture our interest for a new human visit are the near-Earth objects (NEOs). These objects are ideal candidates for deep-space operations and explorations as we extend the human presence out into the solar system. The notion of a crewed mission to a NEO was first discussed in the Apollo era. The most recent assessment has been undertaken by the Advanced Projects Office within NASA's Constellation Program. This particular study examined the feasibility of sending NASA's new Orion spacecraft (also referred to as the crew exploration vehicle, or CEV) to a NEO. Depending on the specifications of spacecraft and integrated components, a mission profile would include two or three astronauts on a 90- to 180-day spaceflight; including a 7- to 14-day stay at the NEO itself. These missions to NEOs provide exploration with an excellent suite of benefits: operational experience beyond cislunar space, risk reduction for space hardware, confidence building for future mission scenarios, in situ resource utilization evaluation, as well as a rich scientific return. This incremental step along the way towards Mars would mark humanity's first foray beyond the Earth–Moon system.
-
#441 by saliva_sweet on 28 Mar, 2015 16:37
-
So, you'd launch to empty point in space, then go do an EVA, wave around a pickaxe and come back inside and back to Earth?
Yes, MUCH better.
I would demonstrate the technologies and gather the data necessary for deep space missions and going to Mars. The things they need the "proving ground" for as Gerst puts it. If waving an axe in space is one of the capabilities that needs to be proven then it should be included as a mission objective, otherwise not. Practicing pickaxe skills in not on the critical path for this and not a good use of an asteroid boulder, which should be brought down and studied in the lab. -
#442 by jongoff on 28 Mar, 2015 18:07
-
So, you'd launch to empty point in space, then go do an EVA, wave around a pickaxe and come back inside and back to Earth?
Yes, MUCH better.
I would demonstrate the technologies and gather the data necessary for deep space missions and going to Mars. The things they need the "proving ground" for as Gerst puts it. If waving an axe in space is one of the capabilities that needs to be proven then it should be included as a mission objective, otherwise not. Practicing pickaxe skills in not on the critical path for this and not a good use of an asteroid boulder, which should be brought down and studied in the lab.
Because we totally wouldn't want to delay our first mars mission by 2-3 months to learn if it's feasible to mine asteroids...
I find the "we can't do anything that isn't 100% related to getting us to Mars" crowd rather frustrating. While Mars is the horizon goal, that doesn't mean we have to forego doing any useful exploration or other missions over the next 25 years just to shave a few tenths of a percent off of the time it'll take to get people to Mars.
~Jon -
#443 by saliva_sweet on 28 Mar, 2015 18:32
-
I find the "we can't do anything that isn't 100% related to getting us to Mars" crowd rather frustrating.
Exactly the point I'm trying to make. The boulder retrieval mission is great and should be done. It should be robotic. Tacking on the crew to make it a part of the "path to mars" is artificial and makes the mission worse. -
#444 by QuantumG on 28 Mar, 2015 21:29
-
Exactly the point I'm trying to make. The boulder retrieval mission is great and should be done. It should be robotic. Tacking on the crew to make it a part of the "path to mars" is artificial and makes the mission worse.
You seem to be forgetting that the EM-2 mission was previously just a shakedown cruise. What's wrong with visiting a captured asteroid too?
-
#445 by saliva_sweet on 28 Mar, 2015 22:25
-
What's wrong with visiting a captured asteroid too?
The boulder shouldn't even be up there. They are only putting it there to artificially create a place to go. The return from hauling an 80 ton rock across the solar system will be a couple of bags worth of pebbles. If they go with option B they should bring a suitably sized boulder to be brought down whole. It would be easier, cheaper and bring more value. But if they really want to make it part of the way to mars they should bring the whole 80 t boulder down to a soft landing on land. That would be a step in the right direction
-
#446 by QuantumG on 28 Mar, 2015 22:29
-
The boulder shouldn't even be up there. They are only putting it there to artificially create a place to go.
You do understand it's already "up there" right?Quote from: saliva_sweetThe return from hauling an 80 ton rock across the solar system will be a couple of bags worth of pebbles.
Yes.. it's called "sampling".Quote from: saliva_sweetIf they go with option B they should bring a suitably sized boulder to be brought down whole.
Perhaps aim it at North Korea?
-
#447 by saliva_sweet on 28 Mar, 2015 23:11
-
Yes.. it's called "sampling".
You know what's better than samples? The whole subject. This mission feels like going to the superbowl, buying the tickets, driving across country to the stadium parking lot and then staying in the car and watching the game from your phone. This type of sampling should have been done with a sample return mission like hayabusa.
Didn't bother responding to the other quips. -
#448 by QuantumG on 28 Mar, 2015 23:22
-
This type of sampling should have been done with a sample return mission like hayabusa.
Did you actually see how much Hayabusa returned? 1500 grains. A single picogram sample.Quote from: saliva_sweetThis mission feels like going to the superbowl, buying the tickets, driving across country to the stadium parking lot and then staying in the car and watching the game from your phone.
No, what it's like is a person who is wilfully ignorant of the subject trying to tell people who are actually working on it that he knows better. I know that's a fun hobby around here, but you've really refined it to an art. "Dude, if ya wanna study and asteroid, why don't you just get in your spaceship and go get one?" Pass the bong.
-
#449 by DMeader on 28 Mar, 2015 23:30
-
they should bring the whole 80 t boulder down to a soft landing on land.
Good luck with that. -
#450 by Will on 29 Mar, 2015 00:16
-
So, you'd launch to empty point in space, then go do an EVA, wave around a pickaxe and come back inside and back to Earth?
Yes, MUCH better.
I would demonstrate the technologies and gather the data necessary for deep space missions and going to Mars. The things they need the "proving ground" for as Gerst puts it. If waving an axe in space is one of the capabilities that needs to be proven then it should be included as a mission objective, otherwise not. Practicing pickaxe skills in not on the critical path for this and not a good use of an asteroid boulder, which should be brought down and studied in the lab.
Because we totally wouldn't want to delay our first mars mission by 2-3 months to learn if it's feasible to mine asteroids...
I find the "we can't do anything that isn't 100% related to getting us to Mars" crowd rather frustrating. While Mars is the horizon goal, that doesn't mean we have to forego doing any useful exploration or other missions over the next 25 years just to shave a few tenths of a percent off of the time it'll take to get people to Mars.
~Jon
If we can demonstrate the ability to essentially mine a Martian moon for propellant, that's game changing technology. The whole mission becomes much easier.
-
#451 by saliva_sweet on 29 Mar, 2015 08:17
-
Did you actually see how much Hayabusa returned? 1500 grains. A single picogram sample.
Hayabusa returned as much as it could. US has a fleet of reentry vehicles that either exist or will exist by the time this part of the mission happens: Dragon, Orion, CST-100, Dragon 2, X-37B and possibly Dreamchaser. They could bring back tons of extremely valuable material.No, what it's like is a person who is wilfully ignorant of the subject trying to tell people who are actually working on it that he knows better. I know that's a fun hobby around here, but you've really refined it to an art. "Dude, if ya wanna study and asteroid, why don't you just get in your spaceship and go get one?" Pass the bong.
All I'm doing is pointing out my single gripe with the otherwise good mission concept. It certainly looks like the US is deliberately crippling the mission by returning ~100X less than they could. Just to involve the crew. I may be ignorant but certainly not by volition so why not enlighten me? All I've read so far other than insults and sarcastic quips is that it's necessary to deomonstrate crew tech and I've pointed out that this is not a good reason. -
#452 by Clyde on 29 Mar, 2015 10:06
-
The mission should be used to demonstrate the full suit of steps for mining useful volatiles and other chemicals, probably a lot more useful that retrieve a stone that might or might not tell us about the origin of the solar system. Better specialised missions and targets can be designed for that without having to bring back the asteroid.
So imho the ARM mission should include the equipment necessary to analyse, find, select and retrieve a usable boulder for ISRU, so essentially allow a mining survey of the asteroid, to see what can be retrieved and then bring some of that back.
- Make a prioritized list of minerals/volatiles/usable chemicals that would be useful to have in space for a mars mission.
- Equip the AR ship with the suit of instrument that allows to actually analyse and identify any of the components above in a boulder
- retrieve that boulder and bring to orbit the moon
- let new space companies test their ISRU technologies on the retrieved boulder and propose to pay for water/propellant/useful stuffs that they can bring to space station or provide in form of a useful depot
- demonstrate how the retrieved boulder can be used for radiation shield, eg. crushing and packing into some layer that could cover one side of the orion or demo of that.
- can it be digged into?
- there were some ideas that by heating one side of a space stone one could do electric propulsion without having to launch the propellant, the propellant just being whatevent comes out of the space stone when heated up, so try that too and surely other ideas.
-
#453 by Robotbeat on 30 Mar, 2015 01:30
-
The mission should be used to demonstrate the full suit of steps for mining useful volatiles and other chemicals, probably a lot more useful that retrieve a stone that might or might not tell us about the origin of the solar system. Better specialised missions and targets can be designed for that without having to bring back the asteroid.
The beauty of ARM is that, in addition to everything else (the planetary protection part of which is under-rated, and perhaps is actually the most important apart, IMHO) at the end of the mission, you still have dozens of tons of material in a stable orbit that you can use to test ISRU techniques later on. But the ARM craft itself need not and probably shouldn't include that equipment. As you mentioned, commercial space companies can do that.
So imho the ARM mission should include the equipment necessary to analyse, find, select and retrieve a usable boulder for ISRU, so essentially allow a mining survey of the asteroid, to see what can be retrieved and then bring some of that back.
- Make a prioritized list of minerals/volatiles/usable chemicals that would be useful to have in space for a mars mission.
- Equip the AR ship with the suit of instrument that allows to actually analyse and identify any of the components above in a boulder
- retrieve that boulder and bring to orbit the moon
- let new space companies test their ISRU technologies on the retrieved boulder and propose to pay for water/propellant/useful stuffs that they can bring to space station or provide in form of a useful depot
- demonstrate how the retrieved boulder can be used for radiation shield, eg. crushing and packing into some layer that could cover one side of the orion or demo of that.
- can it be digged into?
- there were some ideas that by heating one side of a space stone one could do electric propulsion without having to launch the propellant, the propellant just being whatevent comes out of the space stone when heated up, so try that too and surely other ideas. -
#454 by Clyde on 30 Mar, 2015 07:53
-
Do we have any details on how they plan to select the boulder?
-
#455 by Nilof on 30 Mar, 2015 14:32
-
Could the option B ARM spacecraft bring some cubesats to the asteroid to further characterize it? The visit to a larger asteroid with a craft that has a significant mass budget certainly sounds like a great opportunity for deep space cubesats.
-
#456 by jongoff on 30 Mar, 2015 14:42
-
Do we have any details on how they plan to select the boulder?
They didn't give a ton of details in the conference call, but stated they would be bringing along a suite of sensors to help them try to pick the most "interesting" boulder. My guess would be at least some sort of spectrometry tools. One cool thing depending on the range of the sensors, their relative position on the spacecraft, and the distance of the gravity tractor halo orbit, they can probably characterize the whole asteroid pretty well, in case anyone else wanted to visit 2008 EV 5 in the future.
~Jon -
#457 by jongoff on 30 Mar, 2015 14:42
-
Could the option B ARM spacecraft bring some cubesats to the asteroid to further characterize it? The visit to a larger asteroid with a craft that has a significant mass budget certainly sounds like a great opportunity for deep space cubesats.
That was the point of some of the smaller ARM BAA contracts--seeing what if any smallsat or cubesat hitchikers could come along to help.
Though, one challenge will be figuring out which sensors should be on the ARV (which will have a *ton* of power and mass available) vs. which make more sense on cubesats. NASA wants to pick the best boulder possible, but probably doesn't want to load up the ARV with too much in the way of expensive sensors... it'll be interesting to see how they strike this balance.
~Jon -
#458 by TrevorMonty on 31 Mar, 2015 00:06
-
Here is Spacereview article
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2721/1.
NASA has international partners interested in participating in some way. I can see the appeal to other agencies, it would give them access rights to the retrieved boulder. -
#459 by Helodriver on 31 Mar, 2015 00:31
-
So now that the ARM mission has been rescoped to bring a boulder back to DRO with a SEP spacecraft equipped with some sort of gripper arms rather than a larger free flying object with a complex inflatable bag mechanism, I wonder how much work has been done on reuse of the unmanned portion of the spacecraft?
It would seem that gripper arms could be made to release as well as grab and once the spacecraft has placed the boulder in stable DRO, the manned portion of the mission could refill it with whatever propellant it operates on (xenon, argon, ?) and send it on its way to another target to grab more samples. The DV to get it to DRO has already been paid for as has the hardware, even a less than full propellant load should be sufficient to reach another object and retrieve useful amounts of mass. Perhaps Planetary Resources would be interested in buying/leasing the ARM tug after the EM-2 mission is finished.
