HLV Industry Day

Mr. Ken HampstenSpace and Missile Systems Center

Lt. Col. Jim CeneyAir Force Research Laboratory

Lt. Col. Gus HernandezAir Force Space Command

07 March 2005

HLV Studies and Analysis

UNCLASSIFIED

2

Agenda

Air Force Space Command Drivers

HLV Development Phases

PRDA Assumptions

Overview of Activities HLV Reference Architecture Development Identification of HLV Technologies, Processes, and

System Attributes HLV SD Development and Demonstration Plan Supporting Infrastructure Evaluation

Program Overview

Programmatics

3

Emerging RelationshipsAir Force Space Command Drivers…

National Security Space (NSS)

Operationally Responsive Space• Tailored to JFC needs• War Reserve Material• On-demand launch and capabilitiesOn-demand launch and capabilities• Affordable LiftAffordable Lift• Rapid satellite initialization• Seamless integration• Responsive Ranges• Near Space

Global• Core and enduring capabilities• Global/multiple theater effects• Various controlling authorities

Theater (JWS)• Single theater effects• JFC dedicated• Expeditionary Units

Joint Warfighter Space (JWS): Concept of Joint Force Commander-dedicated, rapid launch capabilities Joint Warfighter Space (JWS): Concept of Joint Force Commander-dedicated, rapid launch capabilities that are tailored and integrated seamlessly with theater and global Nation Security Systems that are tailored and integrated seamlessly with theater and global Nation Security Systems

Operationally Responsive Space (ORS): The ability to promptly, accurately, decisively deliver, Operationally Responsive Space (ORS): The ability to promptly, accurately, decisively deliver, position, and operate national and military assets in and through space-HQ AFSPC ORS White Paper, position, and operate national and military assets in and through space-HQ AFSPC ORS White Paper, 23 Aug 0423 Aug 04

4

Operationally Responsive SpaceliftAFSPC Missions

Air Force Space Command Drivers…

• Rapid reconstitution of space capabilities lost due to enemy action

• Augmentation of critical ISR capabilities

Force EnhancementForce Enhancement

• Cost Effective Lift• Responsive launch• Routine launch

• Surge Capability• Recover Space Assets• On-Orbit Servicing• Support ACTDs &

Testing

Space SupportSpace Support

• Defensive Counterspace

• Satellite Protection• Offensive

Counterspace• Space Surveillance• Small (300-lb) PLs to

high-energy orbits

CounterspaceCounterspace

• Global Precision Strike• Centers of Gravity• HDBT & WMD Defeat • Anti-Access• Common Aero Vehicle

(CAV) • Response from CONUS• < 120 min

Force ApplicationForce Application

5

AFSPC Operational Objectives

Ops Parameters HLV Subscale Demonstrator (SD) HLV Full Scale Vehicle

Operational System (OS)

Turn-Around Time 5 Flights, 10 Days, 15 People 24-48 hours

Cost Objectives Design to cost Reduced Life Cycle Cost

Recurring Flight Cost* Traceability to full scale

~ $3 M /Flight for 10 Flights

(Without Upper Stage)

3x - 6x Reduction from current EELV-M launch costs

~ $20 M /Flight (10 klb to LEO)

(Including Upper Stage)

Operations Two Tail Numbers

Return-to-Base (RTB)

Ops Representative Demo Team

Six Initial Tail Numbers

Return-to-Base (RTB)

Blue-suit Operators/Contractors

Blue-suit Operators

Second Stage

(Orbital Option)

Production ELV < $5 M

2000 lbs to LEO / 28° Inclination

Production ELV < $5-$10 M

10-15K lbs to LEO/ 28° Inclination

Flights First Flight – FY10 First Flight – FY18

*Flight cost is for notional 10k vehicle

Air Force Space Command Drivers…

6

ORS AoA Spacelift Roadmap

EELV REPLACEMENT

POSSIBLE FOLLOW-ON R&D or OPS (tbd)HLV SUBSCALE DEMO

OPS (10 – 15 KLB) FULL SCALE HLV DEVELOPMENT

HLV HEAVY DEVEL. OPS

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

Lessons Learned &Risk Reduction

Lessons Learned &Risk Reduction

SPACELIFT SPIRALS

7

Assumptions

Basing, Flight rate, and fleet size: The HLV-OS initially deployed at VAFB and CCAFS Baseline HLV Mission Model provided at contractor

kickoff• Nominal flight rate

• Surge rate

• Payload capture Booster turn time of 24 hrs (Obj.) - 48 hours (Thres.) Fleet size of 6 boosters (total between both bases) Production and storage of upper stages and payloads will

satisfy ORS needs

8

AssumptionsContinued

Performance Acquisition via spiral development, to achieve growth in system

performance. 1st Spiral: HLV OS (Operational Spacelift) 2nd Spiral: HLV HS (Heavy Spacelift) Commonality between elements of the HLV OS and HLV HS Return to Launch Base (RTB) of the booster for all HLV

configurations RTB in most abort situations

Orbit LEO Sun-synch Polar GTOApogee (nmi) 100 432 100 19,323Perigee (nmi) 100 432 100 90

Inclination (Deg) 28.5 98.6 90 28.5 Lift Capacity (Klbs)

HLV-OS > 10 > 7 > 8.5 > 4HLV-HS > 45 >30 >35 >20

9

Overview of Activities

Activities described in SOO 6.1 – 6.4 6.1: Development of reference HLV architecture 6.2: Identification of HLV TPSAs for which demonstration

is critical • TPSA= Technologies, Processes, & System Attributes

6.3: HLV SD development and demonstration plan 6.4: Supporting infrastructure evaluation

HLV S&A contractor inputs assist Government in: Planning for potential future acquisitions

• Determining appropriate requirements and resources

10

Activity 6.1Development of Reference HLV Architecture

1/3 – 1/6 current Air Force recurring launch costs 24-48 hour highly operable ground processing High probability of successful booster RTB in event of system

malfunction Mission success rate (including upper stage systems) equal to present

DoD missions Minimize system susceptibility to terrorist attack and/or preemptive strike All-azimuth launch capability (architecture) Modular growth through heavy lift

Departure & landing concept Airframe/thermal protection Propellant selection and propulsion cycle First stage separation velocity Upper stage approaches, integration, and booster sep. techniques Method of first stage RTB (glide/jet/rocket-back, etc.) Guidance Navigation and Control (GN&C) Ground processing systems And more…

Based on thesearchitecture attributes…

…Recommend these system

attributes

Considering:• LCC• Operability• Reliability• System

survivability

Recommend a conceptual operational HLV architecture, on which to base demonstration decisions

11

Use of the term “technologies”

The term technology has different meanings to different people/organizations

Remember… HLV SD is the first phase of an acquisition program Air Force wants to achieve its goals using the lowest risk

approach practical HLV management team uses the term technologies in the

generic sense of describing the technological means to an end• It is not intended to indicate specifically immature, “high-tech”,

stretch design goals, or high risk technologies This is not a tech-push effort

12

Activity 6.2Identify TPSAs for which Demonstration is Critical

TPSAs= Technologies*, Processes, and System Attributes (*per definition on prior page)

Identify TPSAs that need to be demonstrated to provide adequate risk reduction for the HLV full-scale Y-vehicle

Provide clear justifications Provide risk reduction activities and/or

demonstrations Identify criticality of the demonstration

Based on system

attributes you define in

Activity 6.1 …

…Identify & Justify

Item Tech Proc Sys Attrib

Justification How to Demo When to Demo Criticallity of Demo Non-Demo Risk Reductions

Criticallity of Risk Reductions

HC Engine X

Operations via TOs X

Turn Time XNOTIONAL TPSA DEMO CRITICALITY MATRIX

Provides basis for HLV-SD design and test/flight plan

13

Demo Matrix Terminology Notional Samples

JUSTIFICATION ‘Provides turn-time traceability

relative to the TVC system…’ Etc.

HOW to DEMO Simulation Ground demo Flight demo

WHEN to DEMO Pre SD flight SD flights Post SD flights Independent ground test Pre Y-flight Y-flight

CRITICALITY of DEMO Critical Significant Desired

NON-DEMO RISK REDUCTIONS Component de-rating Parallel acquisition of an alternate

system Etc.

CRITICALITY of RISK REDUCTIONS Critical Significant Desired

Item Tech Proc Sys Attrib

Justification How to Demo When to Demo Criticallity of Demo Non-Demo Risk Reductions

Criticallity of Risk Reductions

HC Engine X

Operations via TOs X

Turn Time X

NOTIONAL TPSA DEMO CRITICALITY MATRIX

14

Activity 6.3HLV-SD Concept & Demo Plan

Develop a baseline conceptual subscale demo design & initial demo plan

Target ROM cost of $200-250 Million Include…

• SD vehicle, GSE, & other infrastructure

• 2 Airframes desirable – options need to be explored Show the traceability & scalability of SD to HLV OS Test plan—what, where, how ID any potential leave-behind capabilities for

research/ops

Assess additional ROM cost required for HLV SD with capability to place ~2000 lbs into LEO

Based on the TPSAs and

demo criticallity matrix you define in

Activity 6.2 …

Supports Gov’t Planning

15

Activity 6.4Supporting Infrastructure Evaluation

Recommend strategies to minimize infrastructure & launch complex costs for both the HLV SD and HLV OS systems – considerations include

For HLV OS & the Subscale demonstrator Advisability of modified vs new facilities SD and OS launch site issues Mission flexibility cost impacts Logistics constraints and impacts

(Intended as smaller portion of overall effort)

Based on the Architecture (6.1)

and theHLV-SD & demo

plan (6.3) …

Supports Gov’t Planning

16

HLV S&A Overview

Purpose of HLV S&A Conceptual design of OS, derivation of demo

requirements, conceptual design of the demo system, and demo planning.

Basic Contract 14 months, $6M, up to 4 awards planned.

Option 6 months, $6M, exercised anytime during the HLV S&A

period of performance. Purposes

• Additional refinement of SOO tasks 6.1 and 6.3

• Increase design maturity

• Maintain momentum

17

HLV S&A Deliverables

Deliverables (in Contractor format): OS architecture conceptual design package

• Interim (TBR); Draft 11 months after award; Final 14 months after award TPSA demonstration matrix

• Interim (TBR); Draft 11 months after award; Final 14 months after award SD conceptual design package

• Interim (TBR); Draft 11 months after award; Final 14 months after award SD demonstration plan

• Interim (TBR); Draft 11 months after award; Final 14 months after award Recommended strategies to minimize infrastructure & launch complex costs

• Draft 11 months after award; Final 14 months after award Option 1 HLV OS and HLV SD final conceptual design packages and demo

plan (specified upon award) Monthly-updated status and cost accounting reports:

• Status report: Progress, results, conclusions/ recommendations• Cost report: Cumulative spending by labor category compared to nominal burn-rate;

discussions of any potential funding issues Quarterly status updates on technical and programmatic progress, delivered

at completion of QMR/TIMs

18

Notional HLV S&A Schedule

Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

2005 2006

HLV S&A Award

Working Group Mtgs

QMRsTIMs

Final HLV SD Demo Plan

Jan Feb

HLV S&A - Basic HLV S&A - Option

Kick-Off Mtg

* Interim HLV OS Design PackageTPSA Demo MatrixInterim HLV SD Design Package

* Indicates range of acceptable delivery dates

Final HLV SD & Ref. OS Design Pkg.

Interim HLV SD Demo PlanFacility Strategies

19

HLV Bidder’s Library

www.losangeles.af.mil/smc/xr/public/bidderslibrary/index.html

BACK UP

21

HLV S&A Communications

QMRs: Cost, schedule, & programmatic progress.

TIMs: Technical progress/recommendations. Conducted in conjunction with QMRs.

Working Group Meetings: Three (3) meetings at contractor’s facility

Covers issues not handled in other forums.

Email and Telecons: As deemed necessary by contractor and Government