Lessons Learned in the Decommissioning of the Stardust Spacecraft

Larson, Timothy W.

doi:10.2514/6.2012-1295605

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 1 publication

(1 reference statement)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Understanding the impact of every activity on the fuel budget required frequent, active communication among all the teams and constant vigilance on the part of the project leadership. [1] In the end, the spacecraft was successful in its flyby of Tempel 1 and met all of its science requirements and goals. About a month after the February 2011 flyby the spacecraft was decommissioned and the decommissioning burn showed that the tank was empty.…”

Section: Risk Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Measurement of the crater size would provide important information on the consistency and strength characteristics of the nucleus surface material. 1 Manager, Small Bodies Program and EPOXI Project, MS 264-379, 4800 Oak Grove Dr., Pasadena, CA 91109 T Along with the Stardust NExT selection, two complementary proposals were selected for the new Deep Impact mission: EPOCh (Exoplanet Observation and Characterization) and DIXI (Deep Impact Extended Investigation). These two were combined into one extended mission -EPOXI.…”

Section: Missions Of Opportunitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

EPOXI and Stardust NExT - The Management Challenges of Two Comet Flybys in Three Months

Larson

2012

SpaceOps 2012 Conference

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The EPOXI and Stardust NExT missions were missions of opportunity utilizing the Deep Impact and Stardust spacecraft, respectively. These new missions took advantage of the cost savings of utilizing spacecraft that were already flying for new science investigations. Both were retargeted to fly by an additional comet. EPOXI visited Hartley 2, significantly smaller than the other Jupiter family comets visited previously. Stardust NExT flew by Tempel 1, providing a second look at the comet previously studied by Deep Impact in 2005. Both projects were part of NASA's Discovery Program. In order to further save costs, the projects were combined into a single project office at JPL. This provided some efficiencies due to the similarity of the missions, but having the flybys space only three months apart posed challenges for the project management team to ensure each project was ready for its critical event and ensuring each received the proper support from the management team. The project office relied on an integrated calendar for tracking and scheduling meetings, reviews, and other key events. The project management team also coordinated their availability for both projects to maintain involvement with each team to ensure effective risk identification and management.

show abstract

Section: Risk Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Missions Of Opportunitymentioning

confidence: 99%

EPOXI and Stardust NExT - The Management Challenges of Two Comet Flybys in Three Months

Larson

2012

SpaceOps 2012 Conference

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Satellite Rescue- Luck of Skillful Application of Technology

Yendler¹

2012

AIAA SPACE 2012 Conference &Amp; Exposition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prediction of Spacecraft Remaining Life - Challenges and Achievements

Nariyoshi¹,

Chernikov²,

Yendler³

2013

49th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A successful mission planning, in particular, at End-of-Life (EOL) depends on many factors including an accurate knowledge of remaining propellant, as a one of the major factors. Achieving the highest accuracy of propellant estimation is very important to a successful mission management. The current paper discusses different methods of propellant estimation, such as, book-keeping, PVT (Pressure, Volume, Temperature) and thermal gauging. The current paper shows that the Thermal Gauging Method (TGM) provides more accurate estimation of propellant remaining than bookkeeping and PVT methods at End-ofLife (EOL). The current paper also discusses the difference between the various thermal gauging methods, namely, TPGT, PGS and TGM . While the TGM consists of several steps, the paper discusses problems related to finding load of a propellant tank, e.g., how to isolate tank temperature rise due to tank heaters from rise due to other heat sources: sun, equipment, etc. A "toolbox" of software tools has been developed for pre and post processing and debugging. Some of the tools could be very useful for general thermal analyses. For satellites with multi-tank propulsion system, regardless of mono-or bipropellant, estimation uncertainty of individual tank load is another factor affecting remaining spacecraft life. Therefore, a total usable propellant load could be less than the sum of the individual tank propellant estimate. The current paper shows how to derive the expected usable propellant from load of each component and uncertainties associated with the load estimates. Nomenclature  = standard deviation m = propellant load/mass p = model parameter which affects heating i = parameter index tot = total uncertainty fit = uncertainty related to curve fit BK

show abstract

Lessons Learned in the Decommissioning of the Stardust Spacecraft

Cited by 3 publications

References 1 publication

EPOXI and Stardust NExT - The Management Challenges of Two Comet Flybys in Three Months

EPOXI and Stardust NExT - The Management Challenges of Two Comet Flybys in Three Months

Satellite Rescue- Luck of Skillful Application of Technology

Prediction of Spacecraft Remaining Life - Challenges and Achievements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About