DOCSLIB.ORG

The Disruptive Potential of Subsonic Air-Launch

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Disruptive Potential of Subsonic Air-Launch BIS-RS-2014-28 The Disruptive Potential of Subsonic Air-Launch David J. Salt Telespazio VEGA Deutschland GmbH Europaplatz 5, D-64293 Darmstadt, Germany; +49 (0)6151 8257-0 dave.salt@telespazio-vega.de ABSTRACT This paper tries to show that big launch vehicles may not be required to enable big space operations. It first highlight the essential role of space launch in enabling all space operations and indicates the dominant role that ‘customer’ demand has played in both enabling and constraining its development. It then discusses the advantages and drawbacks of a subsonic air-launched reusable launch vehicle (RLV); comparing and contrasting them against a wide range of other possible launcher concepts. In doing this it highlights the unique evolutionary opportunities that this concept has to offer and provides some insight as to how these may be realised and enhanced via existing technologies. Finally, the paper highlights the radical improvements in operational architectures afforded by such a vehicle. It shows how an RLV with a relatively modest launch performance of less than 5t to low Earth orbit could be capable of supporting almost all current and future launch demand by forming the key element of a fully reusable space transportation infrastructure. KEYWORDS: ACES = Air Collection & Enrichment System LEO = Low Earth Orbit CR = Collection Ratio Mg = Metric tonne ELV = Expendable Launch Vehicle Mn = Mach number GEO = Geosynchronous Earth Orbit SSTO = Single Stage to Orbit GTO = Geosynchronous Earth Orbit TSTO = Two Stage to Orbit IRR = Internal Rate of Return RLV = Reusable Launch Vehicle kg = kilogram 1. THE LIMITS TO GROWTH realisation. Given the importance of markets in the development of commercial activities, this assessment HE frequency and complexity of space operations T has evolved relatively slowly over the last three also considers how such factors may also influence decades and is certainly much reduced in comparison their growth and sustainability. with the first two decades of the Space Age, which began more than half a century ago. The reasons for this i) Current Constraints ‘phase change’ can be easily understood when one Current space activities range from pure science considers the changes in both political and economic missions through to civil and military applications like drivers that control most space activities, especially communication, navigation and observation systems. those involving human spaceflight. Nevertheless, growth and evolution in all these areas is The past five decades of space activity have, to a limited by a few key factors: large degree, been driven by a few specific issues such government priorities and constraints; as national security and conservation of the industrial competition from terrestrial alternatives; base. In contrast, the slow growth of commercial low market ‘elasticity’ (i.e. lower prices ventures has been due mainly to market and financial stimulate only limited market growth); constraints, rather than any basic limitation of the launcher cost/availability/reliability. available technology. As a consequence, the diversity The first factor is important because the growth of and intensity of spaceflight operations have also been space activities is still dominated by government paced by these trends, though the manner in which they programmes, both civil and military. Communication are performed, on both the ground and in space, has satellites represent the nearest thing to a truly been radically improved by the phenomenal advances in commercial market sector, but government funding still computing and software over this same period. underpins much of their basic R&D while the second and third factors have placed significant restraints on 1.1 The Current Space Paradigm & Potential of their growth and evolution, as witnessed by the NewSpace problems of commercial ventures like Iridium, We first consider future possibilities to identify the Globalstar, ICO, SkyBridge and Teledesic. factors that may either prevent or severely restrain their Salt 1 Reinventing Space Conference 2014 To put the situation into perspective, Figure 1 shows aim being to reduce specific launch costs by an order of a breakdown of the global space industry’s annual magnitude to below about $1000/kg to LEO, the point revenue, which was $304 billion in 2012. However, this where significant growth in all market sectors is was still less than the annual turn-over of a single expected to be triggered. successful commercial company like Wal-Mart [RD.2], Nevertheless, it is important to realize that the which was founded in 1962 but has managed to NewSpace paradigm is not solely restricted to outgrow the entire world space industry by servicing entrepreneurial start-up companies. A more thoughtful vastly bigger and established markets to give a turnover definition would also include groups working within of $445 billion in 2011. established companies, such as Boeing, Lockheed- Martin and Orbital Sciences, who are also seeking to stimulate existing and new markets by applying novel technologies and commercial practices such as fixed- price, rather than cost-plus, contracts. 1.2 NewSpace and the Realities of Space Access As launch services are one of the most significant constraints on the growth of future space operations, we now consider the significant improvements in vehicle design, operation and economics that will be required and the ways in which these could be realized. It has long been recognised that the only way to achieve significant improvements in space access is via reusable launch vehicles (RLVs) instead of expendable Figure 1. Global Space Activities, 2012 [RD.1] launch vehicles (ELVs), because they offer: major reductions in marginal costs, as expensive ii) Future Potentials components tend not to be discarded after use; better amortisation of investments, as costs can A wide range of future space-based activities and 1 be spread across more users; associated business opportunities have been discussed for many decades (e.g. space manufacturing facilities, higher reliability and safety, due to the intrinsic solar power satellites) but their realisation has also been value of the vehicle. limited by a few key factors: Unfortunately government efforts to field such systems have, to date, either missed many of their large investment requirements; original goals (i.e. Shuttle) or been outright failures (X- operation and utilization cost uncertainty; 33/VentureStar, X-34, etc.). Moreover, commercial market demand and ‘elasticity’ uncertainty; efforts to develop such systems have been hampered launcher cost, availability and reliability. because their development costs are difficult to justify Given these circumstances – and in the absence of a against potential markets, for example: major government imperative, equivalent to that which many studies estimate it will cost $10-20 billion justified Apollo (i.e. the Cold War) – it has become to field an operational system; clear to many that the current paradigm will not lead to the existing markets are insufficient to justify any significant growth of space activities in the their development because they have limited foreseeable future. As a consequence, a number of growth and ‘elasticity’3 (i.e. lower prices NewSpace ventures have begun to emerge2 that stimulate only limited market growth); represent an attempt to change the paradigm by placing the new markets that could justify their greater emphasis on entrepreneurial rather than development are far too uncertain and government activities. speculative. NewSpace ventures believe that the best way to Such factors show that both market and financial change the paradigm is to stimulate existing and/or new issues play just as important a role as the obvious markets in order to drive and sustain their growth, technical ones. They also explain why NewSpace primarily through the power of commercial enterprise. ventures have chosen to begin by developing RLVs to Moreover, as launch issues are seen as the common service sub-orbital markets, which demand significantly factor that limits both current and future growth, most less of an initial investment, with many estimating that have chosen to address this issue first; their ultimate only $100m-$200 million will be required. 1 For example, the Commercial Space Transportation Study (CSTS) 3 performed a comprehensive review in 1994 of all current and Space market elasticity is difficult to estimate due to the relatively foreseeable markets [RD.3] small size and low diversity of current markets, though studies 2 Summaries and links for all current ventures are at such as the CSTS [RD.3] and the NASA ASCENT Study [RD.4] (http://www.space-frontier.org/commercialspace/) have derived tentative estimates. Salt 2 Reinventing Space Conference 2014 Nevertheless, it should be appreciated that cost isn’t altitude of 555 km. Since then, the only operational air- everything and that frequent flight availability and a launched rocket has been Pegasus, which was timely and efficient integration process are just as developed by the Orbital Sciences Corporation as a important. A good example of this is NASA’s Get commercial satellite launch vehicle and first flown on Away Special (GAS) canisters [RD.5] that were priced 5th March, 1990, with 42 launches to date. on the order of $100/kg to LEO but, because of the long Most air-launch concepts carry the rocket external and complex Shuttle integration process, were to the launch vehicle, either on top
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Világ Legnagyobb Repülőgépe
    1. ábra. A valaha megépült legnagyobb repülőgép, a Stratolaunch Carrier Aircraft. Akár három rakéta is felfüggeszthető lesz a Stratolaunch Systemre (Grafika: Stratolaunch Corporation) Schuminszky Nándor* A világ legnagyobb repülőgépe magán űripar egyre nagyobb szerepet játszik a világ- űr gazdasági hasznosításáért folytatott versenyfutás- A ban. Az első jelentős eredményt a Scaled Composites cég érte el; a Burt Rutan mérnök vezetésével megalkotott SpaceShipOne nevű, kisméretű űrrepülőgép 2004 őszén elnyerte a dúsgazdag Ansari család által létrehozott XPRIZE-t, kerek 10 millió dollár értékben. Az X-díj odaítélé- sét három fő feltételhez kötötték: a járműnek két héten belül kétszer át kellett lépnie a világűr elméleti határát, azaz a 100 km-es magasságot, fedélzetén három emberrel, vagy ennek a feltételnek megfelelően egy pilótával és leg- alább 2 × 75 kg-os ballaszttal. A KEZDET 2. ábra. 2017. május 31-én az első Stratolaunch Carrier Aircraft kigurult a Mojave Air and Space Port hangárjából Burt Rutan a 2004-es siker után nem ült sokáig a babérjain. A SpaceShipOne-t szállító repülőgéppel nyert tapasztala- vőből: egy hordozó légi járműből – a Scaled Composites- tokat felhasználva, nekilátott új tervének. Paul G. Allen ból –, egy többlépcsős rakétából és a Dynetics cég össze- személyében – aki a világhírű Microsoft vállalat egyik alapí- illesztési és integrációs rendszeréből áll. Az első próbaindí- tója – ideális társat talált a munkájához. Közös vállalatuk, a tásokat 2017-re tervezték, hogy az eszközt 2020-ban már Stratolaunch Systems Corporation székhelyét Seattle-ben, kereskedelmi célokra tudják használni. Washington államban jegyezték be. Fő céljuk olyan légi és Az ötlet nem tekinthető teljesen újnak, hiszen az Egyesült űrrepülési rendszer kombinációjának létrehozása volt, Államokban a Space Shuttle rendszer előkísérleteit egy amellyel űrobjektumokat lehet Föld körüli pályára állítani.
    [Show full text]
  • The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2017
    Federal Aviation Administration The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2017 January 2017 Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2017 i Contents About the FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation The Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation (FAA AST) licenses and regulates U.S. commercial space launch and reentry activity, as well as the operation of non-federal launch and reentry sites, as authorized by Executive Order 12465 and Title 51 United States Code, Subtitle V, Chapter 509 (formerly the Commercial Space Launch Act). FAA AST’s mission is to ensure public health and safety and the safety of property while protecting the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States during commercial launch and reentry operations. In addition, FAA AST is directed to encourage, facilitate, and promote commercial space launches and reentries. Additional information concerning commercial space transportation can be found on FAA AST’s website: http://www.faa.gov/go/ast Cover art: Phil Smith, The Tauri Group (2017) Publication produced for FAA AST by The Tauri Group under contract. NOTICE Use of trade names or names of manufacturers in this document does not constitute an official endorsement of such products or manufacturers, either expressed or implied, by the Federal Aviation Administration. ii Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2017 GENERAL CONTENTS Executive Summary 1 Introduction 5 Launch Vehicles 9 Launch and Reentry Sites 21 Payloads 35 2016 Launch Events 39 2017 Annual Commercial Space Transportation Forecast 45 Space Transportation Law and Policy 83 Appendices 89 Orbital Launch Vehicle Fact Sheets 100 iii Contents DETAILED CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .
    [Show full text]
  • IAC-13-E6.2.6 Page 1 of 16 IAC-13
    64th International Astronautical Congress, Beijing, China. Copyright ©2013 by the International Astronautical Federation. All rights reserved. IAC-13-E6.2.6 x19035 INDUSTRIAL INNOVATION CYCLE ANALYSIS OF THE ORBITAL LAUNCH VEHICLE INDUSTRY Julio Aprea European Space Agency, France, Julio.Aprea@esa.int Ulfert Block European Space Agency, France, Ulfert.Block@esa.int Emmanuelle David Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt e.V., Germany, Emmanuelle.David@dlr.de The analysis in this paper provides an initial look at the Orbital Launch Vehicle Industry within the Model for Industrial Innovation, proposed by James M. Utterback and William J. Abernathy in their article “Patterns of Industrial Innovation” (1978). The paper starts with a summary of the Abernathy-Utterback Model, its phases (fluid, transitional and specific) and its characteristics, the concept of dominant design and the focus on product and process innovation. This work then analyses the Orbital Launch Vehicle industry from a historical perspective of its major innovations and compares the development of this industry with the Abernathy-Utterback Model. It as well highlights some interesting current developments and analyses certain technology innovations that will likely shape the industry in the future, namely serial production and incremental degrees of reusability. Based on this analysis this paper finally draws some preliminary conclusions and proposes future work on the subject. INTRODUCTION at defining the elements of the dominant design and This paper is part of a series of papers aiming at determining which phase of the Innovation Model we analysing the different sectors of the space industry are currently experiencing. from the point of view of different innovation models and industry structure theories.
    [Show full text]
  • Forging Commercial Confidence
    SPACEPORT UK: AHEAD FORGING WITH COMMERCIAL CONFIDENCE Copyright © Satellite Applications Catapult Ltd 2014. SPACEPORT UK: FORGING AHEAD WITH COMMERCIAL CONFIDENCE TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 07 2 DEMAND FORECAST 11 • Commercial human spaceflight • Very high speed point to point travel • Satellite deployment • Microgravity research • Other commercial demand 3 SPACEPORT FACILITIES 47 • Core infrastructure required • Spaceflight preparation and training • Tours/visitor centre • Space campus • Key findings 4 WIDER ECONOMIC IMPACT 57 • Summary • Site development • Employment • Tourism • R&D/education • Key findings 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS 5 REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT 67 • Unlocking commercial potential 6 RISKS 73 • Accidents • Single operator • Local opposition 7 FINANCING 77 • Existing scenario • Potential funding sources • Other sources of funds • Insurance • Key findings Appendices 85 • Appendix A • Appendix B Acknowledgements and contact information 89 5 Spaceport UK: A pillar of growth for the UK and European space industry, enabling lower cost access to space, and creating economic benefit far beyond its perimeter fence. A spaceport will unlock economic growth and jobs in existing UK industries and regions, while positioning the UK to take advantage of emerging demand for commercial human spaceflight, small satellite launch, microgravity research, parabolic flights, near-space balloon tourism, and eventually high-speed point-to-point travel. Without a specific site selected and looking at the economic impact of a spaceport generically, this report expects the spaceport to deliver approximately £2.5bn and 8,000 jobs to the broader UK economy over 10 years. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 Executive Summary Our plan is for Britain to have a fully functional, operating spaceport “by 2018. This would serve as a European focal point for the pioneers of commercial spaceflight using the potential of spaceflight experience companies like Virgin Galactic, XCOR and Swiss S3 to pave the way for satellite launch services to follow.
    [Show full text]
  • First Century Commercial Space Imperative
    SPRINGER BRIEFS IN SPACE DEVELOPMENT Anthony Young The Twenty- First Century Commercial Space Imperative 123 SpringerBriefs in Space Development Series editor Joseph N. Pelton Jr., Arlington, USA More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/10058 Anthony Young The Twenty-First Century Commercial Space Imperative 123 Anthony Young Orlando, FL USA ISSN 2191-8171 ISSN 2191-818X (electronic) SpringerBriefs in Space Development ISBN 978-3-319-18928-4 ISBN 978-3-319-18929-1 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-18929-1 Library of Congress Control Number: 2015940433 Springer Cham Heidelberg New York Dordrecht London © The Author(s) 2015 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.
    [Show full text]
  • Air-Launch to Orbit
    Air-Launch to Orbit Stephen A. Muir ASEN 5053, The University of Colorado at Boulder, Boulder, CO 80909 This report details the current state of air-launch to orbit vehicles and what their capabilities are. It also touches on new systems and what development the future holds in this field. The air-launch to orbit market is primed to become the premier method of placing small satellites into orbit in a quick and cheap manner. The veritable explosion of cubesat and nanosat technology in the last decade will propel this niche market to the forefront of space launch systems. Nomenclature Isp = specific impulse USD = united states dollars ∆V = delta velocity I. Introduction HE cost to launch satellites into space has become exorbitant over the years. While the shuttle program was Tdeveloped with the idea that a launch each week and reusable boosters would drop the overall cost, this never materialized. Instead, the government watched while prices skyrocketed and as funding became scarce due to economic downturn, so did the launches. By the end of the shuttle program, the US government was shelling out an estimated $400M USD1. While, the return to more conventional rockets dropped this cost, it still remained high due to the lack of private investment in the field. Heavy launches aboard Delta IV and Atlas V rockets rose to prices between $150M and $200M USD1. Currently, if you have a high mass satellite or spacecraft, expect to pay plently of money to get it into orbit. As one might expect, the rise in cost has paralleled a massive push to miniaturize satellites.
    [Show full text]
  • Az F–35 Lightning II. Harcirepülőgép Éves Előfizetési Díj 3120 Ft
    A múlt, a jelen és a jövő fegyverei HHADITECHNIKAADITECHNIKA 2018/2 LII. évfolyam 2. szám Ára 520 Ft Az F–35 Lightning II. harcirepülőgép Éves előfizetési díj 3120 Ft 9 770230 6891081 8 0 0 2 Tartalom A HONVÉDELMI MINISZTÉRIUM FÓKUSZBAN NEMZETKÖZI MŰSZAKI-TUDOMÁNYOS HADITECHNIKAI SZEMLE ÉS ISMERETTERJESZTŐ FOLYÓIRATA Dr. Mujzer Péter: A magyar Kelecsényi István: Az F–35 megszálló erők páncélos Lightning II-es harcirepülő- 2018/2. szám. alakulatai 2 gép-család I. rész 8 LII. évfolyam A szerkesztőbizottság elnöke: Dr. Végh Ferenc: A belga Szabó István vezérőrnagy haderő napjainkban II. rész 16 Honvéd Vezérkar főnök koordinációs helyettes (HVK) Elnökhelyettes: Baráth István ddtbk. ŰRTECHNIKA c. egyetemi docens (MH LK pk.) Schuminszky Nándor: A világ A szerkesztőbizottság tagjai: legnagyobb repülőgépe 19 Amaczi Viktor ny. mk. alez. (HT) Dr. Balajti István (NATO) Sárhidai Gyula: Vízre bocsátották Dr. Strádi Andrea: Személyi Benkó Imre (HM Currus Zrt.) Kína első légvédelmi cirkálóját 4 Dr. Both Előd csillagász dozimetria extrém Dr. Gáspár Tibor nyá. mk. vörgy. (MKLE) környezetben 23 Gecse János ezds. (MH LK) Dr. Germuska Pál (HM HIM) Dr. habil. Gyarmati József mk. alez. (NKE) Dr. Gyulai Gábor nyá mk. ezds. (NKE KMDI) HAZAI TÜKÖR Prof. Dr. Ványa László mk. ezds. (NKE) Dr. Balajti István: A magyar Prof. Dr. Haig Zsolt mk. ezds. (NKE) Prof. Dr. Halász László mk. ezds. (NKE) légtérellenőrzés jövőbeni Kaposvári László Zoltán ddtbk. (HVK LCsF csf.) műszaki kihívásai 27 Prof. Dr. Kende György mk. ezds. (NKE) Prof. Dr. Kiss Péter (SzIE) Dr. Koller József ddtbk. (MH 86. SZHB pk.) Prof. Dr. Kovács László mk. ezds. (NKE) HADITECHNIKA-TÖRTÉNET Dr. Kovács Vilmos ezds.
    [Show full text]