There are numerous ways

to get there— Around the Corner Th As then–US Space Command chief from rocket The Gen. Howell M. Estes III said to launch to space defense writers just before his re- tirement in August, “This is going maneuver to come along a lot quicker than we vehicles—and the think it is. ... We tend to think this stuff is way out there in the future, Air Force is but it’s right around the corner.” keeping its Flight The Air Force and NASA have divided the task of providing the options open. US government with a means of reliable, low-cost transportation to Earth orbit. The Air Force, with the largest immediate need, is heading to up the effort to revamp the Expend- to able Launch Vehicles now used to loft military and other government satellites. Called the Evolved ELV, this program is focused on derivatives of existing rockets. Competitors have been invited to redesign or value- engineer their proven boosters with new materials and technologies to provide reliable launch services at a he Air Force would like to go Orbit far lower price than today’s bench- back and forth to Earth orbit as bit mark of around $10,000 a pound to T O easily as it goes back and forth to Low Earth Orbit. The reasoning is 30,000 feet—routinely, reliably, and that an “evolved”—rather than an relatively cheaply. Such a capability all-new—vehicle will yield cost sav- goes hand in hand with being a true ings while reducing technical risk. “aerospace” force but is one which By John A. Tirpak, Senior Editor The goal is to reduce launch costs has long eluded a hardware solution. by at least 25 percent; industry Concepts such as the X-20 Dyna-Soar leaders are shooting for a cut of 50 of the 1960s and the X-30 National percent or more. The Air Force wants Aerospace Plane of the 1980s and a family of launch vehicles, scaled early 1990s reached beyond the to fit medium and heavy payloads technological grasp of their times. headed for LEO or Geosynchronous The , while a formidable that both help reach orbit and slow Transfer Orbit. technical feat, has never lived up to descent. Many involve international In addition, USAF wants to “stan- the twice-monthly launch sched­ule partnerships, particularly with Rus- dardize the interfaces” between or cost originally envisioned for it. sian outfits, but all emphasize reuse rockets and satellites, so any US All this may soon change. As the of all or most of the system, with an military satellite can be carried by demand for both commercial and eye toward becoming a space-age the launchers available. This will military satellites multiplies almost version of today’s overnight package increase flexibility and eliminate the exponentially, more than two dozen companies. possibility that the entire military private and government projects are Even if only a fraction of the new space effort could be shut down if a under way to try to meet the cor- concepts work out, access to space particular kind of vehicle developed responding need for inexpensive will broaden and the cost of getting a flaw that grounded it. The EELV launch services. One concept calls there will drop significantly. One program also calls for most of the for winged vehicles to be towed to industry official made the analogy processing of rockets to take place altitude, then released for a rocket- between today’s rush to build cheap off-pad, freeing the launchpads— powered flight to orbit. Another launchers to the barnstorming days which are in limited supply—to be anticipates a midflight air refueling of aviation, which paved the way for used as much as possible for launch before the final ascent. Still another an explosion of new machines and and not be tied up waiting for one. envisions employing giant rotors new applications. While the Air Force originally

AIR FORCE Magazine / November 1998 41 of the next decade. The VentureStar Ever since the Space Age will take off vertically, using the began, the Air Force has liquid hydrogen and wanted a craft that could in its vast internal fuel tanks, orbit, quickly get to orbit and then return to a runway landing. It can land like an airplane. This be flown autonomously, remotely, drawing of the Martin SV-5D, an unmanned or by an onboard crew. lifting body tested in the It’s an ambitious undertaking. To 1960s, was the pre-cursor reduce risk and prove the technolo- to the X-24A, a manned gies involved, a half-scale demon- vehicle flight-tested from 1969 to 1971. USAF and strator called the X-33 is being built NASA flew various lifting and will fly next year on suborbital body concepts, but they flights of up to Mach 15. The main proved too technically thing to be proven with the X-33 is ambitious for the time. that its power plant—the linear aero­ What goes around comes around, though; the spike engine—will work. Though Soviet space pro­-gram conceived in the 1970s as a space test flew a sub-scale craft shuttle motor, it was ruled out for very much like the X-24, that program in favor of conventional and NASA is evaluating a similar craft, built by rocket motors, considered less risky Scaled Composites, as at the time. an Inter-national Space Now, Lockheed believes, the tech- Station emergency crew nology for a practical aerospike return vehicle. engine is available; the company has flown the concept aboard an SR-71 test bed. The linear aerospike is described as an “inside out” rocket motor, with fuel combustion taking place outside of a central core. The concept planned to select a single contractor take over leadership in lift services. eliminates the weight of rocket bell from among the entries in the com- China and Russia also have captured a exhausts and much of the plumbing petition, it decided late last year to very significant chunk of the market. involved with today’s rockets, thus carry two companies into production: saving weight and cost, and should Boeing with its Delta IV variants and The Next Phase be more reliable than a standard with its Atlas and The Air Force was expected to an- rocket motor. Titan follow-ons. The companies nounce details of the next phase of About 15 test flights of the X-33 will compete on a per-launch basis. the EELV program this fall, includ- are planned from Edwards AFB, Cal­ A test of medium-lift variants will ing how it will save money while if. Shorter-duration flights will end take place in Fiscal 2002, and the maintaining two unique launch ve- with a landing at Michael Army Air heavy-lift versions are set to fly in hicle production lines. The project is Field at the Army’s Dugway Prov- Fiscal 2003, with a full operational expected to carry the bulk of USAF ing Grounds in Utah, while longer capability by Fiscal 2005. Earlier satellites into the 2015–20 era, when flights will conclude at Malmstrom flights are definitely possible, given it is hoped that a thoroughly Reusable AFB, Mont. Most of the flight tests that both Boeing and Lockheed will be available. will average a week apart, but the Martin had planned to pursue their NASA has taken the lead on this program calls for demonstrating a respective vehicles with or without longer-term solution. While the space turnaround time of two days at least a “win” in the EELV competitions shuttle orbiter and its large external once. The suborbital flight to Utah and given that the demand for launch solid boosters can be used again after will take about 15 minutes while services is starting to overtake the extensive refurbishment, its huge the trip to Malmstrom will take 24 number of rockets available. external liquid fuel tank is discarded minutes. The program would, not coinci- on every flight, and turnaround time The Air Force is interested in both dentally, help US companies reclaim has never bested two months. NASA VentureStar and the X-33 as possible their dominance of the satellite and the Air Force want a system which launch vehicles for its own more launch business. American firms, consumes nothing but fuel and parts routine operations in space but will which once seemed unbeatable in and with a re-fly window measured not commit to the system for some commercial space, now have only 36 in days, not weeks. time, waiting to see that the concept percent of the annual launch market of The anticipated system for the RLV delivers on its promises. The X-33 around $2.8 billion. The Challenger is the Lockheed Martin VentureStar. does have a small payload bay, mea- accident in 1986, which forced a This lifting-body design is expected suring 5 feet by 10 feet. two-year shutdown in shuttle opera- to loft 50,000 pounds to Low Earth tions and left the US scrambling for Orbit—compared to the shuttle’s No More expendable alternatives, allowed the 51,000-pound maximum—at only “We envision a Space Operations European Arianespace consortium to about $1,000 a pound in the middle Vehicle system,” according to Air

42 AIR FORCE Magazine / November 1998 Force Space Command requirements Its key capabilities will be “launch, sive platform. The SMV could rou- chief Brig. Gen. Brian A. Arnold. return, and reuse on demand,” Ar- tinely “replenish the constellation,” The term “system” denotes that nold said. Arnold said. USAF has dropped the idea of an “We’re talking about the opera- Satellites being launched by the Air all-in-one military spaceplane and tional concepts,” and a mission need Force today are not configured for is now pursuing a building-block statement will soon be in the offing, on-orbit servicing, Arnold said, but approach that will involve different Arnold noted. However, “the key is the availability of SOVs in the future types of vehicles. to be cheaper and more responsive” may swing design in that direction. The fundamental element “will than today’s satellites and launch be the Space Operations Vehicle,” vehicles. Checking Things Out Ar­nold explained. The SOV will be Having such a capability would The availability of an SMV would an entirely reusable, single-stage- make it possible to build cheaper make it possible to look over a foreign to-orbit “which could go military satellites, he noted, since satellite, and possibly knock it out, to Medium [Earth Orbit] or geosyn- today’s orbiting reconnaissance if it carried mechanisms to blind or chronous orbit,” he said. “battle­ships” must have multiple destroy US assets in space. Also being While the SOV could carry a mis- redundant systems and a large supply looked at as an SOV payload is the sion payload and sensors, it probably of maneuvering propellant. That’s Orbital Transfer Vehicle—a satellite would be used chiefly “as a truck,” because once on orbit, it’s both that would perform a “tug” mission, Arnold said, to carry aloft satellites difficult and highly expensive to moving satellites to higher or lower or what is termed a Space Maneuver retrieve or resupply them with the orbits or bringing them to an SOV or Vehicle. It would have a high sortie space shuttle. With the ability to SMV for repair or refueling. rate as well as interchangeable pay- get to space on short notice would The X-33 or VentureStar could loads tailored to the mission—not come the option of making satel- well be the basis of the Air Force’s unlike changing the pods or ordnance lites with less redundancy and less SOV, Arnold said, if the concept on a combat aircraft. propellant, making them cheaper to proves successful. A derivative of The SMV would be a smaller build and thus cheaper to launch. An the smaller X-33 in particular is vehicle capable of performing “any SMV would allow a quick satellite interesting to the Air Force because number of missions,” he added, from refueling or replacement in a crisis. it will fly sooner and, being smaller spot surveillance of a touchy region A constellation of small “cheap­ than the VentureStar, may be more to refueling or repairing a satellite sats,” as they are also known, would suitable to quick-reaction military to orbiting a specialized, short-lived also degrade more gracefully under missions. “smallsat” for a special mission. failure or attack than a single, mas- The Air Force is also testing a 90-percent-scale version of an SMV called the X-40A, built by Boeing. The SMV demonstrator, which is 22 feet long, has been air-dropped and recently demonstrated an autonomous landing in a crosswind. A full-scale version could carry a 1,200-pound payload into Seen here being drop- tested by a UH-60 Black space, frequently change its altitude Hawk is the X-40A, a Boe- and inclination, or orbit, and stay in ing concept for a Space space for about a year. The vehicle Maneuver Ve-hicle. In could ride to space either on an X-33 this test, the craft flew to an autonomous landing derivative, VentureStar, or an Expend- in a cross­wind. The Air able Launch Vehicle. Force envisions orbiting President Clinton exercised a line- 30-foot-long SMVs up to item veto of funding for an Air Force 22,000 miles for a variety spaceplane earlier this year, amid of missions: inspect- ing foreign satellites for concerns that the US was “weapon­ hostile capabilities, fixing izing” space and laying the grounds or refueling friendly for a new arms race. satellites, or conduct- Estes noted, though, that “the ing spot reconnaissance of world hot spots. The kinds of technologies resident in the unmanned SMV might development of a Space Operations remain in orbit as long as Vehicle ... are the kinds of things a year before re-entering that I’ve been asked to look at in the atmos­phere, making doing my space control mission.” a runway landing, and being used again. Continued research—without de- ployment, because “we don’t need it right now”—is essential, Estes said, since “there are certain capabilities ... that are important for us to un- derstand, so when it comes time to deploy systems to do space control,

AIR FORCE Magazine / November 1998 43 getting smaller, lighter, and going only to LEO, though many at a time are being launched to create large constellations. In this artist’s concept, a A funded SOV program as such Lockheed Martin Skunk Works X-33 variant gives doesn’t exist, Arnold noted, as the an SMV a piggyback ride Air Force is narrowing down the mis- to Low Earth Orbit. The sions it would perform and defining X-33 program could yield the need for such a vehicle. both a large Reusable “We’re in the ... requirements Launch Vehicle twice its size as well as a smaller, definition and ... military utility military version like analysis” phase of the effort, he said, this one. While the Air with an eye toward a system’s use- Force sees such a Space fulness and affordability. The first Operations Vehicle as being able to carry some draft of the operational requirements sensors and perhaps document, which is the cornerstone do on-orbit refueling, its of any new program, is to be down primary mission would on paper this fall, he noted. A mis- be as a “truck,” carrying sion need statement for the SMV SMVs into space. isn’t expected for another year yet, Arnold forecasted. The Boeing X-40 project is to help the Air Force understand what is possible and to reduce risk if the program goes forward, he added. Ultimately, for the vast majority of space systems, “we would like to get out of the business of launch,” Arnold asserted. The Air Force would prefer to simply hire a launch company and we make decisions that are right for “signed a treaty that says we won’t deliver a payload for launch, rather the country.” put weapons of mass destruction in than maintain its own vehicles and As he was wrapping up his tenure space, but we’ve signed no treaty rocket infrastructure. Part of what as the dual-hatted chief of both US that says we won’t weaponize space.” will make this possible will be the and Air Force Space Command, Estes If for no other reason than to ag- development of the standardized in- said he was working closely with the gressively chase down the cost of terface between satellites and launch White House and the Pentagon to getting into orbit, Estes said SOV vehicles, so rocket companies can continue exploring SOV technology research is worthwhile. Given a simply bid for the launch contract without ignoring Clinton’s intent. “fixed amount of money to do things without any modifications to the “We’re trying to be true to what the in space,” the Air Force can do far vehicle. President told us to do,” Estes said, more if it only has to spend “15 to 20 As with any road map, the plan for “but also [to] have enough latitude percent” on getting to orbit “instead launch vehicles is constantly shifting. to understand the technology well of 50 percent.” Anticipating such The shuttle era, after 17 years of op- enough to make an informed decision needs and having ready answers erations, is in middle age, and NASA about what’s right for the country when asked “is what you pay your is beginning to think seriously about in terms of doing the space control military for,” he added. its next steps, bearing in mind that, mission, ... a mission we have been Another RLV concept in devel- in addition to its sizable manifest of given by the President.” opment is called the X-34, built by satellites to launch, it must build the Given the capabilities afforded by Orbital Sciences. This vehicle, de- International Space Station. a spaceplane type of vehicle, such rived from the company’s successful In September, NASA awarded five as the ability to protect friendly Pegasus launcher, would be carried contracts to industry to develop a satellites, to conduct “negation-type to high altitude by the company’s space transportation architecture that missions ... with directed energy L-1011 wide-body ex-airliner. Re- will lay out how the US will get people systems, or through less offensive leased from the plane, the X-34’s and cargo into space after the retire- kinds of things,” for short-duration engines would take it the rest of the ment of the four workhorse orbiters reconnaissance, bringing a satellite way to Low Earth Orbit, where the circa 2010. The contractors, which back for repair, or “refueling a sat- vehicle would deploy a satellite and include Boeing, Lockheed Martin, ellite to get longer use out of [it] ... return to an autonomous landing on Orbital Sciences, Space Access LLC, then for national security purposes, a runway. and Kelly Space and Technology, will ... a maneuvering vehicle in space ... The X-34, a liquid-fueled vehicle, examine whether the shuttles will makes some sense,” Estes asserted. would also be fully reusable, Arnold have to be refurbished for extended said. Systems like the X-34 will be service or whether NASA can go No Treaty Constraints increasingly in demand because the directly to derivatives of the X-33 He also pointed out that the US has majority of commercial satellites are and X-34. ■

44 AIR FORCE Magazine / November 1998