Search Results

The Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) is the first crew transport vehicle to be developed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in the last thirty years. The CEV is being developed to transport the crew safely from the Earth to the Moon and back again. This year, the prime contractor has been selected, requirements have been refined, and development areas are being pursued. The Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) system, which includes the life support and active thermal control systems, is moving one year closer to performing on orbit.

The Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), also known as Orion, is the first crew transport vehicle to be developed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in the last thirty years. The CEV is being developed to transport the crew safely from the Earth to the Moon and back again. This year, the vehicle went through a major redesign to reduce weight, refine requirements, and further development. The design of the Orion Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) system, which includes the life support and active thermal control systems, moved one year closer to performing on orbit. This paper covers the Orion ECLS development from April 2007 to April 2008.

The International Space Station (ISS) Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) system includes regenerative and non-regenerative technologies that provide the basic life support functions to support the crew, while maintaining a safe and habitable shirtsleeve environment. This paper provides a summary of the U.S. ECLS system activities over the past year, covering the period of time between April 2002 and March 2003. The ISS continued permanent crew operations, with the start of Phase 3 of the ISS Assembly Sequence. Work continued on the Phase 3 pressurized elements with Node 3 just completing its final design review so that it can proceed towards manufacturing and the continued manufacturing of the regenerative ECLS equipment that will be integrated into Node 3.

The Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) is the first crew transport vehicle to be developed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in the last thirty years. The CEV is being developed to transport the crew safely from the Earth to the Moon and back again. The mission is similar to the Apollo approach with expanded capabilities and extended durations to support a larger crew and a longer mission. The Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) system, which includes the life support and thermal control systems, will have to meet these new requirements taking advantage of the latest in component development where necessary and applicable.

The baseline environmental control and life support (ECLS) systems currently deployed on board the International Space Station (ISS) and that planned to be launched in Node 3 are based upon technologies selected in the early 1990's. While they are generally meeting or exceeding requirements for supporting the ISS crew, lessons learned from years of on orbit and ground testing, together with new advances in technology state of the art, and the unique requirements for future manned missions prompt consideration of the next logical step to enhance these systems to increase performance, robustness, and reliability, and reduce on-orbit and logistical resource requirements. This paper discusses the current state of the art in ISS ECLS system technologies, and identifies possible areas for enhancement and improvement.

The Orion Crew and Service Modules are often compared to the Apollo Command and Service Modules due to their similarity in basic mission objective: both were dedicated to getting a crew to lunar orbit and safely returning them to Earth. Both spacecraft rely on the environmental control, life support and active thermal control systems (ECLS/ATCS) for the basic functions of providing and maintaining a breathable atmosphere, supplying adequate amount of potable water and maintaining the crew and avionics equipment within certified thermal limits. This assessment will evaluate the driving requirements for both programs and highlight similarities and differences. Further, a short comparison of the two system architectures will be examined including a side by side assessment of some selected system's hardware mass.