AD1 High Level Requirements Final Issue 6

8/8/2019 AD1 High Level Requirements Final Issue 6

1/47

document title/ titre du document

IGH EVEL RCHITECTUREEQUIREMENTS FORUROPEAN PACE

XPLORATION

prepared by/prpar par William Carey

reference/rference HME-HS/STU/RQ/BC/2007-05001

issue/dition 6

date of issue/date ddition 12 April 2008

status/tat Final

Document type/type de document RQ

Distribution/distribution HME-HS

a

ESTEC

Keplerlaan 1 - 2201 AZ Noordwijk - The Netherlands

Tel. +31 71 565 5404 - Fax +31 71 565 4499


2/47

High-Level Architecture Requirements for European Space Exploration

HME-HS/STU/RQ/BC/2007-05001

Final Issue 6

page ii

A P P R O V A LTitle

titre

High-Level Architecture Requirements for European SpaceExploration

issue

issue

Author

auteur

William Carey date

date

12 April 2008

approved by

approuv by

Bernhard Hufenbach date

date

12 April 2008

C H A N G E L O Greason for change /raison du changement issue/issue date/date

First release 1 (Draft A) 1 February 2007

Second release 2 (Draft A) 12 June 2007

Third release 3 (Draft A) 18 July 2007

Fourth release 4 (Final) 17 August 2007

Fifth release

Sixth release

5 (Draft)

6 (Final)

12 December2007

12 April 2008


3/47



Final Issue 6

page iii

C H A N G E R E C O R DISSUE:6

reason for change/raison du changement page(s)/page(s) paragraph(s)/paragraph(s)

Minor editorial modifications to Introductionchapter

all -

Inclusion of new chapter on ESA GenericRequirements (Chapter 2)

7 - 9 All

Updating of Generic Requirements andAssociated Objectives (Chapter 3)

10 - 12 All

Updating of Moon Requirements and AssociatedObjectives (Chapter 5)

13 - 19 All

Updating of following sections following RIDreview of complete document:

Section 1.2.1/ 2-3Section 1.2.2/4Section 1.3.1/6Sections 2, 3, 5/9-27

All

Addition of requirements for LEO, NEOs, LPsand Mars

Updating of following sections following RIDreview of complete document:

Sections 6, 7 and 8

Sections 1.5, 2.1, 4.2, 7.1,7.3, 8.1, 8.3, 8.4

All

All


4/47



Final Issue 6

page iv

T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S

1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................11.1 Purpose .............................................................................................................................11.2 Scope.................................................................................................................................1

1.2.1 Themes.......................................................................................................................2 1.2.2 Political Framework Scenarios....................................................................................41.2.3 Exploration Timescale ................................................................................................6

1.3 Applicable & Reference Documents ..................................................................................61.3.1 Applicable Documents ................................................................................................61.3.2 Reference Documents ................................................................................................61.3.3

References .................................................................................................................6

1.4 Definition of Terms.............................................................................................................61.5 Acronyms & Abbreviations.................................................................................................71.6 Document Structure...........................................................................................................8

2 ESA GENERIC REQUIREMENTS .......................................................................92.1 Safety and Mission Success..............................................................................................92.2 Planetary Protection.........................................................................................................112.3 Robustness......................................................................................................................11 2.4 Redundancy.....................................................................................................................12 2.5 European Assets .............................................................................................................132.6 Roadmap .........................................................................................................................13


5/47



Final Issue 6

page v

2.7 Cost .................................................................................................................................132.8 Stakeholder Management................................................................................................142.9 European Industry ...........................................................................................................142.10 Innovation ........................................................................................................................14

3 GENERIC REQUIREMENTS .............................................................................153.1 Associated Exploration Objectives...................................................................................19

4 LOW EARTH ORBIT..........................................................................................214.1 Robotic Orbital Operations...............................................................................................214.2 Human Orbital..................................................................................................................214.3 Robotic Surface ...............................................................................................................214.4 Human Surface................................................................................................................21

5 MOON ................................................................................................................225.1 Moon Generic ..................................................................................................................22

5.1.1 Associated Objectives ..............................................................................................225.2 Robotic Orbital Operations...............................................................................................23

5.2.1 Associated Exploration Objectives............................................................................245.3 Human Orbital Operations ...............................................................................................255.4 Robotic Surface Operations.............................................................................................25

5.4.1 Associated Exploration Objectives............................................................................275.5 Human Surface Operations .............................................................................................28

5.5.1 Associated Exploration Objectives............................................................................296 LIBRATION (LAGRANGE) POINTS..................................................................30


6/47


7/47



Final Issue 6

page 1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose

The document contains the high-level architectural requirements derived from European space explorationobjectives that will be used for the analysis and development of European Reference Architectures forspace exploration. The exploration objectives are referred to in the document for information, and tofacilitate traceability between the high-level architectural requirements and their associated explorationobjectives.

1.2 Scope

Issue 6 of the document now includes high-level architecture requirements for Libration (Lagrange) Points,Near Earth Objects (NEOs) and Mars, in addition to the Moon. All of these requirements have been derivedfrom the exploration objectives coming from the stakeholder group communities consulted in the scenariostudies (i.e. scientific, economic/industrial and political respectively).

The document was a living document subject to change control, with planned updates as indicated in thetable below. All requirements were subject to critical review. Issue 6 is the final version of the document.

Planned Issue Planned Issue Release Date Expected Updates

Issue 2 12 June 2007 Insertion of draft requirementsfrom missing stakeholder groups

Issue 3 18 July 2007 Draft requirements for MoonArchitecture

Issue 4 17 August 2007 Finalised requirements for MoonArchitecture

Issue 5 13 December 2007 Draft requirements for LagrangePoints, Near Earth Objects andMars Architecture

Issue 6 Early March 2008 Finalised requirements forLagrange Points, Near EarthObjects and Mars Architecture

The document evaluates the European exploration objectives defined and elaborated in RD1 to assesswhich objectives address the same destination, may be combined in terms of similar capability requirementsand/or which may be performed at the same time. The objectives are grouped initially with respect toexploration target, i.e. where to go. From these grouped objectives, concrete and quantifiable stakeholder-driven architecture requirements have then been derived. The document serves as starting point for theanalysis of possible European architectures for space exploration.


8/47



Final Issue 6

page 2

1.2.1 THEMES

The overarching exploration themes (as defined and discussed in detail in RD1) are:

Scientific Themes:

1. Life and its co-evolution with its planetary environment: The origin and evolution oflife is very much dependent on the origin and evolution of the planetary system, in particularthe terrestrial planets. In addition, the reverse can be true i.e. life itself affects the evolutionof a planetary surface and atmosphere. This theme has the grand goal of understandingnot only both the origin and evolution of life and of the planetary system, but also theinteraction between the two.

2. Astronomical observatories on the Moon: To use the Moon to perform astronomicalobservations that are either impossible or at best severely degraded from other platforms(i.e. Earth or free-flyer).

3. Life sciences: This theme encompasses two sub-goals:

a. In order to enable human exploration, provisions must be made to maintain healthand to provide medical support. Still significant preparatory work is required todayin order to develop this core capability.

b. If human beings are involved in exploration missions, the outstanding opportunity toincrease general life science knowledge with more fundamental investigations willhave to be considered for any of the eventual targets.

Economic Themes:

1. Microgravity applied research: Secure long term European access (includingacceptable costs and supporting resources) to micro-gravity facilities in order to developinnovative techniques, technologies, and products (also to enable space exploration).

2. Entrepreneurial activities: Enable first the emergence of a space tourism industry inEurope, and ensure later the sustainability of permanent tourism and media andentertainment industry presence in space.

3. Space services: Offer opportunities for industry to provide elements to use the Moon(and possibly NEOs) as source of natural resources and industrial components, use outerspace specific areas as safe haven and operational hub, position in-space infrastructures,to support Space Exploration deployment and to make Space Exploration sustainable.

Political Themes:

1. European ambition: Make the European Union appear in the world as a unified actor inmajor undertakings of global value, associated with great power positioning. Demonstrateincreased European assertiveness on the international scene by conducting very visibleand ambitious space exploration and human spaceflight activities. Contribute to the drive ofEurope towards an independent strategic posture in foreign affairs and security matters,including autonomous initiatives and leadership of major strategic operations.

2. Lisbon agenda: Leverage two of the main space exploration and human spaceflightcharacteristics to support the goal of the EU Lisbon agenda, i.e. make Europe the most


9/47



Final Issue 6

page 3

competitive and the most dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world by 2020through

inspiration, education, research and innovation, and increase quality and quantity ofEuropean science and technology.

a. Scientific and technical challenges of ambitious space missions, fostering theinnovation process in Europe

b. Space visibility and attraction to young Europeans, fostering the development of abroader interest for science and technology at all levels of the education systemsand increasing the dynamism, the level of motivation and the personal interest ofEuropean students and scientists

Bring more European students towards scientific and engineering studies and careers, andprevent the vanishing of European scientific lifeblood and the brain drain towards theUSA. Increase and use, very exciting and science and technology noble spaceexploration domains, as an impetus to provide new opportunities for research and

innovation. This approach will attract foreign high-skilled scientists and investors.

3. Global partnership: Increase the European diplomatic, economic and scientificrelationships through the development of new or historical partnerships with the USA andemerging world powers, particularly the so-called BRIC nations: Brazil, Russia, India andChina. This goal includes contribution to:

c. The consolidation and deepening of a long-term fruitful strategic partnership withthe United States, in the framework of a balanced international cooperation.

d. The development of a multi-polar world taking fully into account the economic andstrategic rise of emerging international powers.


10/47



Final Issue 6

page 4

1.2.2 POLITICAL FRAMEWORK SCENARIOS

The definition of the European role in space exploration is ultimately a political decision. For supporting theanalysis process, three political framework scenarios have been developed representing differing levels ofEuropean ambition:

1. Europe as a Pragmatic Space Actor: This scenario represents basically the current realitywithin the European space programme. The European ambition in human spaceflight andexploration is limited to immediately valuable scientific, technical or commercial activities, generallywithin the framework of cooperative international programmes. European activities could focus onrobotic exploration. Its role for human spaceflight would be limited and may include the contributionof some specific capabilities and services to global space exploration effort selected on the basis ofEuropean heritage, overall innovation potential and international niches. The overall investments

over a 30 year programme would amount to ~ 5 % of what the United States intend to invest in thisdomain.

2. Europe as an Economic Space Power: This scenario represents basically the current realitywithin the overall European environment. Europe focuses on selected strategic priorities andinitiatives with a strong scientific and technological content and concentrates its activities in humanspaceflight on the provision of end-to-end services to the international community in domains whichare competitive or complementary to those of the other space powers. European activities couldinclude a strong robotic exploration programme addressing all destinations of interests includingMoon and Mars. Europe could participate to the development of new transportation capabilities forcrew and cargo to secure its sustained access to space at a more relevant level. In addition Europecould contribute end-to-end capabilities and services to international space exploration activitiese.g. in the domains navigation/transportation, logistics, in-space services, energy/resource

management, surface exploration (e.g. drilling/surface mobility) building on European scientific andtechnological core competences. The overall budget required would amount to ~ 10 % of whatNASA intents to invest over a 30 years time period (which would be similar to the ESA/NASAinvestment ratio in the ISS Programme). This would require doubling of related budget over a 30years time period with respect to what is currently projected.

3. Europe as a Political Space Power: This scenario represents basically a European ambitionwhich is shared at least by some European member states. Europe enlarges its strategic prioritiesin space to include human spaceflight and exploration and controls access and operations in theEarth-Moon-Mars space. European activities would include next to a strong European roboticexploration programme with European-led missions, a strong participation to the development ofnew capabilities to access space exploration destinations with crew and cargo compared to thesecond scenario. The overall human spaceflight programme would be driven by the ambition to

implement a European-led post-ISS human spaceflightscenariofully integrated in the global spaceexploration endeavor building on European scientific and technological core competences andresponding to European specific interests in space exploration. The overall budget required wouldamount to ~ 15 % of what NASA intents to invest over a 30 years time period. This would requiretripling of related budget over a 30 years time period with respect to what is currently projected.


11/47



Final Issue 6

page 5

The following table summarises the relationship between the stakeholder themes and the political

framework scenarios:

Themes Europe as PragmaticSpace Actor

Europe as EconomicSpace Power

Europe as PoliticalSpace Power

Life and its co-evolution with itsplanetary environment

Astronomicalobservatories on theMoon

Life sciences

Microgravity appliedresearch in space

Entrepreneurial basedactivities

Space services

European ambition

Lisbon agenda

Global partnership

The smaller stars in the table indicate that the theme is relevant for the particular political frameworkscenario, and the large star indicates those themes which are the main drivers for each scenario.


12/47



Final Issue 6

page 6

1.2.3 EXPLORATION TIMESCALE

Concerning the overall exploration timescale, the following dates are defined:

Near term: 2009 2018;

Medium term: 2019 2028;

Long term: 2029 2038.

1.3 Applicable & Reference Documents

1.3.1 APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS

1. ECSS-E-10-04-A Space Engineering Space environment.2. ESA-PSS-03-70 Human Factors.3. ESA-ECSS-Q-40B Space Product Assurance Safety.4. ESA/PB-HME (2007) 5.

1.3.2 REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

[RD1] European Space Exploration Objectives. Draft A, HME-HS/STU/RQ/WC/2007-03017. 17/07/2007.

1.3.3 REFERENCES

[R1] ESA Manned Spaceflight Human Factors Engineering Handbook [MS-ESA-HB-013].

[R2] ESA Planetary Protection Policy [ESA/PB-HME (2007) 5].See also http://cosparhq.cnes.fr/Scistr/Pppolicy.htm.

1.4 Definition of Terms

Deep Drilling: For the purposes of this document, deep drilling is considered to be adepth of greater than 10 m, and up to several tens of metres. 100 metresand greater is defined as Very Deep Drilling. The distinction is clarified inthe text.

European: European refers to the ESA membership, which consist of the 17 currentMember States and Canada as an Associate Member.

Near Earth Object (NEO): An asteroid or comet whose orbit brings it in close proximity (periheliondistance < 1.3 AU) to the orbit of the Earth, i.e. comes close to or crossesthe orbit of the Earth, and which could thus pose a collision danger. NEOsare readily accessible from Earth and are important not only scientificallybut also potentially for commercial exploitation. Some near-Earth asteroids
http://cosparhq.cnes.fr/Scistr/Pppolicy.htmhttp://cosparhq.cnes.fr/Scistr/Pppolicy.htm


13/47


14/47



Final Issue 6

page 8

TBC To be confirmed

TBD To be determinedTRL Technology Readiness LevelUS United StatesUSA United States of AmericaUV Ultra VioletW Watt

1.6 Document Structure

The top level structure of the five major chapters of this document is based on the exploration targets asdefined in RD1, i.e. Low Earth Orbit, Moon, Libration Points, Near Earth Objects and Mars.

Chapter 1: Introduction: This chapter summarises the purpose and scope of the High-Level ArchitectureRequirements document, together with a listing of the relevant applicable and reference documents,definition of terms, acronyms and abbreviations and document structure.

Chapters 2: This chapter contains generic requirements based on ESA internal guidelines and designpractices which are applicable to the architecture.

Chapters 3: Generic Requirements: This chapter contains those requirements which are applicable to thearchitecture, but are not destination-specific, i.e. are not specific to the Moon, Mars, etc.

Chapters 4-8: Each of the five main chapters has the following internal structure:

Architectural Requirements:The high-level architecture requirements derived from a preliminaryanalysis of the exploration objectives are then listed and grouped according to the followingclassification:

- Robotic orbital;- Human orbital;- Robotic surface;- Human surface.

Associated Objectives:The exploration objectives relevant to each requirement class are then listed.


15/47



Final Issue 6

page 9

2 ESA GENERIC REQUIREMENTS

This chapter contains generic high-level architecture requirements based on ESA internal guidelines anddesign practices which are applicable to the architecture.

NOTE: The requirements are in bold text with additional explanations or guidelines in italics theitalicised text is not part of the formal requirement, but is meant to clarify the requirement only.

2.1 Safety and Mission Success

The main aim here is to identify all possible safety hazards, to eliminate/control them to an acceptable levelduring all mission phases.

EGR1 The architecture human mission design activities shall comply with ESA-PSS-03-70Human Factors.

ESA-PSS-03-70 provides details concerning in particular maximum acceleration levels andradiation exposure for humans.

EGR23 The architecture shall comply with ESA-ECSS-Q-40B Space Product Assurance - Safety.

EGR2 Survival modes shall be provided through all human missions phases.

Survival modes can be provided through the following capabilities (but not limited to): abort,escape or use of safe haven, and rescue.

EGR3 The architecture shall separate crew and large cargo during ascent phases.

Note: Large cargo is to be understood in this instance as having a mass of more than 100 kg.However, it is recognised that this is a somewhat arbitrary figure. The intention here is that therequirement should not be interpreted literally, but as a general principle to be applied for theascent phases of missions.

EGR4 Space systems shall be designed so that no two failures result in human fatality orpermanent disability.

EGR5 Space systems shall not use emergency systems or emergency operations to satisfy thetwo-failure tolerance requirements.

The main objective of a human-survival-centred design is for the system to withstand criticalsystem failure with appropriate redundancy and robust design. The need for survival modesthrough emergency systems beyond this robust design (two-failure tolerant) is anacknowledgement that the space system cannot always be designed to anticipate and withstandall failure modes.


16/47


17/47



Final Issue 6

page 11

2.2 Planetary ProtectionEGR8 The architecture shall enforce planetary protection requirements as defined in the ESA

Planetary Protection Policy [ESA/PB-HME (2007) 5].

2.3 Robustness

EGR9 European exploration missions, or international missions with a significant Europeancontribution, shall have at least one back-up launch system.

EGR10 All major European infrastructure assets shall be able, at least in a back-up scenario, to be

launched and delivered to their final location, with European transportation systems, ortransportation systems in which Europe has a significant stake such as, but not limited to,design authority, components.

The above two requirements (EGR9, EGR10) reflect the ESA Launch Service Procurement Policythat has been adopted at the ministerial council in 2005 (Chapter IV of ESA/C-M/CLXXXV/Res.3(Final)). This policy shall apply to Exploration as far as possible. Major European infrastructureassets are exploration architecture elements in which Europe has a leading role and that arecritical to continuous operations.

EGR11 The number of launch and proximity operations for a given mission shall be restrictedwithin practical limits.

A practical limit on the maximum number of launch and proximity operations shall be establishedbased on parameters such as (but not limited to): launch pad availability and recycle duration,launcher reliability, rendezvous and docking systems reliability

EGR12 All systems shall be designed taking into account a margin policy function of theirmaturity level. The following mass margin will be used at equipment level:

5% for fully developed equipments (TRL 8 to 9), 10% for equipments to be modified (TRL 5 to 7), 20% for equipments to be developed (TRL 1 to 4).

Furthermore a system margin of 20% shall be applied on dry mass and a 5% margin shallbe applied on all delta-Vs to be performed.


18/47



Final Issue 6

page 12

2.4 RedundancyEGR13 The architecture shall ensure redundancy of safety critical architecture functions and

capabilities taking into account possible contributions from international partners.

EGR14 The architecture shall ensure redundancy of architecture functions and capabilities criticalfor operations of the Exploration programme key infrastructures taking into accountpossible contributions from international partners.

The particular functions or capabilities that necessitate redundancy are to be assessed laterdepending on architecture configuration. An example of critical functions is provided andhighlighted in light blue for illustrative purpose on the chart hereafter.

Capabilities

TransportationIn SpacePlanetarySurface

Ground-based

Habitation

Mobility

Power provision &Management

In-situ resource

utilisation

Logistic SupportServices

Food Production

Science/research

equipment

Robotic Assistance

Drilling

Construction

EVA Support

Others

Crew Launchers

Cargo Launchers

Crew and Cargo

ExplorationVechicles

Planetary DescentVehicles

Planetary AscentVehicles

Others

Control Centres

Test Facilities

Ground Tracking

Crew Training

Centres

Ground Based

Research Facilities/Analogue Sites

Data Archiving andDistribution

Other

Telecommunication

Navigation

Remote Sensing

Space Weather

Forecasting

Vehicle Servicing

In-orbit Assembly

Science/Research

Equipment

Rendezvous andDocking

Other


19/47



Final Issue 6

page 13

2.5 European AssetsEGR15 The architecture shall make use of European available competence, heritage, services and

planned Exploration projects.

2.6 Roadmap

EGR16 The architecture roadmap shall exploit mission opportunities for capability demonstration.

EGR17 The European architecture roadmap shall be coherent with the roadmaps of potentialinternational partners such as to allow cooperation.

2.7 Cost

EGR18 The architecture shall minimize the cost to benefits ratio over the programme life cyclethrough innovative approaches.

EGR19 The European contributions shall not exceed the ESA budget limitation depending on thescenario (Pragmatic, Economic, and Political) as defined in the following table.

Scenario PragmaticSpace Actor

(B*)

EconomicSpace Power

(B*)

Political SpacePower

(B*)

2009-2018 1.25 2.75 4.25

2019-2028 4.75 8.25 13.00

2029-2038 5.50 9.25 13.75

Total 11.50 20.25 31.00

(*) - Including human European transportation capabilities (e.g. CSTS), European participation to Mars Sample Returnmission, European post-ISS human spaceflight scenario.

- Excluding operations and utilisation of ISS until 2020, implementation of ExoMars mission and NEXT mission,launchers developments, communication infrastructure development, basic technology development, and nationalactivities.


20/47



Final Issue 6

page 14

2.8 Stakeholder ManagementThe following requirements aim at establishing a framework for the satisfaction of stakeholder objectives asdefined in [RD1]. The objective is to provide flexibility in meeting open objectives while focusing on clearand precise objectives as much as possible.

EGR20 The architecture should reflect political objectives.

EGR21 The architecture should meet science objectives as much as possible.

EGR22 The architecture should create opportunities for private sector engagement.

2.9 European Industry

EGR24 The architecture shall improve the world-wide competitiveness of European industry bymaintaining and developing space technology.

EGR25 The architecture shall sustain industry exploration related capabilities that have alreadybeen developed or are being developed.

EGR26 The architecture shall ensure a wide industrial participation especially concerning Smalland Medium Enterprises (SMEs).

2.10 Innovation

EGR27 The architecture shall propose innovative ways to reduce the mass to be lifted from Earth.


21/47



Final Issue 6

page 15

3 GENERIC REQUIREMENTSThis chapter contains those high-level architecture requirements which are applicable to the architecture,but are not destination-specific, i.e. are not specific to the Moon, Mars, etc.

NOTE: that the associated exploration objectives are indicated in the square brackets immediatelyfollowing each requirement.

NOTE: The high-level architecture requirements are in bold text with additional explanations orguidelines in italics the italicised text is not part of the formal requirement, but is meant to clarifythe requirement only.

GR1 The architecture shall secure human access for Europe to exploration destinations of

European interest. [P1, P2]

This objective is both ambitious, and in the line of historical European strategy for autonomy inspace transportation. It was part of the Ariane 5/Hermes/MTFF strategy of the 1980s, and is in linewith the objectives of the recently initiated Crew Space Transportation System preparatoryprogramme in cooperation with Russia. Additionally, having astronauts on the Moon is a loud andclear message of assertiveness for a country. It is the goal of the United States and probably ofChina in the 2010s. European astronauts on the Moon would be the most visible expression ofEuropean ambitions in space and in the world, particularly if Europe was playing a large role in thehuman transportation system with contribution to an alternative to the US system, which would addflexibility and robustness to international lunar efforts. Apart from lunar landing systems, suchcontributions could include transportation nodes in EML1 or LLO, and stations in SEL2.

GR2 The architecture shall incorporate innovative technologies for sustaining human life inspace. [P7]In spite of their long-time leadership in human spaceflight, the US have not focused on thesustainability of life in space, when this issue will be at the core of future human deep-spacemissions, including Moon settlements, distant outposts (Lagrange points, Moon and Mars orbits),long duration flights to Mars and beyond. This situation opens fascinating opportunities for Europe,which could take the international R&D lead on this very inspirational and challenging topic.

GR3 The architecture shall provide opportunities for the development of technologies forprotecting astronaut explorers and the planetary environment. [P8]

Preserving planetary surfaces environment is fast becoming a major concern in a global policy ofenvironment preservation and sustainable development. Planetary environment in this respect also

means protection of the Earth from contamination brought from space. Europe (e.g. COSPAR) hasa leading role in the definition and implementation of planetary protection guidelines.

GR4 The architecture shall exploit synergies between the Moon, NEO/LP and Mars architecture,particularly with respect to the demonstration of key capabilities for human missions, wherebeneficial to the overall programme. [P6]

Mars human missions are going to be the most visible and ambitious space activities of theforthcoming decades, up to 2050, with Mars human missions probably beginning in the 2030s.Stating firmly that Europe will play a leading role in this long-term undertaking and will engage earlyin technological developments are ways to express European ambitions in space in the 21

st

century, on a par with other great world powers. This preparation programme could include


22/47



Final Issue 6

page 16

precursor human missions in various places (EML1/L2, SEL2) and to Near Earth Asteroids (NEAs),

which would be interesting destinations by themselves.

GR5 The architecture shall provide opportunities for inclusion of small educational payloads.[P10, E12]

The value of inspiration is well documented with respect to the massive increase in students takingup science and engineering studies in the US following the Apollo Programme.In order to make Europe the top knowledge-based economy, students are extremely importantbecause they are the tomorrow lifeblood of Europe, and the next innovators. Exploration policyshould therefore emphasize academia direct and active participation. The ISS programme alreadyallocates 1% of its resources to academia, in order to allow students to perform scientific researchon the ISS. The Exploration programme could implement a similar scheme.Most educational payloads would be less than 10kg in mass and consume


23/47



Final Issue 6

page 17

GR6 The architecture shall maximise the utilisation of innovation in advanced technologies for

planetary surface activities. [P11]

Exploration of planetary surfaces is the most visible and important activity in robotic and humanspace missions. It requires mastering of very challenging technologies, which will attract the interestof young scientists and engineers, and foster the European innovation process. Controlling thesetechnologies will also be a way to secure a major role in international programmes. Of particularinterest to science would be an accurate in-situ dating technique, as current high accuracy methodsrequire irradiation of the sample at a synchrotron or nuclear facility.

Miniaturisation and improved accuracy are key to science technology and stepwise improvementsare continually being made. Of particular interest to science would be an accurate in-situ datingtechnique as current high accuracy methods require irradiation of the sample at a synchrotron ornuclear facility (see also requirement R3d).

GR7 The architecture shall facilitate international cooperation. [P12]

Whatever role Europe chose to play in space exploration and human spaceflight, Europe can andmust be a very active promoter of space multilateralism, supporting in the international bodiesinvolved collaborative approaches of the Systems of systems kind, very different from the currentISS integrated model (with a strong US leadership), giving each of the partners the possibility todevelop and operate its own systems in a flexible but interoperable global architecture.

GR8 The architecture shall provide opportunities for the participation of emerging space nations.[P13]

Recent space nations like China and India are very proud of their new capabilities and want thesecapabilities to be recognised by the more experienced space nations like the US, Russia andEurope. Participating in their projects and offering them attractive opportunities to become part ofour own projects is a sure way to improve the relationships with these countries, and to favour thediplomatic and economic exchanges with them. This approach could be extended to lessexperienced countries, such as Brazil, who are eager to expose their students and engineers toadvanced visible technologies.

GR9 Secure long term European access to applied research facilities in the microgravityenvironment (including assuring acceptable cost and supporting resources). [E1]

Europe already has a long history of fundamental and applied research on various low-gravityplatforms (e.g. drop towers, zero-g flights, sounding rockets, Shuttle, Foton, and the ISS). In order

to provide the already extensive research community with a stable perspective of future researchopportunities, it is necessary that the architectural design incorporates access to applied researchfacilities, together with supporting resources, in a cost-efficient manner. (See Science perspectivesfor ESAs Future Programme in Life and Physical Sciences in Space, ESF-ESSC, 2005).

GR10 The architecture shall facilitate the emergence and sustainability of entrepreneurialactivities. [E2, E3]

In order to facilitate the introduction of entrepreneurial activities in Europe, the architectural designshould offer opportunities for commercial activities to develop and to achieve long-termsustainability. Examples of such activities would be space tourism, media and entertainment,sports/competitions, etc.


24/47



Final Issue 6

page 18

GR11 The architecture shall reduce dependency on supplies from Earth by utilisation of in-situ

resources. [E6]

The architectural design should attempt to ensure the optimum utilisation of in-situ resources,especially with respect to:

Transportation.

Life support and sustainability. Construction. Energy management.

The gravity well of the Earth and the air-braking effect means that 96% of the energy required to getto the Moon is required in order to go from the Earths surface to LEO. Consequently, for thesustainable exploration of space, it is necessary to utilise as much as possible natural lunarresources and their derivatives, i.e. water, propellants, etc.

GR12 The architecture shall facilitate the emergence and sustainability of commercial services.[E7]

The architectural design should offer opportunities for the development of commercial activities inareas such as:

Communication and navigation;

Cargo transport; Propellant and power supply; Life systems resources supply (e.g. oxygen, etc.), and others.

GR13 The architecture shall foresee human/robotic assembly and servicing operations on largehigh-value space assets in outer space. [E9]

The architectural design should ensure capabilities for human/robotic assembly and servicingoperations on large high-value space assets in outer space. Such large space assets could include:

Orbital infrastructures: e.g. manned and unmanned platforms for microgravity and lifescience research, modules (to be assembled), fuel depots, platforms for tourism and mediaactivities;

Next generation telescopes; Satellites and orbiters (e.g. for communication and navigation).

The assembly and service operations could take place e.g. LEO (e.g. ISS), LLO, EML1 and SEL2.

GR14 The architecture shall enable opportunities for the transfer or spin-off of innovativetechnologies to non-space sectors. [E10, E11]

As one of the most innovative economic sectors, space has a high potential to provide beneficialtechnology transfer and spin-offs of innovative technologies to non-space sectors.

GR15 The architecture shall provide opportunities for demonstrating MSR technologies. [P4]

The leadership in this very ambitious robotic mission would show the excellence of European spaceprojects management and technologies. It is considered as an obligatory precursor for later human


25/47



Final Issue 6

page 19

Mars missions. This mission would include different major sub-systems/vehicles, and is very well

adapted to a large-scale cooperation scheme.

GR16 The architecture shall provide opportunities for Europe to play a lead role in deep spacecommunications and navigation. [P9]

Space communication and navigation systems are crucial infrastructures elements for robotic anhuman space exploration, which could leverage existing European capabilities (Galileo, commercialtelecommunication systems) and provide an additional source of innovation for European spaceindustry.

GR17 The architecture shall enable opportunities for education and cultural involvement in spaceactivities. [E12]

In the space age, the involvement of educational and cultural institutions in space activities is part ofsocietys development. The architecture should therefore facilitate opportunities for suchinvolvement.

MGR1 The architecture shall ensure that Europe takes a lead role in those areas of lunar scientificexploration which Europe has identified as priority areas. [P5]

The European priority areas as defined by the science stakeholder community are:

Life and life factories, planetary geosciences, lunar observatories, life sciences.

The European science communities and agencies independently define their own scientific prioritiesfor the Moon and Mars, and engage in ambitious missions in the chosen areas, open tointernational cooperation, but with a clear European leadership.

R2a The architecture shall enable opportunities for performing life sciences activities inpreparation for long-term space missions. [S35]

Preparatory life sciences activities are mandatory in order to prepare fully for long-term spacemissions, especially for a human mission to Mars.

NOTE: This requirement has been moved from section 5.3.

3.1 Associated Exploration Objectives

Theme Exploration Objective

Life sciences S35 - To ensure human health and performance.

P1 - Secure European astronauts presence in cis-lunar space and on the Moon.

P2 - Secure autonomous human transport to outer space.

P4 Lead International Mars Sample Return mission.

EuropeanAmbition

P5 - Lead international exploration missions of Moon and Mars in European scientific priorityareas.


26/47



Final Issue 6

page 20

P6 Prepare to be a major player in Mars missions.

P7 - Be the key innovator for sustaining human life in space.

P8 - Develop enabling technology for protecting the planetary environment.

P9 - Play a lead role in deep space communications and navigation.

Lisbon Agenda

P10 - Support academia exploration activities.

P11 - Be the key innovator for advanced technologies for planetary surface activities.

P12 - Lead the international coordination process.

GlobalPartnership

P13- Support participation of emerging space nations in space exploration activities.

MicrogravityAppliedResearch

E1- Secure long term European access to applied research facilities in microgravity (includingassuring acceptable cost and supporting resources).

E2 Enable the emergence of a space tourism industry in Europe.EntrepreneurialActivities

E3 Ensure sustainability of permanent tourist, media and entertainment industry presence inspace.

E5 DELETED (now combined with E6).

E6 Develop and implement production and processing capabilities related to spaceresources utilisation (e.g. propellant production, green houses, power plants, industrialcomponent production).

E7 Provide opportunities forcommercial services.

E8 DELETED (now combined with E9).

E9 Enable routine human/robotic assembly and servicing operations on large high valuespace assets (e.g. ISS, space telescopes) in outer space.

E10 Stimulate the beneficial and commercial uses or adaptations of space technologies fornon-space applications.

E11 Encourage the creation of new start-up companies to exploit innovative technologies.

Space Services

E12 Enable the involvement of educational and cultural institutions in space activities.


27/47



Final Issue 6

page 21

4 LOW EARTH ORBITThis chapter contains those high-level architecture requirements which are applicable to Low Earth Orbit.


4.1 Robotic Orbital Operations

No specific requirements for this section have been identified. However, chapter 3 contains generic

requirements which would be applicable to this section.

4.2 Human Orbital

R8a The architecture shall provide opportunities for regular flights of European astronauts to theISS (or similar LEO orbital infrastructure) beyond 2016.

In order to maintain a suitable qualified astronaut corps beyond 2016, it will be necessary to haveopportunities for European astronauts to have regular flight opportunities. The most suitabledestination in the short term is LEO. For future human exploration of the Moon and Mars, it is likelythat the required competences will be more operational than scientific, so activities other than

scientific research should be envisaged, and oriented towards learning skills as opposed to taskfulfillment.

R8b The architecture shall provide opportunities for performing research activities in LEObeyond 2016.

NASA currently foresees to terminate its utilisation of the ISS by 2016, to then concentrate onARES/Orion and exploration of the Moon, with a proposed initial human landing on the lunarsurface around 2020-2022. Opportunities to extend the research utilisation of the ISS, and inparticular the Columbus Laboratory, beyond the year 2016, should be considered in the architecturedefinition.

4.3 Robotic SurfaceNot applicable for LEO.

4.4 Human Surface

Not applicable for LEO.


28/47



Final Issue 6

page 22

5 MOONThis chapter contains those high-level architecture requirements which are applicable to lunar architecture.



5.1 Moon GenericMGR1 This requirement has been moved to the Generic Requirements chapter (i.e. Chapter 3).

MGR2 The architecture shall perform a mapping of lunar resources. [E4]

The gravity well of the Earth and the air-braking effect means that 96% of the energy required to getto the Moon is required in order to go from the Earths surface to LEO. Consequently, for thesustainable exploration of space, it is necessary to utilise as much as possible natural lunarresources and their derivatives, i.e. water, propellants, etc.

MGR3 The architecture shall provide the capability to transport a medium cargo payload to anylocation on the lunar surface. [P3]

Soft and precise landing of 2 tonne payloads in any lunar location would be extremely useful forrobotic and human missions. It could give Europe a significant role in lunar scientific and economicstudies at the international level, and demonstrate European capabilities in deep space automatictransportation.

5.1.1 ASSOCIATED OBJECTIVES

Theme Objective

European Ambition P3 Transport medium cargo payload to any place on the Moon.

Space Services E4- Perform mapping of Moon resources.


29/47



Final Issue 6

page 23

5.2 Robotic Orbital OperationsR1a The architecture shall place a scientific payload in LLO to investigate the lunar dust

environment. [S22, S24] see note below in text

Observations and models suggest a dust atmosphere extending up to around 80 km altitude. Thisdust may cause problems for lunar observatories and in addition, surface dust may effectExploration equipment and also possibly astronaut health.

The scientific objective here is to characterise the dust environment per se, together with a morepractical characterisation of the dust and its effect on exposed equipment and human surfaceoperations. It is important that the environment is observed prior to making any astronomicalobservations from the lunar surface, and in any case before any long-term human presence is

established on the surface.

From the science perspective, the minimum observation should be at least 1 lunar day, medium 1year and maximum around 5 years. These data would allow investigation of potential diurnal andannual variations that may occur.

Continuous monitoring of the dust environment could also be considered, in order to determine theeffect on the dust environment from robotic and human surface operations, and of course viceversa. In this case, the deployment of a scientific payload with a similar functionality on the lunarsurface could be implemented (e.g. a nethelometer). NOTE: Requirement R3e has been deletedfrom section 5.4 robotic surface operations.

One approach would be to use a relatively simple camera/telescope instrument to image scattered

sunlight from the dust particles in the atmosphere. The dust is anticipated to be in the 0.01 1micron size range. Multiple wavelength and polarimetry capabilities would allow the mapping ofdifferent size dust particles as a function of altitude.

Note:The scientific payload to measure the dust environment could be replaced or combined withmagnetometer measurements to investigate remnant magnetism on the lunar surface. Mapping oflunar magnetism has been performed in the past (resolution of ~100 km), but the intention herewould be to map to ~10 km or better. The eventual aim would be to map 100% of the lunar surface.

R1b The architecture shall place a scientific payload in LLO to perform high resolution altimetryof lunar craters. [S23]

The moon is practically saturated with craters of many sizes and types (these types fall into 6 broadcategories). This provides an opportunity to investigate this universal solar system process andcompare the results with theoretical models.

A high-resolution stereo camera could be used to perform the lunar crater altimetry, e.g. similar tothe Mars Express High Resolution Stereo Camera (HRSC), although a much simpler instrumentthan the HSRC could be envisaged.

Significant extra scientific benefit may be achieved by the inclusion of a ground penetrating radarinstrument for global mapping of shallow sub-surface features, such as layered lava/regolithstructure (palaeoregolith), fracture bedrock (megaregolith), and identification of buried craters andbedrock disruption below known craters.


30/47



Final Issue 6

page 24

The minimum number of craters that should be mapped is 1, medium 6, with an upper limit of 1000

or so.

5.2.1 ASSOCIATED EXPLORATION OBJECTIVES


Life and its Co-evolutionwith its PlanetaryEnvironment:

AND

Astronomicalobservatories on theMoon:

S22 - Investigate the effects of lunar dust and the lunar dust environment.

S23 - Investigate cratering processes on the Moon.Life and its Co-evolutionwith its PlanetaryEnvironment: S24 - Investigate remnant magnetism in the lunar surface and magnetic anomalies.


31/47



Final Issue 6

page 25

5.3 Human Orbital OperationsNo specific requirements for this section have been identified. However, chapter 3 contains genericrequirements which would be applicable to this section.

5.4 Robotic Surface Operations

R3a The architecture shall place a scientific payload on the lunar surface to search for territes(i.e. meteorites from the Earth). [S11]

On Earth geological samples are destroyed on large timescales removing any record of conditionson the early Earth, however, material can be ejected from the Earth by impacts to land on the Moon

and be preserved. Calculations predict that each 100 km2area of the moon should hold around 100kg of territes within the top 1cm of material (i.e. predicted density is ~7 parts per million).

Territe material will need identifying amongst native lunar material. One potential method couldemploy infrared spectroscopy to find hydrated minerals which are abundant in terrestrial rocks butwhich are absent from the Moon. Here, sample identification could be performed using aspectroscopic camera conceptually similar to the Cassini Visual and Infrared Mapping Spectrometerto find any hydrated minerals in the lunar regolith, but the instrument could be much simpler thanthe Cassini model. The imaging device would need to be tuned to the wavelength of interest suchan instrument does not yet exist. The approach would be to scan the surface regolith to identify thehydrated mineral, and then scoop up a small amount of the regolith containing the requiredsample - although drilling could be required, it is much less likely. The camera would need to locatethe hydrate sample to an accuracy of ~mm.

Once identified, the preferred approach would be to return the sample to Earth for analysis. It isestimated 150kg of regolith should contain approximately 1g of hydrated minerals, thus searchingthrough 3000kg of regolith material could in principle yield around 20g of hydrated minerals. Otheroptions for the analysis of the recovered material would be to: a) Place the isolated hydratedsamples in a cache, i.e. some kind of container, which could then be left in a known location whenfull to be collected at a later time, or b) Perform in-situ analysis.

An analysis of 3000kg of regolith would be the target here, although an analysis of 400kg would beacceptable. A minimum quantity would be 150kg.

The existence of the hydrated material is highly speculative, so there is no specific requirementregarding the specific locations of where to search beyond areas containing older surfaces.

R3b The architecture shall place a scientific payload on the lunar surface to sample sitesidentified as being of special geological interest. [S19]

Although the retrieved Apollo samples are extremely valuable, they encompass only a narrow rangeof geological types. Sampling of other sites will offer a more complete coverage and the opportunityto access special sites. For example, the Aitken Basin is an extremely large crater at the lunarsouth pole where mantle material may have been excavated (this material is normally at km depth).Additional interesting geological areas should be researched and investigated, e.g. areas of thelunar far side and perpetually shadowed polar craters (which may harbour preserved cometarymaterial). These areas could be identified through mapping from lunar orbit.


32/47



Final Issue 6

page 26

Minimally at least 1 site should be sampled, with 3 being acceptable and 10 the optimum note that

this means different sites, and not samples from the same site, i.e. multiple sites (which could bewidely dispersed). The preferred option here would be to return the collected samples to Earth,although the same options as requirement R3a, i.e. cache and in-situ, could also be considered.

R3c The architecture shall deploy a scientific payload on the lunar surface to investigate thelunar interior. [S20]

The internal structure of the moon is largely unknown and even the existence of a core is uncertain.The main method of investigating deep within the Moon is by seismology, and although a series ofseismometers were deployed in the Apollo programme, they were neither widely spaced nor of longduration.

Although some internal information may be determined by measuring the lunar gravity field by

gradiometry, this technique is currently far less sensitive than seismometry.

An example scenario would be the deployment of a number of seismometers (e.g. 10) over as largean area as possible - separation of the seismic elements should be by at least 100s of km. Existingexamples of seismometer masses are in the range 10-20kg, although recent designs indicate amuch smaller mass is possible.

The seismometer elements should have a minimum operational lifetime of at least 1 year, with 7-10years providing the optimum scientific return. The minimum number of elements is clearly 1, with 4being acceptable the optimum science return could be gained through the deployment of 8seismic elements.

R3d The architecture shall place a scientific payload on the lunar surface to collect crater

samples and lava flow samples for dating purposes. [S21]Lunar crater dating is used throughout the inner Solar System to date all surfaces. However, thecalibration of the chronology curve relies on a relatively small number of points which are not widelyspaced in time. A larger age range is clearly needed. Accurate dating currently requires neutronirradiation of the sample at a large radiation source (e.g. nuclear facility), so only sample returntechniques are currently used where high accuracy is required.

An optimum science return here would be 5 samples collected from different sites. The sitesthemselves should either be very old locations (i.e. >4.2 billion years) or reasonably younglocations. The minimum requirement would be 1 sample.

A Scooping of samples from the regolith material at these sites would be the best approach, aspebble-sized material is best suited to the analysis technique. Drilling could also be considered.

The preferred approach here would be to return the samples to Earth for analysis, as currently noin-situ dating techniques exist.

The minimum amount of material to be returned would be ~10g from each sample site.

R3e This requirement has been deleted (see requirement R1a in section 5.2).


33/47



Final Issue 6

page 27

R3f The architecture shall deploy a radiofrequency scientific payload on the far side of the lunar

surface. [S33]

The very low-frequency radio region (>10 m wavelength) cannot be observed from the Earthssurface (due to shielding and emission by the Earths ionosphere) and hence has never beeninvestigated. This wavelength region is expected to provide insight into a number of cosmologicalphenomena, particularly the dark ages of the universe prior to the re-ionisation era where thehighly red-shifted 21 cm emission from neutral hydrogen would reveal the early structures that wereformed at this time.

An interferometric array of simple dipole detectors could be utilised to investigate this wavelengthregion for the first time in history. The far side of the moon would make an ideal site for such anarray as it is shielded from terrestrial interference and a surface site does not require the advancedformation-flying technology that would be needed for a similar space-based interferometer.

A preferred location would be around the equatorial region of the lunar far side. Distribution of theindividual dipole detectors is assumed to be robotic, with power/data connection cables to a centralhub (e.g. lander). The layout of the sensors should be in a 3-arm-spiral-Y configuration. Thenecessary data rate for such an array would be ~100 Mbits/s.

The dipole sensors would need to be distributed over an area of ~100 km2, with various concepts

for the number of sensors in each arm, ranging from ~10-100.

In order to test such a LF telescope concept, a possible approach could be to deploy (via adispenser system) ~100 or so dipole detectors into a crater shadow area (e.g. close to the lunarsouth pole) over an area of ~km

2.



S11 - Hunt for territes, i.e. Earth meteorites, expected to have landed on the Moon

S19 - Sample important geological sites such as the Aitken Basin on the lunar surface.

S20 - Investigate the lunar interior.


S21 - Date lunar craters and lava flows to improve chronology.


S33 - Investigate the low-frequency radio region (>10m wavelength) of theelectromagnetic spectrum through establishment of a LF radio telescope on the lunarsurface (far side).


34/47



Final Issue 6

page 28

5.5 Human Surface OperationsR4a The architecture shall provide the capability for very deep-drilling (i.e. ~ 100s of metres

depth) to collect palaeoregolith samples. [S12]

As consecutive eruption events have occurred, fresh lava flows have been bombarded formingregolith which has been buried by further flows. This repeated process has created layers of buriedregolith, known as palaeoregolith, which record conditions from the time-interval when they wereexposed on the surface. As the Moon has no atmosphere, the regolith is exposed to the spaceenvironment and provides an effective trap for solar emissions and cosmic rays. In addition, like thesurface regolith, palaeoregolith is expected to contain territes. These layers of palaeoregoliththerefore record parameters of prime importance to the understanding of the habitability of Earthand other terrestrial planets. The thickness of the soft palaeoregolith layers are anticipated to be~10s of centimeters, sandwiched between ~ 1-10 metres of hard lava.

Palaeoregolith is likely to be found below much of the surface of the Moon, but specific sites foreasiest access still require identification, perhaps by a survey from orbit using ground penetratingradar, e.g. precursor survey to look for interesting areas - some suitable areas are known already,e.g. Oceanus Procellarum.

The general principle is that the deeper the drilling, the older the material, and the optimum sciencereturn here would be obtained from a drilling depth of ~200m. Current technology drilling (e.g. asdemonstrated by ExoMars) is ~2m. The amount of material to be analysed would be ~10g fromeach sample site.

The preferred approach would be to return the samples to earth for analysis, however, as verydeep-drilling will very likely involve human presence, the analysis could be performed in a suitably

equipped laboratory at an existing lunar base or outpost.

R4b The architecture shall provide the capability for deep-drilling (i.e. ~ 10 metres depth) tocollect samples from the lunar bedrock, and to perform heat flux measurements. [S25, S26]

All current lunar samples are regolith material which has been distributed across the moon. Bedrocksamples are required to allow investigation of geological context. The depth of regolith coveringbedrock can vary across the lunar surface and is a function of local topography and age. However,most bedrock is expected to lie at depths of 2 to 20 m. A precursor survey using ground penetratingradar may be appropriate to identify easily accessible samples.

Currently all samples returned to Earth are from the Moons near side and tend to be from sites

close to the rims of Mare basins. It is important to increase the diversity of sites explored andsampled.

Although there may exist known sites of bedrock, e.g. in crater bottoms (e.g. the centre of theCopernicus, Aitken Basin craters), highlands and mare, the identification of bedrock sites wouldbenefit from a robotic orbital survey e.g. using ground penetrating radar. Note that some of thesesites would be relevant to other scientific objectives.

The optimum science return would be obtained with samples from 20-25 different sites. The amountof material to be analysed would be ~10g from each sample site.

Heat flux through the moons surface is an important parameter for investigating and understandingthe Moons history. So far the measurement has only been made with low accuracy in regolith


35/47



Final Issue 6

page 29

material at two sites by the Apollo missions. Apollo astronauts were only able to measure the

temperature gradient down to a depth of ~ 1 m so deeper measurements would improve theaccuracy. Measurement at a depth of ~10m would be acceptable, but ~25m would be preferred.

The optimum science return is obtained in this case through a single accurate one-off measurementat each of ~20 different sites.

R4c This requirement has been deleted (see requirement R3f in section 5.4).

R4d The architecture shall support the establishment of a high-energy cosmic ray telescopefacility on the lunar surface. [S34]

This wavelength region cannot be observed from the Earths surface (due to the Earthsmagnetosphere) and requires large area telescopes that would be relatively simple to construct onthe lunar surface. Possibility to utilise lunar regolith material in the construction. Will enableunprecedented astronomy of completely unknown phenomena.

Assembly utilises regolith material. Location on lunar surface is not critical.

R4e This requirement has been deleted.

R4f The architecture shall support scientific geological fieldwork for collection and analysis ofsamples.

The science return from sample identification, collection and analysis would be significantlyenhanced by human intervention, specifically by a geologist.



S12 -Investigate the lunar palaeoregolith.

S25 - Sample bedrock material expected to be around 10m depth on the Moon.

Life and its Co-evolutionwith its Planetary

Environment:

S26 - Measure heat flux through lunar bedrock.


S34 - Investigate the high-energy cosmic ray wavelength region of the electromagneticspectrum through the establishment of a high-energy cosmic ray telescope on thelunar surface.


36/47



Final Issue 6

page 30

6 LIBRATION (LAGRANGE) POINTSThis chapter contains those high-level architecture requirements which are applicable to Libration Pointarchitecture.




R5a The architecture shall place a scientific payload at a Libration (Lagrange) Point toinvestigate the dust environment. [S3]

Elemental abundances will give an estimate of the elemental rate of delivery onto the terrestrialplanets. Isotopic ratios will allow comparison with inclusions in comets and asteroids/ meteorites.Studies of interstellar dust will allow us to investigate the source of material that created the solarsystem. Studies of cometary and asteroidal dust will give us an understanding of the parent bodiesand how dust is modified in interplanetary space. Interstellar dust has been considered as asuitable reaction site for production of complex organic molecules such as amino acids but these

organics so far remain undetected. Chemical analysis of cometary/asteroidal dust will allow us toidentify processes occurring on the dust since leaving their parent bodies. As seen above relatingthe dust to a source i.e. either cometary, asteroidal or interstellar is very important. This may beachieved by a combination of velocity vector measurements and chemical or isotopic comparisonwith parent bodies.

The scientific measurements would be carried out in-situ. Known orientation of detector instrumentis important, as is capability to change the orientation. The area-time product is important here.

Could also combine the real-time detection with an Aerogel collector, which could be subsequentlyretrieved by human/robotic activity and returned to earth for ground-based analysis.

Related missions: Dune Express. See also Cassini CDA.




S3 - Determine inorganic and organic chemical abundances, CHON isotope ratios, andsource(s) (i.e. cometary, asteroidal or interstellar) of any dust at the Libration Points.


37/47



Final Issue 6

page 31

6.2 Human Orbital OperationsR5b The architecture shall provide the capability to perform human-assisted servicing of large

telescope assemblies located at a libration point.

One of the most effective demonstrations of the capability of humans to perform complex repairtasks in space was the Hubble Repair Mission carried out in 1993. Another, but more recent eventinvolved the repair of a significantly damaged solar array on the ISS. Lagrangian points representexcellent places to place space-based telescopes, so the capability to perform human-assistedassembly, maintenance and/or repair of such high-value resources would be highly beneficial.


Not applicable for Libration Points.

6.4 Human Surface Operations

Not applicable for Libration Points.


38/47



Final Issue 6

page 32

7 NEAR EARTH OBJECTSThis chapter contains those high-level architecture requirements which are applicable to Near Earth Objectsarchitecture.




R8a The architecture shall deliver a scientific payload to orbit the NEO to perform high-resolutionaltimetry.

An orbital robotic mission is likely to be integrated with or precede a surface mission, in order toobtain high-resolution topographic information to assist the selection of a suitable landing location,prior to the initiation of the robotic surface operations.

7.2 Human Orbital Operations

No specific requirements for this section have been identified. However, chapter 3 contains genericrequirements which would be applicable to this section.


R6a The architecture shall deliver a scientific payload to a NEO surface to perform surface andsub-surface sample analysis and return the samples to Earth. [S1, S2]

A NEO is normally considered to be asteroidal in nature. However, such objects can also be extinctcomets, i.e. comets that are no longer active.

Asteroid-like NEO:Current meteorite samples provide high accuracy data. To give improvedscience, sample returnrather than in-situ analysis will be required. Complex organics such asamino acids have been found in meteorites and an extensive investigation into organics onasteroids would allow friable material that would not otherwise survive atmospheric entry to bestudied.Because of the effect of UV radiation the sample should be from at least a few centimetres into asolid particle. The continuous turnover of material on an asteroid means that a soil sample from afew centimetres depth would not suffice due to the exposure to solar UV which ensures the likelydestruction of any organic material. However, as the effects of space weathering from cosmic rayand micrometeorite bombardment are also very important, surface samples would also be requiredin order to evaluate the effects of space weathering.


39/47


40/47



Final Issue 6

page 34

be the most interesting from a scientific viewpoint, so the target list of preferred objects may differ in

each case.A global mapping should be carried out to identify elements of interest for propellant production(e.g. H, O2), life support (O2) and feedstock (SI, Al, Fe, etc.). Such elements should exist in all of theNEO classes, so for the purposes of this document, there is no a priori preferred type of NEO to betargeted.



S1 - Determine inorganic and organic chemical abundances, CHON abundances andisotope ratios in cometary material.

S2 - Determine inorganic and organic chemical abundances, mineral composition andCHON isotope ratios in asteroidal material.

E5 - Perform scalable demonstrations of key capabilities related to space resourcesutilization (e.g. propellant production, green houses, power plants, industrialcomponent production)


E6 - Implement full scale production and processing capabilities related to spaceresources utilization (e.g. propellant production, green houses, power plants, industrialcomponent production)

7.4 Human Surface Operations



41/47



Final Issue 6

page 35

8 MARSThis chapter contains those high-level architecture requirements which are applicable to Martianarchitecture.




R7q The architecture shall place a scientific payload in orbit around Mars to perform a globaltopographical and chemical mapping.

In order to assist in the selection of suitable landing sites for a Mars Sample Return mission, it isextremely important to carry out orbital measurements to survey the surface of Mars bothtopographically and chemically. Note: The ground-truth of chemical mapping from orbit shows apoor correlation with what is interpreted from orbital measurements.

R7a The architecture shall place a scientific payload in orbit around Mars to investigate the

distribution of atmospheric methane. [S14]

It is thought that the lifetime of methane on Mars is such that it should be well-mixed in theatmosphere. However, some measurements indicate otherwise. As a biologically significantmolecule the methane distribution on Mars may require significant further investigation, as themethane could have a biological origin, but could equally well be of non-biological origin. Therequired in-situ measurement sensitivity should be better than 10 ppbv (parts per billion by volume) this is the level reported by the Mars Express Planetary Fourier Spectrometer (PFS). Themeasurement should be made over at least one Martian season (to observe any possible seasonalvariations), and it should occur prior to any human presence, i.e. as soon as possible, but certainlybefore any human landing. A 100% coverage of the Martian atmospheric volume is preferable, with10% being a minimum. The atmospheric volume = the annular volume of the atmosphere betweenthe surface of Mars and its upper limit (~105 km).

R7b The architecture shall place a scientific payload in orbit around Mars to perform a mappingof the Martian sub-surface permafrost layer. [S10]

It is now well established that water ice exists on Mars on or below the surface. This permafrostneeds examining to find out how extensive and deep it is and hence how much water it holds. Thiscold subsurface layer may preserve evidence of past life.Area mapped: 10, 50, 100%. A ground-penetrating radar would be a suitable instrument for thispurpose. Note: This requirement is already addressed by the Mars Express (MARSIS) and MRO(SHARAD) missions, but this requirement relates to an instrument(s) that would measure to agreater depth of sounding, have a higher vertical resolution and larger horizontal foot-print.


42/47



Final Issue 6

page 36



S14 - Investigate methane distribution in the Martian atmosphere.Life and its Co-evolutionwith its PlanetaryEnvironment: S10 Map the subsurface permafrost layer distribution of Mars.

8.2 Human Orbital Operations



R7c The architecture shall place a scientific payload on the Martian surface to investigate itschemical/mineralogical characteristics, including high precision C, H, O, N, S, P isotopemeasurements. [S4, S5]

CHONSP = Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen, Nitrogen, Sulphur, Phosphorus

Although a large range of observations and measurements are required to completely determinethe conditions which lead to the production of any specific rock sample, e.g. rock structure, textureand composition, the measurement of isotopic variations in rock samples can assist in thedetermination of conditions when the rocks were produced. From all of these measurements onecan derive conclusions about potential habitability.An atmospheric measurement would provide an appropriate baseline for comparison. Ameasurement of carbon in a number of sources (e.g. atmosphere, carbonates, etc.) would allow thecarbon cycle to be recreated and investigated to search for evidence of life.Atmospheric isotopic measurements provide information on the degree of atmospheric loss overtime, this does not mean that the loss rate can be monitored, but that the total loss over geologicaltime may be assessed through the measurement of various isotope ratios.

The process of photosynthesis on Earth results in carbon isotope fractionation between inorganicand different organic reservoirs. Although it is not considered likely, it should be investigated if thephotosynthesis process has or is occurring on Mars. It is considered unlikely because it took ~1billion years to appear on Earth, where conditions were far more clement than on Mars. With thevery early degradation of surface environmental conditions on Mars, any life forms would haveretreated to the subsurface early (~ 4.2- 4.0 Ga), which would not have left sufficient time forphotosynthesis to evolve. However, carbon isotope measurements could confirm this latterscenario.

Ground-based atmospheric methane measurements are required in order to identify and monitorsources and provide a ground-truth for orbital measurements. This would involve measurements of


43/47



Final Issue 6

page 37

methane isotopic composition and concentration versus time (i.e. multi-site measurements).

Chemical and mineral investigations of the Martian surface help to further constrain Mars' historyincluding dating when the surface was habitable.

Number of discrete sources from which carbon isotope measurements are required: 3, 9, 30.Sources should include at least 1 atmospheric, 1 soil/rock and 1 water (if located) measurement.Hence the requirement here is for 3 sources at each of 1, 3, or 10 sites. Also, observations of therock structure and texture (good close -up imager/microscope) as well as geochemicalmeasurements to obtain information about the mineralogy and elemental compositions of the rocks.

In-situ measurement could be made, although as in all scientific objectives relating to the search forlife, sample return would be the preferred option. Amount of sample return ~0.5 kg.

Drilling is not necessarily required, as surface samples would be suitable for some scientificanalyses. Samples from the sub-surface would be required for organics and un-weathered material.

The atmospheric samples could be taken at any location. The methane sampling however, wouldbe used to identify any possible local hotspots to determine the source location and origin.

Possible sampling sites would be similar to those being considered for the ExoMars and MSLmissions.

Related missions: GAP on Beagle-2. Also, ExoMars, Mars Express, SAM (on MSL) and Phoenix.

R7d The architecture shall provide the capability for drilling beneath the surface to search for

organic material. [S6]

Exposure to Martian UV and an as yet unidentified oxidant, has extremely detrimental effects onorganic molecules. A subsurface search may reveal evidence for organics which are no longerobservable on the surface.

In-situ measurement - sample return is not required in this case, but could be an option for samplesthat exhibit a positive result. The in-situ/sample return option would be highly dependent on thesensitivity of the instruments. As an example, the amount of biogenic organic carbon related to pastlife in Ma