DOCSLIB.ORG

U.S. Space Launch Systems

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Chapter 9 U.S. SPACE LAUNCH SYSTEMS Space systems can be divided into two categories: the launch vehicle and the payload. The launch vehicle, commonly called the booster, propels the spacecraft and its associated payload into space. Typically for military missions, a specific payload is always flown on a specific booster. For example, the Global Positioning System (GPS) satellites are always launched on a Delta II launch vehicle. The same is true for most of our military payloads. US SPACE LAUNCH SYSTEM Challenger disaster and other launch DEVELOPMENT failures. The first Delta II was successfully launched on 14 February 1989. The Legacy Boosters Delta II 6925 carried nine GPS satellites into orbit. The Delta II model 7925, the Delta current version of this venerable launch vehicle, boosted the remainder of the Delta rockets are a family of medium original GPS constellation and is lift class vehicles by which a variety of currently used to launch the new Block satellites have been launched as part of 2R version of GPS. U.S. and international space programs. It The Delta II's first stage is 12 feet was originally designed as an interim longer than previous Deltas, bringing the launch vehicle consisting of a Thor total vehicle height to 130.6 feet. The Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile payload fairing (shroud covering the third (IRBM) first stage and Vanguard second stage and the satellite) was widened from and third stages. Continued improvements eight to 9.5 feet to hold the GPS satellite. allow the Delta to inject over 4,000 The nine solid-rocket motors (SRM) that pounds into a geosynchronous transfer ring the first stage contain a more powerful orbit (GTO). propellant mixture than previously used. The National Aeronautics and Space Delta 7925 began boosting GPS Administration (NASA) placed the satellites in November 1990. The Delta original contract with the Douglas 7925 added new solid rocket motors with Aircraft Company in April 1959. The cases made of a composite material early three-stage vehicle had a length of called graphite-epoxy. The motor cases 85.4 feet, a first stage diameter of eight built by Hercules Aerospace are lighter, feet and a lift-off weight of 113,500 but as strong as the steel cases they pounds. The modified Thor first stage replaced. The new motors are six feet had a thrust of about 170,000 pounds. longer and provide much greater thrust. On 13 May 1960, the first Delta failed to The main-engine nozzle on the first stage achieve orbit, but subsequent vehicles was also enlarged to give a greater proved to be highly reliable. expansion ratio for improved performance. Built by McDonnell Douglas (which The Delta program has had a history of merged with Boeing in August 1997), successful domestic/foreign military and The Delta II entered the Air Force commercial launches. The Delta has inventory in February 1988. The vehicle accomplished many firsts over its was developed after the Air Force lifetime: it was the first vehicle to launch decided to return to a mixed fleet of an international satellite (Telstar I in expendable launch vehicles following the 1962); the first geosynchronous orbiting AU Space primer 7/23/2003 9 - 1 satellite (Syncom II in 1963) and the first The first Atlas launches were at Cape commercial communication satellite Canaveral in 1957, but only the third (COMSAT I in 1965). launch on 2 August 1958 was a complete success, traveling about 2,500 miles Atlas downrange. The operational Atlas D was flight-tested from the Pacific Test Range The Atlas (Fig. 9-1) was produced in in California, between April and August the 1950s as the first U.S. of 1959. Improved versions, Atlas E and intercontinental ballistic missile to F, were test launched in 1960 and 1961, counter the threat posed by the Soviet respectively. Some operational missiles development of large ballistic missiles. were contained in coffin-like shelters An Atlas booster carried U.S. astronaut (Atlas E) from which they were raised to John Glenn into orbit under the first U.S. a vertical position for launch. The manned program, Project Mercury. increasing vulnerability of launch sites to Its design profited from Soviet ICBMs led to the construction of the thermonuclear break- an underground silo in which the Atlas F through of 1954, which led was fueled, serviced and elevated to the to warheads of lighter surface for launching. weight. Atlas rockets also In its role as a space launch vehicle, played a prominent role in systems are modified for specific space the U.S. space program. missions. Current Atlas II boosters, The Atlas ICBM stood provide a medium lift capability for the 82.5 feet high and had a Fleet Satellite Communications Systems diameter of 10 feet. The (FLTSATCOM) and the Defense lift-off weight was about Satellite Communications System 266,000 pounds, with a (DSCS). The booster generates range exceeding 9,000 approximately 340,000 pounds of thrust miles. at liftoff and can place payloads of up to Attached to the base of 1,750 pounds into polar orbit. Atlas the Atlas structure was a space launch vehicles were used in all gimbal-mounted Rocket- three unmanned lunar exploration dyne LR-105 engine of programs. Atlas Centaur vehicles also 57,000 lb thrust, which launched Mariner and Pioneer planetary operated together with two probes. 1,000 lb thrust swiveling The Atlas booster has been in use for motors used for roll more than 30 years and remains a key control. part of the U.S. space program. The first Two Rocketdyne LR-89 space launch on an Atlas E was in 1974 boost engines burned at and the last launch of the “E” series was takeoff with the central in March 1995. The E series had been sustainer. Each of these used to launch the military’s Defense 165,000 lb-thrust engines Meteorological Satellite Program operated for about 145 (DMSP) satellites. Fig. 9-1. seconds before separating In May 1988, the Air Force chose ATLAS I (half-stage). The central General Dynamics to develop the Atlas II Atlas engine continued to vehicle, primarily to launch DSCS burn for a total of about 270 seconds. All payloads. This series uses an improved the engines drew their liquid oxygen- Centaur upper stage, the world's first kerosene (RP-1) propellants from common high-energy propellant stage, to increase tanks in the sustainer. Guidance its payload capability. Atlas II also has depended on an inertial system that lower-cost electronics, an improved flight deflected the main engines in conjunction computer and longer propellant tanks with the two roll jets. than Atlas I, which was developed for AU Space primer 7/23/2003 9 - 2 commercial payloads due to the lull of Titan II launch activity caused by several launch failures in the late 1980s. It was used Deployed as an ICBM from 1963 until throughout the 1990's primarily for 1987, the Titan II (Fig. 9-2) is not new to commercial comsats. the space launch role. In 1965, modified Atlas II provides higher performance Titan IIs began supporting NASA's than the earlier Atlas I by using engines manned Gemini and other unmanned with greater thrust and longer fuel tanks space flights. Fifteen of the 50 existing for both stages. The total thrust Titan II ICBMs were refurbished and capability of the Atlas II of modified to support future launches. approximately 490,000 pounds enables The two-stage Titan II ICBM stood the booster to lift payloads of about 6,100 103 feet tall with a diameter of 10 feet, pounds into geo-synchronous orbit. and a lift-off weight of about 330,000 On 15 December 1993, the first Atlas pounds. Operationally, the single reentry IIAS was launched. The rocket can carry vehicle usually carried a thermonuclear 8,000 pounds to a geo-synchronous warhead of five to 10 megatons with a transfer orbit and up to 18,000 pounds to top range of 9,300 miles. The a low earth orbit. The vehicle uses four Titan II was in service Castor 4A solid strap-ons, is 156 feet tall between 1963 and 1987, with and weighs 524,789 pounds at lift off. 54 operational missiles. The Only two of the strap-ons are used at force comprised three wings launch. The other two are air-starts about of 18 missiles each stored in one minute after launch. The launch of underground silos at Davis- the Atlas IIAS completes the Mothan AFB, Arizona, development of the original Atlas family. McConnell AFB, Kansas and The division of General Dynamics that Little Rock AFB, Arkansas. builds the Atlas was acquired by Martin Each of the two first-stage Marietta in 1994. They, in turn, merged Titan II engines develops a with Lockheed in 1996 to form the thrust of 215,000 pounds. Lockheed-Martin conglomerate. The single second-stage As of mid-1999, the radically new engine develops 100,000 Atlas III was about to make its inaugural pounds of thrust. Both stages flight. Due to numerous delays stemming use storable nitrogen from a problem with the upper stage tetroxide and aerozine-50 motor, The Atlas III was finally launched propellants. An inertial on 24 May 1999, flawlessly boosting an system provides guidance Eutelsat communications satellite to commands to the engines. geosynchronous orbit. The new model The engines are gimbal- use a Russian designed RD-180 engine Fig. 9-2. mounted for thrust vector Titan II with two thrust chambers rather than the control. traditional one sustainer/two booster Modified Titan IIs launched Gemini configuration of the original Atlases.
Recommended publications
  • General Assembly Distr.: General 29 January 2001

    General Assembly Distr.: General 29 January 2001

    United Nations A/AC.105/751/Add.1 General Assembly Distr.: General 29 January 2001 Original: English Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space National research on space debris, safety of space objects with nuclear power sources on board and problems of their collisions with space debris Note by the Secretariat* Addendum Contents Chapter Paragraphs Page I. Introduction........................................................... 1-2 2 Replies received from Member States and international organizations .................... 2 United States of America ......................................................... 2 European Space Agency.......................................................... 7 __________________ * The present document contains replies received from Member States and international organizations between 25 November 2000 and 25 January 2001. V.01-80520 (E) 020201 050201 A/AC.105/751/Add.1 I. Introduction 1. At its forty-third session, the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space agreed that Member States should continue to be invited to report to the Secretary- General on a regular basis with regard to national and international research concerning the safety of space objects with nuclear power sources, that further studies should be conducted on the issue of collision of orbiting space objects with nuclear power sources on board with space debris and that the Committee’s Scientific and Technical Subcommittee should be kept informed of the results of such studies.1 The Committee also took note of the agreement of the Subcommittee that national research on space debris should continue and that Member States and international organizations should make available to all interested parties the results of that research, including information on practices adopted that had proved effective in minimizing the creation of space debris (A/AC.105/736, para.
  • Launch and Deployment Analysis for a Small, MEO, Technology Demonstration Satellite

    Launch and Deployment Analysis for a Small, MEO, Technology Demonstration Satellite

    46th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit AIAA 2008-1131 7 – 10 January 20006, Reno, Nevada Launch and Deployment Analysis for a Small, MEO, Technology Demonstration Satellite Stephen A. Whitmore* and Tyson K. Smith† Utah State University, Logan, UT, 84322-4130 A trade study investigating the economics, mass budget, and concept of operations for delivery of a small technology-demonstration satellite to a medium-altitude earth orbit is presented. The mission requires payload deployment at a 19,000 km orbit altitude and an inclination of 55o. Because the payload is a technology demonstrator and not part of an operational mission, launch and deployment costs are a paramount consideration. The payload includes classified technologies; consequently a USA licensed launch system is mandated. A preliminary trade analysis is performed where all available options for FAA-licensed US launch systems are considered. The preliminary trade study selects the Orbital Sciences Minotaur V launch vehicle, derived from the decommissioned Peacekeeper missile system, as the most favorable option for payload delivery. To meet mission objectives the Minotaur V configuration is modified, replacing the baseline 5th stage ATK-37FM motor with the significantly smaller ATK Star 27. The proposed design change enables payload delivery to the required orbit without using a 6th stage kick motor. End-to-end mass budgets are calculated, and a concept of operations is presented. Monte-Carlo simulations are used to characterize the expected accuracy of the final orbit.
  • Delta II Icesat-2 Mission Booklet

    Delta II Icesat-2 Mission Booklet

    A United Launch Alliance (ULA) Delta II 7420-10 photon-counting laser altimeter that advances MISSION rocket will deliver the Ice, Cloud and land Eleva- technology from the first ICESat mission tion Satellite-2 (ICESat-2) spacecraft to a 250 nmi launched on a Delta II in 2003 and operated until (463 km), near-circular polar orbit. Liftoff will 2009. Our planet’s frozen and icy areas, called occur from Space Launch Complex-2 at Vanden- the cryosphere, are a key focus of NASA’s Earth berg Air Force Base, California. science research. ICESat-2 will help scientists MISSION investigate why, and how much, our cryosphere ICESat-2, with its single instrument, the is changing in a warming climate, while also Advanced Topographic Laser Altimeter System measuring heights across Earth’s temperate OVERVIEW (ATLAS), will provide scientists with height and tropical regions and take stock of the vege- measurements to create a global portrait of tation in forests worldwide. The ICESat-2 mission Earth’s third dimension, gathering data that can is implemented by NASA’s Goddard Space Flight precisely track changes of terrain including Center (GSFC). Northrop Grumman built the glaciers, sea ice, forests and more. ATLAS is a spacecraft. NASA’s Launch Services Program at Kennedy Space Center is responsible for launch management. In addition to ICESat-2, this mission includes four CubeSats which will launch from dispens- ers mounted to the Delta II second stage. The CubeSats were designed and built by UCLA, University of Central Florida, and Cal Poly. The miniaturized satellites will conduct research DELTA II For nearly 30 years, the reliable in space weather, changing electric potential Delta II rocket has been an industry and resulting discharge events on spacecraft workhorse, launching critical and damping behavior of tungsten powder in a capabilities for NASA, the Air Force Image Credit NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center zero-gravity environment.
  • This Boeing Team's Skills at Producing Delta IV Rocket Fairings Helped

    This Boeing Team's Skills at Producing Delta IV Rocket Fairings Helped

    t’s usually the tail end of the rocket that gets all the early atten- other work. But they’d jump at the chance to work together again. tion, providing an impressive fiery display as the spacecraft is Their story is one of challenges and solutions. And they attribute hurled into orbit. But mission success also depends on what’s their success to Lean+ practices and good old-fashioned teamwork. Ion top of the rocket: a piece of metal called the payload fairing “The team took it upon themselves to make an excellent that protects the rocket’s cargo during the sometimes brutal ride product,” said program manager Thomas Fung. “We had parts to orbital speed. issues and tool problems, but the guys really stepped up and took “There’s no room for error,” said Tracy Allen, Boeing’s manu- pride and worked through the issues.” facturing production manager for a Huntington Beach, Calif., team The aluminum fairing team went through a major transition that made fairings for the Delta IV. The fairing not only protects the when Boeing merged its Delta Program with Lockheed Martin’s payload from launch to orbit but also must jettison properly for Atlas Program to form United Launch Alliance in 2006. deployment of the satellite or spacecraft. “There were a lot of process changes in the transition phase Allen and his colleagues built the 65-foot-long (20-meter-long) because we were working with a new company,” Fung said. “We aluminum isogrid fairings for the Delta IV heavy-lift launch vehicle. had part shortages because of vendor issues, and that caused The design was based on 41 similar fairings Boeing made for the an impact to the schedule.
  • Douglas Missile & Space Systems Division

    Douglas Missile & Space Systems Division

    ·, THE THOR HISTORY. MAY 1963 DOUGLAS REPORT SM-41860 APPROVED BY: W.H.. HOOPER CHIEF, THOR SYSTEMS ENGINEERING AEROSPACE SYSTEMS ENGINEERING DOUGLAS MISSILE & SPACE SYSTEMS DIVISION ABSTRACT This history is intended as a quick orientation source and as n ready-reference for review of the Thor and its sys­ tems. The report briefly states the development of Thor, sur'lli-:arizes and chronicles Thor missile and booster launch­ inGs, provides illustrations and descriptions of the vehicle systcn1s, relates their genealogy, explains sane of the per­ fon:iance capabilities of the Thor and Thor-based vehicles used, and focuses attention to the exploration of space by Douelas Aircraf't Company, Inc. (DAC). iii PREFACE The purpose of The Thor History is to survey the launch record of the Thor Weapon, Special Weapon, and Space Systems; give a systematic account of the major events; and review Thor's participation in the military and space programs of this nation. The period covered is from December 27, 1955, the date of the first contract award, through May, 1963. V �LE OF CONTENTS Page Contract'Award . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 Background • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • l Basic Or�anization and Objectives • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 Basic Developmenta� Philosophy . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 2 Early Research and Development Launches • • • ·• • • • • • • • • • 4 Transition to ICBM with Space Capabilities--Multi-Stage Vehicles . 6 Initial Lunar and Space Probes ••••••• • • • • • • •
  • L AUNCH SYSTEMS Databk7 Collected.Book Page 18 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM Databk7 Collected.Book Page 19 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM

    L AUNCH SYSTEMS Databk7 Collected.Book Page 18 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM Databk7 Collected.Book Page 19 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM

    databk7_collected.book Page 17 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM CHAPTER TWO L AUNCH SYSTEMS databk7_collected.book Page 18 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM databk7_collected.book Page 19 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM CHAPTER TWO L AUNCH SYSTEMS Introduction Launch systems provide access to space, necessary for the majority of NASA’s activities. During the decade from 1989–1998, NASA used two types of launch systems, one consisting of several families of expendable launch vehicles (ELV) and the second consisting of the world’s only partially reusable launch system—the Space Shuttle. A significant challenge NASA faced during the decade was the development of technologies needed to design and implement a new reusable launch system that would prove less expensive than the Shuttle. Although some attempts seemed promising, none succeeded. This chapter addresses most subjects relating to access to space and space transportation. It discusses and describes ELVs, the Space Shuttle in its launch vehicle function, and NASA’s attempts to develop new launch systems. Tables relating to each launch vehicle’s characteristics are included. The other functions of the Space Shuttle—as a scientific laboratory, staging area for repair missions, and a prime element of the Space Station program—are discussed in the next chapter, Human Spaceflight. This chapter also provides a brief review of launch systems in the past decade, an overview of policy relating to launch systems, a summary of the management of NASA’s launch systems programs, and tables of funding data. The Last Decade Reviewed (1979–1988) From 1979 through 1988, NASA used families of ELVs that had seen service during the previous decade.
  • Learning from Other People's Mistakes

    Learning from Other People's Mistakes

    Learning from Other People’s Mistakes Most satellite mishaps stem from engineering mistakes. To prevent the same errors from being repeated, Aerospace has compiled lessons that the space community should heed. Paul Cheng and Patrick Smith he computer onboard the Clementine spacecraft froze immediately after a thruster was commanded to fire. A “watchdog” algorithm designed to stop “It’s always the simple stuff the thrusters from excessive firing could not execute, and CTlementine’s fuel ran out. !e mission was lost. Based on that kills you…. With all the this incident, engineers working on the Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous (NEAR) program learned a key lesson: the testing systems, everything watchdog function should be hard-wired in case of a com- puter shutdown. As it happened, NEAR suffered a similar computer crash during which its thrusters fired thousands looked good.” of times, but each firing was instantly cut off by the still- —James Cantrell, main engineer operative watchdog timer. NEAR survived. As this example illustrates, insights from past anoma- for the joint U.S.-Russian Skipper lies are of considerable value to design engineers and other mission, which failed because program stakeholders. Information from failures (and near its solar panels were connected failures) can influence important design decisions and pre- vent the same mistakes from being made over and over. backward (Associated Press, 1996) Contrary to popular belief, satellites seldom fail because of poor workmanship or defective parts. Instead, most failures are caused by simple engineering errors, such as an over- looked requirement, a unit mix-up, or even a typo in a docu- ment.
  • Atlas Launch System Mission Planner's Guide, Atlas V Addendum

    Atlas Launch System Mission Planner's Guide, Atlas V Addendum

    ATLAS Atlas Launch System Mission Planner’s Guide, Atlas V Addendum FOREWORD This Atlas V Addendum supplements the current version of the Atlas Launch System Mission Plan- ner’s Guide (AMPG) and presents the initial vehicle capabilities for the newly available Atlas V launch system. Atlas V’s multiple vehicle configurations and performance levels can provide the optimum match for a range of customer requirements at the lowest cost. The performance data are presented in sufficient detail for preliminary assessment of the Atlas V vehicle family for your missions. This guide, in combination with the AMPG, includes essential technical and programmatic data for preliminary mission planning and spacecraft design. Interface data are in sufficient detail to assess a first-order compatibility. This guide contains current information on Lockheed Martin’s plans for Atlas V launch services. It is subject to change as Atlas V development progresses, and will be revised peri- odically. Potential users of Atlas V launch service are encouraged to contact the offices listed below to obtain the latest technical and program status information for the Atlas V development. For technical and business development inquiries, contact: COMMERCIAL BUSINESS U.S. GOVERNMENT INQUIRIES BUSINESS INQUIRIES Telephone: (691) 645-6400 Telephone: (303) 977-5250 Fax: (619) 645-6500 Fax: (303) 971-2472 Postal Address: Postal Address: International Launch Services, Inc. Commercial Launch Services, Inc. P.O. Box 124670 P.O. Box 179 San Diego, CA 92112-4670 Denver, CO 80201 Street Address: Street Address: International Launch Services, Inc. Commercial Launch Services, Inc. 101 West Broadway P.O. Box 179 Suite 2000 MS DC1400 San Diego, CA 92101 12999 Deer Creek Canyon Road Littleton, CO 80127-5146 A current version of this document can be found, in electronic form, on the Internet at: http://www.ilslaunch.com ii ATLAS LAUNCH SYSTEM MISSION PLANNER’S GUIDE ATLAS V ADDENDUM (AVMPG) REVISIONS Revision Date Rev No.
  • Materials for Liquid Propulsion Systems

    Materials for Liquid Propulsion Systems

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20160008869 2019-08-29T17:47:59+00:00Z CHAPTER 12 Materials for Liquid Propulsion Systems John A. Halchak Consultant, Los Angeles, California James L. Cannon NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Alabama Corey Brown Aerojet-Rocketdyne, West Palm Beach, Florida 12.1 Introduction Earth to orbit launch vehicles are propelled by rocket engines and motors, both liquid and solid. This chapter will discuss liquid engines. The heart of a launch vehicle is its engine. The remainder of the vehicle (with the notable exceptions of the payload and guidance system) is an aero structure to support the propellant tanks which provide the fuel and oxidizer to feed the engine or engines. The basic principle behind a rocket engine is straightforward. The engine is a means to convert potential thermochemical energy of one or more propellants into exhaust jet kinetic energy. Fuel and oxidizer are burned in a combustion chamber where they create hot gases under high pressure. These hot gases are allowed to expand through a nozzle. The molecules of hot gas are first constricted by the throat of the nozzle (de-Laval nozzle) which forces them to accelerate; then as the nozzle flares outwards, they expand and further accelerate. It is the mass of the combustion gases times their velocity, reacting against the walls of the combustion chamber and nozzle, which produce thrust according to Newton’s third law: for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. [1] Solid rocket motors are cheaper to manufacture and offer good values for their cost.
  • Past, Present, and Future

    Past, Present, and Future

    Rockets: Past, Present, and Future Robert Goddard With his Original Rocket system Delta IV … biggest commercial Rocket system currently in US arsenal Material from Rockets into Space by Frank H. Winter, ISBN 0-674-77660-7 MAE 5540 - Propulsion Systems Earliest Rockets as weapons • Chinese development, Sung dynasty (A.D. 960-1279) – Primarily psychological • William Congreve, England, 1804 – thus “the rockets red glare” during the war of 1812. – 1.5 mile range, very poor accuracy. • V2 in WWII MAE 5540 - Propulsion Systems First Principle of Rocket Flight • “For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.” Isaac Newton, 1687, following Archytas of Tarentum, 360 BC, and Hero of Alexandria, circa 50 AD. • “Rockets move because the flame pushes against the surrounding air.” Edme Mariotte, 1717 • Which one is correct? MAE 5540 - Propulsion Systems Isaac Newton explains how to launch a Satellite MAE 5540 - Propulsion Systems The Reaction-propelled Spaceship of Hermann Ganswindt (1890) • The fuel for his spaceship consisted of heavy steel cartridges with dynamite charges. They were to be fed machine gun style into a reaction chamber where they would fire and be dropped away. • “Shock absorbers protected the travelers” MAE 5540 - Propulsion Systems The Three Amigos of Spaceflight Theory • Konstantin Tsiolkovsky • Hermann Oberth • Robert Goddard • Independent and parallel development of Rocket theory MAE 5540 - Propulsion Systems Three Amigos • Goddard • Oberth • Tsiolkovsky MAE 5540 - Propulsion Systems Konstantin Tsiolkovsky 1857 - 1935 • Deaf Russian School Teacher - fascinated with space flight, started by writing Science Fiction Novels • Discovered that practical space flight depended on liquid fuel rockets in the 1890’s, and developed the fundamental Rocket equation in 1897.
  • Implementation of a Femto-Satellite and a Mini-Launcher

    Implementation of a Femto-Satellite and a Mini-Launcher

    Implementation of a femto-satellite and a mini-launcher Joshua Tristancho SUPERVISED BY Jordi Guti errez´ Universitat Polit ecnica` de Catalunya Master in Aerospace Science & Technology May 2010 Implementation of a femto-satellite and a mini-launcher BY Joshua Tristancho DIPLOMA THESIS FOR DEGREE Master in Aerospace Science and Technology AT Universitat Polit ecnica` de Catalunya SUPERVISED BY: Jordi Guti errez´ Applied Physics department A Sonia Quiero agradecer a Dios, a mi familia y a mi iglesia de Salou por el apoyo recibido durante estos a nos˜ de trabajo en el proyecto PicoRover y WikiSat. Sin ellos hubiera sido imposible llegar hasta aqu ´ı. Agradecer tambi en´ el incondicional apoyo de los profesores de la UPC: Cristina Barrado Mux ´ı Dagoberto Jos e´ Salazar Hern andez´ Daniel Crespo Artiaga Enric Pastor Llorens Enrique Carg ´ıa-Berro Montilla Francisco Javier Mora Serrano F. Xavier Estop a` Mulet Jordi Guti errez´ Cabello Jos e´ Luis Andr es´ Yebra Juan L opez´ Rubio M. Ang elica´ Reyes Mu noz˜ Marcos Qu ´ılez Figuerola Miguel Valero Garc ´ıa Oscar Casas Piedrafita Pablo Royo Chic Pilar Gil Pons Ricard Gonz alez´ Cinca Santiago Torres Gil Xavier Prats Men endez´ Yuri Koubychine . Carles, mai t’oblidarem. ABSTRACT In this Master Thesis we begin with a short analysis of the current space market, with the aim of searching solutions that allow us to implement femto-satellites (that is, satellites with a mass less than 100 grams) and mini-launchers (in this case less than 100 kilograms). New synergies will be explored in order to reduce drastically the cost of development, construction, operation and disposal of femto-satellites and mini-launchers for operations in LEO (Low Earth Orbits below 300 kilometers of altitude) and short duration, about one week.
  • The Evolving Launch Vehicle Market Supply and the Effect on Future NASA Missions

    The Evolving Launch Vehicle Market Supply and the Effect on Future NASA Missions

    Presented at the 2007 ISPA/SCEA Joint Annual International Conference and Workshop - www.iceaaonline.com The Evolving Launch Vehicle Market Supply and the Effect on Future NASA Missions Presented at the 2007 ISPA/SCEA Joint International Conference & Workshop June 12-15, New Orleans, LA Bob Bitten, Debra Emmons, Claude Freaner 1 Presented at the 2007 ISPA/SCEA Joint Annual International Conference and Workshop - www.iceaaonline.com Abstract • The upcoming retirement of the Delta II family of launch vehicles leaves a performance gap between small expendable launch vehicles, such as the Pegasus and Taurus, and large vehicles, such as the Delta IV and Atlas V families • This performance gap may lead to a variety of progressions including – large satellites that utilize the full capability of the larger launch vehicles, – medium size satellites that would require dual manifesting on the larger vehicles or – smaller satellites missions that would require a large number of smaller launch vehicles • This paper offers some comparative costs of co-manifesting single- instrument missions on a Delta IV/Atlas V, versus placing several instruments on a larger bus and using a Delta IV/Atlas V, as well as considering smaller, single instrument missions launched on a Minotaur or Taurus • This paper presents the results of a parametric study investigating the cost- effectiveness of different alternatives and their effect on future NASA missions that fall into the Small Explorer (SMEX), Medium Explorer (MIDEX), Earth System Science Pathfinder (ESSP), Discovery,