06.02.2013 Views

ESA Document - Emits - ESA

ESA Document - Emits - ESA

ESA Document - Emits - ESA

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

s<br />

HMM<br />

Assessment Study<br />

Report: CDF-20(A)<br />

February 2004<br />

page 312 of 422<br />

To maximize the communications from the SHM and MAV to the Earth once on the Martian<br />

surface, the visibility for communications with the TV and/or G/S has been studied. For<br />

example, for Gusev crater the black out for communications is around 6 h (so no visibility of TV<br />

or G/S). For other latitudes, the values change but are of the same order of magnitude. So, to<br />

accomplish the requirement of a maximum of 1 hour without communications with the Earth, a<br />

relay satellite must be included in the design.<br />

Two kinds of relays have been considered: the first is satellites orbiting Mars and the second is a<br />

relay in a Sun - Earth Lagrangian point. This second option has the problem of its high distance<br />

to Mars, since basically the relay is in an Earth like orbit. So, data rate from Martian surface or<br />

TV would be low. Additionally, there is experience with relay satellites in Mars orbit, but not in<br />

Lagrangian points, so that option would be more complex. Therefore Mars relay has been<br />

selected.<br />

To maximize the communications availability from SHM, Mars aerostationary satellites are<br />

needed, since they will be always visible from SHM. Two options have been considered: the first<br />

is a constellation of three relay satellites and the second is the minimum configuration, just one.<br />

The constellation would provide complete surface coverage and will avoid any eclipse of the<br />

Earth, as would happen with a single aerostationary satellite, but would be more complex and<br />

expensive. Since coverage is needed just in a small zone around the MEV landing point and the<br />

communications availability for relay –Earth communications is high enough (95% of time there<br />

is visibility), so the second option has been selected.<br />

Due the situation of the SHM dish antennas and to avoid the occultation of the relay by the SHM<br />

structure, which could happen with high elevations, the relay satellite should not be placed just<br />

over SHM-MAV (in case the landing point is on the equator).<br />

To select the link relay-G/S, Ka-band has been selected because it will give more link<br />

availability and will be simpler and cheaper than an optical link.<br />

In addition, communications are required from SHM-MAV to the TV. Due to the low link<br />

availability for a direct transmission being about 12% of the time, to increase it TV could use the<br />

relay satellite as well.<br />

4.3.7.2.2 Requirements for EVA<br />

During EVA, a communication link must be provided. For EVAs, high-quality video and high<br />

quality voice is required within the astronauts’ walking distance, approximately 1 km (despite a<br />

pessimistic value of 2 km will be used for the calculations). This distance is the maximum<br />

distance that an astronaut would be able to walk back to the base in case of contingency.<br />

EVA astronaut operations are done in groups of two, so communication between both astronauts<br />

and with the SHM should be provided. Biomedical data, space suit data, high-quality voice and<br />

high-quality video are basic requirements, and the design will be done to support them. The data<br />

rate estimation for these requirements is shown in Table 4-17.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!