Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Space Architecture Education for Engineers and Architects pp 53–101Cite as

Comprehensive Planning

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 1959 Accesses

Part of the book series: Space and Society ((SPSO))

Abstract

Every exploration plan begins with determination of goals to be achieved and an outline of missions that have to be performed in order to attain selected targets. Comprehensive planning has to be applied when goals, requirements, and potential outputs are put together in one complete process for planning a space exploration mission. This chapter addresses general aspects of such a process, aiming to help students grasp a “big picture” space architecture vision. Examples of space missions that have already been performed and either completed or under way at this writing are used to illustrate the mission planning process through an overview of their statements and goals. Future exploration mission statements and goals are presented as examples of possible options.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Appendix for definitions of terms.

  2. 2.

    Astrotecture™ Space Architect.

  3. 3.

    USC University of Southern California, Department of Astronautical Engineering.

  4. 4.

    Source for research: “Introduction to Space: The Science of Spaceflight” by Damon (1995, p. 217).

  5. 5.

    Mission = The core function(s) and primary job(s) of the Agency.

  6. 6.

    Goal = Objective = A specific milestone or target level necessary to realize goals.

  7. 7.

    ISECG Global Exploration Roadmap, NASA; NASA/SP–2009-566-ADD2 Human Exploration of Mars Design Reference Architecture 5.0; ESA Roadmaps for Technologies for Exploration; Draft 2015 NASA Technology Roadmaps: http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/home/roadmaps/index.html.

  8. 8.

    http://federalbook.ru/files/OPK/Soderjanie/OPK-11/V/Osnovnie%20pologeniya.pdf (in Russian).

  9. 9.

    Further Resource: NASA Developed Technical Standards can be found at: https://standards.nasa.gov/documents/nasa.

  10. 10.

    Chamber Classes are explained in Appendix A.5, Table A.2.

  11. 11.

    Philip Culbertson, Jr. was the industrial designer who produced this Suitport demonstrator/mockup.

  12. 12.

    Chamber Classes are explained in Appendix A.5, Table A.2.

  13. 13.

    Chamber Classes are explained in Appendix A.5, Table A.2.

  14. 14.

    Further information: http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/analogs/desertrats/index.html.

  15. 15.

    Personal conversation with Mike Gernhardt, May 2012.

  16. 16.

    Further information: http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/research/technology-onepagers/human_factors_ISHM.html.

  17. 17.

    Chamber Classes are explained in Appendix A.5, Table A.2.

  18. 18.

    Personal communication, Kriss J. Kennedy.

  19. 19.

    Further information: http://www.esa.int/esaMI/Mars500/SEM7W9XX3RF_0.html.

  20. 20.

    Chamber Classes are explained in Appendix A.5, Table A.2.

  21. 21.

    Personal conversation with Prof. Ted Krueger, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Rensselaer NY, May 2005.

  22. 22.

    Chamber Classes are explained in Appendix A.5, Table A.2.

  23. 23.

    Chamber Classes are explained in Appendix A.5, Table A.2.

  24. 24.

    Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics.

References

  • Bannova, Olga, and Jorgensen, Jesper. 2006. Can we test design for coming interplanetary expeditions in the Arctic? AIAA: 1702–1711.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bannova, Olga, and Mayorova, Vera. 2014. In Proceedings of International Astronautical Congress 2014, IAC-14-E1.7.3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barabasz, Arreed F. 1991. Effects of isolation on states of consciousness. In From Antarctica to outer space: Life in isolation and confinement, ed. A.A. Harrison, Y.A. Clearwater, and C.P. McKay, 201–208. New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Marc M. 1996. Mars mission design evaluation criteria. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Environmental Systems, Monterey, California, SAE 961467.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Marc M. 2002. Design participation in the human exploration demonstration project. In AIAA Space Architecture Symposium, The World Space Congress—2002, Houston TX, AIAA-2002-6112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Marc M. 2012. Mockups 101: Code and standard research for space habitat analogues. In AIAA Space 2012 Conference, 11–13 September 2012. Pasadena, California, AIAA 2012–5153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connolly, Jan, Daues, Kathy, Howard, Robert L. Jr., Toups, Larry. 2006. Engineering, construction, and operations in challenging environment. In Definition and Development of Habitation Readiness Level (HRLs) for Planetary Surface Habitats, Earth & Space, 1–8. Reston VA: American Society of Civil Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damon, Thomas D. 1995. Introduction to Space: The Science of Spaceflight.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, Dwayne. 2005. Twenty-five gigabucks of steel: the objectives of the international space station. The Space Review June 13. http://www.thespacereview.com/article/391/1. Accessed xy March 2015.

  • Duerk, Donna P. 1993. Architectural Programming: Information management for design. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dudley-Rowley, M., Whitney, S., Bishop, S., Caldwell, B., Nolan, P., and Gangale T. 2002. Crew size, composition, and time: Implications for exploration design. In 1st Space Architecture Symposium (SAS 2002), Houston, Texas, USA, 10–11 October 2002. Reston, Virginia, USA, AIAA 2002-4959.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckart, Peter. 2006. Lunarbase Handbook. McGraw-Hill Primis Custom Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Space Agency [TRL]. 2008. Technology Readiness Levels Handbook for Space Applications, Issue I, Revision 6. Paris, France: European Space Agency. https://artes.esa.int/sites/default/files/TRL_Handbook.pdf.

  • ISECG. 2013. The global exploration roadmap, international space exploration coordination group (ISECG). https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/GER-2013_Small.pdf.

  • Kanas, Nick. 2011. From Earth’s orbit to the outer planets and beyond: Psychological issues in space. Acta Astronautica: 576–581.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanas, Nick, and Dietrich Manzey. 2003. Space Psychology and Psychiatry. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, Wiley J., and Pranke, Linda K. 1999. Human Spaceflight: Mission Analysis and Design. McGraw-Hill Companies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mankins, John C. 1995. Technology Readiness Levels: A White Paper. NASA, Office of Space Access and Technology, Advanced Concepts Office. http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codeq/trl/trl.pdf. Accessed June 2014.

  • Mohanty, Susmita, Fairburn, Sue, Imhof, Barbara, Ranson, Stephen, and Vogler, Andreas. 2008. Survey of Past, Present, and Planned Human Space Mission Simulators, SAE 2008-01-2020. Warrendale PA: Society of Automotive Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  • NASA [HIDH]. 2010. Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH), NASA SP 2010-3407. Washington DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

    Google Scholar 

  • NASA [ISS]. 2015. International Space Station: Space Station Research & Technology. http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/overview.html.

  • NASA [Missions]. 2015. NASA Mission A-7. http://www.nasa.gov/missions. Accessed April 2015.

  • NASA [Standards]. 2014. NASA Developed Technical Standards. Online June, 2014. https://standards.nasa.gov/nasa-technical-standards. Accessed June 2014.

  • NASA [Strategic]. 2005. Strategic Management and Governance Handbook. NPD 1000.0., NASA, Office of the Chief Engineer. http://www.nasa.gov/offices/emd/home/mgo.html.

  • NASA [TLR]. 2012. Definition of Technology Readiness Levels. http://www.nasa.gov/content/technology-readiness-level/. Accessed June 2014.

  • NASA [Voyages]. 2012. Charting the Course for Sustainable Human Space Exploration. http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/ExplorationReport_508_6-4-12.pdf. Accessed June 2014.

  • NASA [STD 3001-2]. 2011. NASA Space Flight Human-System Standard (Vol. 2). Human Factors, Habitability, and Environmental Health, Washington DC, NASA-STD-3001.

    Google Scholar 

  • NASA [Guidelines]. 2003. Guidelines and Capabilities for Designing Human Missions. NASA/TM-2003-210785. http://spacecraft.ssl.umd.edu/design_lib/TM-2003-210785.pdf. Accessed October 2014.

  • NASA [Messenger]. 1999–2015. Messenger: MErcury Surface, Space ENvironment, GEochemistry, and Ranging, http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/why_mercury/q5.html. Accessed April 2015.

  • Nolte, William, and Kruse Robert. (2011, October 26). Readiness Level Proliferation. Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. Fairborn OH: Air Force Research Laboratory. http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2011system/13132_NolteWednesday.pdf. Retrieved 17 August 2012.

  • Palinkas, L.A. 1986. Long-term Effects of Environment on Health and Performance of Antarctic Winter-over Personnel. In Naval Health Research Center Report, 85–48. San Diego.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, J.F. 2004. Spacecraft Systems Design and Operations. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skylab Program Office. 1974. MSFC Skylab Orbital Workshop, NASA TMX-64813. Huntsville AL: George C. Marshall Spaceflight Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stuster, Jack. 1986. Space Station Habitability Recommendations Based on a Systematic Comparative Analysis of Analogous Conditions, NASA CR-3943. Washington DC: NASA.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Architecture and Design, Vienna University of Technology (TU Vienna), Vienna, Austria

    Sandra Häuplik-Meusburger

  2. Cullen College of Engineering, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA

    Olga Bannova

Authors
  1. Sandra Häuplik-Meusburger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Olga Bannova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sandra Häuplik-Meusburger .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Häuplik-Meusburger, S., Bannova, O. (2016). Comprehensive Planning. In: Space Architecture Education for Engineers and Architects. Space and Society. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19279-6_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19279-6_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-19278-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-19279-6

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation