BrandWikiReturn

Asteroid Redirect Mission

Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM), also known as the Asteroid Retrieval and Utilization (ARU) mission and the Asteroid Initiative, was a space mission proposed by NASA in 2013; the mission was later cancelled. The Asteroid Retrieval Robotic Mission (ARRM) spacecraft would have rendezvoused with a large near-Earth asteroid and used robotic arms with anchoring grippers to retrieve a 4-meter boulder from the asteroid and bring it to lunar orbit.

The spacecraft would have characterized the asteroid and demonstrated at least one planetary defense technique before transporting the boulder to a stable lunar orbit, where it could have been further analyzed both by robotic probes and by a future crewed mission, Asteroid Redirect Crewed Mission (ARCM).[1] If funded, the mission would have launched in December 2021, with the additional objectives to test a number of new capabilities needed for future human expeditions to deep space, including advanced ion thrusters.[2]

The proposed 2018 NASA budget called for its cancellation, the mission was given its notice of defunding in April 2017,[3] and NASA announced the "close out" on June 13, 2017.[3] Key technologies being developed for ARM have continued, especially the ion thruster propulsion system that would have been flown on the robotic mission.

Objectives

The main objective of the Asteroid Redirect Mission was to develop deep space exploration capabilities needed in preparation for a human mission to Mars and other Solar System destinations[4][5] per NASA's Journey to Mars flexible pathways.[6][7][8][9][10]

Mars precursor

Slow cargo missions by space tugs for Mars logistics could reduce costs by as much as 60% (if using advanced solar electric propulsion (ion engines)[11]) and reduce overall mission risk by enabling on-site check-out of critical systems before the crew departs by quicker transport.[4][9][6][12][13][14]

Not only could the solar electric propulsion technologies and designs be applied to future missions, but the ARRM spacecraft could be left in a stable orbit for reuse.[4][6][9] The project baselined multiple refueling capabilities; the asteroid-specific payload would have been at one end of the bus for possible removal and replacement via future servicing or as a separable spacecraft, leaving a qualified space tug in cislunar space.[5][7][15][16][17]

Expanded and sustainable deep space operations

The robotic and crewed missions would have demonstrated capabilities past Earth orbit, yet within a few days' return contingency.[18] Lunar Distant Retrograde Orbit (DRO) encompassing Earth-Moon L1 and L2, is essentially a node for Earth system escape and capture.[9][19][20][21] This is more so if an Exploration Augmentation Module (EAM) is brought for extended human stays, possibly by an ARRM-like SEP module.[4][6][9] On its return leg from Mars, a human mission may save tons in mass by capturing into DRO and transferring to a parked Orion for Earth return and re-entry.[10]

Additional objectives

A secondary objective was to develop the required technology to bring a small near-Earth asteroid into lunar orbit – "the asteroid was a bonus."[10] There, it could've been analyzed by the crew of the Orion EM-5 or EM-6 ARCM mission in 2026.[22]

Additional mission aims included demonstrating planetary defense techniques able to protect the Earth in the future – such as using robotic spacecraft to deflect potentially hazardous asteroids.[23][24] Under consideration for deflecting an asteroid were: grabbing the asteroid and directly moving it, as well as employing gravity tractor techniques after collecting a boulder from its surface to increase mass ("enhanced gravity tractor").

The mission would have also tested the performance of advanced solar electric propulsion (ion engines)[11] and broad-band laser communication in space. These new technologies could help send the large amounts of cargo, habitats, and propellant to Mars in advance of a human mission to Mars and/or Phobos.

Spacecraft overview

The vehicle would land on a large asteroid and grippers on the end of the robotic arms would grasp and secure a boulder from the surface of a large asteroid. The grippers would dig into the boulder and create a strong grip. An integrated drill would be used to provide final anchoring of the boulder to the capture mechanism. Once the boulder is secured, the legs would push off and provide an initial ascent without the use of thrusters.[23][38]

Propulsion

The spacecraft would be propelled by advanced solar electric propulsion (SEP) (possibly a Hall-effect thruster, a type of ion thruster). Electricity would be provided by high efficiency UltraFlex-style solar panels (50 kW).[11][39]

The advanced ion engine uses 10% of the propellant required by equivalent chemical rockets, it can process three times the power of previous designs, and increase efficiency by 50%.[40] It would use the Hall effect, which provides low acceleration but can fire continuously for many years to thrust a large mass to high speed.[11] Hall effect thrusters trap electrons in a magnetic field and use them to ionize the onboard xenon gas propellant. The magnetic field also generates an electric field that accelerates the charged ions creating an exhaust plume of plasma that pushes the spacecraft forward.[40] The spacecraft concept would have a dry mass of 5.5 tons, and could store up to 13 tons of xenon propellant.

Each thruster would have a 30- to 50-kilowatt power level,[41] and several thrusters can be combined to increase the power of an SEP spacecraft. This engine, which is scalable to 300 kilowatts and beyond, is being researched and developed by Northrop Grumman with Sandia National Laboratories and the University of Michigan.[42] NASA Glenn Research Center is managing the project.[42]

Even at a destination, the SEP system can be configured to provide power to maintain the systems or prevent propellant boil-off before the crew arrives.[4][43] However, existing flight-qualified solar-electric propulsion is at levels of 1–5 kW. A Mars cargo mission would require ~100 kW, and a crewed flight ~150–300 kW.[4][9]

Proposed timeline

Originally planned for 2017, then 2020,[24] and then for December 2021.[44] The mission was given its notice of defunding in April 2017.[3] The launch vehicle would have been either a Delta IV Heavy, SLS or Falcon Heavy. The boulder would have arrived in lunar orbit by late 2025.

Target asteroid

By October 2017, there were 16,950 known near-Earth asteroids,[45] having been discovered by various search teams and catalogued as potentially hazardous objects. By early 2017 NASA had yet to select a target for ARM, but for planning and simulation purposes, the near-Earth asteroid was used as an example for the spacecraft to pick up a single 4 m boulder from it.[23] Other candidate parent asteroids were Itokawa, Bennu, and Ryugu.[46]

The carbonaceous boulder that would have been captured by the mission (maximum 6 meter diameter, 20 tons)[47] is too small to harm the Earth because it would burn up in the atmosphere. Redirecting the asteroid mass to a distant retrograde orbit around the Moon would ensure it could not hit Earth and also leave it in a stable orbit for future studies.

History

NASA Administrator Robert Frosch testified to Congress on "asteroid retrieval to Earth" in July 1980. However, he stated that it was infeasible at the time.[48][49]

The ARU mission, excluding any human missions to an asteroid which it may enable, was the subject of a feasibility study in 2012 by the Keck Institute for Space Studies.[50] The mission cost was estimated by the Glenn Research Center at about $2.6 billion,[51] of which $105 million was funded in 2014 to mature the concept.[52][53] NASA officials emphasized that ARM was intended as one step in the long-term plans for a human mission to Mars.[54]

The two options studied to retrieve a small asteroid were Option A and Option B. Option A would deploy a large 50 ft capture bag capable of holding a small asteroid up to 8 m in diameter,[11] and a mass of up to 500 tons.[52] Option B, which was selected in March 2015, would have the vehicle land on a large asteroid and deploy robotic arms to lift up a boulder up to 4 m in diameter from the surface, transport it and place it into lunar orbit.[23][55] This option was identified as more relevant to future rendezvous, autonomous docking, lander, sampler, planetary defense, mining, and spacecraft servicing technologies.[56][57]

The crewed portion to retrieve asteroid samples from the Moon orbit (Orion EM-3) was criticized as an unnecessary part of the mission with claims that thousands of meteorites have already been analyzed[58] and that the technology used to retrieve one boulder does not help develop a crewed mission to Mars.[54] The plans were not changed despite the NASA Advisory Council suggested on April 10, 2015 that NASA should not carry out its plans for ARM, and should instead develop solar electric propulsion and use it to power a spacecraft on a round-trip flight to Mars.[59]

In January 2016 contracts were awarded by NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) for design studies for a solar electric propulsion-based spacecraft. The robotic ARRM mission would have been the first phase of ARM. The contracts were won by Lockheed Martin Space Systems, Littleton, Colorado; Boeing Phantom Works, Huntington Beach, California; Orbital ATK, Dulles, Virginia; and Space Systems/Loral, Palo Alto, California.[60]

In May 2016, ASI (the Italian Space Agency) agreed to a joint study, and possible Italian participation.[61]

Under the 2018 NASA budget proposed by the Trump administration in March 2017, this mission was cancelled in favor of the Artemis program.[62] On June 13, 2017 NASA announced a "closeout phase" following the defund.[3] NASA has emphasized that key technologies being developed for ARM will continue, especially the solar electric propulsion system, which would have been flown on the robotic mission, which will be used on the Lunar Gateway as the Power and Propulsion Element.[3][63]

See also

External links

References

  1. Mike Wall. Inside NASA's Plan to Catch an Asteroid (Bruce Willis Not Required) Space.com, April 10, 2013, retrieved April 10, 2013^
  2. DC Agle. NASA Associate Administrator on Asteroid Initiative JPL, April 10, 2013, retrieved 2015-03-29^
  3. Jeff Foust. NASA closing out Asteroid Redirect Mission Space News, June 14, 2017, retrieved September 9, 2017^
  4. J. Cassady, K. Maliga, S. Overton, T. Martin, S. Sanders, C. Joyner, T. Kokam, M. Tantardini. Next Steps in the Evolvable Path to Mars Proceedings of the IAC, 2015^
  5. D. Mazanek. The Asteroid Redirect Mission May 20, 2016^
  6. P. Troutman. The Evolvable Mars Campaign: the Moons of Mars as a Destination July 30, 2014^
  7. Michele Gates, Dan Mazanek. Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM) Lunar and Planetary Institute, June 28, 2016^
  8. John R. Brophy, Louis Friedman, Nathan J. Strange, Thomas A. Prince, Damon Landau, Thomas Jones, Russell Schweickart, Chris Lewicki. Synergies of Robotic Asteroid Redirection Technologies and Human Space Exploration International Astronautical Federation, October 2, 2014^
  9. D. Craig. Evolvable Mars Campaign June 10, 2015^
  10. M. Elvis. ARM and the Mars Forward NASA August 11, 2014^
  11. Karl Tate. How to Catch an Asteroid: NASA Mission Explained (Infographic) Space.com, 2013-04-10, retrieved 2015-03-26^
  12. E. Howell. Human Mars Plan: Phobos by 2033, Martian Surface by 2039? space.com, May 8, 2015, retrieved October 9, 2016^
  13. T. McElratht, J. Elliott. There and Back again: Using planet-based SEP tugs to repeatably aid interplanetary payloads Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, Jan 2014^
  14. Humphrey W. Price, Ryan Woolley, Nathan J. Strange, John D. Baker. AIAA SPACE 2014 Conference and Exposition 2014^
  15. Enhanced Gravity Tractor Technique for Planetary Defense IAA-PDC, April 13, 2015^
  16. NASA RFI: Spacecraft Bus Concepts to Support the ARM and In-Space Robotic Servicing- Section "Separable Spacecraft Architecture ARRM Concept"^
  17. Will April, 2020 be the last month on this earth? NASA told the whole truth retrieved March 20, 2020^
  18. C. Moore. Technology development for NASA's asteroid redirect mission Jan 2014^
  19. David Conte, Marilena Di Carlo, Koki Ho, David B. Spencer, Massimiliano Vasile. Earth-Mars Transfer through Moon Distant Retrograde Orbits Acta Astronautica, August 28, 2015^
  20. S. Gong, J. Li. Asteroid Capture Using Lunar Flyby Advances in Space Research, September 1, 2015^
  21. Jacob Englander, Matthew A. Vavrina, Bo J. Naasz, Raymond G. Merrill, Min Qu. Mars, Phobos, and Deimos Sample Return Enabled by ARRM Alternative Trade Study Spacecraft AIAA, August 2014^
  22. How Will NASA's Asteroid Redirect Mission Help Humans Reach Mars?. NASA, June 27, 2014.^
  23. Jeff Foust. NASA Selects Boulder Option for Asteroid Redirect Mission SpaceNews, March 25, 2015, retrieved 2015-03-27^
  24. NASA Announces Next Steps on Journey to Mars: Progress on Asteroid Initiative NASA, March 25, 2015, retrieved March 25, 2015^
  25. Kathleen C. Laurini and Michele M. Gates, "NASA's Space Exploration Planning: the Asteroid Mission and the Step Wise Path to Mars", 65th International Astronautical Congress, Toronto, Canada, Sept–Oct. 2014. This paper (and related papers from the 65 IAC) can be found on the NASA page Asteroid Initiative Related Documents (accessed January 5, 2014)^
  26. Bamsey, M. Investigation of a Phobos Sample Return Mission retrieved 2016-09-14^
  27. S. Hoffman. A Phobos-Deimos Mission as an Element of the NASA Mars Design Reference Architecture 5.0 Second International Conference on the Exploration of Phobos and Deimos 2011^
  28. N. Strange, R. Merrill. Human Missions to Phobos and Deimos Using Combined Chemical and Solar Electric Propulsion 47th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit^
  29. Human Mars Plan: Phobos by 2033, Martian Surface by 2039? Space.com, May 8, 2015, retrieved 2016-09-14^
  30. Matthew Duggan. The Path to Mars December 2015, retrieved 2016-09-14^
  31. Mars Base Camp retrieved 2016-09-14^
  32. Emerging Capabilities for the Next Mars Orbiter retrieved 2016-09-14^
  33. The New Orbit-first Consensus retrieved 2016-09-14^
  34. P. Lee, C. Hoftun. Phobos and Deimos: Robotic Exploration in Advance of Humans to Mars Orbit Concepts and Approaches for Mars Exploration 2012, 2012^
  35. H. Price, J. Baker. Human Missions to Mars Orbit, Phobos, and Mars Surface Using 100-kWe-Class Solar Electric Propulsion AIAA Space 2014 Conference and Expo Proceedings^
  36. T. Percy, M. McGuire. Combining Solar Electric Propulsion and Chemical Propulsion for Crewed Missions to Mars NTRS 20150006952^
  37. Asteroid Retrieval Feasibility Study Keck Institute for Space Studies, California Institute of Technology, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 2012-04-12^
  38. NASA YouTube video:ARM, 'Option B': Boulder collection from a large asteroid.^
  39. Advanced Solar Arrays: Powering Exploration. NASA.^
  40. Hall Thruster Research: Propelling Deep Space Missions SpaceRef, March 31, 2015, retrieved 2015-03-31^
  41. Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP). NASA.^
  42. Mary Blake. Northrop Grumman Tapped by NASA to Develop Solar Electric Propulsion Flight Concepts for Future Space Missions Northrop Grumman Corporation, January 31, 2012, retrieved 2015-03-31^
  43. Why ARM? 2015-01-21, retrieved October 9, 2016^
  44. Jeff Foust. NASA slips schedule of Asteroid Redirect Mission SpaceNews, March 3, 2016, retrieved March 6, 2016^
  45. Near-Earth Asteroid Discovery Statistics NASA/JPL CNEOS, October 25, 2017, retrieved 2017-10-29^
  46. Michele Gates. Asteroid Redirect Mission Update NASA, July 28, 2015, retrieved 2015-09-06^
  47. NASA Calls for American Industry Ideas on ARM Spacecraft Development SpaceRef, October 22, 2015, retrieved 2015-10-23^
  48. H. Rept. 114–153 - SPACE RESOURCE EXPLORATION AND UTILIZATION ACT OF 2015 retrieved 2016-10-02^
  49. Human Asteroid Exploration: The Long And Storied Path April 17, 2013, retrieved 2016-09-14^
  50. John Brophy, Fred Culick, Louis Friedman and al. Asteroid Retrieval Feasibility Study Keck Institute for Space Studies, California Institute of Technology, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, April 12, 2012^
  51. NASA Solar System Exploration, Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM) (accessed September 30, 2014)^
  52. Tariq Malik. Obama Seeks $17.7 Billion for NASA to Lasso Asteroid, Explore Space Space.com, March 27, 2015, retrieved April 10, 2013^
  53. NASA 2014 budget proposal on ARU mission. (PDF)^
  54. Jeff Foust. NASA's Choice for Asteroid Redirect Mission May Not Sway Skeptics SpaceNews, March 27, 2015, retrieved 2015-03-28^
  55. Erin Mahoney. What Is NASA's Asteroid Redirect Mission? NASA.GOV, NASA, retrieved July 6, 2014^
  56. D Steitz. NASA seeks additional information for asteroid redirect mission spacecraft phys.org, retrieved October 10, 2015^
  57. R. Ticker. NASA's In-Space Robotic Servicing Proceedings, AIAA SPACE 2015 Conference and Exposition, Aug 2015^
  58. Loren Grush. Everyone Hates NASA's Asteroid Capture Program Popular Science, August 7, 2014, retrieved 2015-03-27^
  59. Staff. News from the 31st Space Symposium: Bolden Not Concerned About ARM Criticism SpaceNews, April 13, 2015, retrieved 2015-04-15^
  60. Companies Selected to Provide Early Design Work for Asteroid Redirect Robotic Mission Spacecraft NASA, 2016-01-27, retrieved January 30, 2016^
  61. Asteroid Redirect Mission: robotic collaboration between NASA and ASI retrieved 2016-09-14^
  62. William Harwood. Trump budget blueprint focuses on deep space exploration, commercial partnerships Spaceflight Now, March 16, 2017, retrieved March 17, 2017^
  63. NASA closing out Asteroid Redirect Mission SpaceNews.com, 2017-06-14, retrieved 30 May 2019^