1.
NSROC Beginnings
The Sounding Rocket
Working Group (SRWG) is encouraged
that the implementation of the NASA Sounding Rocket Operations Contract
(NSROC)
has gotten off to a good start. We are
particularly pleased that NSROC management has retained the core group
of
first-class contractors at Wallops. The
many ideas presented at the meeting by NSROC managers, including ideas
concerning facilitating software and hardware sharing between groups,
were
well-received. In general, NSROC’s
apparent openness to input and communication was particularly
heartening to the
user community.
2.
Next Generation ACS
Specifications/Fine-Pointing
The most
commonly-used fine-pointing ACS configuration
on NASA sounding rocket astronomy payloads is the Aerojet Mark VI
platform with
a Ball star tracker, which yields a typical pointing stability of 5''
rms. Recent advances in ground-based and
orbiting,
space-based spatial resolving power are routinely less than 1''. The SRWG believes the next generation
sounding rocket fine-pointing capability should be better than 1'' in
order to
remain competitive with the rest of the field. Towards
this end, a new digital Mark VI will be
flown on Cruddace/36.162
DG and we look forward to reviewing the performance of this new system. However, it is equally important to improve
the pointing accuracy of the ACS star tracker. The
current Ball star tracker has a number of
limitations, namely a 4th
magnitude brightness limit, the ability to track only 1 target within a
4
degree field of view, and a noise equivalent angle of 3'' at Oth
magnitude that
grows to 9'' at 3th magnitude. In
addition,
these trackers are no longer manufactured and the stock is dwindling.
A new star tracker is
desired that can track multiple
faint targets within the same field of view and be functionally
compatible with
the digital Mark VI. Star trackers tend
to be expensive, i.e., in the $100K -- $1M range. Given
the limited resources of the suborbital
program, we believe supporting experimenter-led development efforts is
a more
cost-effective approach. Towards this
end Aerojet has developed a standardize interface that will accept
user-provided error signals, which will be tested on Clarke/36.174 UL. They will provide ACS with “quad-cell” error
signals while tracking Jupiter, which is very bright (-2.5 magnitude). A more sophisticated effort is being lead by
Nordsieck at UW-Madison who has made considerable progress in
developing and
testing a direct replacement to the Ball star tracker with the
aforementioned
capability. Last April (1999) on
Nordsieck/36.172 UG, this group flew their CCD star tracker (ST5000)
alongside
the Ball tracker. They successfully
tracked the guide stars acquired on route to the science target and
provided
low bandwidth imaging and pointing monitoring of the gyro tracking on
the
science field. UW-Madison has recently
been awarded an Explorer Technology Grant to further develop their low
cost
tracker; their reproduction cost target is $50K. (Further
details may be found at the
following web site: http://www.sal.wisc.edu/~jwp/st5000/st5000.html.) We note the successful development of such a
low cost and highly capable tracker may represent a significant
marketing
opportunity for NSROC.
We recommend that
Wallops and NSROC pursue these
innovative ideas for improving fine-pointing ACS systems and, in
particular,
that the University of Wisconsin-Madison tracker be made available to
the wider
sounding rocket community, if indeed that system proves successful and
cost-effective.
3.
Next Generation ACS Systems/Coarse-Pointing
The SRWG finds much
need for improvement in the
utilization of coarse-pointing ACS systems on sounding rockets. An informal poll of sounding rocket users
indicates that there is a range of operation problems regarding the use
of
coarse-pointing ACS systems including inertial pointing inaccuracy and
firing
at inopportune times, including times inside the dead band. These types of ACS problems can lead to
serious compromise of the science objectives because instruments do not
end up
oriented as desired or the firing operations disturb the scientific
measurements. The reasons for the
occurrence of these problems is varied, but appear to arise from
insufficient
system level (payload and ACS) testing coupled with less than ideal
communication between the manufacturer (which does the ACS programming)
and the
payload team.
It is recommended
that these problems be mitigated by
improving the ACS system-level design, by testing, and by ensuring that
all key
parties, including the payload development team, scientific team, and
ACS
manufacturer team, clearly communicate with one another.
The ACS operations and timeline should be
fully understood and achievable within the operational constraints of
the
payload and ACS systems. It may be
advisable to put in place a separate review meeting (which could be
conducted
via telephone) among these key parties to ensure that all agree on the
approach
and implementation for the ACS system on a given rocket.
4.
Next Generation “Coarse” Attitude Systems
Another area of
long-standing concern of the scientific
user community and the SRWG in particular involves “coarse” (i.e., ~ 1
degree
knowledge) attitude solutions. These
solutions are frequently supplied to the science teams only to be
subsequently
determined to be inaccurate. Consequently,
a great deal of effort is expended by
the science team to
both verify and develop acceptable solutions which should, in
principle, be an
accurate data product when delivered to the science team.
It is not clear exactly where the problem
lies, but the technical specifications of the attitude systems indicate
that
accurate solutions should be routinely obtainable.
One area where inaccuracy may creep in is
through the use (or lack thereof) of accurate calibration data for the
specific
attitude system.
The standard payload
system used to provide coarse
attitude knowledge for most space physics payloads in the MIDAS gyro
platform. These gyros utilize a design
that is over 25 years old. Although a
dependable "workhorse" of many NASA sounding rocket payloads over the
years, these gyros have recently been shown to be noisy and to include
unacceptable drift. Based on the
presentation at the last meeting, we understand that a new procurement
of
attitude sensors is being carried out by NSROC and we urge that ease of
data
analysis and interpretation be taken into account, in addition to
standard
evaluation factors such as in-flight performance (accuracy, noise,
drift),
size, power, telemetry, cost, etc.
The SRWG believes
that Wallops should clearly specify
with whom the responsibility lies to determine if a given attitude
solution is
accurate and acceptable (e.g.., Wallops? NSROC? Attitude manufacturer? Users?) We urge
Wallops to enact a process with which to
verify the attitude
solutions post flight before delivery to the science teams.
5.
User's Manual
In the past, Wallops
has provided a “User’s Manual” for
P.I.s which explained many of the basics of the program and helped new
researchers get started. The User's
Manual should provide a common location for information for Sounding
Rocket
PI's and engineers, including vehicle performance, NASA facilities, and
documentation requirements. In addition
to T/M and electrical requirements, it would be useful to include
information
about the ACS system data, such as details about how to interpret the
MIDAS
gyro data.
The current manual is
out of date, and we encourage
Wallops to update this information, particularly now that NSROC has
been
enacted. To this end, the SRWG would be
more than happy to contribute to this endeavor, including reading of
drafts and
providing feedback.
6.
Reviews/Independent Oversight
Several recent
mission failures and near-failures have
been caused by planning errors that should have been caught in reviews,
such as
mis-matched time-lines. This seems to
point to a need to make the reviews more technically rigorous. This includes both Design Reviews and Mission
Readiness Reviews. Impartial overseers
with mission heritage should be present at the reviews, and required to
ask
hard questions. This appears to be
especially necessary at the present time because of the large turnover
in
engineering personnel.
7.
New Systems/Purchases -- SRWG input
The SRWG notes that
several important procurement
decisions will be made by NSROC over the next year, which could have
significant impact on the scientific capabilities of the payloads and
hence the
sounding rocket users. These include
decisions on a new rocket motor purchase, new gyro or other attitude
platforms,
standardization of TM stacks, and development of new ACS systems. The SRWG would like to be involved in the
specifications for these and similar items that will impact the system,
reliability, and scientific capabilities of the payloads for future
flights. For example, we would like an
opportunity to
comment on the draft RFP concerning the requirements and specifications
for the
other systems mentioned above. This
requires a closer working relationship between the NSROC contractor and
the
SRWG than has existed to date. A simple
mechanism, which should not adversely impact the NSROC procurement
process,
might be to alert the SRWG to draft RFP information, particularly in
cases
where such a draft RFP is made public to potential bidders for comment
prior to
release.
8.
Availability of TM Simulators
The
Sounding Rocket Working Group strongly believes that experimenters,
contractors, and NASA would all benefit from the development of a
portable,
PC-based telemetry interface emulator. As
envisioned by the panel, these could take the
form of plug-in PC
boards or stand-alone modules built around the same hardware that NASA
uses in
their current TM systems. The emulator
systems would be programmable in the same way that the flight TM
systems are
now programmed, and would be capable of producing the same
synchronization and
ENABLE signals as the flight systems (e.g., word clock, bit clock,
frame synch,
parallel word enable pulses, and serial handshaking signals).
Several
experimenter groups already have developed or purchased key components
of such
systems, but no standard is in place and none of these systems uses all
the
same parts as the NASA TM systems.
There
is a substantial cost savings to be realized by providing such
standardized
development systems to experimenters prior to integration.
First, such systems would allow experimenter
teams to solve telemetry interface problems at home on the bench
instead of
during the Wallops integration process. Telemetry
interface issues are among the most common
and time-consuming
integration problems. Availability of
standard emulators would optimize use of the TM groundstations,
allowing more
payloads to be processed in less time. Secondly,
it is likely that availability of
emulators would lead to a
reduction in travel costs by the experimenter teams, and fewer overall
problems
during integration.
The
Working Group recommends that a dozen such systems be created at
Wallops. These could then be loaned to
experimenter
teams involved in active payload development activities.
(The simulators could be returned at the
Mission Readiness Reviews, for example.)
Implementation
of a plan such as the one described here would likely result in shorter
integrations, fewer scheduling problems with TM groundstations, and
improved
utilization of contractor resources. Despite
these many advantages, we note that the SRWG
has made this
recommendation in the past and in each instance, it has received strong
support
from Wallops management. We thus urge
that concrete steps be taken to make this idea a reality.
9.
SPARCS Command Uplink System and ACS Optics
Support -- Uplink Command and Optical Simulators at WSMR
We applaud NSROC for
maintaining the existing corporate
memory in the sounding rocket support personnel both at WFF and the
White Sands
Missile Range (WSMR). We note however
two areas that require immediate attention at White Sands:
programming support for the command uplink
system (CUS) and ACS optics support.
A recent effort to
make the CUS a “turn-key” system has
been successful for the most part. However, we have lost the capability
for
making fiducial markings (overlays) and selectable cursors for
reference and
target identification. During one of the
last flights (Feldman/36.136UG) the reference cursor was so large that
it
obscured the slit of the spectrograph frustrating the ability to make
accurate
point adjustments. In addition, the
cursor colors were red and green while the Feldman CUS operator is
red-green
color blind. The capability to generate
programmable overlays for accurately positioning field stars in the
target
region was not available and compromised operator tracking knowledge
and data
quality. We recommend that a programming
effort be established to enable the “turn-key” CUS to provide widget
driven
selection options for these features.
It has also come to
our attention that the star
simulators (collimators) at WSMR and WFF are in need of maintenance. Current NSROC personnel either are too busy
or lack the optical expertise to maintain these systems.
In particular the collimator at WSMR is badly
out of focus and the elevating mechanism is broken.
Problems have also been encountered at both
at WFF and WSMR with the ACS “cradle,” a table upon which the payload
is placed
to simulate ACS pointing maneuvers and allow for CUS practice during
integration. We recommend additional
resources be expended to properly maintain these critical testing
systems.
NASA Sounding Rocket
Working
Group
Dr.
Robert F. Pfaff, Jr. (Chair)
NASA/Goddard
Space Flight Center
Prof.
David Burrows
The Pennsylvania State University
Dr.
Joseph Davila
NASA/Goddard
Space Flight Center
Dr.
Greg Delory
University of California at Berkeley
Prof.
Greg Earle
University of Texas at Dallas
Dr.
Mark Hurwitz
University of California, Berkeley
Prof.
Craig Kletzing
University of Iowa
Dr.
Kristina Lynch
University of New Hampshire
Dr.
Stephan McCandliss
Johns Hopkins University
Dr.
David Slater
Southwest
Research Institute
Dr.
James Ulwick
Utah State University
|