Members Can Post Anonymously On This Site
GPM Celebrates Ten Years of Observing Precipitation for Science and Society
-
Similar Topics
-
By NASA
10 min read
Preparations for Next Moonwalk Simulations Underway (and Underwater)
Return to 2024 SARP Closeout Faculty Advisors:
Dr. Guanyu Huang, Stony Brook University
Graduate Mentor:
Ryan Schmedding, McGill University
Ryan Schmedding, Graduate Mentor
Ryan Schmedding, graduate mentor for the 2024 SARP Atmospheric Science group, provides an introduction for each of the group members and shares behind-the scenes moments from the internship.
Danielle Jones
Remote sensing of poor air quality in mountains: A case study in Kathmandu, Nepal
Danielle Jones
Urban activity produces particulate matter in the atmosphere known as aerosol particles. These aerosols can negatively affect human health and cause changes to the climate system. Measures for aerosols include surface level PM2.5 concentration and aerosol optical depth (AOD). Kathmandu, Nepal is an urban area that rests in a valley on the edge of the Himalayas and is home to over three million people. Despite the prevailing easterly winds, local aerosols are mostly concentrated in the valley from the residential burning of coal followed by industry. Exposure to PM2.5 has caused an estimated ≥8.6% of deaths annually in Nepal. We paired NASA satellite AOD and elevation data, model meteorological data, and local AirNow PM2.5 and air quality index (AQI) data to determine causes of variation in pollutant measurement during 2023, with increased emphasis on the post-monsoon season (Oct. 1 – Dec. 31). We see the seasonality of meteorological data related to PM2.5 and AQI. During periods of low temperature, low wind speed, and high pressure, PM2.5 and AQI data slightly diverge. This may indicate that temperature inversions increase surface level concentrations of aerosols but have little effect on the total air column. The individual measurements of surface pressure, surface temperature, and wind speed had no observable correlation to AOD (which was less variable than PM2.5 and AQI over the entire year). Elevation was found to have no observable effect on AOD during the period of study. Future research should focus on the relative contributions of different pollutants to the AQI to test if little atmospheric mixing causes the formation of low-altitude secondary pollutants in addition to PM2.5 leading to the observed divergence in AQI and PM2.5.
Madison Holland
Analyzing the Transport and Impact of June 2023 Canadian Wildfire Smoke on Surface PM2.5 Levels in Allentown, Pennsylvania
Madison Holland
The 2023 wildfire season in Canada was unparalleled in its severity. Over 17 million hectares burned, the largest area ever burned in a single season. The smoke from these wildfires spread thousands of kilometers, causing a large population to be exposed to air pollution. Wildfires can release a variety of air pollutants, including fine particulate matter (PM2.5). PM2.5 directly affects human health – exposure to wildfire-related PM2.5 has been associated with respiratory issues such as the exacerbation of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In June 2023, smoke from the Canadian wildfires drifted southward into the United States. The northeastern United States reported unhealthy levels of air quality due to the transportation of the smoke. In particular, Pennsylvania reported that Canadian wildfires caused portions of the state to have “Hazardous” air quality. Our research focused on how Allentown, PA experienced hazardous levels of air quality from this event. To analyze the concentrations of PM2.5 at the surface level, NASA’s Hazardous Air Quality Ensemble System (HAQES) and the EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS) ground-based site data were utilized. By comparing HAQES’s forecast of hazardous air quality events with recorded daily average PM2.5 with the EPA’s AQS, we were able to compare how well the ensemble system was at predicting total PM2.5 during unhealthy air quality days. NOAA’s Hybrid Single-Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory model, pyrsig, and the Canadian National Fire Database were used. These datasets revealed the trajectory of aerosols from the wildfires to Allentown, Pennsylvania, identified the densest regions of the smoke plumes, and provided a map of wildfire locations in southeastern Canada. By integrating these datasets, we traced how wildfire smoke transported aerosols from the source at the ground level.
Michele Iraci
Trends and Transport of Tropospheric Ozone From New York City to Connecticut in the Summer of 2023
Michele Iraci
Tropospheric Ozone, or O₃, is a criteria pollutant contributing to most of Connecticut and New York City’s poor air quality days. It has adverse effects on human health, particularly for high-risk individuals. Ozone is produced by nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds from fuel combustion reacting with sunlight. The Ozone Transport Region (OTR) is a collection of states in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic United States that experience cross-state pollution of O₃. Connecticut has multiple days a year where O₃ values exceed the National Ambient Air Quality Standards requiring the implementation of additional monitoring and standards because it falls in the OTR. Partially due to upstream transport from New York City, Connecticut experiences increases in O₃ concentrations in the summer months. Connecticut has seen declines in poor air quality days from O₃ every year due to the regulations on ozone and its precursors. We use ground-based Lidar, Air Quality System data, and a back-trajectory model to examine a case of ozone enhancement in Connecticut caused by air pollutants from New York between June and August 2023. In this time period, Connecticut’s ozone enhancement was caused by air pollutants from New York City. As a result, New York City and Connecticut saw similar O₃ spikes and decline trends. High-temperature days increase O₃ in both places, and wind out of the southwest may transport O₃ to Connecticut. Production and transport of O₃ from New York City help contribute to Connecticut’s poor air quality days, resulting in the need for interstate agreements on pollution management.
Stefan Sundin
Correlations Between the Planetary Boundary Layer Height and the Lifting Condensation Level
Stefan Sundin
The Planetary Boundary Layer (PBL) characterizes the lowest layer in the atmosphere that is coupled with diurnal heating at the surface. The PBL grows during the day as solar heating causes pockets of air near the surface to rise and mix with cooler air above. Depending on the type of terrain and surface albedo that receives solar heating, the depth of the PBL can vary to a great extent. This makes PBL height (PBLH) a difficult variable to quantify spatially and temporally. While several methods have been used to obtain the PBLH such as wind profilers and lidar techniques, there is still a level of uncertainty associated with PBLH. One method of predicting seasonal PBLH fluctuation and potentially lessening uncertainty that will be discussed in this study is recognizing a correlation in PBLH with the lifting condensation level (LCL). Like the PBL, the LCL is used as a convective parameter when analyzing upper air data, and classifies the height in the atmosphere at which a parcel becomes saturated when lifted by a forcing mechanism, such as a frontal boundary, localized convergence, or orographic lifting. A reason to believe that PBLH and LCL are interconnected is their dependency on both the amount of surface heating and moisture that is present in the environment. These thermodynamic properties are of interest in heavily populated metropolitan areas within the Great Plains, as they are more susceptible to severe weather outbreaks and associated economic losses. Correlations between PBLH and LCL over the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan statistical area during the summer months of 2019-2023 will be discussed.
Angelica Kusen
Coupling of Chlorophyll-a Concentrations and Aerosol Optical Depth in the Subantarctic Southern Ocean and South China Sea (2019-2021)
Angelica Kusen
Air-sea interactions form a complex feedback mechanism, whereby aerosols impact physical and biogeochemical processes in marine environments, which, in turn, alter aerosol properties. One key indicator of these interactions is chlorophyll-a (Chl-a), a pigment common to all phytoplankton and a widely used proxy for primary productivity in marine ecosystems. Phytoplankton require soluble nutrients and trace metals for growth, which typically come from oceanic processes such as upwelling. These nutrients can also be supplied via wet and dry deposition, where atmospheric aerosols are removed from the atmosphere and deposited into the ocean. To explore this interaction, we analyze the spatial and temporal variations of satellite-derived chl-a and AOD, their correlations, and their relationship with wind patterns in the Subantarctic Southern Ocean and the South China Sea from 2019 to 2021, two regions with contrasting environmental conditions.
In the Subantarctic Southern Ocean, a positive correlation (r²= 0.26) between AOD and Chl-a was found, likely due to dust storms following Austrian wildfires. Winds deposit dust aerosols rich in nutrients, such as iron, to the iron-limited ocean, enhancing phytoplankton photosynthesis and increasing chl-a. In contrast, the South China Sea showed no notable correlation (r² = -0.02) between AOD and chl-a. Decreased emissions due to COVID-19 and stricter pollution controls likely reduced the total AOD load and shifted the composition of aerosols from anthropogenic to more natural sources.
These findings highlight the complex interrelationship between oceanic biological activity and the chemical composition of the atmosphere, emphasizing that atmospheric delivery of essential nutrients, such as iron and phosphorus, promotes phytoplankton growth. Finally, NASA’s recently launched PACE mission will contribute observations of phytoplankton community composition at unprecedented scale, possibly enabling attribution of AOD levels to particular groups of phytoplankton.
Chris Hautman
Estimating CO₂ Emission from Rocket Plumes Using in Situ Data from Low Earth Atmosphere
Chris Hautman
Rocket emissions in the lower atmosphere are becoming an increasing environmental concern as space exploration and commercial satellite launches have increased exponentially in recent years. Rocket plumes are one of the few known sources of anthropogenic emissions directly into the upper atmosphere. Emissions in the lower atmosphere may also be of interest due to their impacts on human health and the environment, in particular, ground level pollutants transported over wildlife protected zones, such as the Everglades, or population centers near launch sites. While rockets are a known source of atmospheric pollution, the study of rocket exhaust is an ongoing task. Rocket exhaust can have a variety of compositions depending on the type of engine, the propellants used, including fuels, oxidizers, and monopropellants, the stoichiometry of the combustion itself also plays a role. In addition, there has been increasing research into compounds being vaporized in atmospheric reentry. These emissions, while relatively minimal compared to other methods of travel, pose an increasing threat to atmospheric stability and environmental health with the increase in human space activity. This study attempts to create a method for estimating the total amount of carbon dioxide released by the first stage of a rocket launch relative to the mass flow of RP-1, a highly refined kerosene (C₁₂H₂₆)), and liquid oxygen (LOX) propellants. Particularly, this study will focus on relating in situ CO₂ emission data from a Delta II rocket launch from Vandenberg Air Force Base on April 15, 1999, to CO₂ emissions from popular modern rockets, such as the Falcon 9 (SpaceX) and Soyuz variants (Russia). The findings indicate that the CO₂ density of any RP-1/LOX rocket is 6.9E-7 times the mass flow of the sum of all engines on the first stage. The total mass of CO₂ emitted can be further estimated by modeling the volume of the plume as cylindrical. Therefore, the total mass can be calculated as a function of mass flow and first stage main engine cutoff. Future CO₂ emissions on an annual basis are calculated based on these estimations and anticipated increases in launch frequency.
Return to 2024 SARP Closeout Share
Details
Last Updated Nov 22, 2024 Related Terms
General Explore More
8 min read SARP East 2024 Ocean Remote Sensing Group
Article 21 mins ago 10 min read SARP East 2024 Hydroecology Group
Article 21 mins ago 11 min read SARP East 2024 Terrestrial Fluxes Group
Article 22 mins ago View the full article
-
By Space Force
Over the past two years, the first U.S. space service component has tripled in size, established a 24/7 space watch cell and executed three Tier 1 Combatant Command exercises.
View the full article
-
By NASA
Associate Director for Mission Planning, Earth Sciences, and environmental scientist Robert J. “Bob” Swap makes a difference by putting knowledge into action.
Name: Robert J. “Bob” Swap
Title: Associate Director for Mission Planning, Earth Sciences
Organization: Earth Science Division (Code 610)
Robert Swap (right) and Karen St. Germain, NASA Earth science director (left) joined NASA’s Student Airborne Research Program, an eight-week summer internship program for rising senior undergraduates during summer 2023. Photo courtesy of Robert Swap What do you do and what is most interesting about your role here at Goddard?
I work with our personnel to come up with the most viable mission concepts and put together the best teams to work on these concepts. I love working across the division, and with the center and the broader community, to engage with diverse competent teams and realize their potential in address pressing challenges in the earth sciences.
Why did you become an Earth scientist?
In the mid to late ’70s, the environment became a growing concern. I read all the Golden Guides in the elementary school library to learn about different creatures. I grew up exploring and discovering the surrounding woods, fields, and creeks, both on my own and through scouting and became drawn to nature, its connectedness, and its complexity. The time I spent fishing with my father, a military officer who also worked with meteorology, and my brother helped cement that love. I guess you could say that I became “hooked.”
What is your educational background?
In 1987, I got a B.A. in environmental science from the University of Virginia. While at UVA, I was a walk-on football player, an offensive lineman on UVA’s first ever post-season bowl team. This furthered my understanding of teamwork, how to work with people who were much more skilled than I was, and how to coach. I received master’s and Ph.D. degrees in environmental science from UVA in 1990 and 1996, respectively.
As an undergraduate in environmental sciences, I learned about global biochemical cycling — meaning how carbon and nitrogen move through the living and nonliving systems — while working on research teams in the Chesapeake Bay, the Blue Ridge Mountains and the Amazon Basin.
Before graduating I had the good fortune to participate in the NASA Amazon Boundary Layer Experiment (ABLE-2B) in the central Amazon, which I used to kick off my graduate studies. I then focused on southern African aerosol emissions, transports and depositions for my doctoral studies that ultimately led to a university research fellow postdoc at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, South Africa.
What are some of your career highlights?
It has been a crazy journey!
While helping put up meteorological towers in the Amazon deep jungle, we would encounter massive squall lines. These storms were so loud as they rained down on the deep forest that you could not hear someone 10 feet away. One of the neatest things that I observed was that after the storms passed, we would see a fine red dust settling on top of our fleet of white Volkswagen rental vehicles in the middle of the rainforest.
That observation piqued my interest and led to a paper I wrote about Saharan dust being transported to the Amazon basin and its potential implications for the Amazon, especially regarding nutrient losses from the system. Our initial work suggested there was not enough input from Northern Africa to support the system’s nutrient losses. That caused us to start looking to Sub-Saharan Africa as a potential source of these nutritive species.
I finished my master’s during the first Persian Gulf War, and finding a job was challenging. During that phase I diversified my income stream by delivering newspapers and pizzas and also bouncing at a local nightspot so that I could focus on writing papers and proposals related to my research. One of my successes was the winning of a joint National Science Foundation proposal that funded my doctoral research to go to Namibia and examine sources of aerosol and trace gases as part of the larger NASA TRACE-Southern African Atmosphere Fire Research Initiative – 92 (SAFARI-92). We were based at Okaukuejo Rest Camp inside of Namibia’s Etosha National Park for the better part of two months. We characterized conservative chemical tracers of aerosols, their sources and long-range transport from biomass burning regions, which proved, in part, that Central Southern Africa was providing mineral and biomass burning emissions containing biogeochemically important species to far removed, downwind ecosystems thousands of kilometers away.
When I returned to Africa as a postdoctoral fellow, I was able to experience other countries and cultures including Lesotho, Mozambique, and Zambia. In 1997, NASA’s AERONET project was also expanding into Africa and I helped Brent Holben and his team deploy instruments throughout Africa in preparation for vicarious validation of instrumentation aboard NASA’s Terra satellite platform.
I returned to UVA as a research scientist to work for Chris Justice and his EOS MODIS/Terra validation team. I used this field experience and the international networks I developed, which contributed to my assuming the role of U.S. principal investigator for NASA’s Southern African Regional Science Initiative. Known as SAFARI 2000, it was an effort that involved 250 scientists from 16 different countries and lasted more than three years. When it ended, I became a research professor and began teaching environmental science and mentoring UVA students on international engagement projects.
Around 2000, I created a regional knowledge network called Eastern/Southern Africa Virginia Network and Association (ESAVANA) that leveraged the formal and informal structures and networks that SAFARI 2000 established. I used my team building and science diplomacy skills to pull together different regional university partners, who each had unique pieces for unlocking the larger puzzle of how southern Africa acted as a regional coupled human-natural system. Each partner had something important to contribute while the larger potential was only possible by leveraging their respective strengths together as a team.
I traveled extensively during this time and was supported in 2001 partially by a Fulbright Senior Specialist Award which allowed me to spend time at the University of Eduardo Mondlane in Maputo Mozambique to help them with hydrology ecosystem issues in the wake of massive floods. We kept the network alive by creating summer study abroad, service learning and intersession January educational programs that drew upon colleagues and their expertise from around the world that attracted new people, energy, and resources to ESAVANA. All of these efforts contributed to a “community of practice” focused on learning about the ethics and protocols of international research. The respectful exchange of committed people and their energies and ideas was key to the effort’s success. I further amplified the impact of this work by contributing my lived and learned experiences to the development of the first ever global development studies major at UVA.
In 2004, I had a bad car accident and as a result have battled back and hip issues ever since. After falling off the research funding treadmill, I had to reconfigure myself in the teaching and program consultant sector. I grew more into a teaching role and was recognized for it by UVA’s Z-Society 2008 Professor of the Year, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching’s Virginia’s 2012 Professor of the Year, as well as my 2014 induction into UVA’s Academy of Teaching — all while technically a research professor. I was also heavily involved for almost a decade with the American Association for the Advancement of Science and its Center for Science Diplomacy and tasks related to activities such as reviewing the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research and teaching science diplomacy in short courses for the World Academy of Sciences for the Advancement of Science in Developing Countries located in Trieste, Italy, and the Academy of Science of South Africa.
I worked in the Earth Sciences Division at NASA Headquarters from 2014 to early 2017 as a rotating program support officer as part of the Intergovernmental Personnel Act (IPA), where I supported the atmospheric composition focus area. One of my responsibilities involved serving as a United States Embassy science fellow in the summer of 2015, where I went to Namibia to support one of our Earth Venture Suborbital field campaigns. I came to Goddard in April 2017 to help revector their nascent global network of ground-based, hyperspectral ultraviolet and visible instruments known as the Pandora.
What is your next big project?
I am currently working with the NASA Goddard Earth Science Division front office to craft a vision for the next 20 years, which involves the alignment of people around a process to achieve a desired product. With the field of Earth System Science changing so rapidly, we need to position ourselves within this ever evolving “new space” environment of multi-sectoral partners — governmental, commercial, not-for-profit, and academic — from the U.S. and beyond to study the Earth system. This involves working with other governmental agencies, universities and industrial partners to chart a way forward. We will have a lot of new players. We will be working with partners we never imagined.
We need people who know how to work across these different sectors. One such attempt to “grow our own timber” involves my development of an experimental version of the first NASA Student Airborne Research Program East Coast Edition (SARP and SARP-East), where student participants from a diversity of institutions of higher learning can see the power and promise of what NASA does, how we work together on big projects, and hopefully be inspired to take on the challenges of the future. In other words, I am pushing an exposure to field-based, Earth system science down earlier into their careers to expose them to what NASA does in an integrated fashion.
What assets do you bring to the Earth Science Division front office?
In 2020, I came to the Earth science front office to help lead the division. I make myself available across the division to help inspire, collect, suggest, and coach our rank and file into producing really cool mission concept ideas.
Part of why the front office wanted me is because I use the skills of relationship building, community building, and science diplomacy to make things happen, to create joint ventures. Having had to support myself for over 20 years on soft money, I learned to become an entrepreneur of sorts — to be scientifically and socially creative — and I was forced to look inward and take an asset-based approach. I look at all the forms of capital I have at hand and use those to make the best of what I have got. In Appalachia, there is an expression: use everything but the squeal from the pig.
Lastly, I bring a quick wit with a good dose of self-deprecating humor that helps me connect with people.
How do you use science diplomacy to make things happen?
Two of the things that bind people together about science are the process of inquiry and utilizing the scientific method, both of which are universally accepted. As such, they allow us to transcend national and cultural divides.
Science diplomacy works best when you start with this common foundation. Starting with this premise in collaborative science allows for conversations to take place focusing on what everyone has in common. You can have difficult conversations and respectful confrontations about larger issues.
Scientists can then talk and build bridges in unique ways. We did this with SAFARI 2000 while working in a region that had seen two major wars and the system of Apartheid within the previous decade. We worked across borders of people who were previously at odds. We did that by looking at something apart from national identity, which was Southern Africa. We focused on how a large-scale system functions and how to make something that incorporates 10 different countries operate as a unit. We wanted to conduct studies showing how the region operated as a functional unit while dealing with transboundary issues. It took a lot of community and trust, and we began with the science community.
What drives you?
I want to put knowledge into action to make a difference. I realize it is not about me, it is about “we.” That is why I came to NASA, to make a difference. There is no other agency in the world where we can harness such a unique and capable group of people.
What do you do for fun?
I enjoy watching sports. I still enjoy hiking, fishing, and tubing down the river. My wife and I like long walks through natural settings with our rescues, Lady, our black-and-tan coonhound, and Duchess, our long-haired German Shepherd Dog. They are our living hot water bottles in the winter.
My wife and I also like to cook together.
Who would you like to thank?
Without a doubt, it starts with my wife, family, and children whom without none of what I have accomplished would have been possible. I have had the good fortune to be able to bring them along on some of my international work, including to Africa.
I am also very grateful to all those people during my school years who stepped in and who did not judge me initially by my less than stellar grades. They gave me the chance to become who I am today.
Who inspires you?
There is an old television show that I really liked called “Connections,” by James Burke. He would start with a topic, go through the history, and show how one action led to another action with unforeseen consequences. He would take something modern like plastics and link it back to Viking times. Extending that affinity for connections, the Resilience Alliance out of Sweden also influences me with their commitment to showing connections and cycles.
My mentors at UVA were always open to serving as a sounding board. They treated me as a colleague, not a student, as a member of the guild even though I was still an apprentice. That left an indelible impression upon me and I always try to do the same. My doctoral mentor Mike Garstang said that he already had a job and that this job was to let me stand on his shoulders to allow me to get to the next level, which is my model.
Another person who was very formative during my early professional career was Jerry Melillo who showed me what it was like to be an effective programmatic mentor. I worked with him as his chief staffer of an external review of the IAI and learned a lot by watching how he ran that activity program.
With respect to NASA, a number of people come to mind: Michael King, Chris Justice, and Tim Suttles, as well as my South African Co-PI, Harold Annegarn, all of whom, at one time or another, took me under their respective wings and mentored me through the whole SAFARI 2000 process. From each of their different perspectives, they taught me how NASA works, how to engage, how to implement a program, and how to navigate office politics. And my sister and our conversations about leadership and what it means to be a servant leader. To be honest, there are scores more individuals who have contributed to my development that I don’t have the space to mention here.
What are some of your guiding principles?
Never lose the wonder — stay curious. “We” not “me.” Seeking to understand before being understood. We all stand on somebody’s shoulders. Humility rather than hubris. Respect. Be the change you wish to see.
By Elizabeth M. Jarrell
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md.
Conversations With Goddard is a collection of Q&A profiles highlighting the breadth and depth of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center’s talented and diverse workforce. The Conversations have been published twice a month on average since May 2011. Read past editions on Goddard’s “Our People” webpage.
Share
Details
Last Updated Nov 19, 2024 EditorMadison OlsonContactRob Garnerrob.garner@nasa.govLocationGoddard Space Flight Center Related Terms
People of Goddard Goddard Space Flight Center People of NASA Explore More
6 min read Matthew Kowalewski: Aerospace Engineer and Curious About Everything
Matthew Kowalewski describes himself as “curious about too many things,” but that curiosity comes in…
Article 7 days ago 6 min read Inia Soto Ramos, From the Mountains of Puerto Rico to Mountains of NASA Earth Data
Dr. Inia Soto Ramos became fascinated by the mysteries of the ocean while growing up…
Article 7 days ago 5 min read Carissa Arillo: Testing Spacecraft, Penning the Owner’s Manuals
Article 3 weeks ago View the full article
-
By NASA
Anthocyanins protect seeds in space
After exposure to space outside the International Space Station, purple-pigmented rice seeds rich in anthocyanin had higher germination rates than non-pigmented white rice seeds. This result suggests that anthocyanin, a flavonoid known to protect plants from UV irradiation, could help preserve seed viability on future space missions.
Plants are key components for systems being designed to produce nutrients and recycle carbon for future sustained space habitation, but space has been shown to reduce seed viability. Tanpopo-3, part of a series of investigations from JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency), examined the role of anthocyanins in maintaining seed viability. Results of this and previous experiments suggest that solar light in space is more detrimental to seeds than radiation.
Preflight image of the Tanpopo panel used to expose seeds and other samples to space. Tanpopo-3 team Low-cost, autonomous technology validated for space research
Researchers verified a pair of devices for conducting experiments in space that have multi-step reactions and require automatic mixing of solutions. This type of low-cost, autonomous technology expands the possibilities for space-based research, including work by commercial entities.
Ice Cubes #6- Kirara, an investigation from ESA (European Space Agency) developed by the Japan Manned Space Systems Corporation, used a temperature-controlled incubator to crystallize proteins in microgravity. The Kirara facility also enables production of polymers, including cellulose, which have different uses than protein crystals. This experiment synthesized and decomposed cellulose.
The Kirara incubator used for experiments in microgravity. United Arab Emirates/Sultan Alneyadi Insights from observations of an X-ray binary star
Researchers used Neutron star Interior Composition Explorer (NICER) to observe the timing of 15 X-ray bursts from 4U 1820–30, an ultracompact X-ray binary (UCXB) star. An X-ray binary is a neutron star orbiting a companion from which it takes matter. If confirmed with future observations, this result makes 4U 1820–30 the fastest-spinning neutron star known in an X-ray binary system and provides insights into the physics of neutron stars.
NICER makes high-precision measurements of neutron stars (the ultra-dense matter created when massive stars explode as supernovas) and other phenomena to increase our understanding of the universe. NICER has monitored 4U 1820–30 since its launch in June 2017. A short orbital period indicates a relatively small binary system, and 4U 1820–30 has the shortest known orbital period among low-mass X-ray binaries.
Animated image of a binary star system,NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center/Chris SmithView the full article
-
By NASA
On Nov. 16, 2009, space shuttle Atlantis began its 31st trip into space, on the third Utilization and Logistics Flight (ULF3) mission to the International Space Station, the 31st shuttle flight to the orbiting lab. During the 11-day mission, the six-member STS-129 crew worked with the six-person Expedition 21 crew during seven days of docked operations. The mission’s primary objectives included delivering two external logistics carriers and their spare parts, adding nearly 15 tons of hardware to the station, and returning a long-duration crew member, the last to return on a shuttle. Three of the STS-129 astronauts conducted three spacewalks to transfer spare parts and continue assembly and maintenance of the station. As a group of 12, the joint crews celebrated the largest and most diverse Thanksgiving gathering in space.
Left: Official photograph of the STS-129 crew of Leland D. Melvin, left, Charles O. Hobaugh, Michael J. Foreman, Robert “Bobby” L. Satcher, Barry “Butch” E. Wilmore, and Randolph “Randy” J. Bresnik. Middle: The STS-129 crew patch. Right: The ULF3 payload patch.
The six-person STS-129 crew consisted of Commander Charles O. Hobaugh, Pilot Barry “Butch” E. Wilmore, and Mission Specialists Randolph “Randy” J. Bresnik, Michael J. Foreman, Leland D. Melvin, and Robert “Bobby” L. Satcher. Primary objectives of the mission included launch and transfer to the station of the first two EXPRESS Logistics Carriers (ELC-1 and ELC-2) and their multiple spare parts, and the return of NASA astronaut and Expedition 20 and 21 Flight Engineer Nicole P. Stott, the last astronaut to rotate on the shuttle.
Left: In the Orbiter Processing Facility (OPF) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida, workers finish processing Atlantis for STS-129. Right: Space shuttle Atlantis rolls over from the OPF to the Vehicle Assembly Building.
Left: Atlantis rolls out to Launch Pad 39A. Right: The STS-129 crew during the Terminal Countdown Demonstration Test.
Atlantis returned to NASA’s Kennedy Space Center (KSC) from its previous mission, STS-125, on June 2, 2009, and workers towed it to the Orbiter Processing Facility (OPF) to prepare it for STS-129. The orbiter rolled over to the Vehicle Assembly Building on Oct. 6, and after mating with its external tank and twin solid rocket boosters, rolled out to Launch Pad 39A on Oct. 14, targeting a Nov. 16 launch. Six days later, the six-member crew participated in the Terminal Countdown Demonstration Test, essentially a dress rehearsal of the actual countdown for launch, returning to Houston for final training. They returned to KSC on Nov. 13 to prepare for launch.
Left: With Atlantis sitting on Launch Pad 39A, the Ares 1-X rocket lifts off from Launch Pad 39B. Right: The payload canister arrives at Launch Pad 39A.
Left: The STS-129 astronauts leave crew quarters for the ride to Launch Pad 39A. Right: Liftoff of space shuttle Atlantis on STS-129.
On Nov. 16, at 2:28 p.m. EST, space shuttle Atlantis lifted off from Launch Pad 39A to begin its 31st trip into space, carrying its six-member crew on the ULF3 space station outfitting and resupply mission. Eight and a half minutes later, Atlantis and its crew had reached orbit. The flight marked Hobaugh’s third time in space, having flown on STS-104 and STS-118, Foreman’s and Melvin’s second, having flown on STS-123 and STS-122, respectively, while Wilmore, Bresnik, and Satcher enjoyed their first taste of weightlessness.
Left: The two EXPRESS Logistics Carriers in Atlantis’ payload bay. Middle: Leland D. Melvin participates in the inspection of Atlantis’ thermal protection system. Right: The Shuttle Remote Manipulator System grasps the Orbiter Boom Sensor System for the inspection.
After reaching orbit, the crew opened the payload bay doors, deployed the shuttle’s radiators, and removed their bulky launch and entry suits, stowing them for the remainder of the flight. The astronauts spent six hours on their second day in space conducting a detailed inspection of Atlantis’ nose cap and wing leading edges, with Hobaugh, Wilmore, Melvin, and Bresnik taking turns operating the Shuttle Remote Manipulator System (SRMS), or robotic arm, and the Orbiter Boom Sensor System (OBSS).
Left: The International Space Station as seen from Atlantis during the rendezvous and docking maneuver. Middle: Atlantis as seen from the space station, showing the two EXPRESS Logistics Carriers (ELC) in the payload bay. Right: View of the space station from Atlantis during the rendezvous pitch maneuver, with the Shuttle Remote Manipulator System grasping ELC-1 in preparation for transfer shortly after docking.
On the mission’s third day, Hobaugh assisted by his crewmates brought Atlantis in for a docking with the space station. During the rendezvous, Hobaugh stopped the approach at 600 feet and completed the Rendezvous Pitch Maneuver so astronauts aboard the station could photograph Atlantis’ underside to look for any damage to the tiles. Shortly after docking, the crews opened the hatches between the two spacecraft and the six-person station crew welcomed the six-member shuttle crew. After the welcoming ceremony, Stott joined the STS-129 crew, leaving a crew of five aboard the station. Melvin and Bresnik used the SRMS to pick up ELC-1 from the payload bay and hand it off to Wilmore and Expedition 21 NASA astronaut Jeffrey N. Williams operating the Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS), who then installed it on the P3 truss segment.
Images from the first spacewalk. Left: Michael J. Foreman unstows the S-band Antenna Support Assembly prior to transferring it to the station. Middle: Robert “Bobby” L. Satcher lubricates the robotic arm’s Latching End Effector. Right: Satcher’s image reflected in a Z1 radiator panel.
During the mission’s first of three spacewalks on flight day four, Foreman and Satcher ventured outside for six hours and 37 minutes. During the excursion, with robotic help from their fellow crew members, they transferred a spare S-band Antenna Support Assembly from the shuttle’s payload bay to the station’s Z1 truss. Satcher, an orthopedic surgeon by training, performed “surgery” on the station’s main robotic arm as well as the robotic arm on the Kibo Japanese module, by lubricating their latching end effectors. One day after joining Atlantis’ crew, Stott celebrated her 47th birthday.
Left: Space station crew member Jeffery N. Williams assists STS-129 astronaut Leland D. Melvin in operating the space station’s robotic arm to transfer and install the second EXPRESS Logistics Carrier (ELC2) on the S3 truss. Middle: The station robotic arm installs ELC2 on the S3 truss. Right: Michael J. Foreman, left, and Randolph J. Bresnik during the mission’s second spacewalk.
On the mission’s fifth day, the astronauts performed another focused inspection of the shuttle’s thermal protection system. The next day, through another coordinated robotic activity involving the shuttle and station arms, the astronauts transferred ELC-2 and its complement of spares from the payload bay to the station’s S3 truss. Foreman and Bresnik completed the mission’s second spacewalk. Working on the Columbus module, they installed the Grappling Adaptor to On-Orbit Railing (GATOR) fixture that includes a system used for ship identification and an antenna for Ham radio operators. They next installed a wireless video transmission system on the station’s truss. This spacewalk lasted six hours and eight minutes.
Left: Randolph J. Bresnik during the third STS-129 spacewalk. Middle: Robert “Bobby” L. Satcher during the third spacewalk. Right: The MISSE 7 exposure experiment suitcases installed on ELC2.
Following a crew off duty day, on flight day eight Satcher and Bresnik exited the airlock for the mission’s third and final spacewalk. Their first task involved moving an oxygen tank from the newly installed ELC-2 to the Quest airlock. They accomplished this task with robotic assistance from their fellow crew members. Bresnik retrieved the two-suitcase sized MISSE-7 experiment containers from the shuttle cargo bay and installed them on the MISSE-7 platform on ELC-2, opening them to begin their exposure time. This third spacewalk lasted five hours 42 minutes.
Left: An early Thanksgiving meal for 12 aboard the space station. Right: After the meal, who has the dishes?
Thanksgiving Day fell on the day after undocking, so the joint crews celebrated with a meal a few days early. The meal represented not only the largest Thanksgiving celebration in space with 12 participants, but also the most international, with four nations represented – the United States, Russia, Canada, and Belgium (representing the European Space Agency).
Left: The 12 members of Expedition 21 and STS-129 pose for a final photograph before saying their farewells. Right: The STS-129 crew, now comprising seven members.
A selection of STS-129 Earth observation images. Left: Maui. Middle: Los Angeles. Right: Houston.
Despite their busy workload, as with all space crews, the STS-129 astronauts made time to look out the windows and took hundreds of photographs of their home planet.
Left: The space station seen from Atlantis during the flyaround. Middle: Atlantis as seen from the space station during the flyaround, with a now empty payload bay. Right: Astronaut Nicole P. Stott looks back at the station, her home for three months, from the departing Atlantis.
On flight day nine, the joint crews held a brief farewell ceremony. European Space Agency astronaut Frank De Winne, the first European to command the space station, handed over command to NASA astronaut Williams. The two crews parted company and closed the hatches between the two spacecraft. The next day, with Wilmore at the controls, Atlantis undocked from the space station, having spent seven days as a single spacecraft. Wilmore completed a flyaround of the station, with the astronauts photographing it to document its condition. A final separation burn sent Atlantis on its way.
The astronauts used the shuttle’s arm to pick up the OBSS and perform a late inspection of Atlantis’ thermal protection system. On flight day 11, Hobaugh and Wilmore tested the orbiter’s reaction control system thrusters and flight control surfaces in preparation for the next day’s entry and landing. The entire crew busied themselves with stowing all unneeded equipment.
Left: Atlantis about to touch down at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Middle: Atlantis touches down. Right: Atlantis deploys its drag chute as it continues down the runway.
Left: Six of the STS-129 astronauts pose with Atlantis on the runway at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Right: The welcome home ceremony for the STS-129 crew at Ellington Field in Houston.
On Nov. 27, the astronauts closed Atlantis’ payload bay doors, donned their launch and entry suits, and strapped themselves into their seats, a special recumbent one for Stott who had spent the last three months in weightlessness. Hobaugh fired Atlantis’ two Orbital Maneuvering System engines to bring them out of orbit and head for a landing half an orbit later. He guided Atlantis to a smooth touchdown at KSC’s Shuttle Landing Facility.
The landing capped off a very successful STS-129 mission of 10 days, 19 hours, 16 minutes. The six astronauts orbited the planet 171 times. Stott spent 90 days, 10 hours, 45 minutes in space, completing 1,423 orbits of the Earth. After towing Atlantis to the OPF, engineers began preparing it for its next flight, STS-132 in May 2010. The astronauts returned to Houston for a welcoming ceremony at Ellington Field.
Enjoy the crew narrate a video about the STS-129 mission.
Explore More
23 min read 55 Years Ago: Apollo 12 Makes a Pinpoint Landing on the Moon
Article 4 days ago 12 min read 40 Years Ago: STS-51A – “The Ace Repo Company”
Article 1 week ago 1 min read Oral History with Jon A. McBride, 1943 – 2024
Article 2 weeks ago View the full article
-
-
Check out these Videos
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.