@inproceedings{JeanPierrePBaqueBillietal.2018, author = {Jean-Pierre P., de Vera and Baque, Mickael and Billi, Daniela and B{\"o}ttger, Ute and Bulat, Sergey and Czupalla, Markus and Dachwald, Bernd and de la Torre, Rosa and Elsaesser, Andreas and Foucher, Fr{\´e}d{\´e}ric and Korsitzky, Hartmut and Kozyrovska, Natalia and L{\"a}ufer, Andreas and Moeller, Ralf and Olsson-Francis, Karen and Onofri, Silvano and Sommer, Stefan and Wagner, Dirk and Westall, Frances}, title = {The search for life on Mars and in the Solar System - strategies, logistics and infrastructures}, series = {69th International Astronautical Congress (IAC)}, booktitle = {69th International Astronautical Congress (IAC)}, pages = {1 -- 8}, year = {2018}, abstract = {The question "Are we alone in the Universe?" is perhaps the most fundamental one that affects mankind. How can we address the search for life in our Solar System? Mars, Enceladus and Europa are the focus of the search for life outside the terrestrial biosphere. While it is more likely to find remnants of life (fossils of extinct life) on Mars because of its past short time window of the surface habitability, it is probably more likely to find traces of extant life on the icy moons and ocean worlds of Jupiter and Saturn. Nevertheless, even on Mars there could still be a chance to find extant life in niches near to the surface or in just discovered subglacial lakes beneath the South Pole ice cap. Here, the different approaches for the detection of traces of life in the form of biosignatures including pre-biotic molecules will be presented. We will outline the required infrastructure for this enterprise and give examples of future mission concepts to investigate the presence of life on other planets and moons. Finally, we will provide suggestions on methods, techniques, operations and strategies for preparation and realization of future life detection missions.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{GrundmannBorellaCeriottietal.2021, author = {Grundmann, Jan Thimo and Borella, Laura and Ceriotti, Matteo and Chand, Suditi and Cordero, Federico and Dachwald, Bernd and Fexer, Sebastian and Grimm, Christian D. and Hendrikse, Jeffrey and Herč{\´i}k, David and Herique, Alain and Hillebrandt, Martin and Ho, Tra-Mi and Kesseler, Lars and Laabs, Martin and Lange, Caroline and Lange, Michael and Lichtenheldt, Roy and McInnes, Colin R. and Moore, Iain and Peloni, Alessandro and Plettenmeier, Dirk and Quantius, Dominik and Seefeldt, Patric and Venditti, Flaviane c. F. and Vergaaij, Merel and Viavattene, Giulia and Virkki, Anne K. and Zander, Martin}, title = {More bucks for the bang: new space solutions, impact tourism and one unique science \& engineering opportunity at T-6 months and counting}, series = {7th IAA Planetary Defense Conference}, booktitle = {7th IAA Planetary Defense Conference}, year = {2021}, abstract = {For now, the Planetary Defense Conference Exercise 2021's incoming fictitious(!), asteroid, 2021 PDC, seems headed for impact on October 20th, 2021, exactly 6 months after its discovery. Today (April 26th, 2021), the impact probability is 5\%, in a steep rise from 1 in 2500 upon discovery six days ago. We all know how these things end. Or do we? Unless somebody kicked off another headline-grabbing media scare or wants to keep civil defense very idle very soon, chances are that it will hit (note: this is an exercise!). Taking stock, it is barely 6 months to impact, a steadily rising likelihood that it will actually happen, and a huge uncertainty of possible impact energies: First estimates range from 1.2 MtTNT to 13 GtTNT, and this is not even the worst-worst case: a 700 m diameter massive NiFe asteroid (covered by a thin veneer of Ryugu-black rubble to match size and brightness), would come in at 70 GtTNT. In down to Earth terms, this could be all between smashing fireworks over some remote area of the globe and a 7.5 km crater downtown somewhere. Considering the deliberate and sedate ways of development of interplanetary missions it seems we can only stand and stare until we know well enough where to tell people to pack up all that can be moved at all and save themselves. But then, it could just as well be a smaller bright rock. The best estimate is 120 m diameter from optical observation alone, by 13\% standard albedo. NASA's upcoming DART mission to binary asteroid (65803) Didymos is designed to hit such a small target, its moonlet Dimorphos. The Deep Impact mission's impactor in 2005 successfully guided itself to the brightest spot on comet 9P/Tempel 1, a relatively small feature on the 6 km nucleus. And 'space' has changed: By the end of this decade, one satellite communication network plans to have launched over 11000 satellites at a pace of 60 per launch every other week. This level of series production is comparable in numbers to the most prolific commercial airliners. Launch vehicle production has not simply increased correspondingly - they can be reused, although in a trade for performance. Optical and radio astronomy as well as planetary radar have made great strides in the past decade, and so has the design and production capability for everyday 'high-tech' products. 60 years ago, spaceflight was invented from scratch within two years, and there are recent examples of fast-paced space projects as well as a drive towards 'responsive space'. It seems it is not quite yet time to abandon all hope. We present what could be done and what is too close to call once thinking is shoved out of the box by a clear and present danger, to show where a little more preparedness or routine would come in handy - or become decisive. And if we fail, let's stand and stare safely and well instrumented anywhere on Earth together in the greatest adventure of science.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{Dachwald2005, author = {Dachwald, Bernd}, title = {Global optimization of low-thrust space missions using evolutionary neurocontrol}, series = {Proceedings of the international workshop on global optimization}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the international workshop on global optimization}, pages = {85 -- 90}, year = {2005}, abstract = {Low-thrust space propulsion systems enable flexible high-energy deep space missions, but the design and optimization of the interplanetary transfer trajectory is usually difficult. It involves much experience and expert knowledge because the convergence behavior of traditional local trajectory optimization methods depends strongly on an adequate initial guess. Within this extended abstract, evolutionary neurocontrol, a method that fuses artificial neural networks and evolutionary algorithms, is proposed as a smart global method for low-thrust trajectory optimization. It does not require an initial guess. The implementation of evolutionary neurocontrol is detailed and its performance is shown for an exemplary mission.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{DachwaldSeboldtLoebetal.2007, author = {Dachwald, Bernd and Seboldt, Wolfgang and Loeb, Horst W. and Schartner, Karl-Heinz}, title = {A comparison of SEP and NEP for a main belt asteroid sample return mission}, series = {7th International Symposium on Launcher Technologies, Barcelona, Spain, 02-05 April 2007}, booktitle = {7th International Symposium on Launcher Technologies, Barcelona, Spain, 02-05 April 2007}, pages = {1 -- 10}, year = {2007}, abstract = {Innovative interplanetary deep space missions, like a main belt asteroid sample return mission, require ever larger velocity increments (∆V s) and thus ever more demanding propulsion capabilities. Providing much larger exhaust velocities than chemical high-thrust systems, electric low-thrust space-propulsion systems can significantly enhance or even enable such high-energy missions. In 1995, a European-Russian Joint Study Group (JSG) presented a study report on "Advanced Interplanetary Missions Using Nuclear-Electric Propulsion" (NEP). One of the investigated reference missions was a sample return (SR) from the main belt asteroid (19) Fortuna. The envisaged nuclear power plant, Topaz-25, however, could not be realized and also the worldwide developments in space reactor hardware stalled. In this paper, we investigate, whether such a mission is also feasible using a solar electric propulsion (SEP) system and compare our SEP results to corresponding NEP results.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{DupratDachwaldHilchenbachetal.2013, author = {Duprat, J. and Dachwald, Bernd and Hilchenbach, M. and Engrand, Cecile and Espe, C. and Feldmann, M. and Francke, G. and G{\"o}r{\"o}g, Mark and L{\"u}sing, N. and Langenhorst, Falko}, title = {The MARVIN project: a micrometeorite harvester in Antarctic snow}, series = {44th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference}, booktitle = {44th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference}, year = {2013}, abstract = {MARVIN is an automated drilling and melting probe dedicated to collect pristine interplanetary dust particles (micrometeorites) from central Antarctica snow.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{HallmannHeideckerSchlottereretal.2016, author = {Hallmann, Marcus and Heidecker, Ansgar and Schlotterer, Markus and Dachwald, Bernd}, title = {GTOC8: results and methods of team 15 DLR}, series = {26th AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, Napa, CA}, booktitle = {26th AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, Napa, CA}, year = {2016}, abstract = {This paper describes the results and methods used during the 8th Global Trajectory Optimization Competition (GTOC) of the DLR team. Trajectory optimization is crucial for most of the space missions and usually can be formulated as a global optimization problem. A lot of research has been done to different type of mission problems. The most demanding ones are low thrust transfers with e.g. gravity assist sequences. In that case the optimal control problem is combined with an integer problem. In most of the GTOCs we apply a filtering of the problem based on domain knowledge.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{SeboldtBlomeDachwaldetal.2004, author = {Seboldt, Wolfgang and Blome, Hans-Joachim and Dachwald, Bernd and Richter, Lutz}, title = {Proposal for an integrated European space exploration strategy}, series = {55th International Astronautical Congress of the International Astronautical Federation, the International Academy of Astronautics, and the International Institute of Space Law}, booktitle = {55th International Astronautical Congress of the International Astronautical Federation, the International Academy of Astronautics, and the International Institute of Space Law}, pages = {1 -- 10}, year = {2004}, abstract = {Recently, in his vision for space exploration, US president Bush announced to extend human presence across the solar system, starting with a human return to the Moon as early as 2015 in preparation for human exploration of Mars and other destinations. In Europe, an exploration program, termed AURORA, was established by ESA in 2001 - funded on a voluntary basis by ESA member states - with a clear focus on Mars and the ultimate goal of landing humans on Mars around 2030 in international cooperation. In 2003, a Human Spaceflight Vision Group was appointed by ESA with the task to develop a vision for the role of human spaceflight during the next quarter of the century. The resulting vision focused on a European-led lunar exploration initiative as part of a multi-decade, international effort to strengthen European identity and economy. After a review of the situation in Europe concerning space exploration, the paper outlines an approach for a consistent positioning of exploration within the existing European space programs, identifies destinations, and develops corresponding scenarios for an integrated strategy, starting with robotic missions to the Moon, Mars, and near-Earth asteroids. The interests of the European planetary in-situ science community, which recently met at DLR Cologne, are considered. Potential robotic lunar missions comprise polar landings to search for frozen volatiles and a sample return. For Mars, the implementation of a modest robotic landing mission in 2009 to demonstrate the capability for landing and prepare more ambitious and complex missions is discussed. For near-Earth asteroid exploration, a low-cost in-situ technology demonstration mission could yield important results. All proposed scenarios offer excellent science and could therefore create synergies between ESA's mandatory and optional programs in the area of planetary science and exploration. The paper intents to stimulate the European discussion on space exploration and reflects the personal view of the authors.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{LoebSchartnerSeboldtetal.2006, author = {Loeb, Horst W. and Schartner, Karl-Heinz and Seboldt, Wolfgang and Dachwald, Bernd and Streppel, Joern and Meusemann, Hans and Sch{\"u}lke, Peter}, title = {SEP for a lander mission to the jovian moon europa}, series = {57th International Astronautical Congress}, booktitle = {57th International Astronautical Congress}, doi = {10.2514/6.IAC-06-C4.4.04}, pages = {1 -- 12}, year = {2006}, abstract = {Under DLR-contract, Giessen University and DLR Cologne are studying solar-electric propulsion missions (SEP) to the outer regions of the solar system. The most challenging reference mission concerns the transport of a 1.35-tons chemical lander spacecraft into an 80-RJ circular orbit around Jupiter, which would enable to place a 375 kg lander with 50 kg of scientific instruments on the surface of the icy moon "Europa". Thorough analyses show that the best solution in terms of SEP launch mass times thrusting time would be a two-stage EP module and a triple-junction solar array with concentrators which would be deployed step by step. Mission performance optimizations suggest to propel the spacecraft in the first EP stage by 6 gridded ion thrusters, running at 4.0 kV of beam voltage, which would save launch mass, and in the second stage by 4 thrusters with 1.25 to 1.5 kV of positive high voltage saving thrusting time. In this way, the launch mass of the spacecraft would be kept within 5.3 tons. Without a launcher's C3 and interplanetary gravity assists, Jupiter might be reached within about 4 yrs. The spiraling-down into the parking orbit would need another 1.8 yrs. This "large mission" can be scaled down to a smaller one, e.g., by halving all masses, the solar array power, and the number of thrusters. Due to their reliability, long lifetime and easy control, RIT-22 engines have been chosen for mission analysis. Based on precise tests, the thruster performance has been modeled.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{GrundmannBauerBieleetal.2018, author = {Grundmann, Jan Thimo and Bauer, Waldemar and Biele, Jens and Boden, Ralf and Ceriotti, Matteo and Cordero, Federico and Dachwald, Bernd and Dumont, Etienne and Grimm, Christian D. and Herč{\´i}k, David and Ho, Tra-Mi and Jahnke, Rico and Koch, Aaron D and Koncz, Alexander and Krause, Christian and Lange, Caroline and Lichtenheldt, Roy and Maiwald, Volker and Mikschl, Tobias and Mikulz, Eugen and Montenegro, Sergio and Pelivan, Ivanka and Peloni, Alessandro and Quantius, Dominik and Reershemius, Siebo and Renger, Thomas and Riemann, Johannes and Ruffer, Michael and Sasaki, Kaname and Schmitz, Nicole and Seboldt, Wolfgang and Seefeldt, Patric and Spietz, Peter and Spr{\"o}witz, Tom and Sznajder, Maciej and Tardivel, Simon and T{\´o}th, Norbert and Wejmo, Elisabet and Wolff, Friederike and Ziach, Christian}, title = {Small spacecraft based multiple near-earth asteroid rendezvous and landing with near-term solar sails and 'Now-Term 'technologies}, series = {69 th International Astronautical Congress (IAC)}, booktitle = {69 th International Astronautical Congress (IAC)}, pages = {1 -- 18}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Physical interaction with small solar system bodies (SSSB) is the next step in planetary science, planetary in-situ resource utilization (ISRU), and planetary defense (PD). It requires a broader understanding of the surface properties of the target objects, with particular interest focused on those near Earth. Knowledge of composition, multi-scale surface structure, thermal response, and interior structure is required to design, validate and operate missions addressing these three fields. The current level of understanding is occasionally simplified into the phrase, "If you've seen one asteroid, you've seen one asteroid", meaning that the in-situ characterization of SSSBs has yet to cross the threshold towards a robust and stable scheme of classification. This would enable generic features in spacecraft design, particularly for ISRU and science missions. Currently, it is necessary to characterize any potential target object sufficiently by a dedicated pre-cursor mission to design the mission which then interacts with the object in a complex fashion. To open up strategic approaches, much broader in-depth characterization of potential target objects would be highly desirable. In SSSB science missions, MASCOT-like nano-landers and instrument carriers which integrate at the instrument level to their mothership have met interest. By its size, MASCOT is compatible with small interplanetary missions. The DLR-ESTEC Gossamer Roadmap Science Working Groups' studies identified Multiple Near-Earth asteroid (NEA) Rendezvous (MNR) as one of the space science missions only feasible with solar sail propulsion. The Solar Polar Orbiter (SPO) study showed the ability to access any inclination, theDisplaced-L1 (DL1) mission operates close to Earth, where objects of interest to PD and for ISRU reside. Other studies outline the unique capability of solar sails to provide access to all SSSB, at least within the orbit of Jupiter, and significant progress has been made to explore the performance envelope of near-term solar sails for MNR. However, it is difficult for sailcraft to interact physically with a SSSB. We expand and extend the philosophy of the recently qualified DLR Gossamer solar sail deployment technology using efficient multiple sub-spacecraft integration to also include landers for one-way in-situ investigations and sample-return missions by synergetic integration and operation of sail and lander. The MASCOT design concept and its characteristic features have created an ideal counterpart for thisand has already been adapted to the needs of the AIM spacecraft, former part of the NASA-ESA AIDA missionDesigning the 69th International Astronautical Congress (IAC), Bremen, Germany, 1-5 October 2018. IAC-18-F1.2.3 Page 2 of 17 combined spacecraft for piggy-back launch accommodation enables low-cost massively parallel access to the NEA population.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{GrundmannBauerBodenetal.2019, author = {Grundmann, Jan Thimo and Bauer, Waldemar and Boden, Ralf Christian and Ceriotti, Matteo and Cordero, Federico and Dachwald, Bernd and Dumont, Etienne and Grimm, Christian D. and Hercik, D. and Herique, A. and Ho, Tra-Mi and Jahnke, Rico and Kofman, Wlodek and Lange, Caroline and Lichtenheldt, Roy and McInnes, Colin R. and Mikschl, Tobias and Mikulz, Eugen and Montenegro, Sergio and Moore, Iain and Pelivan, Ivanka and Peloni, Alessandro and Plettemeier, Dirk and Quantius, Dominik and Reershemius, Siebo and Renger, Thomas and Riemann, Johannes and Rogez, Yves and Ruffer, Michael and Sasaki, Kaname and Schmitz, Nicole and Seboldt, Wolfgang and Seefeldt, Patric and Spietz, Peter and Spr{\"o}witz, Tom and Sznajder, Maciej and Toth, Norbert and Viavattene, Giulia and Wejmo, Elisabet and Wolff, Friederike and Ziach, Christian}, title = {Responsive integrated small spacecraft solar sail and payload design concepts and missions}, series = {Conference: 5th International Symposium on Solar Sailing (ISSS 2019)}, booktitle = {Conference: 5th International Symposium on Solar Sailing (ISSS 2019)}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Asteroid mining has the potential to greatly reduce the cost of in-space manufacturing, production of propellant for space transportation and consumables for crewed spacecraft, compared to launching the required resources from Earth's deep gravity well. This paper discusses the top-level mission architecture and trajectory design for these resource-return missions, comparing high-thrust trajectories with continuous low-thrust solar-sail trajectories. This work focuses on maximizing the economic Net Present Value, which takes the time-cost of finance into account and therefore balances the returned resource mass and mission duration. The different propulsion methods will then be compared in terms of maximum economic return, sets of attainable target asteroids, and mission flexibility. This paper provides one more step towards making commercial asteroid mining an economically viable reality by integrating trajectory design, propulsion technology and economic modelling.}, language = {en} }