Desert Research and Technology Studies (DRATS) 2010 science operations: Operational approaches and lessons learned for managing science during human planetary surface missions

Dean Eppler, Byron Adams, Doug Archer, Greg Baiden, Adrian Brown, William Carey, Barbara Cohen, Chris Condit, Cindy Evans, Corey Fortezzo, Brent Garry, Trevor Graff, John Gruener, Jennifer Heldmann, Kip Hodges, Friedrich Hörz, Jose Hurtado, Brian Hynek, Peter Isaacson, Catherine JuranekKurt Klaus, David Kring, Nina Lanza, Susan Lederer, Gary Lofgren, Margarita Marinova, Lisa May, Jonathan Meyer, Doug Ming, Brian Monteleone, Caroline Morisset, Sarah Noble, Elizabeth Rampe, James Rice, John Schutt, James Skinner, Carolyn M. Tewksbury-Christle, Barbara J. Tewksbury, Alicia Vaughan, Aileen Yingst, Kelsey Young

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Desert Research and Technology Studies (Desert RATS) is a multi-year series of hardware and operations tests carried out annually in the high desert of Arizona on the San Francisco Volcanic Field. These activities are designed to exercise planetary surface hardware and operations in conditions where long-distance, multi-day roving is achievable, and they allow NASA to evaluate different mission concepts and approaches in an environment less costly and more forgiving than space. The results from the RATS tests allow selection of potential operational approaches to planetary surface exploration prior to making commitments to specific flight and mission hardware development. In previous RATS operations, the Science Support Room has operated largely in an advisory role, an approach that was driven by the need to provide a loose science mission framework that would underpin the engineering tests. However, the extensive nature of the traverse operations for 2010 expanded the role of the science operations and tested specific operational approaches. Science mission operations approaches from the Apollo and Mars-Phoenix missions were merged to become the baseline for this test. Six days of traverse operations were conducted during each week of the 2-week test, with three traverse days each week conducted with voice and data communications continuously available, and three traverse days conducted with only two 1-hour communications periods per day. Within this framework, the team evaluated integrated science operations management using real-time, tactical science operations to oversee daily crew activities, and strategic level evaluations of science data and daily traverse results during a post-traverse planning shift. During continuous communications, both tactical and strategic teams were employed. On days when communications were reduced to only two communications periods per day, only a strategic team was employed. The Science Operations Team found that, if communications are good and down-linking of science data is ensured, high quality science returns is possible regardless of communications. What is absent from reduced communications is the scientific interaction between the crew on the planet and the scientists on the ground. These scientific interactions were a critical part of the science process and significantly improved mission science return over reduced communications conditions. The test also showed that the quality of science return is not measurable by simple numerical quantities but is, in fact, based on strongly non-quantifiable factors, such as the interactions between the crew and the Science Operations Teams. Although the metric evaluation data suggested some trends, there was not sufficient granularity in the data or specificity in the metrics to allow those trends to be understood on numerical data alone.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)224-241
Number of pages18
JournalActa Astronautica
Volume90
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 2013

Fingerprint

Communication
Hardware
Voice/data communication systems
Planets
NASA
Planning

Keywords

  • Analog testing
  • Metric evaluation
  • Planetary science
  • Planetary surface operations
  • Science operations

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Aerospace Engineering

Cite this

Desert Research and Technology Studies (DRATS) 2010 science operations : Operational approaches and lessons learned for managing science during human planetary surface missions. / Eppler, Dean; Adams, Byron; Archer, Doug; Baiden, Greg; Brown, Adrian; Carey, William; Cohen, Barbara; Condit, Chris; Evans, Cindy; Fortezzo, Corey; Garry, Brent; Graff, Trevor; Gruener, John; Heldmann, Jennifer; Hodges, Kip; Hörz, Friedrich; Hurtado, Jose; Hynek, Brian; Isaacson, Peter; Juranek, Catherine; Klaus, Kurt; Kring, David; Lanza, Nina; Lederer, Susan; Lofgren, Gary; Marinova, Margarita; May, Lisa; Meyer, Jonathan; Ming, Doug; Monteleone, Brian; Morisset, Caroline; Noble, Sarah; Rampe, Elizabeth; Rice, James; Schutt, John; Skinner, James; Tewksbury-Christle, Carolyn M.; Tewksbury, Barbara J.; Vaughan, Alicia; Yingst, Aileen; Young, Kelsey.

In: Acta Astronautica, Vol. 90, No. 2, 2013, p. 224-241.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Eppler, D, Adams, B, Archer, D, Baiden, G, Brown, A, Carey, W, Cohen, B, Condit, C, Evans, C, Fortezzo, C, Garry, B, Graff, T, Gruener, J, Heldmann, J, Hodges, K, Hörz, F, Hurtado, J, Hynek, B, Isaacson, P, Juranek, C, Klaus, K, Kring, D, Lanza, N, Lederer, S, Lofgren, G, Marinova, M, May, L, Meyer, J, Ming, D, Monteleone, B, Morisset, C, Noble, S, Rampe, E, Rice, J, Schutt, J, Skinner, J, Tewksbury-Christle, CM, Tewksbury, BJ, Vaughan, A, Yingst, A & Young, K 2013, 'Desert Research and Technology Studies (DRATS) 2010 science operations: Operational approaches and lessons learned for managing science during human planetary surface missions', Acta Astronautica, vol. 90, no. 2, pp. 224-241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2012.03.009
Eppler, Dean ; Adams, Byron ; Archer, Doug ; Baiden, Greg ; Brown, Adrian ; Carey, William ; Cohen, Barbara ; Condit, Chris ; Evans, Cindy ; Fortezzo, Corey ; Garry, Brent ; Graff, Trevor ; Gruener, John ; Heldmann, Jennifer ; Hodges, Kip ; Hörz, Friedrich ; Hurtado, Jose ; Hynek, Brian ; Isaacson, Peter ; Juranek, Catherine ; Klaus, Kurt ; Kring, David ; Lanza, Nina ; Lederer, Susan ; Lofgren, Gary ; Marinova, Margarita ; May, Lisa ; Meyer, Jonathan ; Ming, Doug ; Monteleone, Brian ; Morisset, Caroline ; Noble, Sarah ; Rampe, Elizabeth ; Rice, James ; Schutt, John ; Skinner, James ; Tewksbury-Christle, Carolyn M. ; Tewksbury, Barbara J. ; Vaughan, Alicia ; Yingst, Aileen ; Young, Kelsey. / Desert Research and Technology Studies (DRATS) 2010 science operations : Operational approaches and lessons learned for managing science during human planetary surface missions. In: Acta Astronautica. 2013 ; Vol. 90, No. 2. pp. 224-241.
@article{399df94bceb440c28c6d3802bf418bf8,
title = "Desert Research and Technology Studies (DRATS) 2010 science operations: Operational approaches and lessons learned for managing science during human planetary surface missions",
abstract = "Desert Research and Technology Studies (Desert RATS) is a multi-year series of hardware and operations tests carried out annually in the high desert of Arizona on the San Francisco Volcanic Field. These activities are designed to exercise planetary surface hardware and operations in conditions where long-distance, multi-day roving is achievable, and they allow NASA to evaluate different mission concepts and approaches in an environment less costly and more forgiving than space. The results from the RATS tests allow selection of potential operational approaches to planetary surface exploration prior to making commitments to specific flight and mission hardware development. In previous RATS operations, the Science Support Room has operated largely in an advisory role, an approach that was driven by the need to provide a loose science mission framework that would underpin the engineering tests. However, the extensive nature of the traverse operations for 2010 expanded the role of the science operations and tested specific operational approaches. Science mission operations approaches from the Apollo and Mars-Phoenix missions were merged to become the baseline for this test. Six days of traverse operations were conducted during each week of the 2-week test, with three traverse days each week conducted with voice and data communications continuously available, and three traverse days conducted with only two 1-hour communications periods per day. Within this framework, the team evaluated integrated science operations management using real-time, tactical science operations to oversee daily crew activities, and strategic level evaluations of science data and daily traverse results during a post-traverse planning shift. During continuous communications, both tactical and strategic teams were employed. On days when communications were reduced to only two communications periods per day, only a strategic team was employed. The Science Operations Team found that, if communications are good and down-linking of science data is ensured, high quality science returns is possible regardless of communications. What is absent from reduced communications is the scientific interaction between the crew on the planet and the scientists on the ground. These scientific interactions were a critical part of the science process and significantly improved mission science return over reduced communications conditions. The test also showed that the quality of science return is not measurable by simple numerical quantities but is, in fact, based on strongly non-quantifiable factors, such as the interactions between the crew and the Science Operations Teams. Although the metric evaluation data suggested some trends, there was not sufficient granularity in the data or specificity in the metrics to allow those trends to be understood on numerical data alone.",
keywords = "Analog testing, Metric evaluation, Planetary science, Planetary surface operations, Science operations",
author = "Dean Eppler and Byron Adams and Doug Archer and Greg Baiden and Adrian Brown and William Carey and Barbara Cohen and Chris Condit and Cindy Evans and Corey Fortezzo and Brent Garry and Trevor Graff and John Gruener and Jennifer Heldmann and Kip Hodges and Friedrich H{\"o}rz and Jose Hurtado and Brian Hynek and Peter Isaacson and Catherine Juranek and Kurt Klaus and David Kring and Nina Lanza and Susan Lederer and Gary Lofgren and Margarita Marinova and Lisa May and Jonathan Meyer and Doug Ming and Brian Monteleone and Caroline Morisset and Sarah Noble and Elizabeth Rampe and James Rice and John Schutt and James Skinner and Tewksbury-Christle, {Carolyn M.} and Tewksbury, {Barbara J.} and Alicia Vaughan and Aileen Yingst and Kelsey Young",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1016/j.actaastro.2012.03.009",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "90",
pages = "224--241",
journal = "Acta Astronautica",
issn = "0094-5765",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Desert Research and Technology Studies (DRATS) 2010 science operations

T2 - Operational approaches and lessons learned for managing science during human planetary surface missions

AU - Eppler, Dean

AU - Adams, Byron

AU - Archer, Doug

AU - Baiden, Greg

AU - Brown, Adrian

AU - Carey, William

AU - Cohen, Barbara

AU - Condit, Chris

AU - Evans, Cindy

AU - Fortezzo, Corey

AU - Garry, Brent

AU - Graff, Trevor

AU - Gruener, John

AU - Heldmann, Jennifer

AU - Hodges, Kip

AU - Hörz, Friedrich

AU - Hurtado, Jose

AU - Hynek, Brian

AU - Isaacson, Peter

AU - Juranek, Catherine

AU - Klaus, Kurt

AU - Kring, David

AU - Lanza, Nina

AU - Lederer, Susan

AU - Lofgren, Gary

AU - Marinova, Margarita

AU - May, Lisa

AU - Meyer, Jonathan

AU - Ming, Doug

AU - Monteleone, Brian

AU - Morisset, Caroline

AU - Noble, Sarah

AU - Rampe, Elizabeth

AU - Rice, James

AU - Schutt, John

AU - Skinner, James

AU - Tewksbury-Christle, Carolyn M.

AU - Tewksbury, Barbara J.

AU - Vaughan, Alicia

AU - Yingst, Aileen

AU - Young, Kelsey

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Desert Research and Technology Studies (Desert RATS) is a multi-year series of hardware and operations tests carried out annually in the high desert of Arizona on the San Francisco Volcanic Field. These activities are designed to exercise planetary surface hardware and operations in conditions where long-distance, multi-day roving is achievable, and they allow NASA to evaluate different mission concepts and approaches in an environment less costly and more forgiving than space. The results from the RATS tests allow selection of potential operational approaches to planetary surface exploration prior to making commitments to specific flight and mission hardware development. In previous RATS operations, the Science Support Room has operated largely in an advisory role, an approach that was driven by the need to provide a loose science mission framework that would underpin the engineering tests. However, the extensive nature of the traverse operations for 2010 expanded the role of the science operations and tested specific operational approaches. Science mission operations approaches from the Apollo and Mars-Phoenix missions were merged to become the baseline for this test. Six days of traverse operations were conducted during each week of the 2-week test, with three traverse days each week conducted with voice and data communications continuously available, and three traverse days conducted with only two 1-hour communications periods per day. Within this framework, the team evaluated integrated science operations management using real-time, tactical science operations to oversee daily crew activities, and strategic level evaluations of science data and daily traverse results during a post-traverse planning shift. During continuous communications, both tactical and strategic teams were employed. On days when communications were reduced to only two communications periods per day, only a strategic team was employed. The Science Operations Team found that, if communications are good and down-linking of science data is ensured, high quality science returns is possible regardless of communications. What is absent from reduced communications is the scientific interaction between the crew on the planet and the scientists on the ground. These scientific interactions were a critical part of the science process and significantly improved mission science return over reduced communications conditions. The test also showed that the quality of science return is not measurable by simple numerical quantities but is, in fact, based on strongly non-quantifiable factors, such as the interactions between the crew and the Science Operations Teams. Although the metric evaluation data suggested some trends, there was not sufficient granularity in the data or specificity in the metrics to allow those trends to be understood on numerical data alone.

AB - Desert Research and Technology Studies (Desert RATS) is a multi-year series of hardware and operations tests carried out annually in the high desert of Arizona on the San Francisco Volcanic Field. These activities are designed to exercise planetary surface hardware and operations in conditions where long-distance, multi-day roving is achievable, and they allow NASA to evaluate different mission concepts and approaches in an environment less costly and more forgiving than space. The results from the RATS tests allow selection of potential operational approaches to planetary surface exploration prior to making commitments to specific flight and mission hardware development. In previous RATS operations, the Science Support Room has operated largely in an advisory role, an approach that was driven by the need to provide a loose science mission framework that would underpin the engineering tests. However, the extensive nature of the traverse operations for 2010 expanded the role of the science operations and tested specific operational approaches. Science mission operations approaches from the Apollo and Mars-Phoenix missions were merged to become the baseline for this test. Six days of traverse operations were conducted during each week of the 2-week test, with three traverse days each week conducted with voice and data communications continuously available, and three traverse days conducted with only two 1-hour communications periods per day. Within this framework, the team evaluated integrated science operations management using real-time, tactical science operations to oversee daily crew activities, and strategic level evaluations of science data and daily traverse results during a post-traverse planning shift. During continuous communications, both tactical and strategic teams were employed. On days when communications were reduced to only two communications periods per day, only a strategic team was employed. The Science Operations Team found that, if communications are good and down-linking of science data is ensured, high quality science returns is possible regardless of communications. What is absent from reduced communications is the scientific interaction between the crew on the planet and the scientists on the ground. These scientific interactions were a critical part of the science process and significantly improved mission science return over reduced communications conditions. The test also showed that the quality of science return is not measurable by simple numerical quantities but is, in fact, based on strongly non-quantifiable factors, such as the interactions between the crew and the Science Operations Teams. Although the metric evaluation data suggested some trends, there was not sufficient granularity in the data or specificity in the metrics to allow those trends to be understood on numerical data alone.

KW - Analog testing

KW - Metric evaluation

KW - Planetary science

KW - Planetary surface operations

KW - Science operations

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84885638450&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84885638450&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.actaastro.2012.03.009

DO - 10.1016/j.actaastro.2012.03.009

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84885638450

VL - 90

SP - 224

EP - 241

JO - Acta Astronautica

JF - Acta Astronautica

SN - 0094-5765

IS - 2

ER -