Using the ESA exploration technology roadmaps in support of new mission concepts and technology prioritization
Introduction
Exploration technology roadmaps have been developed by ESA in the past few years and the edition of 2015 has just been released. Scope of these technology roadmaps, elaborated in consultation with the different ESA stakeholders (e.g. European Industries and Research Entities), is to provide a tool for strategic, programmatic and technical decisions in support of the European role within an International Space Exploration context.
Many references can be found in literature dealing with the issue of exploration enabling technologies, which report roadmaps according to the plans of space agencies and associations [[1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]], deriving them with different procedures and features (Fig. 1). Almost all present roadmaps are based on interviews and are generally manually updated, but this kind of updating process deals with two main problems. Firstly, discussing with experts may create roadmaps able to support strategic decisions, but they are sometime limited by having single perspective that lacks in an integrated point of view capable of including all crucial elements beneath roadmaps. Secondly, compiling and updating such roadmaps could become an overwhelming task only a few would be able to take on, due the continuous evolution of technologies and ideas regarding new mission concepts.
To support the roadmapping process with a methodology able to fulfil these problems can lead faster to optimal results. Actually, the paper focus on a methodology developed to drive roadmaps' creation and update. Indeed, the innovative aspect of the work here presented lays in the methodology that has been developed to generate roadmaps to eventually support strategic decisions. The proposed methodology is intended to be flexible: the main aim of this work is not only to support the work on-going, especially at ESA, about the definition and the creation of technologies roadmaps, but it aims also at creating in a semi-automatic process the roadmaps themselves according to the user needs. The methodology is flexible enough to adapt to different type of users, which can be interested in looking specifically at one or more operational capabilities, technology areas, building blocks or mission concepts to increase Technology Readiness Level (TRL) or, more generally, to improve a particular kind of property in one or more elements between the one listed above.
In literature other methodologies to assess technology roadmaps for space exploration do exist [7,8]. The main methodology implemented in Refs. [7,8] is based on a database of technologies and allows identifying where, how and when they are needed and/or implementable according to a reference space exploration scenario such as [9]. Even if this approach leads to a versatile methodology, which can be easily extended to various reference missions, the tool does not pursue flexibility. Indeed, starting from the analysis of the OCs, the user has to move to MCs [10], BBs and eventually to technologies through a predetermined path. Even if this work was more technical and less related to programmatic aspects (e.g. costs analysis), a flexible and updatable methodology has been derived starting from this work, taking into account experts feedbacks and international roadmaps results [[11], [12], [13]].
In the context of Moon exploration initiatives, the paper will illustrate the use of the technology roadmaps to highlight the role of technology within Missions, Building Blocks and Operational Capabilities of relevance. Two years ago, ESA was supporting a specific lunar mission concept for robotic samples return, Human Enhanced Robotic Architecture and Capability for Lunar Exploration and Science (HERACLES) [14]. In particular, HERACLES mission focuses on designing a System of Systems (SoS) able to solve the mission objectives previously stated with multiple robotic missions to the lunar surface in preparation for human missions. Even if the proposed mission is not currently present between the top priorities for ESA, important building blocks and capabilities required for a lunar exploration and outpost are still present even if in a context that is simplified if compared to a Moon Village.
An updated version of the methodology for technology roadmap generation and management has been proposed for this case study. Indeed, while the previous methodology [[11], [12], [13]] was mainly based on market and stakeholders' requests, in this particular work the influence of stakeholders and market has been reduced in some rational and logical processes supporting it with System Engineering theories and tools [[15], [16], [17]]. In addition, a better delineation of demonstrative mission has been introduced. This updated methodology is the main subject of section 2, while the case study will be presented in section 3. Eventually main conclusions are drawn.
Section snippets
Methodology
In order to better support this activity, a logical sequence of actions that has to be performed to generate the roadmaps and the list of pillars and inputs that drive their creation have been studied. Consequently, an optimized methodology able to define and update technology roadmaps has been developed, pursuing a Systems Engineering approach and point of view [11,18]. The methodology is flexible enough to support strategic decisions starting from different points of view (for instance the
Results
Using HERACLES mission as case study, the authors have applied methodologies studied to simulate technology roadmapping activities and technologies prioritization processes. In particular, technology prioritization tools developed in support of the ESA Technology Roadmaps have been applied to two building blocks of relevance for HERACLES (i.e. Tele-Robotic And Autonomous Control Systems; Storable Propulsion Modules And Equipment), and one Operational Capability (i.e. Robotic/Tele-Robotic
Conclusions
The paper presents the elaboration and rational justification of a logical methodology to generate technology roadmaps on the basis of System Engineering theories and tools, decreasing the stakeholders influence over the results. In the context of Moon exploration initiatives, the paper illustrates the use of the technology roadmaps to highlight the role of technology within Missions, Building Blocks and Operational Capabilities of relevance. In particular, using HERACLES mission as case study,
References (27)
- et al.
A methodology for innovative technologies roadmaps assessment to support strategic decisions for future space exploration
Acta Astronaut.
(2014) - et al.
A methodology to support strategic decisions in future human space exploration: from scenario definition to building blocks assessment
Acta Astronaut.
(2013) - et al.
Reusable space tug concept and mission
Acta Astronaut.
(November–December 2016) Exploring Together: ESA Space Exploration Strategy, Published by the Strategic Planning and Outreach Office of the ESA Directorate of Human Spaceflight and Operations, ESTEC, PO Box 299 2200 AG Noordwijk The Netherlands
(2015)Introduction, Crosscutting Technologies, and Index
(May 2015)RT Priorities 2012
(March 2012)The global exploration roadmap
Coordinated ESA initiatives on technologies for space exploration
ESA coordination activities on space exploration technology roadmaps
- et al.
Future Space Exploration: from reference scenario definition to key technologies roadmaps
Interplanetary cubesats mission to earth-sun libration point for space weather evaluations
Effective methodologies to derive strategic decisions from ESA technology roadmaps
Optimized methodology for technology roadmaps definition and update for space systems in a System of Systems architecture
Cited by (15)
Research, development and production costs prediction parametric model for future civil hypersonic aircraft
2023, Acta AstronauticaCitation Excerpt :To overcome this shortcoming, this paper suggests a generic formulation to introduce the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) as cost driver in the RDTE CERs. This improvement paves the way for the exploitation of the cost model along the Technology Roadmapping process, where for every key-enabling technology, an incremental development path consisting of research and experimental activities is proposed, along with an estimation of the economic and time resources request [14–19]. Fig. 1 graphically summarizes the contents of the Cost Estimation Model developed by Politecnico di Torino, highlighting the multiple connections established with the other activities carried out during the early design phases of a complex and advanced system like a hypersonic vehicle.
Design and analysis of the transfer trajectory for switching landing site in emergency during the return flight of crewed lunar exploration mission
2022, Acta AstronauticaCitation Excerpt :At the beginning of the 21st century, the “Constellation Program” announced by the United States clearly put forward the mission objectives of “global lunar access” and “anytime return” [1,2]. In recent years, the “Artemis Project” to return to the Moon has been proposed [3], which has set off an upsurge of crewed lunar exploration planning all over the world [4–6], and has also triggered considerable research on issues related to crewed lunar exploration in the new era [7–9]. With the successful implementation of the Chang’E−5 mission [10,11], China has made great progress in lunar exploration missions.
Technology roadmapping methodology for future hypersonic transportation systems
2022, Acta AstronauticaCitation Excerpt :In this context, the Technology RoadmappIng Strategy (TRIS) methodology and tool developed at Politecnico di Torino [13] has been considered as reference, upgraded and exploited to give priorities in terms of technologies and activities to be planned to meet the ambitious target of the H2020 STRATOFLY project. In Ref. [13], a first upgrade of technology roadmapping methodologies for space transportation systems [14–16] to include hypersonic is presented. However, the goal of that publication was to tailor its application to technologies required for the re-entry phase of a generic hypersonic vehicle, selecting the Intermediate eXperimental Vehicle (IXV) as case study with a specific focus on Thermal Protection System (TPS) technologies.
Three-impulse point return orbit design for the manned lunar high-latitude exploration mission
2021, Acta AstronauticaCitation Excerpt :In 2017, NASA announced that a lunar orbit space station called “Gateway” would be launched [6], which would be deployed in a near rectilinear halo orbit and could effectively support the exploration activities targeting the lunar high-latitude region [7]. In addition to the United States, Russia, ESA, Japan, etc. have also set off a new wave of lunar exploration and formulated corresponding exploration plans [8–10]. With the success of the “Chang-e 4” mission [11,12], more and more Chinese are expecting that Chinese manned lunar landing can be realized as soon as possible.
Technology RoadmappIng Strategy, TRIS: Methodology and tool for technology roadmaps for hypersonic and re-entry space transportation systems
2020, Acta AstronauticaCitation Excerpt :A technology roadmap is the result of complex and strictly interwoven activities, which pursue the identification and selection of technologies, missions, capabilities and building blocks to eventually support strategic decisions. A technology roadmap consists therefore of different elements, according to agencies' or companies’ needs and constraints, which may be summarized as follows [55–57]: Operational Capability (OC), defined as a high level function responding to a mission statement (or more generally to a Research Study Objective);