Briefing to the National Research Council’s Aeronautics...

Reusable Booster System

Briefing to the National Research Council’s

Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board

28 March 2012


2

Hard

ware

Inte

gra

tio

n

Miniature Active

Guidance Units

Satellite Simulators Ballute Flight

Experiment

Responsive Space

Launch Vehicles

Syste

m D

esig

n

Exp

eri

en

ce

ESPA Class Solar

Electric Vehicle

Tactical Imaging

Nanosat

Kistler K-1 Triplex

Subsystem

Management Unit

Bigelow Genesis II ADCS

– 2 years on orbit with no

faults

Aerojet Sundancer Fault

Tolerant Propulsion

Controller

Flig

ht

Qu

alifi

ed

Av

ion

ics

Responsive

and

Innovative

System

Solutions

Andrews is a Small Agile System Integrator

Andrews Space, Inc. was founded to be a catalyst in the commercialization,

exploration, and development of space. The company is an affordable integrator of

aerospace systems and developer of advanced space technologies.

http://www.andrews-space.com/content-photo.php?photoid=441


3

Andrews Space Business Areas and Customers

• Systems Engineering

• Design Development & Analysis

• Modeling & Simulation

• Rapid Prototyping

• System Integration

• Aerodynamic Analysis

• Engineering Visualization

• Advanced Thermal / Material Technologies

• Deployable Technologies

• Air Collection & Enrichment System

• Magnetic Bearings

Advanced Technologies Technical Services

• Nanospacecraft

• SHERPA In-space Tug

• Hypersonic Platforms

• Responsive Launch Systems

• SENTRY Nanospacecraft Bus

• Avionics & Electronics

• Spacecraft Reaction Wheels / CMGs

• Spacecraft ADCS sensors

• Satellite Test Beds

• Ground Support Equipment

Integrated Systems Products & Components

http://www.saic.com/


4

Andrews’ Space Development Experience

2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000

Co

m’l

Sp

ac

e /

Hu

man

Infr

as

tru

ctu

re

Res

po

nsiv

e L

ow

Co

st

Lau

nc

h

Sm

all

Sp

ac

ec

raft

Prime Subcontract

2009 2010 2011

NASA Alternate Access ISS Cargo Vehicle

NASA Orbital Space Plane (NGC)

NASA COTS (RpK)

NASA Gryphon / ACES

NASA Space Launch

Initiative (NGC)

DARPA FALCON: Small Launch Veh.

DARPA FALCON: CAV

DARPA ACES

DARPA LRTCS

DARPA Arclight

NASA Small Tug

NASA Crew Exploration NASA Crew Exploration

Vehicle (LM)

NASA Crew Exploration

Vehicle (NGC)

USAF Hybrid Launch Vehicle

Acquisition of

Automated Control

Environments (ACE)

AFRL Tactical Satellite

Simulator

Proprietary Launch System

RBS Risk Reduction

NASA Altair Study

NASA High Mass Mars

Entry System

CubeSat

Recovery

System

Small Agile Tactical Spacecraft

NPGS Satellite Simulator

NASA COTS (Orbital)

NASA Heavy Lift Propulsion

Study

RBS Pathfinder

Andrews has a highly educated work force capable of executing a wide range of

contracts, and top-tier engineering facilities to meet current and future needs


Andrews Past RBS Studies

• Andrews Space has experience with reusable and expendable booster

concepts through previous and current efforts

– (1999-2002) NASA Space Launch Initiative (SLI)

– (2003-2004) DARPA Falcon Small Launch Vehicle

– (2005 -2006) USAF Hybrid Launch Vehicle

– (2010-2011) NASA Heavy Lift and Propulsion Technology Study

– (2010-2011) RBS Risk Reduction Studies

– (2011–2012) RBS Pathfinder Phase I

5


Why Reusability in a Launch System?

• Can provide lower cost per launch

(up to 50% savings)

• Recurring savings can outweigh

added development costs

• Represents a logical step forward in

launch technology

• Environmental benefits of hardware

re-use

• Higher reliability with potential

engine-out capability

6

Reusability Cost Savings (Example model)

Reusable BoosterExpendable BoosterLi

fe-C

ycle

Co

st

Operations Cost

Other Hardware Cost

Main Engine Cost

Development Cost

Recurring

Cost

Reusable Expendable


Several factors need to be considered when comparing

reusable and expendable boosters.

7

Reusable versus Expendable Trade Factors

Reusable Booster Expendable Booster

Cost Higher Development Costs,

Smaller Recurring Costs

Lower Development Costs,

Higher Recurring Costs

Risk Technology development risks

can impact schedule and cost

Systems using current

technologies have lower risk

Operability

Added booster maintenance can

be offset by improved health

management technology

Mature operations based on

significant launch experience

Performance

Higher booster inert mass

requires additional thrust and

increased size

Can be more mass-efficient with

lighter-weight systems

Flight Rate High Flight Rate Required to

Amortize Development Costs

Lower development cost not as

sensitive to flight rate

Development cost, recurring cost savings, and flight rate

have the highest impact on overall reusable system viability.


What is the Best Place to Apply Reusability?

8

A reusable booster is more cost-effective and

risk-averse than a reusable upper stage

Booster Upper Stage

Rocket Systems Optimal LOX/RP has smaller

tanks (higher density / ISP ratio)

Optimal LOX/LH2 has larger

tanks (lower density / ISP ratio)

Aerosurfaces Optimized for subsonic glide and

landing

Design compromises for wide

range of flight conditions

Power Systems Duration: 15-20 minutes Duration: 90 minutes to days

Adverse

Environments

Brief exposure to near vacuum;

Heating during ascent

Extended exposure to space;

Re-entry heating 10x worse

Performance Risk Mass growth has low (>10:1)

impact on payload performance

Mass growth has 1:1 impact on

payload performance

Lower Cost & Risk Added Cost & Risk


Current Andrews Vision Reusable Booster Architecture

512S 510L 511S 520L 521L

Mission(s) Small LEO;

Small Polar

Med. LEO &

Polar; Med.

ISS; GPS

Medium GTO

& High-energy

Heavy LEO &

Heavy Polar

Heavy GTO &

High-energy

Liftoff Mass 0.784 M lbm 1.11M lbm 1.13M lbm 1.8 - 1.9M lbm 1.77M lbm

P/L Margin 48% 9% - 73% 67% 2% 6%

60m

50m

40m

30m

20m

10m

9

RBS Architecture Addresses a Wide Range of DoD Payloads


RBS Technology Risks – Booster Design

• High performance reusable propulsion (Hydrocarbon Boost engine)

– Engines are a large cost driver and engine performance determines system size

– We know how to make highly reliable, reusable hydrocarbon-fueled jet engines and

high performance, but limited-use hydrocarbon-fueled rocket engines

– Building highly reliable, reusable, hydrocarbon-fueled rocket engines is possible, but

there are risks in meeting performance, weight, or cost goals

• Autonomous Guidance, Navigation & Control

– Allows the booster to compute its own trajectory for at least some portions of flight in

order to respond to flight conditions and to minimize on-board consumables

• Uses flight sensor data and navigation equipment to compute current state

• Controls engine and aerosurface effectors to control flight within the allowed

flight parameters

– Major risks include potential overruns in software development cost and schedule, as

well as difficulty in control systems integration

10


Integrated System Health Management (ISHM)

• Goal is to reduce vehicle maintenance time and expense between flights to ascertain

equipment readiness and/or state-of-health

• Similar to state-of-the-art systems on commercial and military aircraft

• Features

– Built-in-Test functionality

– Sensors to gather data throughout flight

– Software to process data and identify anomalies

– Human interfaces to relay data to maintenance & operations personnel

• Risks include sensor and software development uncertainty, potential creep of requirement

scope (want more functionality), and vehicle integration uncertainty

Low maintenance airframes and subsystems

• Designing low maintenance airframes and subsystems reduces the cost spent on vehicle

upkeep and reduces the time a vehicle spends in a maintenance bay

– Line Replaceable Units (LRU) to allow quick replacement of equipment

– Temperature sensitive coatings to allow visual inspection

– “Green” propellants and fluids to reduce safety issues

– Rechargeable battery-powered subsystems to remove complexity of fueled systems

• Risks include potential increases in development cost and schedule due to inconclusive

technology testing and difficulties in vehicle integration

11

RBS Technology Risks – Operations (1 of 2)


RBS Technology Risks – Operations (2 of 2)

Automation to reduce operations costs

• Designing for automation enforces levels of standardization, interchangeability, simplicity,

and robustness that ultimately drive down operations costs and drive up system reliability

(think Henry Ford)

– Automated integration processes

– Automated pad processes

• Potential risks include the difficulty of overcoming the status quo to improve operational

efficiency, the possibility of workforce reductions or changes, the impact to schedule and

cost of infrastructure modifications, and the added cost of training for new operational

methods and tools

12


Risk Mitigation Strategies

• Focused technology programs (i.e. ISHM, materials,

propulsion, automation)

– Completed in parallel to reduce technological risks and

minimize schedule

• Ground and flight test programs

– Reduce technological and operational risks, and provide

demonstrations of actual flight hardware

– A sub-scale demonstrator (like Pathfinder) can be

developed for a fraction of the cost of a full-scale system

• Commercially-developed sub-scale system

– Mitigates technological and operational risks, while

helping to “sell” a larger, more capable system

• Develop new model for regulatory / range processes

– Reduce risk of launch scheduling bottlenecks –

enhancing an increased flight rate

– Range / FAA approvals (maintain public safety)

– Licensing processes

13


Notional RBS Development Roadmap

14

2010 2020 2030 2040

EELV Program

Reusable Booster RBS Pathfinder

Technology and

demonstration

investments now will

pave the way for an

operational RBS

Advanced Engines

US Government Heavy Lift (SLS)

RBS Risk Reduction


RBS Development: Range and Recovery Infrastructure

• In order to be cost-effective, RBS will require streamlined launch and recovery

operations (analogous to airline operations)

• Improved range assets are needed for simultaneous tracking of multiple vehicle

elements (booster(s) & upper stage after separation)

• Landing Facilities closer to launch sites are most effective

– Parallel runways or runway extensions would improve operations with

multiple boosters

– Service aprons would be added to runway for post-landing ops

15

Booster

Service Aprons


• Multi-use horizontal integration facility streamlines integration operations

− Integrated ground test and checkout

− An extension of the multi-use airport concept

− Hangar space leased out for RBS storage, processing, and integration

• Multi-use, clean pad concept with automated interfaces provides standardization

opportunity

− Significant departure from today’s custom-built launch pads

− Simple launch pad provides basic services with standard interfaces

− Each operator brings its own custom launch table

16

RBS Development: Integration and Launch Infrastructure

Horizontal Integration Facility Multi-use, Clean Launch Pad


RBS Development: Workforce/Ground Ops

• Viable RBS requires significant reduction in workforce

(compared to reusable Space Shuttle) to achieve low

operational cost objectives

– Some workforce may need to shift from less skilled

(launch service technicians) to higher skilled (satellite

& other engineering services) jobs as flight rate

increases

– RBS operations are optimized for steady operations

tempo (flight rate)

• RBS surge capability may require a “standing army”

• USAF personnel can be trained and stationed to

address the surge needs

• RBS vehicle and infrastructure technologies can reduce

ground processing timelines to meet AF surge requirements

– An RBS could be turned around in less than 24-48

hours

17

Shuttle

Option 1 - Cargo

Austere Operations

PROGRAM SEGMENT

VEHICLE SEGMENT

LAUNCH

OPERATIONS

FLIGHT OPERATIONS

Wraps

20% of

Shuttle

5% of

Shuttle

7800

Equivalent

personnel

1600

Equivalent

personnel

420

Equivalent

personnel

Shuttle

Ops

Improved

Ops

Austere

Ops

Annual Cost Comparison

RBS 48-hr Maintenance and

Integration Workflow


Impact of Commercial Technology

• Applicable RBS Commercial Technology:

– Possibility of wrapping a reusable launch system strategy around existing

commercially-developed technology (e.g. commercial hydrocarbon

engines)

– UAV technologies (guidance and control, integrated health management)

could be applied to RBS

• Impact of Commercial Market:

– Commercial launches represent a significant portion of the overall launch

market, as shown in the next chart

• The government is buying more and more commercial on-orbit

services (e.g. communication, imaging) - should this be extended to

launch services?

• Additional market potential may enable some form of joint

commercial/government development of a reusable booster system

– Advancing satellite technology and functional aggregation is leading to

smaller spacecraft

• Launch capability can be consolidated around an optimal market target

(medium–class)

• Heavy lift could be done with other government assets like SLS

18


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000

Cu

mu

lati

ve A

vera

ge P

aylo

ads

pe

r Ye

ar

Equivalent GTO Performance Capability (lbm)

An

tare

s

So

yu

z-2

ST

CS

G

Atl

as V

501

Delt

a I

V M

ed

ium

Falc

on

9 B

lock 2

SeaL

au

nch

3S

L-D

M

Delt

a I

V M

+ (

5,4

)

Atl

as V

431

Atl

as V

551

Ari

an

e5 E

CA

Delt

a I

V H

eavy

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000

Av

era

ge

Pa

ylo

ad

s p

er

Yea

r

Equivalent GTO Performance Capability (lbm)

all payloads

only com'l GTO market

only DoD

only U.S. civil

Addressable Market – Target Performance Capability

19

Extreme impact on design with

minimal increase in launch rate

Best chance for maximum flight rate would require

addressing DoD, Civil, and Commercial market sectors

Ref: 2011 COMSTAC Forecast


Summary (1 of 2)

• Reusability saves on recurring costs, and may provide an

overall life-cycle cost savings

• Booster reusability provides the lowest risk and lowest cost

path to reusable launch systems

• Development cost and flight rate are the most important

factors when considering a reusable system development

– Implementing airline-like operations in range processes

will enable higher flight rates

– Addressing wider market potential (commercial, civil)

increases flight rate

• RBS development and operational risks can be mitigated

through selective technology development

20


• RBS infrastructure must focus on simplicity, shared use, and

automation to achieve low-cost goals

• Workforce size and skill-set will reflect changes in

infrastructure and RBS operation

– Automation and standardization will lead to some

operations workforce reduction

– Some workforce will likely need to transition to higher-skill

capability as flight rate increases (needed for automation,

ISHM, payload integration skills)

• Commercial development of reusable system technology will

happen as market incentives appear. Government

implementation of commercially-developed technology may

improve the chance of RBS system success.

21

Summary (2 of 2)


22

Questions?

Date post:	13-Sep-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

Briefing to the National Research Council’s Aeronautics...

Documents