Scientific Conference XXVIII-th Academic
Conference on Astronautics Section "Space Navigation
and Robotic Technology" (Moscow, Russia, January, 2004) L.N.Lysenko, V.S.Tupolev N.E.Bauman's MSTU 2-nd
Baumanskaya St., 5, Moscow, 105005, Russia Ε-mail: lysenko@sm3.bmsty.ru Without trying to supplant the collection of the paper summaries
published under the title "The current challenges to the Russian Space
Science" [1], this summary review of the papers presented at the workshop
on Space Navigation and Robotics within the framework of the 28th
Academic Readings is aimed at identifying and tracing, based on the materials presented
by the authors, major trends in the rapidly developing field of space mission
control theory and practice, which constitute one of the defining aspects of
the present-day space science. The advisability of summing up the scientific discussion that was not covered in the published collection is seen, on the one hand, in the fact that the reports presented at the workshop came from the undoubted current leading Russian experts in the field under discussion, whose opinion it would be wrong to disregard, and, on the other hand, in the fact that each of these experts presented his own standpoint, stated their considered positions on the particular issues of the overall problem combined under a fairly arbitrary concept of "space mission control". Meanwhile, the above particular issues are, as a rule, closely correlated. Keeping
in mind the established definition of the said concept that is given, for
example, in [2], as well as in article [3] included in this publication, we
should note that the substance of the control technology can be reduced to the
following types of "supports":
trajectory and navigation mission support;
telemetry and data support;
diagnostic and monitoring support;
command and program support;
simulating command and program support and math
support for simulating key mission operations. Efficient performance of a mission implemented on the basis of the above
"supports" depends, to a significant extent, on the pre-planned
mission profile, which takes into account the requirement to minimize possible
"losses" and guarantees the achievement of the functioning
reliability specified for the systems and the crew. This last circumstance makes it necessary to draw up the plan in such a
way as to assure, in case of an off-nominal situation at any stage, the
capability to continue the mission while achieving the particular objective
specified for that stage. A generalized analysis of the problems coming from the practice of
controlling missions of third-generation space stations, as well as from a
study of systems-theory foundations for the synthesis of control technologies
was contained in the report under the same title by V.A. Soloviev and L.N.
Lysenko (see [1]), delivered by Pilot-Cosmonaut of USSR, twice Hero of the
Soviet Union, former Flight Director of the Mir space station and the current
Flight Director of the International Space Station, winner of the Russian
Federation State Prize, Doctor of Engineering, Professor Soloviev V.A. The report emphasized that with a continuous growth in the number of
mission control activities that are governed by strictly defined accuracy,
operational and reliability parameters, the main
and general trend is towards the synthesis of technologies assuring an
increased level of control automation
through more efficient data acquisition, exchange and processing. However,
"control automation" in itself, while characterizing a general trend
towards improving the technological implementation of supports, is a necessary,
but not sufficient element reflecting the modern trends in the process
improvement. An increase in the functional integrity of the mission control system
and its reliability in unfavorable situations results in the need to adapt the system to the changing
conditions with an overall trend towards making more intelligent the decision-making subsystem for the entire set
of the mission control tasks. As follows from the generalized experience of controlling the mission of
a third-generation space station [1], the means of the trend implementation
involve the use of artificial intelligence methods and their software
implementation in the form of an expert system as a part of an intelligent
database, which is an element of a multilevel hierarchical computerized system,
subdivided into the ground and the onboard control loops. The next important trend comes down, to a certain degree, to implementing all types of supports more
expeditiously. As far as performance of control operations is concerned, this can be
achieved through the use of a panoramic scan analysis of the status of
controlled systems, the introduction of the principle of priorities, and the
use of the 'threshold' selection methods. As far as trajectory and navigation support is concerned, as reported in
the paper by the deputy administrator of the Mission Control Center, the head
of a division at TsNIIMash, Doctor of Engineering, professor, winner of the
USSR State Prize N.M. Ivanov, this can be achieved through the use of
'quick" algorithms and special software adapted to solving specific tasks. Concurrently with an increase in responsiveness, there is also a trend
towards increasing the accuracy of
implementation of all kinds of supports, especially navigation supports. It is easy to see that, generally speaking, the trends towards
increasing the responsiveness and the accuracy of the types of support under
discussion are, if not mutually exclusive, at least conflicting. This
produces the next trend, which is the search
for engineering solutions based on a reasonable trade-off between the
complexity of the system math models and structures and their speed of
operation. In part, this trade-off can be achieved through a wide application of reliable a priori data and
integration principle to the development of the navigation systems
involved. The latter approach was presented in great detail and very
convincingly in the paper by Candidate of Science in Engineering, assistant
professor V.D.Dishel (N.A.Pilyugin NPTs AP). As applied to the spaceflight
ground control loop, this problem becomes especially important, taking into
account incorrect statement of ballistic problems due to the use of mission
control technologies based on the small number of points, while preserving the
requirements for prompt and accurate determination of motion. The problems of structural synthesis of high-accuracy
navigation systems, of their development and testing were covered in papers
presented by Doctor of Engineering, Professor S.F.Konovalov et al. (Moscow N.E.
Bauman State Technical University), specialists from NPTs AP A.V. Voronkov,
R.A. Podrugin, I.Ye. Vinogradov, as well as V.M.Soloviev (OAO RPKB) et al. The
next trend, consistent with the current level of development of the Russian
space science, is a clearly traceable tendency towards improving the
reliability of the information support obtained as a result of space missions.
This tendency is especially important with respect to the monitoring of natural
and man-made disasters (a paper by Doctor of Engineering, Professor
B.S.Skrebushevsky et al. (Space Monitoring Center)), as well as in
interplanetary missions (a paper by Doctor of Engineering, Professor
V.P.Kazakovtsev et al. (Moscow N.E. Bauman State Technical University)). Different aspects of the trend to search for reasonable trade-offs in
the development of trajectory and navigation support were also discussed in
papers by Doctor of Engineering, Professor Yu.N.Razumny, Candidate of Science
in Engineering, assistant professor S.V. Benevolsky, Candidate of Science in
Engineering, assistant professor V.V. Grabin, post-graduate student A.V. Kuzmin
(all from Moscow N.E. Bauman State Technical University). On the whole, all the participants in the workshop agree that the
scientific discussions were very productive and contributed to a unanimous
understanding of problems and trends in the discussed areas of theory and
practice of the Russian space science. |
© 1995-2008 Kazan State University