DOCSLIB.ORG

Antares Test Launch “A-ONE Mission” Overview Briefing

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Antares Test Launch “A-ONE Mission” Overview Briefing Antares Test Launch “A-ONE Mission” Overview Briefing April 17, 2013 JFS-3/25/13 1 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. A-ONE Mission Overview Primary Objective Conduct a Test Launch of the Antares Launch Vehicle to Reduce Risk and Improve the Probability of Success for the COTS Demonstration Mission and Cargo Delivery to the ISS Secondary Objectives Perform Payload Pathfinders where Practical Collect Payload Environments and Vehicle Data During Flight Fly Secondary Payloads Mission Approach Define and Implement the Test Launch (A-ONE) to be Representative of the COTS Demonstration Mission (Orb D1) − Launch Vehicle Configuration − Cygnus Simulator Mass Properties, Volume and Mechanical Interfaces − Orbital Parameters − Integration and Launch Operations JFS-3/25/13 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. 2 A-ONE Mission Summary Launch Vehicle – Antares 110 Configuration Booster with Dual AJ-26 Engines CASTOR 30 Solid Motor Second Stage No Third Stage Space Vehicle - Cygnus Mass Simulator Launch Site – MARS Spaceport Pad 0A, Wallops Island, Va. Launch Range – NASA Wallops Flight Facility Launch Window – 1700hrs-2000hrs EDT Target Orbit – Altitude 250 km x 303 km, Inclination 51.64O Payload Separation Time – T+ 603 Seconds End of Mission (EOM) – T+1124 Sec 3 JFS-3/25/13 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. Antares Designed to Provide Versatile, Cost-effective PAYLOAD FAIRING • 3.9 meter diameter by 9.9 meter envelope Access to Space for • Composite Construction • Non-contaminating Separation Systems Medium-Class Payloads STAGE 2 • ATK CASTOR® 30/30B/30XL Solid Motor with Currently Under Contract Active Thrust Vectoring • Orbital MACH avionics module to Support 10 NASA • Cold-gas 3-axis Attitude Control System International Space Station (ISS) Re-supply Missions STAGE 1 On-Ramped to NASA • Liquid Oxygen/RP-1 fueled NLS-II Contract • Two AJ26 engines with independent thrust vectoring • 3.9 meter booster derived from On-Ramped to USAF heritage Zenit design OSP-3 Contract VEHICLE PARAMETERS • Gross Liftoff Mass: 290,000 kg EELV New Entrant • Vehicle Length: 40 m • Vehicle Diameter: 3.9 m Statement of Intent Accepted • Mass to ISS Orbit: 5000 kg Baseline by USAF 6265 kg Enhanced 4/1/13-jfs 4 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. Antares Main Systems Suppliers Medium-Lift Composite Structures Performance Payload Separation Utilizing Largely System Proven Elements From Heritage, World-Class ® Suppliers Avionics CASTOR 30 Solid Motor Thrust Vector Control Systems Frangible Separation Systems Booster Structures and Systems AJ-26 Main Engines 3/13-jfs 5 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. Orbital Maximizes the Use of Core Systems Across Product Lines © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. 6 Antares Launch Vehicle Primary Subsystems Booster Second Stage Payload Accommodations Booster Production and Assembly in Yuzhmash Factory CASTOR 30 Motor Qualification Test Payload Fairing Second Stage Integration AJ-26 Engine Avionics Main Engine Section & TVC And System Payload Adapter RUAG 2624VS Separation System JFS-3/29/13 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. 7 Path to Antares Initial Launch Capability Test Stand Stennis Test Test 100% Complete 100% Complete Test Engine Flight Engine Facilities Demo ATRR Comp. Engine Test Delivery Delivery & Inst. 26 - AJ 100% Complete 100% Complete 100% Complete 100% Complete 100% Complete Dwg Release Inter-Stage Bay Test Article Qual Tests 5K / 7K Test Core First Flight Unit & Fab Liquid Oxygen Tank Core Systems Inter- Tank Bay Kerosene Tank Stage Main Aft Bay Engine System st 1 100% Complete 100% Complete 100% Complete 100% Complete 100% Complete ILV Assy & HIF Pad Site Activation 5000/7000 Tests Roll-out site Launch 100% Complete 100% Complete 100% Complete 2/22/2013 w/o 4/8/13 Static Fire US Qual Tests Fairing Qual First flight units ILC 2nd 2nd stage stage 100% Complete and PLA and 100% Complete 100% Complete 100% Complete JFS-3/25/13 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. 8 Test Launch Vehicle Processing JFS-3/29/13 9 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. Completed Vehicle at the HIF 10 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. Completed Vehicle Roll Out 11 12 Cygnus Mass Simulator Physical Properties Height = 199.25” Diameter = 114” Mass = 8377.6 lbs (3800 kg) Instrumentation 22 Accelerometers 2 Microphones 12 Digital Thermometers 24 Thermocouples 12 Strain Gages JFS-3/25/13 13 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. Secondary Payloads Secondary Payload provider for the Antares Test mission is Spaceflight Services http://www.spaceflightservices.com/Services Payloads manifested are: 3U ISIPOD – NASA Ames Research Center − Three 1U Phone Sat Spacecraft ◦ “Alexander, Graham, Bell” − 1.124 kg each, Lithium battery 3U ISIPOD – Commercial Customer − Dove 1 (One 3U Spacecraft) Neither payload contains a propulsive system Anticipated time in orbit 2 weeks to 1 month Purpose – Demonstrate the Use of Smart Phones as Avionics in Cube Sats JFS-3/29/13 14 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. Wallops Flight Facility Established in 1945 by the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, as a Center for Aeronautic Research. NASA's Principal Facility for Management and Implementation of Suborbital Research Programs. WFF is Ideal for Providing Equatorial Access for Low Earth Orbit Insertion. WFF Offers a Wide Array of Launch Vehicle Trajectory Options. The Coastline of Wallops Island is Oriented Such that a Launch Azimuth of 135° is Perpendicular to the Shoreline. Launch Azimuths Between 90° and 160° can be Accommodated Depending on Impact Ranges. For Most Orbital Vehicles, this Translates into Orbital Inclinations Between 38° and Approximately 60° Trajectory Options Outside of these Launch Azimuths, Including Polar and Sun-Synchronous Orbits, may be Achieved by In-Flight Azimuth Maneuvers © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. 15 Antares Wallops Footprint H-100 Mainland Cargo Processing V-55 Payload Fueling Facility H-100 Cargo Processing Facility Horizontal Integration Facility (HIF) 8.53 Miles Pad 0A V-55 2.46 Miles Payload Fueling HIF 1.1 Miles Pad 0A Liquid Fueling Facility JFS-2/8/13 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. 16 Horizontal Integration Facility JFS-2/8/13 17 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. Pad OA Overview JFS-3/28/13 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. 18 Pad OA JfS 3/39/13 19 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. Launch Countdown Timeline L-08H 00M: Call to stations L-07H 30M: Voice checks L-07H 00M: Range and facility set up L-06H 30M: Pad clear L-06H 00M: OCCS sequencer initiation/warm helium charging L-05H 50M: Vehicle power up and systems checks L-03H 40M: 15 minute hold L-03H 00M: Start of LOLS chilldown L-01H 45M: 15 minute hold T-01H 30M: Start of propellant loading T-00H 25M: Start of engine low flow chilldown T-00H 10M: Start of engine medium flow chilldown T-00H 03M 30S: Initiate autosequencer transition (terminal count) T-00H 03M 00S: Autosequencer control T-00H 00M 00.5S: Initiation launch ordnance train T-00H 00M 00S: Launch (1700 EDT) T+1.5 seconds: Engine health checks complete T+2 seconds: Liftoff L+6 seconds: TEL clear 20 A-ONE Launch Ascent Profile and Mark Events Launch Site Wallops Flight Facility Va. Longitude -75.5o E Latitude 37.4o N Altitude 0.028 km Azimuth 107.8o No. Event Time(s) Altitude Latitude Longitude Velocity (Km) (Deg) (Deg) (m/s) 1 Stage 1 Ignition 0.0 0.0 37.8 -75.5 0 2 Lift Off 2.0 0.0 37.8 -75.5 0 3 MECO 230.0 107 36.6 -73.1 4402 4 Stage 1 Separation 235.0 113 36.5 -72.9 4403 5 Fairing Separation 319.0 184 34.7 -69.8 4251 6 Interstage Separation 324.0 186.8 34.6 -69.6 4244 7 Stage 2 Ignition 328.0 189 34.5 -69.5 4240 8 Stage 2 Burn-out / 483.0 256 29.4 -62.9 7468 Orbit Insertion 9 Payload Separation 603.0 255 23.5 -57.1 7475 21 JFS-4/3/13 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. A-ONE Mission Ground Track Payload Separation Stage 2 Burnout Fairing Separation/ Interstage Separation/ Stage 2 Ignition MECO/Stage 1 Separation JFS-3/25/13 22 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. A-ONE Mission Telemetry Coverage L-0 sec L+231 sec L+236 sec L+319 sec L+328 sec L+483 sec L+603 sec L+606 sec L+1123 sec Stage 1 Stage 1 Fairing Stage 2 Stage 2 Payload Begin C/CAM Ignition MECO Separation Separation Ignition Burnout Separation EOM TELEMETRY (RocketCam) (Stage 2 Avionics) (P/L Instrumentation) (LV Instrumentation) (Stage 1 Avionics) Wallops Coquina Bermuda Antigua FLIGHT TERMINATION Wallops (FTS Receiver) Coquina Bermuda L+440 sec No FTS Req’t RADAR Wallops (Transponder) Coquina Bermuda JFS-3/25/13 23 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. Cygnus Status COTS Mission Pressurized Cargo Element Loaded with Cargo at Wallop Flight Facility Payload Integration Center Additional Cargo To Be Loaded Prior to Launch COTS Service Module, Along with Two Others, Assembled in Orbital Dulles Factory 24 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. Summary Orbital is Moving Into Antares Test Launch with High Confidence Successful Test Launch Will Validate Antares System Performance Successful Test Launch Will be Followed By COTS Demonstration Launch After Data Review and Vehicle Preparations JFS-4/3/13 © 2013 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. 25 Orbital Proprietary 26 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Orbital Lifetime Predictions
    Orbital LIFETIME PREDICTIONS An ASSESSMENT OF model-based BALLISTIC COEFfiCIENT ESTIMATIONS AND ADJUSTMENT FOR TEMPORAL DRAG co- EFfiCIENT VARIATIONS M.R. HaneVEER MSc Thesis Aerospace Engineering Orbital lifetime predictions An assessment of model-based ballistic coecient estimations and adjustment for temporal drag coecient variations by M.R. Haneveer to obtain the degree of Master of Science at the Delft University of Technology, to be defended publicly on Thursday June 1, 2017 at 14:00 PM. Student number: 4077334 Project duration: September 1, 2016 – June 1, 2017 Thesis committee: Dr. ir. E. N. Doornbos, TU Delft, supervisor Dr. ir. E. J. O. Schrama, TU Delft ir. K. J. Cowan MBA TU Delft An electronic version of this thesis is available at http://repository.tudelft.nl/. Summary Objects in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) experience low levels of drag due to the interaction with the outer layers of Earth’s atmosphere. The atmospheric drag reduces the velocity of the object, resulting in a gradual decrease in altitude. With each decayed kilometer the object enters denser portions of the atmosphere accelerating the orbit decay until eventually the object cannot sustain a stable orbit anymore and either crashes onto Earth’s surface or burns up in its atmosphere. The capability of predicting the time an object stays in orbit, whether that object is space junk or a satellite, allows for an estimate of its orbital lifetime - an estimate satellite op- erators work with to schedule science missions and commercial services, as well as use to prove compliance with international agreements stating no passively controlled object is to orbit in LEO longer than 25 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Spacecraft System Failures and Anomalies Attributed to the Natural Space Environment
    NASA Reference Publication 1390 - j Spacecraft System Failures and Anomalies Attributed to the Natural Space Environment K.L. Bedingfield, R.D. Leach, and M.B. Alexander, Editor August 1996 NASA Reference Publication 1390 Spacecraft System Failures and Anomalies Attributed to the Natural Space Environment K.L. Bedingfield Universities Space Research Association • Huntsville, Alabama R.D. Leach Computer Sciences Corporation • Huntsville, Alabama M.B. Alexander, Editor Marshall Space Flight Center • MSFC, Alabama National Aeronautics and Space Administration Marshall Space Flight Center ° MSFC, Alabama 35812 August 1996 PREFACE The effects of the natural space environment on spacecraft design, development, and operation are the topic of a series of NASA Reference Publications currently being developed by the Electromagnetics and Aerospace Environments Branch, Systems Analysis and Integration Laboratory, Marshall Space Flight Center. This primer provides an overview of seven major areas of the natural space environment including brief definitions, related programmatic issues, and effects on various spacecraft subsystems. The primary focus is to present more than 100 case histories of spacecraft failures and anomalies documented from 1974 through 1994 attributed to the natural space environment. A better understanding of the natural space environment and its effects will enable spacecraft designers and managers to more effectively minimize program risks and costs, optimize design quality, and achieve mission objectives. .o° 111 TABLE OF CONTENTS
    [Show full text]
  • March 21–25, 2016
    FORTY-SEVENTH LUNAR AND PLANETARY SCIENCE CONFERENCE PROGRAM OF TECHNICAL SESSIONS MARCH 21–25, 2016 The Woodlands Waterway Marriott Hotel and Convention Center The Woodlands, Texas INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT Universities Space Research Association Lunar and Planetary Institute National Aeronautics and Space Administration CONFERENCE CO-CHAIRS Stephen Mackwell, Lunar and Planetary Institute Eileen Stansbery, NASA Johnson Space Center PROGRAM COMMITTEE CHAIRS David Draper, NASA Johnson Space Center Walter Kiefer, Lunar and Planetary Institute PROGRAM COMMITTEE P. Doug Archer, NASA Johnson Space Center Nicolas LeCorvec, Lunar and Planetary Institute Katherine Bermingham, University of Maryland Yo Matsubara, Smithsonian Institute Janice Bishop, SETI and NASA Ames Research Center Francis McCubbin, NASA Johnson Space Center Jeremy Boyce, University of California, Los Angeles Andrew Needham, Carnegie Institution of Washington Lisa Danielson, NASA Johnson Space Center Lan-Anh Nguyen, NASA Johnson Space Center Deepak Dhingra, University of Idaho Paul Niles, NASA Johnson Space Center Stephen Elardo, Carnegie Institution of Washington Dorothy Oehler, NASA Johnson Space Center Marc Fries, NASA Johnson Space Center D. Alex Patthoff, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Cyrena Goodrich, Lunar and Planetary Institute Elizabeth Rampe, Aerodyne Industries, Jacobs JETS at John Gruener, NASA Johnson Space Center NASA Johnson Space Center Justin Hagerty, U.S. Geological Survey Carol Raymond, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Lindsay Hays, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Paul Schenk,
    [Show full text]
  • SGAC-Annual-Report-2014.Pdf
    ANNUAL REPORT SPACE GENERATION ADVISORY COUNCIL 2014 In support of the United Nations Programme on Space Applications A. TABLE OF CONTENTS A. Table of Contents 2 In support of the United Nations Programme B. Sponsors and Partners 4 on Space Applications 1. Introduction 10 1.1 About the SGAC 12 14 c/o European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) 1.2 Letter from the Co-chairs 15 Schwarzenbergplatz 6 1.3 Letter from the Executive Director 16 Vienna A-1030 1.4 SGAC output at a glance AUSTRIA 2. SGAC Background 22 2.1 History of the SGAC 24 26 [email protected] 2.2 Leadership and Structure 27 www.spacegeneration.org 2.3 Programme +41 1 718 11 18 30 3. The organisation in 2014 30 32 +43 1 718 11 18 99 3.1 Goal Achievement Review 3.2 SGAC Activity Highlights 36 42 © 2015 Space Generation Advisory Council 3.3 Space Generation Fusion Forum Report 3.4 Space Generation Congress Report 50 3.5 United Nations Report 62 3.6 SGAC Regional Workshops 66 3.7 SGAC Supported Events 68 3.8 Financial Summary 72 Acknowledgements 4. Projects 78 4.1 Project Outcomes and Highlights 80 The SGAC 2014 Annual Report was compiled and 4.2 Space Technologies for Disaster Management Project Group 81 edited by Minoo Rathansabapathy (South Africa/ 4.3 Near Earth Objects Project Group 82 Australia), Andrea Jaime (Spain), Laura Rose (USA) 4.4 Space Law and Policy Project Group 84 and Arno Geens (Belgium) with the assistance of 4.5 Commercial Space Project Group 86 Candice Goodwin (South Africa), Justin Park (USA), 4.6 Space Safety and Sustainability Project Group 88 Nikita Marwaha (United Kingdom), Dario Schor 4.7 Small Satellites Project Group 90 (Argentina/Canada), Leo Teeney (UK) and Abhijeet 4.8 Space Exploration Project Group 92 Kumar (Australia) in editing.
    [Show full text]
  • Commercial Orbital Transportation Services
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration Commercial Orbital Transportation Services A New Era in Spaceflight NASA/SP-2014-617 Commercial Orbital Transportation Services A New Era in Spaceflight On the cover: Background photo: The terminator—the line separating the sunlit side of Earth from the side in darkness—marks the changeover between day and night on the ground. By establishing government-industry partnerships, the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program marked a change from the traditional way NASA had worked. Inset photos, right: The COTS program supported two U.S. companies in their efforts to design and build transportation systems to carry cargo to low-Earth orbit. (Top photo—Credit: SpaceX) SpaceX launched its Falcon 9 rocket on May 22, 2012, from Cape Canaveral, Florida. (Second photo) Three days later, the company successfully completed the mission that sent its Dragon spacecraft to the Station. (Third photo—Credit: NASA/Bill Ingalls) Orbital Sciences Corp. sent its Antares rocket on its test flight on April 21, 2013, from a new launchpad on Virginia’s eastern shore. Later that year, the second Antares lifted off with Orbital’s cargo capsule, (Fourth photo) the Cygnus, that berthed with the ISS on September 29, 2013. Both companies successfully proved the capability to deliver cargo to the International Space Station by U.S. commercial companies and began a new era of spaceflight. ISS photo, center left: Benefiting from the success of the partnerships is the International Space Station, pictured as seen by the last Space Shuttle crew that visited the orbiting laboratory (July 19, 2011). More photos of the ISS are featured on the first pages of each chapter.
    [Show full text]
  • Precision Magnetometers for Aerospace Applications: a Review
    sensors Review Precision Magnetometers for Aerospace Applications: A Review James S. Bennett 1,† , Brian E. Vyhnalek 2,†, Hamish Greenall 1 , Elizabeth M. Bridge 1 , Fernando Gotardo 1 , Stefan Forstner 1 , Glen I. Harris 1 , Félix A. Miranda 2,* and Warwick P. Bowen 1,* 1 School of Mathematics and Physics, The University of Queensland, St. Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia; [email protected] (J.S.B.); [email protected] (H.G.); [email protected] (E.M.B.); [email protected] (F.G.); [email protected] (S.F.); [email protected] (G.I.H.) 2 NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, OH 44135, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] (F.A.M.); [email protected] (W.P.B.) † These authors contributed equally to this work. Abstract: Aerospace technologies are crucial for modern civilization; space-based infrastructure underpins weather forecasting, communications, terrestrial navigation and logistics, planetary observations, solar monitoring, and other indispensable capabilities. Extraplanetary exploration— including orbital surveys and (more recently) roving, flying, or submersible unmanned vehicles—is also a key scientific and technological frontier, believed by many to be paramount to the long-term survival and prosperity of humanity. All of these aerospace applications require reliable control of the craft and the ability to record high-precision measurements of physical quantities. Magnetometers deliver on both of these aspects and have been vital to the success of numerous missions. In this review Citation: Bennett, J.S.; Vyhnalek, paper, we provide an introduction to the relevant instruments and their applications.
    [Show full text]
  • Prototype Design and Mission Analysis for a Small Satellite Exploiting Environmental Disturbances for Attitude Stabilization
    Calhoun: The NPS Institutional Archive Theses and Dissertations Thesis and Dissertation Collection 2016-03 Prototype design and mission analysis for a small satellite exploiting environmental disturbances for attitude stabilization Polat, Halis C. Monterey, California: Naval Postgraduate School http://hdl.handle.net/10945/48578 NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA THESIS PROTOTYPE DESIGN AND MISSION ANALYSIS FOR A SMALL SATELLITE EXPLOITING ENVIRONMENTAL DISTURBANCES FOR ATTITUDE STABILIZATION by Halis C. Polat March 2016 Thesis Advisor: Marcello Romano Co-Advisor: Stephen Tackett Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704–0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instruction, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188) Washington, DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED (Leave blank) March 2016 Master’s thesis 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS PROTOTYPE DESIGN AND MISSION ANALYSIS FOR A SMALL SATELLITE EXPLOITING ENVIRONMENTAL DISTURBANCES FOR ATTITUDE STABILIZATION 6. AUTHOR(S) Halis C. Polat 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING Naval Postgraduate School ORGANIZATION REPORT Monterey, CA 93943-5000 NUMBER 9.
    [Show full text]
  • International Amateur Radio Union Region 1 VHF - UHF - MW Newsletter
    International Amateur Radio Union Region 1 VHF - UHF - MW Newsletter Edition 59 17 May 2012 Michael Kastelic, OE1MCU Satellites (contributed by Graham Shirville, G3VZV) Here is an update on the availability of satellites operating in the amateur satellite service. We have noted changes that have occurred since the R1 Meeting in Sun City to spacecraft which carry transponders. Additionally there are many other, non-transponder satellites in operation – see http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/satellites/status.php for the latest information on these. • AO7 was launched in the 1970’s and is still working well when in sunlight. Linear U/V and V/A transponders • FO29 currently has the V/U linear transponder active • VO52 recently had a failure of one U/V transponder, but luckily it has been carrying a “spare” since launch and this is now functioning well • AO27 the V/U FM transponder is active • SO50 the V/U FM transponder is active • SO67 carries a V/U FM transponder, but is presently not active • HO68 the transponder is currently not functioning, but a CW beacon can be heard • AO51 after seven years of active service this satellite suffered a battery failure in late 2011 and is no longer active • ARISSAT this spacecraft which was deployed from the ISS in 2011 de-orbited in early 2012. A number of satellites intended to carry transponders are presently being constructed and have a launch planned: • FUNcube-1 is scheduled for launch from Russia in late 2012. A single CubeSat with a linear U/V transponder and will also provide telemetry for educational outreach • Delfi-n3xt is a triple CubeSat which will also carry a linear U/V transponder and is scheduled to be on the same launch as FUNcube-1 • Fox-1 is a single CubeSat which will carry a U/V FM transponder and is expected to be launched by NASA during 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration
    9 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Ross B. Garelick Bell American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics HIGHLIGHTS • The President’s Budget Request for NASA in FY 2014 is $17.7 billion, $1.3 billion above the estimated FY 2013 level and $84 million below the enacted FY 2012 level. • NASA’s FY 2013 appropriations suffered two across-the-board reductions, a 1.877% rescission in the FY 2013 Continuing Appropriations, P.L. 113-6, and the forced 5% sequester required by the Budget Control Act of 2011. The President’s Budget Request for FY 2014 does not account for the expected sequester required by the Budget Control Act of 2011 on FY 2014 appropriations. • The Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle and Space Launch System, scheduled for their first combined test launch in 2018, with a target crew launch in 2021, are slightly reduced in funding the President’s FY 2014 Budget Request. • As of May 25, 2012, with Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX) having successfully completing its resupply mission to the ISS, commercial cargo has officially begun operations. SpaceX again resupplied the ISS on March 3, 3013. On April 22, 2013, Orbital Sciences Corporation successfully launched its Antares rocket from NASA’s Wallops Launch Facility on the coast of Virginia, another important milestone in creating a commercial market for cargo to the ISS. Orbital anticipates launching both the Antares rocket and the Cygnus capsule in the fall of 2013, and SpaceX, The Boeing Company, Sierra Nevada Corporation, and unfunded Blue Origin are working toward commercial crew missions to the ISS, with launches to begin in 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • 3.2 the Extended Kalman Filter
    Pointing System Performance Analysis for Optical Inter-satellite Communication on CubeSats by Hyosang Yoon B.S., Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (2008) S.M., Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (2010) Submitted to the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY June 2017 @ Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2017. All rights reserved. Author ....................... Signature redacted Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics May 24, 2017 Certified by.....Signature redacted ............... Kerri L. Cahoy Associate Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics Thesij Supervisor Certified by ....... Signature redacted ..... Steven R. Hall Professor of eronVbics 4nd Asironautics Certified by............. Signature redacted ....... David W. Miller Professo.-ro r cs and Astronautics Accepted by ............ Signature redacted ('* Youssef M. Marzouk Associate Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUT E Chair, Graduate Program Committee OF TECHNOLOGY SEP 272017 LIBRARIES ARCHIVES Pointing System Performance Analysis for Optical Inter-satellite Communication on CubeSats by Hyosang Yoon Submitted to the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics on May 24, 2017, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Abstract Free-space optical communication using lasers (lasercom) is a leading contender for future space-based communication systems with potential advantages over radio fre- quency (RF) communication systems in size, weight, and power consumption (SWaP). Key benefits are due to the shorter wavelength: additional bandwidth and narrow beam width. The narrower beam supports higher energy density for a given aperture size, so that lasercom can transmit data at the same rate with smaller SWaP as well as improve link security since the beam footprint is smaller.
    [Show full text]
  • PHONESAT IN-FLIGHT EXPERIENCE RESULTS V4
    PHONESAT IN-FLIGHT EXPERIENCE RESULTS Mr. Alberto Guillen Salas (1,2) [[email protected]] Mr. Watson Attai (1,2), Mr. Ken Y. Oyadomari (1,2), Mr. Cedric Priscal (1,2), Dr. Rogan S. Shimmin (1,2), Mr. Oriol Tintore Gazulla (1,2), Mr. Jasper L. Wolfe (1,2) (1) NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field (CA), United States (2)Stinger Ghaffarian Technologies (SGT,) Moffett Field (CA), United States ABSTRACT Over the last decade, consumer technology has vastly improved its performances, become more affordable and reduced its size. Modern day smartphones offer capabilities that enable us to figure out where we are, which way we are pointing, observe the world around us, and store and transmit this information to wherever we want. These capabilities are remarkably similar to those required for multi-million dollar satellites. The PhoneSat project at NASA Ames Research Center is building a series of CubeSat-size spacecrafts using an off-the-shelf smartphone as its on-board computer with the goal of showing just how simple and cheap space can be. Since the PhoneSat project started, different suborbital and orbital flight activities have proven the viability of this revolutionary approach. In early 2013, the PhoneSat project launched the first triage of PhoneSats into LEO. In the five day orbital life time, the nano-satellites flew the first functioning smartphone-based satellites (using the Nexus One and Nexus S phones), the cheapest satellite (a total parts cost below $3,500) and one of the fastest on-board processors (CPU speed of 1GHz). In this paper, an overview of the PhoneSat project as well as a summary of the in-flight experimental results is presented.
    [Show full text]
  • WORLD SPACECRAFT DIGEST by Jos Heyman 2013 Version: 1 January 2014 © Copyright Jos Heyman
    WORLD SPACECRAFT DIGEST by Jos Heyman 2013 Version: 1 January 2014 © Copyright Jos Heyman The spacecraft are listed, in the first instance, in the order of their International Designation, resulting in, with some exceptions, a date order. Spacecraft which did not receive an International Designation, being those spacecraft which failed to achieve orbit or those which were placed in a sub orbital trajectory, have been inserted in the date order. For each spacecraft the following information is provided: a. International Designation and NORAD number For each spacecraft the International Designation, as allocated by the International Committee on Space Research (COSPAR), has been used as the primary means to identify the spacecraft. This is followed by the NORAD catalogue number which has been assigned to each object in space, including debris etc., in a numerical sequence, rather than a chronoligical sequence. Normally no reference has been made to spent launch vehicles, capsules ejected by the spacecraft or fragments except where such have a unique identification which warrants consideration as a separate spacecraft or in other circumstances which warrants their mention. b. Name The most common name of the spacecraft has been quoted. In some cases, such as for US military spacecraft, the name may have been deduced from published information and may not necessarily be the official name. Alternative names have, however, been mentioned in the description and have also been included in the index. c. Country/International Agency For each spacecraft the name of the country or international agency which owned or had prime responsibility for the spacecraft, or in which the owner resided, has been included.
    [Show full text]