Link Budgets and Data Rates
The problem
Section titled “The problem”A surface vehicle has to return science and engineering data and receive a command load every sol, on a power and mass budget that does not allow a large antenna. The rate it achieves is set by which antenna is used, whether the far end is an orbiter overhead or a Deep Space Network dish, the Earth to Mars range at the time, and the coding. On MER the choices span four and a half orders of magnitude, from 10 bit/s on the low gain antenna to Earth up to 256 kbit/s on UHF to Odyssey [1].
Power and mass limits on landed systems favor an orbiter relay over a direct link to Earth, and round-trip light time rules out a control loop closed over the link. Round-trip light time sets the other constraint. Teleoperation completion time grows linearly with round-trip delay because operators fall into a move-and-wait strategy [23], which is the original argument for putting decision making on the vehicle and for sizing the link to carry data products rather than a control loop. The ground side has followed the same logic: Deep Space Network operations moved from 14 operators per antenna in 1980 to one operator per link by the 2000s through automation [20].
Four families of link are in use or proposed.
- UHF proximity relay to an orbiter. Flown on every Mars surface mission since Sojourner’s successors, and the main data path for MER, Phoenix, Curiosity and Perseverance [1][2][9][8].
- X-band direct to or from Earth. Flown on every Mars rover as the command path and contingency downlink [1][2].
- Open-loop recording and semaphore at entry. Flown for MSL and Schiaparelli entry, where closed-loop links lose lock [6][11][13].
- Store-and-forward networking (delay tolerant networking) and lunar relay standards. Flown only as experiments at a Deep Impact distance and on the International Space Station; a Mars relay topology was simulated and the lunar surface specification is a draft [14][15][5][17].
What has flown
Section titled “What has flown”Mars relay and Phoenix. The 1997 analysis that sized the first Mars UHF relay quantified the price: contact time per sol depends on relay orbit, latitude and the sun elevation at which the rover may transmit, and the predicted return for an 8 kbit/s link was 2.5 Mbytes per sol at the equator and 9.0 Mbytes per sol at 70 degrees south via Mars Global Surveyor [12]. Those were predictions of a link that had not yet been closed. Phoenix was the first Mars lander flown with no direct-to-Earth link of its own, and its relay record is the measured counterpart: 860 passes returned 38,120 Mb over 157 sols, an average of 242 Mb/sol against a 60 Mb/sol requirement [9]. The figure applies to a 68 degrees north site and a negotiated pass allocation, and about a third of the returned volume was fill bits.
MER, 2004 onward. Odyssey’s best recorded MER pass returned 170 Mb, while the best UHF pass at 128 kbit/s was on the order of 110 Mb; a horizon to horizon overflight can last as long as 17 min [1]. Contingency inverts the ordering: the fault configuration drops the uplink to 7.8125 bit/s and the downlink to 10 bit/s on the low gain antenna, the state Spirit was found in during the sol 18 flash anomaly [1].
Curiosity and MSL, 2012 onward. The UHF return link is capable of 2 to 2048 kbit/s with an effective maximum around 1.35 Mbit/s, and the X-band direct uplink carries the daily command load of about 225 kbit in 15 to 20 minutes, an average 190 bit/s [2]. Entry used the semaphore and open-loop chain described below.
Perseverance, 2021 onward. The UHF return link added low-density parity-check coding, the first on a Mars lander, and raised the bitstream mode maximum from 256 kbit/s to 2 Mbit/s [8]. Daily total return averaged 1.5 to 2 Gibit/sol through sol 216 [8].
Ingenuity, 2021 onward. The Ingenuity to Perseverance link is a 914 MHz Zigbee radio with two monopole antennas, and the whole helicopter telecom subsystem is limited to 14 g [28]. The link budget assumed line of sight over flat ground, which held for the first five flights inside the 1 km demonstration range. After the mission extension the in-house Bullington tool was off by more than 20 dB in the non line of sight cases behind communication losses on sols 178, 282 and 287 [29].
Queqiao and Chang’e-4. The relay in an Earth-Moon L2 halo orbit carries a 4.2 m antenna and forwards commands to the farside lander and rover at 125 bit/s with over 5 dB margin [35]. Return links are budgeted at 285 kbit/s from the rover and 555 kbit/s from the lander with a directional surface dish, falling to 700 and 1400 bit/s on omnidirectional antennas [35]. These are budgets with margins, not measured campaign results.
IM-1 Odysseus. The lander came down tipped over near the lunar south pole, and the Deep Space Network was assigned to it after launch with no scheduled passes and no Space Link Extension interface to the operator [30]. Analysis of 48 tracks and over 2 TB of raw samples characterized severe multipath fading during surface operations, which cannot be separated from the off-nominal antenna pointing [30].
Entry, descent and landing links
Section titled “Entry, descent and landing links”Entry is the one phase where coverage, and not rate, sets the link design [11]. Every NASA mission after Mars Polar Lander lost its descent telemetry must be covered by at least two of direct-to-Earth X-band, MRO UHF and Odyssey UHF from entry interface to one minute after landing, and for MSL that requirement shaped the launch period choice. The thresholds used were -163.35 dBm at the Deep Space Network for a 21 dB-Hz carrier-to-noise-density ratio, -130.8 dBm for MRO and -125 dBm for Odyssey and Mars Express at 8 kbps [11]. Flight against prediction: MRO acquired MSL 8 min 7 s before entry interface against a predicted 7 min 36 s to 8 min 20 s, and Odyssey came above threshold at 2 min 18 s after entry against a predicted 1 min 20 s, a miss the paper attributes to plasma blackout although its own blackout timing does not fully account for it [11]. Of the four links the paper tabulates, only two have both a prediction and a flight value.
Three capture strategies cover different failure modes: open-loop recording at 8 bits per sample to survive loss of lock, 1-bit recording that supports only carrier reconstruction, and real-time bent-pipe demodulation for latency [10]. Schiaparelli showed the value of the first: open-loop recording by Electra on Trace Gas Orbiter reconstructed the full 8 kb/s telemetry stream and made the anomaly diagnosable, while the 46 planned surface relay passes across four orbiters returned nothing [13]. The relay link can also serve as a navigation measurement. A covariance analysis predicted the mapped position error falling from nearly 2.5 km to under 100 m within minutes of the first UHF Doppler, but nothing in that study was built or flown [22]. After landing, Phoenix UHF Doppler gave a 12 m formal position error after eight Odyssey and three MRO passes [9].
MSL entry direct link, measured end to end
Section titled “MSL entry direct link, measured end to end”The Mars Science Laboratory entry direct link is a rare case where a prediction, a threshold and a flight measurement of the same link are all published together. Because Doppler dynamics through banking and parachute deployment make phase-modulated telemetry impossible, MSL radiated a semaphore instead: 256 multiple-frequency-shift-keyed tones, 10 s each, on a residual carrier, the first tone at a 2000 Hz offset with 70.5883 Hz nominal spacing [6]. Canberra received it on the 70 m DSS-43 as prime and on a DSS-34 and DSS-45 34 m array as backup.
Measured. Averaged over the whole EDL pass on 5 August 2012, carrier power to noise spectral density on DSS-43 was 27.8 dB-Hz and tone power to noise density 26.4 dB-Hz [6]. Predicted before flight, from the detection-probability equations with the parachute segment parameters: about 23 dB-Hz total power to noise density for 99.9 percent carrier acquisition and about 28 dB-Hz for tone detection, both read off plotted curves rather than tabulated. All radiated tones were correctly detected in real time, verified afterwards against the spacecraft’s own record of which tones it issued [6]. That 100 percent is the design target and it arrives with no margin measurement: the paper reports no missed or marginal tone, so the operating margin above threshold is inferred from a pass average rather than demonstrated. By the authors’ own configuration reasoning some tones were expected to be missed during parachute deployment, because the receiving assembly’s 1 s minimum incoherent integration exceeds the 0.73 s the dynamics called for [6], and that prediction is never revisited against the flight data.
Arraying against a single large aperture. The 34 m array was predicted to sit 4.44 dB below the 70 m antenna, computed from G/T assuming no combining loss [6]. The measured mean difference over the window from 645 s before entry to 299 s after was 4.26 dB, implying about 0.18 dB of mean combining loss. Read that as a residual rather than a clean measurement: the prediction takes a 34 m G/T of 18 percent of a 70 m from the DSN Telecommunications Link Design Handbook rather than measuring it, so the 0.18 dB inherits the handbook value [6].
Where the link went away. Two configuration changes produced outages, 7 s at cruise stage separation where the stage briefly obstructed the Parachute Low Gain Antenna, and 4 s at the swap from that antenna to the Tilted Low Gain Antenna [6]. The closed-loop receivers additionally lost lock at cruise stage separation, the antenna swap, banking and parachute deployment, which is the reason the open-loop semaphore chain was prime rather than backup.
Event timing against the six degree of freedom prediction: bank 1 about 2 s late, bank 2 about 6 s late, bank 3 about 2 s early, maximum deceleration about 9 s late, and entry itself 1 s later than the navigation predict [6]. The source table’s predicted and actual columns transpose on at least two rows, so the individual times are unreliable.
One number on this link is a fit and not a validation. The Small Deep Space Transponder auxiliary oscillator frequency against temperature was fitted as a cubic with R squared 0.9977 against the oscillator sensor and 0.9984 against the baseplate sensor, but the fit was made to cruise data in thermal equilibrium, and EDL is rapid heating with the baseplate overshooting the oscillator [6]. No residual against the EDL data is reported, so the polynomial describes cruise and does not predict the entry excursion.
Direct to Earth against relay
Section titled “Direct to Earth against relay”Direct to Earth survives because it does not depend on another spacecraft. Curiosity’s X-band direct-from-Earth uplink is the primary path for the daily command load, about 225 kbit in 15 to 20 minutes on the high gain antenna, equivalent to an average 190 bit/s, with a 15 minute setup allowance before the window and a 10 minute rover activity keep-out afterward for post-pass processing [2]. Direct-to-Earth downlink is used for limited amounts of data independent of the relay orbiters, and the two are often combined into one station pass long enough to verify the uplinked commands in the telemetry that follows, accounting for round trip light time. On MER, in the extended mission, a flight software update was uplinked at 1000 bit/s and then at 2000 bit/s in February 2005, the highest uplink rate the 20 kW transmitters supported [1].
Contingency inverts the ordering. The MER fault configuration drops the uplink to 7.8125 bit/s and the downlink to 10 bit/s on the low gain antenna, which is the state Spirit was found in during the sol 18 flash anomaly [1]. The Deep Space Network itself is a shared resource: projections from a 2021 mission set put the downlink count about 3.6 times higher in the 2030s than in 2020, with excess demand expressed in antenna equivalents [21]. These are model projections and not measurements.
What is being tried now
Section titled “What is being tried now”Coding, adaptive rate and onboard data reduction
Section titled “Coding, adaptive rate and onboard data reduction”Status: flown. LDPC on the UHF return link and adaptive-rate suppressed carrier operation are in routine relay use, and the effective-rate mechanisms are tabulated under the numbers below. Onboard data reduction. Reducing the bits sent is a cheaper lever than raising the rate. On Mars 2020 GZIP compressed 88.8 Gibit of non-image data to 27.5 Gibit through sol 216, and daily total return averaged 1.5 to 2 Gibit/sol over UHF; pre-packetization and bitstream windows had only ground test results at that point [8]. A UHF pass that reaches about 2 Mb/s through many small products can drain the downlink packet buffer and cause fill data about once every 10 sols [8].
Terrain-aware prediction and pass allocation
Section titled “Terrain-aware prediction and pass allocation”Status: flown on the ground side, tools in operations. Prediction of received power behind terrain is now treated as a planning necessity: for Ingenuity, the parabolic equation method on 1 m HiRISE topography brought the prediction error standard deviation under 3.1 dB against measured power from 50 flights, for one vehicle pair, one site and one band [29]. For Curiosity in Paraitepuy Pass, a horizon profile from HiRISE and HRSC elevation models is plotted against orbiter overflight geometry because the telecom prediction tools model no terrain [32]. For the Mars Sample Return campaign concept, a JPL allocation tool divides relay passes among three co-located assets with terrain masking and split passes; it reports no measurement, only model output under assumptions [33].
Delay tolerant networking
Section titled “Delay tolerant networking”Status: flight experiments, no operational use. Delay tolerant networking replaces the single-pass assumption with store-and-forward bundles. The CCSDS profile mandates reliable storage at each node and an extended class of service block with 256 ordinal priority levels, and it states no throughput, latency or storage figure [16]. A one-week simulation of a Mars relay with two landers, two orbiters and three DSN stations showed bundle delivery over Proximity-1, omitting bit errors, finite buffers and multiple priorities [14]. The flight evidence is the 2008 Deep Impact experiment: about 300 images moved over 27 days at 24 million km with every bundle delivered uncorrupted despite DSN service lapses and an injected 3.125 percent segment loss, and about 20 percent of uplink capacity went to telecommand coding overhead before the bundle layer saw it [15]. Two of its four metrics met their utilization criteria only after underutilized passes and non-DTN overhead were excluded.
Delay tolerant networking on the International Space Station runs over a Ku-band space-to-ground link nominally 20 Mbit/s down and 4 Mbit/s up, with a maximum allowable 90 Mbit/s down for DTN traffic although it is typically limited to about 30 Mbit/s [5]. Measured DTN throughput was about 15 Mbit/s down and 4 Mbit/s up with 100,000 byte bundles. Those rates are three orders of magnitude above any Mars surface link, so protocol overhead and congestion control results from low Earth orbit do not carry across.
Relay architecture and optical links
Section titled “Relay architecture and optical links”Status: proposal and simulation. The relay link rate range is set by the transceiver generation. A 2001 planning paper put the relay case at over 100 dB less path loss than a direct Earth link and projected 512 kbit/s over a UHF relay against 12.5 kbit/s direct for a 2007 lander; these are design values for missions not yet flown [25]. The 2016 international relay framework tabulates forward and return rate ranges for NASA and ESA landers, rovers and orbiters, and states Proximity-1 UHF at 435 to 450 MHz forward and 390 to 405 MHz return with rates of 1 to 2048 kbit/s [24]. Those are specified capabilities and not measured throughput. The one operating snapshot it gives is a late 2015 average of 561 Mb/day returned from MER and MSL over 446 overflights in three months [24].
Optical links are proposed as the next step in rate, and none has been used from a landed vehicle. A JPL point design for the Moon gave more than 200 Mb/s from a mobile 5 cm terminal and more than 1000 Mb/s from a stationary 10 cm terminal at 1 W to a 1 m ground station, with a laboratory-only test of delay tolerant networking over an optical carrier [26]. A DSN loading simulation of one notional Mars optical relay case realized 80 to 93 percent of requested downlink track hours because of station visibility, with weather ignored and no flight validation [27].
A JPL architecture paper for the network of 2030 to 2040 envisions CCSDS delay tolerant networking, optical plus RF links and voice and video relay, with no measurements; its readiness estimates of 5 to 10 years for optical and 15 to 25 for DTN connectivity are the authors’ expectations [34].
Surface-to-surface and lunar links
Section titled “Surface-to-surface and lunar links”Status: ground tests and simulation, one lunar flight demonstration planned or underway. Two groups of links have no flown Mars-scale counterpart in this record. For surface-to-surface radio, ray-tracing over Jezero terrain gave a path loss exponent of 1.93 with 5.31 dB shadowing on flat ground and 2.84 with 16.27 dB shadowing on rocky ground; these are simulation results with no Mars measurement to validate them [18]. For the Moon, the draft LunaNet interoperability specification names Wi-Fi 6, 3GPP LTE and 5G, and UHF at 390 to 405 and 435 to 450 MHz for surface links, and states no link budgets or data rates [17]. A 2005 strawman architecture computed theoretical lunar and Mars link rates from an assumed customer set, not a validated requirement [19].
NASA’s plan to base lunar surface communications on 3GPP cellular plus Wi-Fi includes a 4G LTE system manifested on Intuitive Machines IM-2 for lander-to-rover links at 200 to 300 m and up to 2 km, and an Artemis III objective of 45 minutes of 720p video per one hour window at 2 km or more; the source predates any results, so every figure is a target [31].
The numbers
Section titled “The numbers”Rates by band and path
Section titled “Rates by band and path”| Path | Vehicle | Rate |
|---|---|---|
| UHF return to orbiter | Spirit, Opportunity | 8, 32, 128 or 256 kbit/s, radio capable of all four |
| UHF forward from orbiter | Spirit, Opportunity | 8 kbit/s only, limited by the flight system design |
| UHF return to orbiter | Curiosity | 2 to 2048 kbit/s available; Odyssey supports only 8, 32, 128, 256 |
| UHF forward from orbiter | Curiosity | 2 to 256 kbit/s; 32 kbit/s nominal with MRO, 8 or 32 with Odyssey |
| X-band direct to Earth, high gain antenna | Spirit, Opportunity | up to 28.8 kbit/s at short range |
| X-band direct from Earth, high gain antenna | Spirit, Opportunity | up to 2 kbit/s at short range |
| X-band direct to Earth, low gain antenna | Spirit, Opportunity | 10 bit/s minimum |
| X-band direct from Earth, low gain antenna | Spirit, Opportunity | 7.8125 bit/s minimum |
| X-band direct to Earth, high gain antenna | Curiosity | requirement 160 bit/s to a 34 m station, 800 bit/s to a 70 m station |
| X-band direct from Earth, high gain antenna | Curiosity | typically 1 or 2 kbit/s, never below 500 bit/s to a 34 m station |
| X-band direct from Earth, low gain antenna | Curiosity | 15 bit/s at maximum range; 7.8125 bit/s at 70 degrees off boresight to a 70 m station |
Sources: [1] for MER, [2] for Curiosity. The gap between the UHF and X-band columns is the argument for relay: Curiosity’s direct-to-Earth downlink requirement is 160 bit/s while its relay return link reaches about 1.35 Mbit/s.
What sets the effective rate
Section titled “What sets the effective rate”Antenna and pointing. Curiosity’s high gain antenna is 0.28 m across on a two degree of freedom gimbal with 5 degree system pointing accuracy including rover attitude knowledge, and at 5 degrees off boresight the downlink gain is about 4 dB lower and the uplink gain about 3 dB lower [2]. The solid state power amplifier transmits 15 W. On MER the antenna choice ordering by capability is, from least to greatest, low gain antenna to 34 m stations, low gain antenna to 70 m stations, high gain antenna to 34 m stations, and Earth-pointed high gain antenna to 70 m stations [1].
Range. MER’s nominal cruise uplink rate was 125 bit/s. On the surface the high gain antenna uplink started at 1000 bit/s and fell to 500 bit/s as the Earth to Mars distance grew; the low gain antenna uplink started at 31.25 bit/s and was later reduced to 15.625 bit/s. Curiosity shows the same dependence: its low gain antenna uplink capability dips to 15.625 bit/s at large ranges at a 40 degree off-boresight angle and to 7.8125 bit/s at 70 degrees, and is always at least 31.25 bit/s if a 70 m station is scheduled [2]. Odyssey’s own X-band downlink to the Deep Space Network started the MER primary mission at up to 110 kbit/s and fell to about 40 kbit/s into a 70 m station and 14 kbit/s into a 34 m antenna as range increased [1].
Coding. MER telemetry is convolutionally encoded at either (7,1/2) or (15,1/6), with Reed-Solomon encoding and frame and packet formatting done in avionics before the telecom hardware applies the convolutional code; the data clock is doubled for (7,1/2) and multiplied by six for (15,1/6) [1]. For a given antenna and station combination, (15,1/6) gives on average slightly greater capability than (7,1/2). The UHF relay links use bypass or (7,1/2) convolutional coding on both forward and return [2]. Perseverance’s UHF return link added low-density parity-check coding, the first on a Mars lander, and raised the bitstream mode maximum from 256 kbit/s on Curiosity to 2 Mbit/s [8]. Set against convolutionally coded overflights, LDPC returned 26 percent more data on the Trace Gas Orbiter link and about 70 percent more, equivalently 2.3 dB, on the MAVEN link over the first 27 LDPC overflights [7]. The MAVEN figure is estimated against convolutional predicts rather than paired passes, and the gain varies with orbit geometry.
Framing and protocol. Proximity-1 fixes the Version-3 transfer frame at a 5-octet header plus up to 2043 octets of data in a 2048-octet maximum, with a 3-octet sync marker and 4-octet CRC around it, so overhead on a full frame is 12 octets, under 0.6 percent [4]. The specification contains no throughput or pass-level measurement, so the effective-rate losses come from the flight records: the 8 kbit/s hail, the forward traffic sharing the pass, and retransmission under the reliable service. Perseverance reports 99.9 percent of MSL relay sessions using the reliable mode [8]. Open-loop and bitstream modes are the fallback for entry, and a transceiver without a data scrambler was found to stall an adaptive-rate suppressed-carrier link on repeating data patterns during Schiaparelli interoperability testing [13].
Modulation and adaptive rate. Proximity-1 carries the data rate as a negotiable session parameter rather than a fixed configuration, which is what makes an in-pass rate change possible at all [4]. The Curiosity to MRO return link uses suppressed carrier modulation with adaptive data rates, changing the return rate during a pass under Proximity-1 control; Odyssey links must use residual carrier at a fixed rate for the whole contact [2]. Only the return rate is adapted, the forward rate staying at 32 kbit/s, and the hailing interaction that opens every link runs at 8 kbit/s. Throughput efficiencies at the MRO or MSL end cap the effective maximum around 1.35 Mbit/s, depending on how much forward data MRO is sending at the same time.
Measured against predicted
Section titled “Measured against predicted”Odyssey’s best recorded MER pass returned 170 Mb, while the best UHF pass at 128 kbit/s was on the order of 110 Mb; a horizon to horizon Odyssey overflight can last as long as 17 min, and the 120 Mb per rover buffer allocation corresponds to about 15 min of data at 128 kbit/s [1]. Late in the extended mission at near maximum Earth range, two consecutive rover passes to Odyssey could fall only 2 hours apart while Odyssey’s minimum X-band downlink of 14 kbit/s to the Deep Space Network let it clear only about 50 Mb per hour, including higher priority Odyssey data, so relay data could be overwritten before it was sent.
Prediction error for Phoenix through MRO over a 30 day period, at a 2 dB margin policy [3]:
| Elevation mask | Average data volume delta | Passes more than 10 percent below predict |
|---|---|---|
| 10 degrees | -0.22 percent | 25.00 percent |
| 15 degrees | +13.13 percent | 3.75 percent |
Prediction accuracy is limited by the rover UHF antenna pattern rather than by the link equation. MER operations continued to have difficulty predicting return volume because the antenna gain pattern is asymmetric in azimuth and can be badly distorted by the vehicle structure, and the prediction packages in use were described as crude [1]. The same problem motivated building data volume prediction tools for the Phoenix and MSL surface missions [3]. Pre-landing MSL relay budgets and per-sol volumes were published as plans, and the paper that gives them reports no comparison with anything flown [10].
What is not established
Section titled “What is not established”The record is dominated by JPL relay and telecommunications reports for Mars, so the rate tables describe MER, Phoenix, Curiosity and Perseverance and say little about other operators or the Moon. Most published relay volumes are predictions or single-mission operating points: the Phoenix average depends on its latitude and pass allocation [9], and the pre-flight MSL relay budgets are not compared with flight in the source [10]. The LDPC gain on MAVEN is estimated against predicts [7]. Entry-link margin above threshold is inferred from averages, not measured per tone [6]. The Proximity-1 specification contains no efficiency measurement [4], so protocol cost in operation is known only from mission reports. Delay tolerant networking has no flight data beyond the Deep Impact experiment [15] and low Earth orbit [5], the lunar surface link specification is a draft [17], and no Mars surface radio propagation measurement exists [18]. Optical link figures are point designs and simulations [26][27], and the transceiver rate tables are specifications, not measurements [24]. Lunar relay figures from Queqiao are budgets rather than campaign results [35], the IM-1 fade statistics come from one lander in an off-nominal attitude [30], the Ingenuity prediction error applies to one vehicle pair and site [29], and the lunar 3GPP figures are targets [31].
References
- Taylor, J., Makovsky, A., Barbieri, A., Tung, R., Estabrook, P. and Thomas, A. G. (2014). Mars Exploration Rover Telecommunications
. Deep Space Communications. Source
BibTeX
@incollection{taylor2014mars, title = {Mars Exploration Rover Telecommunications}, author = {Taylor, Jim and Makovsky, Andre and Barbieri, Andrea and Tung, Ramona and Estabrook, Polly and Thomas, A. Gail}, booktitle = {Deep Space Communications}, series = {DESCANSO Design and Performance Summary Series}, publisher = {Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology}, chapter = {7}, year = {2014}, url = {https://descanso.jpl.nasa.gov/monograph/series13/DeepCommo_Chapter7--141030.pdf} } - Makovsky, A., Ilott, P. and Taylor, J. (2009). Mars Science Laboratory Telecommunications System Design
. Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Article 14. Source
BibTeX
@techreport{makovsky2009mars, title = {Mars Science Laboratory Telecommunications System Design}, author = {Makovsky, Andre and Ilott, Peter and Taylor, Jim}, series = {DESCANSO Design and Performance Summary Series}, number = {Article 14}, institution = {Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology}, year = {2009}, url = {https://descanso.jpl.nasa.gov/DPSummary/Descanso14_MSL_Telecom.pdf} } - Taylor, J., Butman, S., Edwards, C., Ilott, P., Kornfeld, R., Lee, D., Shaffer, S. and Signori, G. (2010). Phoenix Telecommunications
. Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Article 15. Source
BibTeX
@techreport{taylor2010phoenix, title = {Phoenix Telecommunications}, author = {Taylor, Jim and Butman, Stan and Edwards, Chad and Ilott, Peter and Kornfeld, Richard and Lee, Dennis and Shaffer, Scott and Signori, Gina}, series = {DESCANSO Design and Performance Summary Series}, number = {Article 15}, institution = {Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology}, year = {2010}, url = {https://descanso.jpl.nasa.gov/DPSummary/PhxArticle_--RC101013DocX_COMPRESSED_AcronFixBU.pdf} } - CCSDS. (2020). Proximity-1 Space Link Protocol: Data Link Layer
. Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems, CCSDS 211.0-B-6, Blue Book. Source
BibTeX
@techreport{ccsds2020proximity, title = {Proximity-1 Space Link Protocol: Data Link Layer}, author = {{CCSDS}}, number = {CCSDS 211.0-B-6, Blue Book}, institution = {Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems}, year = {2020}, url = {https://ccsds.org/Pubs/211x0b6e1.pdf} } - Schlesinger, A., Willman, B. M., Pitts, L., Davidson, S. R. and Pohlchuck, W. A. (2016). Delay/Disruption Tolerant Networking for the International Space Station (ISS)
. SpaceOps. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{schlesinger2016delay, title = {Delay/Disruption Tolerant Networking for the International Space Station (ISS)}, author = {Schlesinger, Adam and Willman, Brett M. and Pitts, Lee and Davidson, Suzanne R. and Pohlchuck, William A.}, booktitle = {SpaceOps}, pages = {1-14}, year = {2016}, doi = {10.1109/aero.2017.7943857}, abstract = {Disruption Tolerant Networking (DTN) is an emerging data networking technology designed to abstract the hardware communication layer from the spacecraft/payload computing resources. DTN is specifically designed to operate in environments where link delays and disruptions are common (e.g., space-based networks). The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has demonstrated DTN on several missions, such as the Deep Impact Networking (DINET) experiment, the Earth Observing Mission 1 (EO-1) and the Lunar Laser Communication Demonstration (LLCD). To further the maturation of DTN, NASA is implementing DTN protocols on the International Space Station (ISS). This paper explains the architecture of the ISS DTN network, the operational support for the system, the results from integrated ground testing, and the future work for DTN expansion.} } - Soriano, M., Finley, S., Finley, S., Schratz, B., Ilott, P., Mukai, R., Estabrook, P., Oudrhiri, K., Kahan, D. and Satorius, E. (2013). Direct-to-Earth communications with Mars Science Laboratory during entry, descent, and landing
. IEEE Aerospace Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{soriano2013direct, title = {Direct-to-Earth communications with Mars Science Laboratory during entry, descent, and landing}, author = {Soriano, Melissa and Finley, Susan and Finley, Susan and Schratz, Brian and Ilott, Peter and Mukai, Ryan and Estabrook, Polly and Oudrhiri, Kamal and Kahan, Daniel and Satorius, Edgar}, booktitle = {IEEE Aerospace Conference}, pages = {1-14}, publisher = {IEEE}, year = {2013}, doi = {10.1109/aero.2013.6496816}, abstract = {Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) undergoes extreme heating and acceleration during Entry, Descent, and Landing (EDL) on Mars. Unknown dynamics lead to large Doppler shifts, making communication challenging. During EDL, a special form of Multiple Frequency Shift Keying (MFSK) communication is used for Direct-To-Earth (DTE) communication. The X-band signal is received by the Deep Space Network (DSN) at the Canberra Deep Space Communication complex, then down-converted, digitized, and recorded by open-loop Radio Science Receivers (RSR), and decoded in real-time by the EDL Data Analysis (EDA) System. The EDA uses lock states with configurable Fast Fourier Transforms to acquire and track the signal. RSR configuration and channel allocation is shown. Testing prior to EDL is discussed including software simulations, test bed runs with MSL flight hardware, and the in-flight end-to-end test. EDA configuration parameters and signal dynamics during pre-entry, entry, and parachute deployment are analyzed. RSR and EDA performance during MSL EDL is evaluated, including performance using a single 70-meter DSN antenna and an array of two 34-meter DSN antennas as a back up to the 70-meter antenna.} } - Young, E., Yang, G., Wagner, T., Ridenhour, F., Lawler, C. and Cox, N. (2023). Relay Planning in the Perseverance Rover's First 600 Solar Days on Mars
. IEEE Aerospace Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{young2023relay, title = {Relay Planning in the Perseverance Rover's First 600 Solar Days on Mars}, author = {Young, Emma and Yang, Genevie and Wagner, Travis and Ridenhour, Flora and Lawler, Christopher and Cox, Nagin}, booktitle = {IEEE Aerospace Conference}, publisher = {JPL Open Repository}, year = {2023}, doi = {10.48577/jpl.f9zcgz}, abstract = {Since landing in Jezero Crater on Mars on February 18, 2021, the Mars 2020 mission’s Perseverance rover has been performing daily operations on the Martian surface and has been collecting samples that may one day be returned to Earth. The majority of science and engineering data from the Perseverance rover is returned through the Mars orbiters operated by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the European Space Agency (ESA) that make up the Mars Relay Network: Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO), Mars Odyssey (ODY), Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution (MAVEN), and Trace Gas Orbiter (TGO). Prior to the rover’s landing, the Mars 2020 team joined the Mars Relay Network to begin planning relay through the coordinated, multi-mission process that is the cornerstone of relay planning. The Perseverance rover has now been on the Martian surface for more than 600 Martian solar days (“sols”) with several UHF relay sessions planned and executed per sol. The Mars 2020 relay planning team has established and improved upon the recurring process and tool suite to enable both data return and forward link of rover uplink products, and continues to coordinate and negotiate relay asset usages and constraints with the Mars Science Laboratory and Insight relay planning teams. Among many accomplishments, the relay planning team has supported checkouts and commissioning of Low-Density Parity-Check (LDPC) relay link configurations, the mission’s first solar conjunction period, and several rover flight software transitions.The Mars 2020 team has also been performing a checkout and commissioning campaign for the use of bitstream, or “unreliable”, relay sessions. Nominal use of bitstream relay is a new operational capability intended for the Perseverance rover that will allow specific science or engineering activities to run in parallel with the relay session, rather than pausing all other activities during relay, enabling additional and more timely data return. Pending the completion of the checkout and commissioning campaign, the operations team plans to approve and begin regular scheduling and use of bitstream UHF relay sessions beginning in 2023. This paper describes the Mars 2020 relay planning processes and tool architecture, key accomplishments (including progress for the bitstream checkout and commissioning campaign), and lessons learned and ongoing challenges during the first 600 sols of the Mars 2020 surface mission.} } - Girerd, A. R., Kuhn, S., Roth, B., Gaines, D., Scandore, S., Cummings, D., Mendoza, R., Lefland, M., Bareh, M., Siegfriedt, R., Lenda, M., Reich, K., Shah, B. and Bohannon, E. (2022). Cross-Cutting Flight Infrastructure Improvements on M2020
. IEEE Aerospace Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{girerd2022cross, title = {Cross-Cutting Flight Infrastructure Improvements on M2020}, author = {Girerd, Andre R and Kuhn, Stephen and Roth, Brian and Gaines, Dan and Scandore, Steve and Cummings, David and Mendoza, Ricardo and Lefland, Mallory and Bareh, Magdy and Siegfriedt, Rebekah and Lenda, Matthew and Reich, Kevin and Shah, Biren and Bohannon, Emily}, booktitle = {IEEE Aerospace Conference}, pages = {1-15}, publisher = {IEEE}, year = {2022}, doi = {10.1109/aero53065.2022.9843523}, abstract = {Mars2020 (M2020) was formulated as a mission that leveraged as much Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) heritage as possible, while focusing major new development efforts on the original and unique elements needed to accomplish the different mission objectives. Well publicized examples of high profile new developments include precision landing, the sampling and caching system, the specific instrument suite, improved mobility via Autonomous Navigation, and later the addition of the Ingenuity helicopter. Less well known are the refinements to the core flight infrastructure, primarily in the cross-cutting functions of Telecom, Avionics, Data Management, Communications Behaviors, and Parameter Management. These enhancements are introduced predominately via flight software, and represent increases in capability that justified their inclusion in an otherwise heritage-focused project environment. Perseverance's cross-cutting flight infrastructure improvements fall into and across the following five categories. First is a trimming of the software footprint of infrastructure modules, in order to make room for memory demands elsewhere in the system. Second is the minimization of data volume to be downlinked, through various methods such as the incorporation of new compression options. Third is the maximization of the available downlink bandwidth for data, by curtailing content-less data (fill) and introducing an improved UHF proximity link protocol. Fourth is a reduction in vulnerabilities, through increased file system redundancy, robustness, and software process monitoring. Fifth is an increase in operations efficiency by lowering file system mount times, improving parallelism between simultaneous events, minimizing the time to recover from file system errors, streamlining the purging of obsolete data, and reducing the number of commands to service parameters by a factor of 100. Individually, none of the cross-cutting infrastructure improvements are likely to garner headlines, but collectively they appreciably improve the safety and operability of Perseverance over its predecessor. This paper will describe the improvements, their promise, and where applicable, their actual impact in operations.} } - Edwards, C. D. J., Erickson, J. K., Gladden, R. E., Guinn, J. R., Ilott, P. A., Jai, B., Johnston, M. D., Kornfeld, R. P., Martin-Mur, T. J., McSmith, G. W., Thomas, R. C., Varghese, P., Signori, G. and Schmitz, P. (2010). Telecommunications relay support of the Mars Phoenix Lander mission
. IEEE Aerospace Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{edwards2010telecommunications, title = {Telecommunications relay support of the Mars Phoenix Lander mission}, author = {Edwards, Charles D. Jr. and Erickson, James K. and Gladden, Roy E. and Guinn, Joseph R. and Ilott, Peter A. and Jai, Benhan and Johnston, Martin D. and Kornfeld, Richard P. and Martin-Mur, Tomas J. and McSmith, Gaylon W. and Thomas, Reid C. and Varghese, Phil and Signori, Gina and Schmitz, Peter}, booktitle = {IEEE Aerospace Conference}, pages = {1-13}, publisher = {IEEE}, year = {2010}, doi = {10.1109/aero.2010.5446953} } - Edwards, C. D. J., Arnold, B. W., Bell, D. J., Bruvold, K. N., Gladden, R. E., Ilott, P. A. and Lee, C. H. (2012). Relay support for the Mars Science Laboratory and the coming decade of Mars relay network evolution
. IEEE Aerospace Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{edwards2012relay, title = {Relay support for the Mars Science Laboratory and the coming decade of Mars relay network evolution}, author = {Edwards, Charles D. Jr. and Arnold, Bradford W. and Bell, David J. and Bruvold, Kristoffer N. and Gladden, Roy E. and Ilott, Peter A. and Lee, Charles H.}, booktitle = {IEEE Aerospace Conference}, pages = {1-11}, publisher = {IEEE}, year = {2012}, doi = {10.1109/aero.2012.6187113}, abstract = {In the past decade, an evolving network of Mars relay orbiters has provided telecommunication relay services to the Mars Exploration Rovers, Spirit and Opportunity, and to the Mars Phoenix Lander, enabling high-bandwidth, energy-efficient data transfer and greatly increasing the volume of science data that can be returned from the Martian surface, compared to conventional direct-to-Earth links. The current relay network, consisting of NASA's Odyssey and Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter and augmented by ESA's Mars Express Orbiter, stands ready to support the Mars Science Laboratory, scheduled to arrive at Mars on Aug 6, 2012, with new capabilities enabled by the Electra and Electra-Lite transceivers carried by MRO and MSL, respectively. The MAVEN orbiter, planned for launch in 2013, and the ExoMars/Trace Gas Orbiter, planned for launch in 2016, will replenish the on-orbit relay network as the current orbiter approach their end of life. Currently planned support scenarios for this future relay network include an ESA EDL Demonstrator Module deployed by the 2016 ExoMars/TGO orbiter, and the 2018 NASA/ESA Joint Rover, representing the first step in a multimission Mars Sample Return campaign.} } - Abilleira, F. and Shidner, J. D. (2012). Entry, Descent, and Landing Communications for the 2011 Mars Science Laboratory
. AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{abilleira2012entry, title = {Entry, Descent, and Landing Communications for the 2011 Mars Science Laboratory}, author = {Abilleira, Fernando and Shidner, Jeremy D.}, booktitle = {AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference}, publisher = {JPL Open Repository}, year = {2012}, url = {https://dataverse.jpl.nasa.gov/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=hdl:2014/43040} } - Horne, W. D., Hastrup, R. and Cesarone, R. (1997). Telecommunications for Mars Rovers and Robotic Missions
. AIAA ASCEND. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{horne1997telecommunicationsa, title = {Telecommunications for Mars Rovers and Robotic Missions}, author = {Horne, W. D. and Hastrup, Rolf and Cesarone, R.}, booktitle = {AIAA ASCEND}, publisher = {JPL Open Repository}, year = {1997}, url = {https://dataverse.jpl.nasa.gov/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=hdl:2014/21726} } - Edwards Jr., C. D., Asmar, S., Esterhuizen, S., Bruvold, K. N., Chamberlain, N. F., Gladden, R. E., Johnston, M. D., Kuperman, I., Mendoza, R., Potts, C. L., Wenkert, D., Denis, M., Schmitz, P., Wood, S., Bayle, O., Winton, A. and Montagna, M. (2017). NASA Relay Support to the ESA Schiaparelli Lander
. IEEE Aerospace Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{edwardsjr2017nasa, title = {NASA Relay Support to the ESA Schiaparelli Lander}, author = {Edwards Jr., Charles D. and Asmar, Sami and Esterhuizen, Stephan and Bruvold, Kristoffer N. and Chamberlain, Neil F. and Gladden, Roy E. and Johnston, Martin D. and Kuperman, Igor and Mendoza, Ricardo and Potts, Christopher L. and Wenkert, Daniel and Denis, Michel and Schmitz, Peter and Wood, Simon and Bayle, Olivier and Winton, Alistair and Montagna, Mario}, booktitle = {IEEE Aerospace Conference}, publisher = {JPL Open Repository}, year = {2017}, url = {https://dataverse.jpl.nasa.gov/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=hdl:2014/46397} } - Krupiarz, C. J., Jennings, E. H., Seguí, J. S., Pang, J. N., Schoolcraft, J. B. and Torgerson, J. L. (2006). Spacecraft data and relay management using delay tolerant networking
. SpaceOps Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{krupiarz2006spacecraft, title = {Spacecraft data and relay management using delay tolerant networking}, author = {Krupiarz, Christopher J. and Jennings, Esther H. and Seguí, John S and Pang, Jackson N and Schoolcraft, Joshua B. and Torgerson, J. Leigh}, booktitle = {SpaceOps Conference}, year = {2006}, doi = {10.2514/6.2006-5754}, abstract = {NASA's demonstration of the successful transmission of relay data through the orbiting Mars Odyssey, Mars Global Surveyor, and Mars Express by the Mars Exploration Rovers has shown not only the benefit of using a relay satellite for multiple landed assets in a deep space environment but also the benefit of international standards for such architecture. As NASA begins the quest defined in the Vision for Exploration with robotic and manned missions to the Moon, continues its study of Mars, and is joined in these endeavors by countries world-wide, landed assets transmitting data through relay satellites will be crucial for completing mission objectives. However, this method of delivery of data will result in increased complexity in routing and prioritization of data transmission as the number of missions increases. Also, there is currently no standard method among organizations conducting such missions to return these data sets to Earth given a complex environment. One possibility for establishing such a standard is for mission designers to deploy protocols which fall under the umbrella of Delay Tolerant Networking (DTN). These developing standards include the Bundle Protocol (BP) which provides a standard, secure, store and forward mechanism designed for high latency and asymmetric communication links and the Licklider Transmission Protocol (LTP) which is used to provide a reliable deep space link transmission service.} } - Jones, R. M. (2009). Disruption Tolerant Network Technology Flight Validation Report: DINET
. Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, JPL Publication 09-2. Source
BibTeX
@techreport{jones2009distribution, title = {Disruption Tolerant Network Technology Flight Validation Report: DINET}, author = {Jones, Ross M.}, number = {JPL Publication 09-2}, institution = {Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology}, year = {2009}, url = {https://dataverse.jpl.nasa.gov/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=hdl:2014/41477} } - CCSDS. (2015). CCSDS Bundle Protocol Specification
. Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems, CCSDS 734.2-B-1, Blue Book. Source
BibTeX
@techreport{ccsds2015bundle, title = {CCSDS Bundle Protocol Specification}, author = {{CCSDS}}, number = {CCSDS 734.2-B-1, Blue Book}, institution = {Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems}, year = {2015}, url = {https://ccsds.org/Pubs/734x2b1.pdf} } - Esper, J. (2022). Draft LunaNet Interoperability Specification
. NASA, NASA/TP-20210021073 Rev. 2. Source
BibTeX
@techreport{esper2022lunanet, title = {Draft LunaNet Interoperability Specification}, author = {Esper, Jaime}, number = {NASA/TP-20210021073 Rev. 2}, institution = {NASA}, year = {2022}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20220004317}, abstract = {This document, along with its companion documents, provides the basis for a comprehensive set of requirements for operation of a lunar communications and navigation network capable of interoperating with other networks compliant with the Lunar Network (LunaNet). LunaNet will include Earth ground stations and orbiting spacecraft and will provide services to human exploration, lunar science, and space technology missions. LunaNet will start with a simple architecture of a few nodes to meet the needs of the early missions and evolve to meet the growing needs of a sustained lunar presence. All relay network services are not expected to be met by a single spacecraft, or node. The expectation is that the needs of users will be met through a combination of interoperable systems provided by NASA, international partners, and commercial providers. Interoperability across this network-of-networks can be achieved through negotiation of mutually-agreed-upon standards that will be reflected in this document and in the specifications defined by other participants in the cooperative lunar network. This document was written and reviewed by NASA and the European Space Agency (ESA).} } - Koktas, E. and Basar, E. (2024). Communications for the Planet Mars: Past, Present, and Future
. IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, 5. Source
BibTeX
@article{koktas2024communications, title = {Communications for the Planet {Mars}: Past, Present, and Future}, author = {Koktas, Enes and Basar, Ertugrul}, journal = {IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine}, volume = {39}, number = {5}, pages = {216--258}, year = {2024}, doi = {10.1109/maes.2024.3396117}, abstract = {Space exploration has been on the rise since the 1960s and Mars plays a significant role in the history of space exploration. As the amount of data collected from science instruments around and on Mars increased, the need for fast and reliable communication between Earth and space probes has emerged. However, communicating over deep space has always been a big challenge due to the propagation characteristics of radio waves. Nowadays, the collaboration of private companies like SpaceX with space agencies to make Mars colonization a reality, introduces even more challenges, such as providing high data rate, low-latency, energy-efficient, and mobility-resistant communication infrastructures in the Martian environment. Propagation medium and wireless channel characteristics of Mars should be extensively studied to achieve these goals. This survey article presents a comprehensive overview of the Mars missions and channel modeling studies of the near-Earth, interstellar, and near-planet links. Studies featuring three-dimensional (3d) channel modeling simulations on the Martian surface are reviewed. Novel computer simulations considering various scenarios based on realistic 3D Martian terrains using the Wireless Insite software are presented. Path loss exponent, power delay profile, and root-mean-square delay spread for these scenarios are calculated and tabularized in this study.} } - Noreen, G., Cesarone, R., Deutsch, L., Edwards, C., Soloff, J., Ely, T., Cook, B., Morabito, D., Hemmati, H., Piazolla, S., Hastrup, R., Abraham, D., Miles, S. and Manshadi, F. (2005). Integrated network architecture for sustained human and robotic exploration
. IEEE Aerospace Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{noreen2005integratednetwo, title = {Integrated network architecture for sustained human and robotic exploration}, author = {Noreen, Gary and Cesarone, Robert and Deutsch, Leslie and Edwards, Charles and Soloff, Jason and Ely, Todd and Cook, Brian and Morabito, David and Hemmati, Hamid and Piazolla, Sabino and Hastrup, Rolf and Abraham, Douglas and Miles, Sue and Manshadi, Farzin}, booktitle = {IEEE Aerospace Conference}, year = {2005}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20060043000}, abstract = {The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Exploration Systems Mission Directorate is planning a series of human and robotic missions to the Earth's moon and to Mars. These missions will require telecommunication and navigation services. This paper sets forth presumed requirements for such services and presents strawman lunar and Mars telecommunications network architectures to satisfy the presumed requirements.} } - Deutsch, L. J., Dowen, A., Townes, S., Guinn, J., Wyatt, E. J., Levesque, M. and Chang, S. (2021). Autonomy for Deep Space Communications and Navigation
. International Astronautical Congress. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{deutsch2021autonomy, title = {Autonomy for Deep Space Communications and Navigation}, author = {Deutsch, Leslie J and Dowen, Andrew and Townes, Stephen and Guinn, Joseph and Wyatt, E. Jay and Levesque, Michael and Chang, Susan}, booktitle = {International Astronautical Congress}, publisher = {JPL Open Repository}, year = {2021}, url = {https://dataverse.jpl.nasa.gov/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=hdl:2014/54762} } - Abraham, D. (2023). NASA Deep Space Communications: Future Mission Trends and Their Implications
. Root. doi.org/10.48577/jpl.vbyofs
BibTeX
@misc{abraham2023nasa, title = {NASA Deep Space Communications: Future Mission Trends and Their Implications}, author = {Abraham, Douglas}, journal = {Root}, year = {2023}, doi = {10.48577/jpl.vbyofs}, abstract = {No abstract available.} } - Burkhart, P. D., Ely, T., Duncan, C., Lightsey, E. G., Campbell, T. and Mogensen, A. (2005). Expected EDL navigation performance with spacecraft to spacecraft radiometric data
. AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{burkhart2005expected, title = {Expected EDL navigation performance with spacecraft to spacecraft radiometric data}, author = {Burkhart, P. Daniel and Ely, Todd and Duncan, Courtney and Lightsey, E. Glenn and Campbell, Thomas and Mogensen, Andreas}, booktitle = {AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference}, publisher = {American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics}, year = {2005}, doi = {10.2514/6.2005-5949}, abstract = {Pinpoint landing (defined for the purpose of this discussion as landing within 1km of a preselected target) is a key Advanced Entry, Descent and Landing (EDL) technology for future Mars landers.} } - Ferrell, W. R. (1964). Remote Manipulation with Transmission Delay
. IEEE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics. Source
BibTeX
@article{ferrell1964remote, title = {Remote Manipulation with Transmission Delay}, author = {Ferrell, William R.}, journal = {IEEE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics}, volume = {HFE-6}, pages = {24-32}, publisher = {Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)}, school = {Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Mechanical Engineering}, type = {Ph.D. thesis}, year = {1964}, doi = {10.1109/thfe.1965.6591253}, abstract = {The effect on the performance of both simple and complex tasks of inserting transmission delay between the master and slave elements of a remote manipulator was studied. Most operators spontaneously adopted an effective “move-and-wait” strategy to cope with delay. A modification of a method proposed earlier enabled task-completion time to be accurately predicted from data taken when there was no delay. With the move-and-wait strategy, completion time depends on the length of sequences of open-loop movements. The number of such moves for positioning in one dimension as a function of task difficulty was found to agree with that predicted by a simple statistical model.} } - Wenkert, D., Gladden, R. E., Edwards, C. D., Schmitz, P., Denis, M. and Winton, A. J. (2016). Enabling International Data Relay at Mars
. SpaceOps Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{wenkert2016enabling, title = {Enabling International Data Relay at Mars}, author = {Wenkert, Daniel and Gladden, Roy. E. and Edwards, Charles D. and Schmitz, Peter and Denis, Michel and Winton, Alistair J.}, booktitle = {SpaceOps Conference}, publisher = {American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics}, year = {2016}, doi = {10.2514/6.2016-2355} } - Bell, D. J. (2001). Bringing data back from Mars: in-situ communications role--the rover to orbiter to Earth link. ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20060031835
BibTeX
@misc{bell2001bringing, title = {Bringing data back from Mars: in-situ communications role--the rover to orbiter to Earth link}, author = {Bell, D. J.}, year = {2001}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20060031835}, abstract = {Over the coming decade, an international fleet of spacecraft will carry out the most intensive exploration to date of another world in our solar system. A wide range of orbiters, landers and rovers will conduct a linking together--detailed in-situ inbestigations, culminating in an eventual return of Martian surface, subsurface, and atmospheric samples to Earth for detailed laboratory evaluation.} } - Wilson, K., Biswas, A. and Schoolcraft, J. (2011). A study of an optical lunar surface communications network with high bandwidth direct to earth link
. International Conference on Space Optical Systems and Applications. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{wilson2011study, title = {A study of an optical lunar surface communications network with high bandwidth direct to earth link}, author = {Wilson, K. and Biswas, A. and Schoolcraft, J.}, booktitle = {International Conference on Space Optical Systems and Applications}, volume = {8037}, pages = {299-305}, year = {2011}, doi = {10.1109/icsos.2011.5783687}, abstract = {A lunar surface systems study explores the application of optical communications to support a high bandwidth data link from a lunar relay satellite and from fixed lunar assets. The results show that existing 1-m ground stations could provide more than 99% coverage of the lunar terminal at 100Mb/s data rates from a lunar relay satellite and in excess of 200Mb/s from a fixed terminal on the lunar surface. We have looked at the effects of the lunar regolith and its removal on optical samples. Our results indicate that under repeated dust removal episodes sapphire rather than fused silica would be a more durable material for optical surfaces. Disruption tolerant network protocols can minimize the data loss due to link dropouts. We report on the preliminary results of the DTN protocol implemented over the optical carrier.} } - Chen, Y., Abraham, D. S., Heckman, D. P., Kwok, A., MacNeal, B. E., Tran, K. and Wu, J. P. (2016). Architectural and operational considerations emerging from hybrid RF-optical network loading simulations
. Free-Space Laser Communication and Atmospheric Propagation XXVIII. doi.org/10.1117/12.2213594
BibTeX
@misc{chennodatearchitectural, title = {Architectural and operational considerations emerging from hybrid RF-optical network loading simulations}, author = {Chen, Yijiang and Abraham, Douglas S. and Heckman, David P. and Kwok, Andrew and MacNeal, Bruce E. and Tran, Kristy and Wu, Janet P.}, booktitle = {Free-Space Laser Communication and Atmospheric Propagation XXVIII}, volume = {9739}, pages = {97390P}, year = {2016}, doi = {10.1117/12.2213594}, abstract = {A technology demonstration of free space optical communication at interplanetary distances is planned via one or more future NASA deep-space missions. Such demonstrations will "pave the way" for operational use of optical communications on future robotic/potential Human missions. Hence, the Deep Space Network architecture will need to evolve. Preliminary attempts to model the anticipated future mission set and simulate how well it loads onto assumed architectures with combinations of RF and optical apertures have been evaluated. This paper discusses the results of preliminary loading simulations for hybrid RF-optical network architectures and highlights key mission and ground infrastructure considerations that emerge.} } - Chahat, N. E. (2021). Mars Helicopter Telecommunication Link: Antennas, Propagation, and Link Analysis
. Root. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{chahat2021mars, title = {Mars Helicopter Telecommunication Link: Antennas, Propagation, and Link Analysis}, author = {Chahat, Nacer E}, journal = {Root}, publisher = {JPL Open Repository}, year = {2021}, doi = {10.48577/jpl.b8h6dp}, abstract = {This paper presents the progress in the development of the telecommunication subsystem for the Mars Helicopter. The antenna performance on the rover and the helicopter are assessed. A detailed analysis of the link between Mars Helicopter and the Mars 2020 rover is presented in details including the impact of polarization loss, multipath, and antenna performance. The antenna designs and analyses are described as they play a critical role in the link assessment. The analysis is verified through a field test which included a proxy rover and helicopter with engineering model antennas.} } - Chahat, N. (2023). Enhancing Communication Link Predictions for Ingenuity Mars Helicopter Mission with the Parabolic Equation Method
. Annual Technical Meeting - ESTECH. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{chahat2023enhancing, title = {Enhancing Communication Link Predictions for Ingenuity Mars Helicopter Mission with the Parabolic Equation Method}, author = {Chahat, Nacer}, booktitle = {Annual Technical Meeting - ESTECH}, publisher = {JPL Open Repository}, year = {2023}, doi = {10.1109/tap.2023.3333433}, abstract = {The Ingenuity helicopter mission on Mars was originally planned to last for only 30 days, during which time it would conduct a technology demonstration to test the feasibility of powered, controlled flight on the planet. However, after the initial flights were successful, NASA decided to extend the mission and transition it to a new phase, where the helicopter would act as a scout for the Rover. The extension posed several challenges, one of which was the prediction of telecommunication links in adverse scenarios involving complex surface topology and non-line-of-sight (NLOS) conditions. To address this challenge, our team at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory developed and demonstrated a highly accurate link budget prediction method using the Parabolic Equation method, which accounted for the actual surface topology of Mars. This approach was verified with 14 flight cases before being integrated into the mission operation tools to plan each helicopter flight and ensure the safety of this valuable asset, which has been operating on Mars for over two years.} } - Asmar, S., Arroyo, B., Benecken, Z., Berner, J., Buckland, B., Johnston, M., Pham, T., Sanchez Net, M., Sanders, F., Minervini, H., Soloff, J., Johnson, D., Landivar, M., Malphrus, B., Fite, N., Walter, E. and Hart, C. (2025). Deep Space Network Support of the Intuitive Machines Lunar Lander
. Annual Computational Neuroscience Meeting. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{asmar2025deep, title = {Deep Space Network Support of the Intuitive Machines Lunar Lander}, author = {Asmar, Sami and Arroyo, Belinda and Benecken, Zsarina and Berner, Jeff and Buckland, Brett and Johnston, Mark and Pham, Timothy and Sanchez Net, Marc and Sanders, Felicia and Minervini, Henry and Soloff, Jason and Johnson, David and Landivar, Micaela and Malphrus, Benjamin and Fite, Nathan and Walter, Emily and Hart, Chloe}, booktitle = {Annual Computational Neuroscience Meeting}, publisher = {JPL Open Repository}, year = {2025}, doi = {10.48577/jpl.byntoc}, abstract = {NASA’s Deep Space Network (DSN) has been designed for the past six decades with very large antennas and customized technologies to communicate with distant planetary missions, including spacecraft outside the solar system. The current exploration trend has shifted emphasis to supporting missions in cis-lunar space and at Lagrange points. This has led to modified strategies for more dynamic mission events and faster planning cycles than traditional solar system missions. In addition to the committed support of many missions, the DSN is a national asset that has supported missions in unplanned scenarios. The historic Intuitive Machines (IM) lunar mission, Odysseus, landed at Malapert A crater near the south pole on 22 February 2024. Prior to launch, there were no plans to utilize the DSN but the spacecraft conditions in transit, in lunar orbit, and after landing necessitated the use of large antennas capable of receiving low signal-to-noise downlink and transmitting high power uplink signals for the purpose of telemetry, commanding, and navigation. A DSN team responded to the request and collaborated with the ground station at Morehead State University (MSU) to relay commands between the IM Nova Control Center and the DSN’s central facility, made possible because MSU had established interfaces with both partners prior to launch while the DSN did not have a Space Link Extension (SLE) interface in place. The infrastructure of the Lunar Node 1 payload carried by Odysseus, which was planned to be tracked by the DSN, played a key role in facilitating this support. This paper describes the complex multi-partner communications architecture that enabled Odysseus’ successful mission and details the concept of operations using stations across multiple continents to achieve reliable two-way communications. The paper also describes the multipath effects that disrupted communications pervasively during surface operations and show how the point of reflection in the lunar surface was reconstructed after-the-fact using data collected during the mission.} } - Edwards, B., Wagner, R. S., Zemba, M., Klein, T. E., Maestro, L. and Dow, J. (2025). Envisioned Lunar Surface Communications Using 3GPP Cellular and Wi-Fi Technologies
. International Conference on Space Operations. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{edwards2025envisioned, title = {Envisioned Lunar Surface Communications Using 3GPP Cellular and Wi-Fi Technologies}, author = {Edwards, Bernard and Wagner, Raymond S. and Zemba, Michael and Klein, Thierry E. and Maestro, Luis and Dow, John}, booktitle = {International Conference on Space Operations}, year = {2025}, url = {https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20250001947}, abstract = {Under NASA’s Artemis Program, NASA plans to collaborate with commercial and international partners to establish a long-term human and robotic presence on the Moon. Critical lunar infrastructure includes having a robust surface wireless communications and navigation network to be developed over time by many organizations, public and private. NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) has envisioned a lunar surface future that includes the use of 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) cellular and 802.11 Wi-Fi technologies. NASA and Nokia Bell Labs are studying and validating the benefits and trade-offs of using 3GPP 4G and 5G technologies originally developed for use here on Earth, and how 3GPP technologies and 802.11 Wi-Fi technologies can be integrated to provide a robust and resilient end-to-end network architecture and solution design. Furthermore, as the 3GPP organization defines future 6G capabilities, NASA wants to understand how that could enhance lunar science and exploration missions and commercial endeavours to provide even more advanced, scalable and high-performance connectivity solutions. The vision is to provide human and robotic missions on the Moon with similar communications and navigation capabilities to what mobile users have on Earth, while adapting these technologies into space-hardened solutions that withstand the environmental and operational challenges of the lunar surface. STMD’s Tipping Point program seeks industry-developed space technologies that can both foster commercial space capabilities and benefit future NASA missions. Via Tipping Point, Nokia Bell Labs will demonstrate the use of 4G / LTE on the lunar surface on the Intuitive Machines IM-2 mission. This will be followed with a technology demonstration with astronauts on the Artemis III lunar landing. This paper provides an overview of NASA’s current and planned future work on using 3GPP and 802.11 Wi-Fi on the Moon.} } - Wiederhold, E., Larsen, R., Chandler, L., Mukai, R., Oij, S., Dula, W., Ellison, D. and Vasavada, A. (2023). Playing Telephone Through Martian Rock: Assessing Terrain Occlusions to Enhance Telecom Predictions
. IEEE Aerospace Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{wiederhold2023playing, title = {Playing Telephone Through Martian Rock: Assessing Terrain Occlusions to Enhance Telecom Predictions}, author = {Wiederhold, Emme and Larsen, Reidar and Chandler, Lea and Mukai, Ryan and Oij, Stephanie and Dula, Walker and Ellison, Doug and Vasavada, Ashwin}, booktitle = {IEEE Aerospace Conference}, publisher = {JPL Open Repository}, year = {2023}, doi = {10.48577/jpl.mzgmxr}, abstract = {As the Curiosity Mars rover has traversed through Gale Crater, a wide variety of terrain and rock formations have been observed. Earlier in the mission, the rover experienced relatively flat local terrain, with few hills or buttes in its immediate vicinity. As the rover traversed into the “clay-sulfate transition region,” the terrain changed dramatically to include higher elevation features. Despite the intrigue and beauty of these formations, their proximity to the rover can impact performance of both Ultra-High Frequency (UHF) and X-Band communication by physically occluding some or all of the link. This paper will describe and demonstrate a tool developed to assess the risk of terrain occlusions, enabling more accurate telecom predictions in addition to providing advanced knowledge of hardware visibility, both from Earth and from the orbiters at Mars. By utilizing Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) derived from images taken by the High Resolution Imaging Science Experiment (HiRISE) onboard the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO), in addition to images from the High Resolution Stereo Camera (HRSC) onboard the Mars Express (MEX) orbiter, a horizon map of the surrounding terrain elevation can be produced at a localized rover position on the surface. The horizon map can then be compared to predicted Earth positions and predicted orbiter geometry during scheduled communication windows to assess the impact of terrain occlusions on those upcoming windows. During nominal operations, the rover utilizes its UHF radio to transmit telemetry to Mars-orbiting relay assets, which then return that data back to Earth. In addition, the rover utilizes its X-Band radio to receive commands directly from Earth via the Deep Space Network (DSN). However, occlusions of either antenna directly impact the planning timeline by delaying the return of critical data required for planning and/or forcing the team to relay commands to the rover via the orbiters. These deviations from the standard procedure almost always result in loss of one or more planning days and present uncommonly encountered risks. By providing invaluable situational awareness of the telecom subsystem in advance of daily planning, this terrain occlusion checking tool reduces the number of lost planning cycles, directly increasing science return.} } - Donitz, B. P., Didion, A., Nicholas, A., Voss, T. and Lee, C. (2021). Assessing Relay Communications for Mars Sample Return Surface Mission Concepts
. IEEE Aerospace Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{donitz2021assessing, title = {Assessing Relay Communications for Mars Sample Return Surface Mission Concepts}, author = {Donitz, Benjamin P and Didion, Alan and Nicholas, Austin and Voss, Thaddaeus and Lee, Charles}, booktitle = {IEEE Aerospace Conference}, pages = {1-10}, publisher = {IEEE}, year = {2021}, doi = {10.1109/aero50100.2021.9438273}, abstract = {The Mars Sample Return (MSR) Campaign is a 3-mission campaign concept supported by NASA and ESA to return samples from the Mars surface. MSR will, for the first time ever, present a need to communicate with multiple surface assets that are co-located on Mars in a coordinated effort to accomplish the unified objective of fetching, transporting, and returning samples from Mars. Currently, Mars surface assets relay data to and from Earth using a number of orbiters in what's known as the Mars Relay Network (MRN). This network is characterized by a small number of surface assets distributed across the Martian globe and a larger number of orbiters to provide relay services. As of June 2020, there are two surface assets for which five orbiters are providing relay. During the MSR Campaign, there will be two rovers and a lander that all will require relay communication from a small number of Mars orbiters to meet the aggressive MSR timeline. The inversion of the current MRN paradigm, a system of many surface assets requiring relay and few orbiters to provide relay, necessitates the unique challenge of optimally allocating relay passes to maximize the operational capability of all assets. The allocation must consider a large number of trade variables including Mars asset operational requirements and Earth ground system constraints, including staffing schedules, operations planning across time zones, and more. To address these telecommunication challenges, the Mars Asset Relay Mission Link Allocation Design Environment (MARMLADE) tool was developed. It is a MATLAB-based tool to assign orbiter passes or Direct-From-Earth (DFE) links to each of the three surface assets and quantify the operational efficiency of each surface asset. MARMLADE uses a data set of simulated Mars relay orbiter geometry and telecommunication capabilities provided by JPL's Telecom Orbit Analysis and Simulation Tool (TOAST) software to compute which asset should get each pass based on a series of heuristics and predictions of all assets' states. Within MARMLADE, the user can provide inputs including the option for time-based pass splitting, fixed FWD data rate capabilities, DFE communication capabilities, and link parameters allowing for the assessment of complex operations and hardware trades using surface mission operational efficiency as a primary figure of merit. As the MSR mission concepts continue to mature, MARMLADE is being used to assess ability of all MSR elements to meet the surface mission timeline requirements and to provide relay link allocations to each of the MSR surface assets. This paper will describe the motivation and design of the MARMLADE tool and how it is being used to perform campaign and mission level trades, generate requirements, and support development of the MSR surface mission scenarios.} } - Kazz, G. J., Burleigh, S., Cheung, K.-M. and Shah, B. (2016). Evolution of the Mars Relay Network end-to-end information system in the Mars Human Era (2030-2040)
. SpaceOps Conference. Source
BibTeX
@inproceedings{kazznodateevolution, title = {Evolution of the Mars Relay Network end-to-end information system in the Mars Human Era (2030-2040)}, author = {Kazz, Greg J. and Burleigh, Scott and Cheung, Kar-ming and Shah, Biren}, booktitle = {SpaceOps Conference}, year = {2016}, doi = {10.2514/6.2016-2420}, abstract = {In order to help the reader understand this evolution from the current to the future MRN state in the Mars human era, we will provide a description of the current communication infrastructure supporting Mars mission users, and how we envision it to change in order to meet the needs and challenges of supporting both human and robotic communication by 2030-2040. This includes the introduction of new data types like audio and video, and new in-situ relay services for communications and navigation services.} } - Wu, W., Wang, Q., Tang, Y., Yu, D., Wang, C., Liu, J., Zheng, L., Zhang, L. and Wang, F. (2021). Development and Prospect of Chinese Lunar Relay Communication Satellite
. Space: Science & Technology. Source
BibTeX
@article{wu2021development, title = {Development and Prospect of Chinese Lunar Relay Communication Satellite}, author = {Wu, Weiren and Wang, Qiong and Tang, Yuhua and Yu, Dengyun and Wang, Chi and Liu, Jizhong and Zheng, Lei and Zhang, Lihua and Wang, Feng}, journal = {Space: Science & Technology}, volume = {2021}, pages = {3471608}, year = {2021}, doi = {10.34133/2021/3471608}, abstract = {Relay communication satellites play a very important role on the lunar far side and pole areas exploration missions. Queqiao relay communication satellite was developed to provide relay communication support for the lander and the rover of Chang’e-4 mission landing on the far side of the Moon. From entering into the halo mission orbit around Earth-Moon libration point 2 on June 14, 2018, it has operated on the orbit more than thirty months. It worked very well and provided reliable, continuous relay communication support for the lander and the rover to accomplish the goals of Chang’e-4 lunar far side soft landing and patrol exploration mission. Exploration of the lunar south polar regions is of high scientific interest. A new relay communication satellite for Chinese south pole exploration mission is also under study. The system design and on-orbit operation status of Queqiao relay communication satellite were summarized in this paper. The system concept of the relay communication satellite for lunar south pole exploration missions is proposed. Finally, the future development and prospect of the lunar relay communication satellite system are given.} }