1. 1 August 19, 2003 Earth Observing-1 Introduction and Some EO-1 Lessons Learned NRO Presentation August 18, 2003 Dan Mandl EO-1 Mission Director

2. 2 August 19, 2003 Earth Observing-1 Agenda u Overview of technology validation missions u Overview of EO-1 Mission u Mission phases u Continuous improvement efforts u Some lessons learned

3. 3 August 19, 2003 Earth Observing-1 Technology Validation Missions u A mission designed to flight validate new technologies to lower the cost or improve the performance of a future mission u At NASA, the future missions are all science missions but this is not a requirement for the process u The NASA New Millennium Program (NMP) is responsible for the flight validation of new technologies relevant to future science missions in both the Office of Space Science and the Office of Earth Science u Within the NMP, each technology has a Validation Plan consisting of two components: –Technical Validation – technologists and engineers proving the technology works in space as advertised –Science Validation– scientists proving the technology is capable of doing the science for which it is intended

4. 4 August 19, 2003 Earth Observing-1 Impact on 21st Century Science Missions Break- through Nature of Technology Excessive Risk to the First User NMP Technology Validation Missions

5. 5 August 19, 2003 Earth Observing-1 Mission Overview u Validate revolutionary technologies contributing to the reduction of cost and increased capabilities for future land imaging missions u Revolutionary land imaging instruments on EO-1 –Hyperion –Advanced Land Imager (ALI) –Atmospheric Corrector (AC) u Revolutionary Spacecraft technologies on EO-1 –X Band Phased Array Antenna (XPAA) –Pulse Plasma Thruster (PPT) –Light Weight Flexible Solar Array (LFSA) u More on website: eo1.gsfc.nasa.gov –Carbon-Carbon Radiator (CCR) –Enhanced Formation Flying (EFF) Mission Overview

6. 6 August 19, 2003 Earth Observing-1 EO-1 Mission Phases u After base mission, three more mission phases evolved as depicted in chart below u Sensor Web/Testbed phase is active now u Virtual observatory phase is the phase in which as much mission autonomy as possible will be implemented to reduce the cost as much as possible of running the EO-1 mission –Includes semi-autonomous tasking of EO-1 Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4 2000 2001 2002 Baseline Mission Extended Mission Phase 3 “Public Access” “Accelerated Mission” Launch Q1 Q2 Q3 2004 Phase 1 Phase 2 “Sensor Web/Test-Bed” 2003 Phase 4 “Virtual Observatory”

7. 7 August 19, 2003 Earth Observing-1 Sorting Success Criteria for EO-1 Pre-Launch

8. 8 August 19, 2003 Earth Observing-1 Determining EO-1 S/C Total Reliability Over Mission Life

9. 9 August 19, 2003 Earth Observing-1 How S/C Reliability Was Determined = Has Consequence Category 1 from FMEA Attitude Control Subsystem (ACS) Electrical Power Subsystem (EPS) Communications Subsystem (CS) Command & Data Handling Subsystem (C&DHS) Reaction Control Subsystem (RCS) ALIWARP 0.94900.96790.95350.9638 0.89600.9846 Reliability @ 1 year = 0.7447 Failure Likelihood = 0.2553 Has Redundancy 0.9999

10. 10 August 19, 2003 Earth Observing-1 Mission Redesign as a Result of Success Criteria and Reliability Assessment

11. 11 August 19, 2003 Earth Observing-1 Budget Realignment to Support Redesigned Accelerated Mission $600K

12. 12 August 19, 2003 Earth Observing-1 Continuous Improvement Efforts to Lower Imaging Costs

13. 13 August 19, 2003 Earth Observing-1 Testing Sensor Web Concepts Using EO-1 as a Testbed On-board Processing End-to-End Communications Autonomous Coordination Operational Testbed On-board Cloud Cover Detection Validation Hyperspectral Compression WG u On-board data mining u On-board intelligent image compression u Working group Smart Antenna u Ground phased array u Cell tower com to sat Livingstone On-board Model Based Diag Tool u Autonomous anomaly diagnosis and recommendations Autonomous Science Experiment(ASE) u Migration of ST6 onto EO-1 SensorWeb Testbed u Test SensorWeb concepts on ground EO-1, Terra, Aqua SensorWeb Demo 1 & 2 u Uses MODIS inst center to detect volcanoes u Uses ASE to coord image collect autonomously Intelligent Distributed Spacecraft Technology Testbed EO-1/ Gnd Sensor SensorWeb u Sensors in Huntington Botanical Garden trigger EO-1 image Preliminary EO-1 Autonomy Experiment u On-board planning u On-board feature detection u Dynamic SW Bus Funded by ESTOFunded by NMPFunded by RASC Proposed activity

14. 14 August 19, 2003 Earth Observing-1 Sample Science Goal Monitor User page — Experiment for Virtual Observatory Front End

15. 15 August 19, 2003 Earth Observing-1 Lessons Learned (1 of 4) u When compared to small science missions, EO-1 was inherently risky since it is a Technology Validation mission due to: –Maturing the technologies –Architectural risks –Developing the technologies –Flight-validating the technologies –Infusing the technologies u Mitigating these risks required: –Greater reserves of time and money –More capable people throughout the Project –Robust Risk Management from the beginning –Strong System Engineering is ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL in orchestrating a successful Technology Validation mission –Ready and repeated access to the best engineering talent is required – a “deep bench” of engineering talent

16. 16 August 19, 2003 Earth Observing-1 Lessons Learned (2 of 4) u More specific Lessons Learned from the NMP/EO-1 mission: –Insist on thorough documentation of all vendor (subcontractor) tests. –Document the “as-built” characteristics of each part. –Provide a complete photo documentation of the instrument prior to delivery, with close-ups of all critical items. –Comparison of several independent calibration techniques has proved to be extremely valuable both in ground and on-orbit measurements. –Calibration of each detector of a large focal plane is a manageable job but requires thorough preparation of test plans, test instrumentation and associated software to process the resulting large volume of data.

17. 17 August 19, 2003 Earth Observing-1 Lessons Learned (3 of 4) u Pre-Launch – Design for flexibility –Build organization for flexibility –Requirements change – inflexibility costs additional money in long run –Perform reliability assessment using FMEA and fault trees –Design S/C with selective redundancy based on risk/reliability assessment –Overstaff operations to provide risk buffer –Easier to de-staff than to gain expertise quickly –FOT used to augment I&T and as workarounds to other problems found on S/C –Use contractual mechanisms that allow flexibility in obtaining additional staff as needs arise – there is always turnover –Facilities should be expandable and changeable to the degree possible to accommodate requirements changes

18. 18 August 19, 2003 Earth Observing-1 Lessons Leaned (4 of 4) u Pre-Launch & Post-Launch – Design for flexibility –Build Continuous Improvement Program from day one –Build capability in mission for progressive autonomy –Many mission lessons learned occur shortly before launch and during early operations –Need capability to install autonomy as operations staff learns how mission needs to run