4.6 Article

The road to on-board crew autonomy: Using ISS' Columbus module as the basis for ground procedure automation4.,4.4.

期刊

ACTA ASTRONAUTICA
卷 213, 期 -, 页码 603-613

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.actaastro.2023.09.024

关键词

Human spaceflight; Spacecraft operations; Crew autonomy; Command interface; Procedure execution; Ground tools

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Future exploration missions require new concepts of operations to achieve autonomy and independence from ground control. This paper introduces a novel tool based on Columbus operations, allowing for the automatic generation, inspection, approval, and execution of command sequences to enable increased crew autonomy and on-board operations.
Future human exploration missions require new concepts of operations since the international roadmap foresees stations with uncrewed periods (e.g. Lunar Gateway) and deep space missions with communication delays making real-time monitoring and control impossible (e.g. any vehicle on its way to or in orbit of Mars). As part of the commitment to achieve human presence in lunar orbit and prepare for missions to Mars, the goal for future operations is to become independent from ground and enable crews to live and work autonomously. However, as a first step towards on-board crew autonomy, the ground segment itself needs to be automated and its functions eventually transferred on-board. For this purpose, this paper introduces a novel tool, based on Columbus operations, conducted at the Columbus Control Center (COL-CC), allowing the interaction between scheduled activities and the commanding infrastructure, by automatically generating a command sequence, transferring the command sequence to the operators' command interface for inspection and approval, and finally sending the commands to the receiver for execution. This tool is implemented as a ground prototype, in order to show how ground operations can be automated and how such a tool can ultimately lead to increased crew autonomy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据