LOST IN SPACE

Angela | Aprilia | Kirana | Agus | Riedo | Sultan

 Hello!

Angela Lesmono 1606887241

We are group 4
Aprilia Ayuning Putri 1606XXXXXX
Kirana Widiani Lestari 160683
M. Agus Setiawan 16068
Riedo Devara Yusyaryahya 1606894344
Sultan Shiddiqi Salman 160690777
 Outline

PART PART
ONE THREE
Exploration – Going to Mars –
Opportunity or The Mars Climate
Albatross? Orbiter Mission
PART PART
TWO FOUR
Why Go To Mars Climate
Mars? Orbiter Mishap
Investigation
 1.
Exploration –
Opportunity or
Albatross?
Objectives

Understanding about pros and cons of space

exploration and how it can fit societal needs and
how to detect life on other planets
 SPACE EXPLORATION HISTORY
HUMANS have always looked up into the night sky and
dreamed about SPACE.
• Half of the 20th century  rockets were developed with advances in
electronics and other technologies
• Mid 1930s and 1940s, Nazi Germany use long-distance rockets as
weapons (World War II)
• Between 1969 and 1972  Six Apollo missions to explore the MOON
• During 1960s, unmanned spacecraft photographed from the moon
(without astronauts)
• In 1980s, satellite communications were developed until now
 PROS AND
1. Against space exploration
2. Space exploration gives us no direct benefit
3. The Earth itself is not fully explored yet
4. A commercial space industry is taking over
5. the new crisis on planet earth: finish your
priorities before starting new ones
6. Money is better used to help human lives in
their own country
7. NASA is very Hazardous
8. Yes, because
9. The resources and efforts focused on space
exploration could better humanity.
10. Its a waste
11. space exploration is a waste of money
12. Could have been used for more impactful
endeavors
CONS
1. Scientific knowledge has value beyond the
measurements of cost
2. The cost isn't actually very high
3. It is in man's nature to explore his
environment.
4. Many discoveries have been made as a
result of Space Exploration
5. Space
6. Its not a waste
7. Plastics Industry/Internet
8. NASA's Inventions and innovations that help
the world
9. The Largest Benefits
10. Man's uncontainable curiosity
11. Safety of Colonization
 FUTURE of Space Exploration
• Modern exploration  exploring MARS
• NASA is on journey on Mars, goal: send
humans to Mars in 2030s
• Progress: NASA and partners have sent
orbiters, landers, and rovers, study about
availability of oxygen and other Martian
resources
Extra-terrestrial life
• Life that occurs outside earth
and did not originate from
earth
• Science  exobiology
• Subsurface oceans make
extraterrestrial life can exist
LIFE Detection
GAS CHEMISTRY

SURROUND
WATER
CONDITION
 Alternative Solution A B
GOOD 1. Existence of
CH4
O2
candidates Musts
Gas
CO2
atmosphere
2. Chemistry
for life?
disequilibrium
3. Surround
32-212°C
Condition
Using K.T. Decision 4. Existence of Water
Wants Weight Rating Score Rating Score
Analysis for any 1) More than 70% of water
26%
planets exists in liquid form
2) Moderate tectonic
16%
activities
3) Moderate magnetic force 13%
4) Gravity range not further
18%
than earth
5) Moderate relative mass
20%
ratio (Earth as basis)
6) Medium rotation and
7%
orbit period
Total 100%
SOLUTION?
GO TO NEXT PART
 2.
Why Go
To Mars?
 Features with icons

Content A Content B Content B

Itself is what the end-user derives Itself is what the end-user derives Itself is what the end-user derives
value from also can refer to the value from also can refer to the value from also can refer to the
information information information

Content C Content D Content D

Itself is what the end-user derives Itself is what the end-user derives Itself is what the end-user derives
value from also can refer to the value from also can refer to the value from also can refer to the
information information information
Your Slide Title
Write here a list of features
Here you can write more
More about your project.

Content itself is what the end-user derives value from also can
refer.
 3.
Going to Mars –
The Mars Climate
Orbiter Mission
CASE (SCENARIO)

December 11, 1998 Spring – Summer 1999 September 8, 1999

3 navigation solutions Trajectory Correction

Mars Climate Orbiter to Mars were
was launched from Maneuver was
generated. computed so once the
earth to approach
Mars. orbit insertion
Discrepancies happen, it stays on
between solution certain distance from
were not overlooked. Mars.
Mars Orbit Insertion – “BURN” (September 23, 1999)
Is when the orbiter arrives just short of Mars, captured
into a long looping orbit. MCO Main engine will
combustion so that it brake its approach speed and
allow MCO to be captured into Mars' orbit.

The 264.4 kilograms of propellant (hydrazine fuel and

nitrogen tetroxide oxidizer, 24 w% of entire orbitor) will
be mixed in the controlled combustion of the engine.
The speed of Mars Express will then change by .804
kilometers per second. The 34-minute burn will reduce
the spacecraft's speed, relative to Mars, to 4.27
kilometers per second.
DESIRED STATE
The first periapse* altitude
planned would be at 226 km and
the second one would be at 210
km from mars.
ACHIEVED STATE
The first periapse* altitude was
110 km, where survivable periapse
altitude was 80 km.

The signal were lost 49 s earlier than predicted , attempts to reacquire

the signal was unsuccessful.

September 27, 1999 September 29, 1999

Operation navigation team ?? Discovery: !!
consulted the spacecraft Small forces velocity change
engineers about velocity reported by the spacecraft
engineer was off by a factor of
?? change modeling issue.
!! 4.44.
CRITICAL QUESTIONS
• Why would 80 km be the minimum altitude of
survivability?
• How may periodic adjustments made to the MCO’s
flightpath?
• What was the cause of discrepancies in small forces
velocity change?

HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN?

 3a
Why would 80 km be
the minimum altitude
of survivability?
Woods Evidence-Based Strategy

I want to Define the

Explore
and I can Problem

Plan Do It Look Back

 Woods E-B Strategy (Continued)
1. I want to and I can
The writer is committed and confident that the problem
will be solved.
 Woods E-B Strategy (Continued)
2. Define the Problem
• The stated objective: Find the reason for mars’
minimum altitude for survivability to be 80 km.
• The situation:
• The constraints:
• The criteria for acceptable answer:
 Woods E-B Strategy (Continued)
3. Explore
• The goal:
• Main Data:
• Supporting Data:
 Woods E-B Strategy (Continued)
4. Plan
• Analyze the data gathered to create solutions based
on the problem given.
• Solution:
 Woods E-B Strategy (Continued)
5. Do It
• Carry out the solution that arises from the previous
section.
 Woods E-B Strategy (Continued)
6. Look Back
• Things to look back on:
• A
• A
• A
Minimum Altitude
Escape velocity calculation:
2𝐺𝑀
𝑅

The sufficient amount of escape velocity is needed to make sure the

orbiter stays on the orbit and doesn’t fall down to the planet surface
because of the gravity. As the altitude decrease, the escape velocity
required will be increased. To achieve a certain escape velocity,
therefore more energy from the fuel is also needed.

80 km is the minimum altitude calculated from the engine’s ability

to give orbiter required escape velocity. If the orbiter goes further
than that, it will surely crash the planet.
 3b
How may periodic
adjustments made to
the MCO’s flightpath?
Woods Evidence-Based Strategy

I want to Define the

Explore
and I can Problem

Plan Do It Look Back

 Woods E-B Strategy (Continued)
1. I want to and I can
The writer is committed and confident that the problem
will be solved.
 Woods E-B Strategy (Continued)
2. Define the Problem
• The stated objective: The navigation of MCO flight
path
• The situation: Adjustments are made to the MCO
• The constraints:
• The planet intended to be orbited is mars
• The orbiter is MCO
• The criteria for acceptable answer: The model used
for the navigation of the orbiter is found
 Woods E-B Strategy (Continued)
3. Explore
• The goal: To find the model used for the navigation
of the MCO.
• Main Data: Attached
• Supporting Data: Attached
 4 TASKS NEEDED
These 4 tasks are needed to be performed for
successful mission design and navigation:
1. Obtain a Map Pre-launch
2. Develop a Travel Plan
3. Take Meaningful Measurements
Post-launch
4. Select a New Optimal Route
 4 TASKS NEEDED (CONTINUED)
1. Obtain a Map
An ephemerides, the trajectory
of mars, is calculated as to
depict the movement of the
planet which is useful for the
calculation of the MCO flight
path.
4 TASKS NEEDED (CONTINUED)
 4 TASKS NEEDED (CONTINUED)
2. Develop a Travel Plan
Selecting the orbit to get to Mars to calculate the arrival
time.
 4 TASKS NEEDED (CONTINUED)
3. Take Measurements
Use radio signals and optical measurements to compute
spacecraft position, velocity and the orbit specifications
(size, shape, and orientation)
4 TASKS NEEDED (CONTINUED)
4 TASKS NEEDED (CONTINUED)
4 TASKS NEEDED (CONTINUED)
4 TASKS NEEDED (CONTINUED)
 4 TASKS NEEDED (CONTINUED)
4. Select a New Optimal Route
• Changing the route based on the calculation by
propulsion system.
4 TASKS NEEDED (CONTINUED)
 Woods E-B Strategy (Continued)
4. Plan
• Analyze the data gathered to create solutions based
on the problem given.
• Solution: Use Deep Space Navigation to navigate the
MCO flight path
 Woods E-B Strategy (Continued)
5. Do It
• Carry out the solution that arises from the previous
section.
 Woods E-B Strategy (Continued)
6. Look Back
• Things to look back on:
• The advantages and disadvantages of deep space
navigation models.
• New technologies that can optimize or replace
deep space navigation to further advance the
development of space exploration.
 3c
What was the cause
of discrepancies in
small forces velocity
change?
Present State/Desired State
Present State Desired State Keterangan
Velocity changes are Velocity changes are The P/D matched,
1 present in the “small not present in the but it is not the heart
forces” model “small forces” model of the problem
The P/D matched,
The model simulated is The model used is
2 but it is not the heart
not correct correct
of the problem
The model simulated is The model simulated The P/D matched,
3 not mathematically is mathematically AND it is the heart of
correct correct the problem
WHY?
ROOT OF FAILURE
 SPACE EXPLORATION HISTORY
• Based on the report, there is an effect on the
spacecraft trajectory by a factor of 4.45.

1 lbf = 4.45 N
ROOT OF FAILURE

Failure to use Metrics Unit

Wrong value of conversion used in the coding of
ground software file, where British unit was
used instead and installed in software
application code titled “Small Forces”
PERIODIC ADJUSTMENTS

Angular Momentum Desaturation

Propulsion maneuver were performed to
remove angular momentum buildup in the fly
wheels. It is found that AMD occurred 10-14
times more often than expected.
 4.
Mars Climate
Orbiter Mishap
Investigation
 This is Patricia Smith.
The Situation She recently was promoted
to Associate Administrator of
Safety and Mission
Assurance at NASA.
She’s been working for NASA
for 12 years.

This is Denis T. Newman.

He is the Head of NASA.
The Situation
Denis had initiated the
revolution in NASA thinking
through the slogan “Faster,
Better, Cheaper”, and he had
requested that Patricia
submit to him personally a
memo that specified what
she though should be done
as a result of the Mars
Climate Orbiter (MCO)
Mishap Investigation Board
(MIB) Report.

The Report
This report addresses any aspects of
the MCO mishap that may have
caused the failure of the mission and
potentially could threaten the
successful completion of the Mars
Polar Lander Mission.
Root Cause: Failure to use metric
units in the coding of a ground
software file, small forces used in
trajectory models
Contributing Causes:
1. Undetected mismodelling of
space craft velocity changes
2. Navigation Team Unfamiliar with
spacecraft
3. Trajectory correction maneuver
number 5 not performed
4. System engineering process didn’t
adequately address transition
from development to operations
5. Inadequate communications
between project elements
6. Inadequate operations navigation
team staffing
7. Inadequate training
8. Verification and validation process
didn’t adequately address ground
software
The Case
Patricia knew the software engineer who was in
charge of that portion of the project whose
name is William (Bill) Burns. He is her close
friend. But she knows well that the error in
software was the primary cause of failure of the
MCO. However she also felt that the “faster,
better, cheaper” could be overarching cause of
the problem.
Questions

1.What Should Patricia do in this situation?

2.Should Patricia act differently if Bill Burns was
not a close personal friend?
3.Is “faster, Cheaper, better” a failure or success?
Why?
What Should Patricia Do?
By Using Duncker Diagram

Patricia Haven’t yet to make a choice about whether to accuse her

Problem Statement friend or the NASA mantra “Faster, Better, Cheaper” as the cause of
the MCO failure.

Recommend to Denis that Make it OK not to

General solutions
Bill be fired or demoted recommend Denis that
bill be fired or demoted

Suggest a replacement for Suggest a new division to Cover the Shut Down the
the software engineer specifically take care of mistake with Whole Division
the signal problem fake reports
What Should Patricia Do?
Suggest a replacement for Shut Down the
the software engineer Whole Division

Find a trained expert Train employees until Keep assuming Convince the
they have a proper on the data world that
knowledge before that NASA is people need to
they do a project trying to find study more
before starting
the mission
again
What Should Patricia Do?
First, she must realize that the engineers’ code of ethics is a very crucial
part on every part of an engineer’s work.

Engineers, in the fulfillment of their professional duties, shall:

1. Hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public.
2. Perform services only in areas of their competence.
3. Issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner.
4. Act for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees.
5. Avoid deceptive acts.
6. Conduct themselves honorably, responsibly, ethically, and lawfully so as to
enhance the honor, reputation, and usefulness of the profession.

Based on the NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers

What Should Patricia Do?

Patricia should tell NASA that the slogan “Faster, Better, Cheaper”
if not accompanied by the ethics of engineers it could be a major
catastrophe and Patricia should give an advice to NASA that they
should give a proper training to the person who’s going to be in
charge on the mission, not prioritizing the “faster, better,
cheaper” slogan.
Should Patricia act differently if Bill was not a
close Personal Friend?

What points should we pay attention to:

Ethics of the engineers and NASA policy

But if Patricia and Bill wasn’t a close friend, the highlight

would be on the ethics of the engineer.
Is "Faster, Cheaper, Better" a failure or
success? Why?

In this case, we can say it’s a failure.