DOCSLIB.ORG

Spaceport Categorization ARC Final Report (3-29-19)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Spaceport Categorization ARC Final Report (3-29-19) Spaceport Categorization RTF ARC Recommendations Aviation Final Report Rulemaking Committee (ARC) November 20, 2015 ARC Recommendations Final Report March 29, 2019 Page intentionally left blank Table of Contents 1. BACKGROUND .........................................................................................................................................................................1 2. OBJECTIVES AND SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES OF THE ARC ................................................................................1 3. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .........................................................................................................................................................2 4. COMMON LANGUAGE ..........................................................................................................................................................3 A. Definitions ................................................................................................................................................................................3 B. Table of Applicability of Terms ......................................................................................................................................... 36 5. ARC RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................................................................. 38 A. The Licensing Process ......................................................................................................................................................... 38 1) The Aviation Community’s Issues and Concerns in the Licensing Process .......................................................... 38 2) The Commercial Space Community’s Issues and Concerns in the Licensing Process ........................................ 39 B. Spaceport Data Disclosure .................................................................................................................................................. 40 6. APPENDIX ................................................................................................................................................................................ 43 i 1. BACKGROUND The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA or the Agency) chartered the Spaceport Categorization Aviation Rulemaking Committee (SC-ARC or ARC) to assist the FAA in providing the appropriate spaceport categorization framework to develop FAA policy and future regulations, while considering the impacts to established aviation operations. As the commercial space transportation industry has grown in vehicle technology, operational capability, and market penetration, enthusiasm of state, regional, and private entities to invest in commercial spaceports has also increased rapidly. The FAA has expressed a desire to encourage a broad, resilient infrastructure supporting a multitude of companies and missions, and to identify potential spaceport integration issues and provide early regulatory clarity to municipalities and enterprises developing their business places. Co-location at airports, impacts to air traffic, and general public safety considerations are all emergent issues as the commercial space transportation industry becomes more widespread and normalized. The FAA believes a spaceport categorization framework provides a primary means to enhance clarity and communication for space and aviation stakeholders and the FAA. The FAA chartered the SC-ARC to assist the FAA in defining a working set of spaceport categories that includes strong consideration of the needs for airspace and airport integration. 2. OBJECTIVES AND SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES OF THE ARC ARC Membership The ARC was composed of members representing airports, spaceports, launch operators, consulting firms and numerous industry member organizations. A complete list of ARC members is included in Appendix A to this report. ARC Objectives The SC-ARC was tasked with assisting the FAA in reviewing category criteria defining ranges of launch and reentry vehicle types and the ease with which they could be accommodated at spaceport locations. Overall, the goal of the SC-ARC was to provide a forum for the United States aviation and space communities to review and discuss a spaceport categorization scheme to be used as a primary communication tool by the FAA and the stakeholder community. The FAA charged the SC-ARC with the following specific task: Review the FAA’s draft spaceport categorization scheme and provide specific consensus comments and recommendations on its overall framework as well as each of its specific elements to assist the FAA in developing clear and useful spaceport categories. 1 ARC Working Groups The members of the SC-ARC were organized into three working groups: • Task Group One – Concerns/Gaps Identified in Current Site Licensing Process • Task Group Two – Common Language/Terminology • Task Group Three – Spaceport Categorization ARC Meetings The initial meeting with the FAA and industry took place in Washington, DC on February 28, 2018. FAA representatives presented industry members with a draft spaceport categorization scheme. Following the initial meeting, the SC-ARC held the meetings and teleconferences on the following dates to discuss the FAA’s effort: March 19, 2018 Teleconference April 16, 2018 Teleconference June 25, 2018 Teleconference July 20, 2018 In-person at Delta HQ in Atlanta, as a joint meeting with the Airspace Access ARC August 6, 2018 Teleconference September 3, 2018 Teleconference September 19, 2018 In-person meeting at NBAA HQ October 1, 2018 Teleconference October 15, 2018 Teleconference November 16, 2018 In-person at Denver International Airport March 15, 2019 Teleconference 3. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The SC-ARC membership represented diverse interests and viewpoints. During the course of the ARC activities described above, the three task groups met on several occasions to address the specific issues they were tasked to consider. The individual task groups’ findings and conclusions were captured in separate task group reports, which were presented to and considered by the full ARC and form the basis of the ARC’s recommendations. Although some decisions were not unanimous, the ARC reached general agreement on their recommendations to the FAA. The recommendations in this report reflect the final statements of the ARC. Because of the variety of stakeholders represented in its membership, the ARC found it necessary to address the fact that many terms were being used and often interpreted differently across stakeholders in the proceedings of the ARC. Section 4 of this report contains a description of common terms agreed to by the ARC for purposes of its activities. The initial goal of the SC-ARC was to provide a forum for the United States aviation and space communities to review and discuss a spaceport categorization scheme to be used as a primary communication tool by the FAA and the stakeholder community. During the course of its deliberations, however, the ARC concluded that a categorization scheme was unnecessary and represented only one way in which the FAA and the stakeholder community could communicate to 2 other interested stakeholders and the general public about the activities that may take place at a spaceport. Instead of developing a spaceport categorization scheme, the ARC recommends a data disclosure requirement for prospective spaceports. The specific data and factors that potential spaceports would be required to disclose are discussed in Section 5.B. of this report. The ARC also considered and makes recommendations to the FAA about the spaceport licensing process. The ARC spent considerable time identifying issues and concerns it has with the existing licensing process. Rather than make specific recommendations about how the FAA should change the licensing process, however, the ARC chose to present its concerns for the FAA to consider. Because these concerns differ between the aviation community and the commercial space community, each community’s concerns is presented separately in Section 5.A. of this report. 4. COMMON LANGUAGE This section is intended to review terms that have been used and often interpreted differently across stakeholders in the proceedings of the ARC. Initially, a survey was conducted of ARC participants to gather a catalog of terms that were confusing, misunderstood, or meant different things to different NAS stakeholders. This section is structured such that for each term, a legal or published definition is listed along with a source reference. In some cases, terms provided in this section are colloquial in nature and thus do not have an associated legal or published definition. In many cases the legal or published definition does not provide the detail needed to generate understanding of what the term actually means. In an attempt to increase understanding and correct use of these terms, a description/discussion section was added that is intended to cover the generally accepted meaning of each term as well as address any areas the same term is used with different intent across NAS stakeholders. This section is structured with the terms in alphabetical order and includes a table of applicability at the end, indicating whether the term applies to the launch/reentry operator, the launch/reentry site, the aircraft/airspace, or some combination of the three. A. Definitions Accident (Launch Site) Legal or Published Definition: Launch site accident means an unplanned event occurring during a ground activity
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rsos/Fsos.  Personnel Directly Supporting Or Interacting with an RSO/FSO During NASA Range Flight Operations
    Range Flight Safety Operations Course: GSFC-RFSO Duration: 24 hours This introductory course focuses on the roles and responsibilities of the Range Safety Officer (RSO) or Flight Safety Officer (FSO) during Range Flight Safety activities and real-time support including pre- launch/flight, launch/flight, and recovery/landing for NASA Sounding Rocket, Unmanned Aircraft System, and Expendable Launch Vehicle operations. Range Flight Safety policies, guidelines, and requirements applicable to the duties of an RSO for each vehicle type are reviewed. Launch/Flight constraints and commit criteria, mission rules, day of launch/flight activities, and display techniques are presented. Tracking and telemetry, post-flight operations, lessons learned, and the use and importance of contingency plans are discussed. This course includes several classroom exercises to reinforce techniques and procedures utilized during Range Flight Safety operations. Due to the unique interaction with real-world equipment, this course is conducted at Wallops Flight Facility and class size is limited to a maximum of twelve (12) students. Prerequisites: SMA-AS-WBT-410, Range Flight Safety Orientation, or equivalent experience and/or training, is required. SMA-AS-WBT-335, Flight Safety Systems, or equivalent experience and/or training, is required. SMA-AS-WBT-435, NASA Range Flight Safety Analysis, or equivalent experience and/or training, is required. Target Audience: Anyone identified as needing initial training for personnel performing RSO/FSO functions during NASA range flight operations. Personnel in the management chain responsible for oversight of RSOs/FSOs. Personnel directly supporting or interacting with an RSO/FSO during NASA range flight operations. RELEASED - Printed documents may be obsolete; validate prior to use..
    [Show full text]
  • Centaur Dl-A Systems in a Nutshell
    NASA Technical Memorandum 88880 '5 t I Centaur Dl-A Systems in a Nutshell (NASA-TM-8888o) CElTAUR D1-A SYSTEBS IN A N87- 159 96 tiljTSBELL (NASA) 29 p CSCL 22D Andrew L. Gordan Lewis Research Center Cleveland, Ohio January 1987 . CENTAUR D1-A SYSTEMS IN A NUTSHELL Andrew L. Gordan National Aeronautics and Space Administration Lewis Research Center Cleveland, Ohio 44135 SUMMARY This report identifies the unique aspects of the Centaur D1-A systems and subsystems. Centaur performance is described in terms of optimality (pro- pellant usage), flexibility, and airborne computer requirements. Major I-. systems are described narratively with some numerical data given where it may 03 CJ be useful. v, I W INTRODUCT ION The Centaur D1-A launch vehicle continues to be a key element in the Nation's space program. The Atlas/Centaur and Titan/Centaur combinations have boosted into orbit a variety of spacecraft on scientific, lunar, and planetary exploration missions and Earth orbit missions. These versatile, reliable, and accurate space booster systems will contribute to many significant space pro- grams well into the shuttle era. Centaur D1-A is the latest version of the Nation's first high-energy cryogenic launch vehicle. Major improvements in avionics and payload struc- ture have enhanced mission flexibility and mission success reliability. The liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen propellants and the pressurized stainless steel structure provide a top-performance vehicle. Centaur's primary thrust comes from two Pratt 8, Whitney constant- thrust, turbopump-fed, regeneratively cooled, liquid-fueled rocket engines. Each RL10A-3-3a engine can generate 16 500 lb of thrust, for a total thrust of 33 000 lb.
    [Show full text]
  • 10/2/95 Rev EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Report, Entitled "Hazard
    10/2/95 rev EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report, entitled "Hazard Analysis of Commercial Space Transportation," is devoted to the review and discussion of generic hazards associated with the ground, launch, orbital and re-entry phases of space operations. Since the DOT Office of Commercial Space Transportation (OCST) has been charged with protecting the public health and safety by the Commercial Space Act of 1984 (P.L. 98-575), it must promulgate and enforce appropriate safety criteria and regulatory requirements for licensing the emerging commercial space launch industry. This report was sponsored by OCST to identify and assess prospective safety hazards associated with commercial launch activities, the involved equipment, facilities, personnel, public property, people and environment. The report presents, organizes and evaluates the technical information available in the public domain, pertaining to the nature, severity and control of prospective hazards and public risk exposure levels arising from commercial space launch activities. The US Government space- operational experience and risk control practices established at its National Ranges serve as the basis for this review and analysis. The report consists of three self-contained, but complementary, volumes focusing on Space Transportation: I. Operations; II. Hazards; and III. Risk Analysis. This Executive Summary is attached to all 3 volumes, with the text describing that volume highlighted. Volume I: Space Transportation Operations provides the technical background and terminology, as well as the issues and regulatory context, for understanding commercial space launch activities and the associated hazards. Chapter 1, The Context for a Hazard Analysis of Commercial Space Activities, discusses the purpose, scope and organization of the report in light of current national space policy and the DOT/OCST regulatory mission.
    [Show full text]
  • Finding of No Significant Impact for Boost-Back and Landing of Falcon Heavy Boosters at Landing Zone-1, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration Office of Commercial Space Transportation Adoption of the Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for Boost-back and Landing of Falcon Heavy Boosters at Landing Zone-1, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida Summary The U.S. Air Force (USAF) acted as the lead agency, and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) was a cooperating agency, in the preparation of the February 2017 Supplemental Environmental Assessment to the December 2014 EA for Space Exploration Technologies Vertical Landing of the Falcon Vehicle and Construction at Launch Complex 13 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida (2017 SEA), which analyzed the potential environmental impacts of Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX) conducting boost-backs and landings of up to three Falcon Heavy boosters at Landing Zone 1 (LZ-1) at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS), Florida during the same mission. LZ-1 is also known as Launch Complex 13 (LC-13). The scope of the action analyzed in the 2017 SEA also included the option of landing one or two Falcon Heavy boosters on SpaceX’s autonomous droneship in the Atlantic Ocean. The 2017 SEA also addressed construction of two landing pads as well as construction and operation of a processing and testing facility for SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) also participated as a cooperating agency in the preparation of the 2017 SEA. The 2017 SEA was prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA; 42 United States Code [U.S.C.] § 4321 et seq.); Council on Environmental Quality NEPA implementing regulations (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] parts 1500 to 1508); the USAF’s Environmental Impact Analysis Process (32 CFR 989); and FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures.
    [Show full text]
  • Aleutian Test Range (Atr)
    Support to Northern Space Operations ALASKA AEROSPACE OVERVIEW • Charter to diversity economy with aerospace industry • Established 1991 as State of Alaska public corporation • Primary focus of creating economic hub with spaceport • Established and trusted launch capabilities • FAA-licensed commercial spaceport • Government & commercial users • Orbital and sub-orbital capability • Business-oriented, low-cost, efficient & effective • No Sustainment funding from State or Federal agencies • Wholly-owned subsidiary, Aurora Launch Services, provides flexible and cost-efficient staffing solutions for daily operations and surge support ESTABLISHED ORBITAL COMMERCIAL SPACEPORT • Kodiak Island, Alaska • Located on 3,700 acres of public land at Narrow Cape • Established Logistics: scheduled sea and air transport • Fiber optic connectivity for off-site data • Year-round launch operations; Gulf of Alaska moderates temperatures • Oriented for responsive access to space • Efficient for Polar, sun synchronous, and high inclination orbits • 21-year launch history – government orbital & suborbital missions, missile defense, commercial launch • Focus on small and light-lift launch vehicles (Minotaur IV, Athena, Venture Class) Pt Arguello • ~$120M of capital investment at PSCA • Federal, State, and private-sector funding • On-going spaceport enhancements to maintain state-of-the-industry capabilities YEAR MONTH SPONSOR MISSION 21 YEARS’ LAUNCH EXPERIENCE 1998 NOV USAF AIT-1 1999 SEP USAF AIT-2 2001 MAR USAF QRLV-1 SEP NASA/USAF Kodiak Star NOV SMDC STARS
    [Show full text]
  • Failures in Spacecraft Systems: an Analysis from The
    FAILURES IN SPACECRAFT SYSTEMS: AN ANALYSIS FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF DECISION MAKING A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Purdue University by Vikranth R. Kattakuri In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering August 2019 Purdue University West Lafayette, Indiana ii THE PURDUE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL STATEMENT OF THESIS APPROVAL Dr. Jitesh H. Panchal, Chair School of Mechanical Engineering Dr. Ilias Bilionis School of Mechanical Engineering Dr. William Crossley School of Aeronautics and Astronautics Approved by: Dr. Jay P. Gore Associate Head of Graduate Studies iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am extremely grateful to my advisor Prof. Jitesh Panchal for his patient guidance throughout the two years of my studies. I am indebted to him for considering me to be a part of his research group and for providing this opportunity to work in the fields of systems engineering and mechanical design for a period of 2 years. Being a research and teaching assistant under him had been a rewarding experience. Without his valuable insights, this work would not only have been possible, but also inconceivable. I would like to thank my co-advisor Prof. Ilias Bilionis for his valuable inputs, timely guidance and extremely engaging research meetings. I thank my committee member, Prof. William Crossley for his interest in my work. I had a great opportunity to attend all three courses taught by my committee members and they are the best among all the courses I had at Purdue. I would like to thank my mentors Dr. Jagannath Raju of Systemantics India Pri- vate Limited and Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenges for a South Texas Spaceport
    Space Traffic Management Conference 2014 Roadmap to the Stars Nov 5th, 2:00 PM Challenges For A South Texas Spaceport Edward Ellegood Florida SpacerePort, [email protected] Wayne Eleazer Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.erau.edu/stm Ellegood, Edward and Eleazer, Wayne, "Challenges For A South Texas Spaceport" (2014). Space Traffic Management Conference. 17. https://commons.erau.edu/stm/2014/wednesday/17 This Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Space Traffic Management Conference by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Safety Challenges for a South Texas Spaceport By Wayne Eleazer and Edward Ellegood, ERAU Space Traffic Management Conference, November 2014 Introduction On September 22, 2014, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) broke ground on a new spaceport facility at Boca Chica, a remote beach located east of Brownsville, Texas, less than three miles north of the U.S./Mexico border. The groundbreaking followed the successful completion of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in coordination with the Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation (FAA-AST), and the commitment of millions of dollars in financial assistance from Texas state and local governments. In addition to purely environmental/ecological impacts, the EIS focused on some other public safety risks, all of which were found to be acceptable with mitigating actions proposed by SpaceX. The EIS was an important step toward gaining community and state/local government support for the Boca Chica spaceport. The successful EIS triggered pledges of about $30 million in financial incentives that SpaceX plans to leverage to develop and operate the spaceport, a project expected to cost in excess of $100 million over several years.
    [Show full text]
  • Space Safety, a New Beginning
    SP-599 December 2005 Proceedings of the First IAASS Conference Space Safety, a New Beginning 25 - 27 October 2005 Nice, France ORGANIZING COMMITTEE Co-Chairmen T. Sgobba (I) J. Holsomback (US) J-P. Trinchero (F) H. Hasegawa (JP) Members G. Baumer (US) D. Bohle (D) R. Chase (CA) V. Chang (CA) M. Childress (US) M. Ciancone (US) A. Desroches (F) M. Ferrante (I) J. Golden (US) A. Larsen (US) E. Lefort (F) C. Moura (BR) A. Menzel (D) J. Pelton (US) C. Preyssl (A) N. Takeuchi (JP) P. Kirkpatrick (US) V. Krishnamurty (IN) M. Stamatelatos (US) L. Summerer (A) P. Vorobiev (RU) J. Wade (US) L. Winzer (D) G. Woop (D) M. Yasushi (JP) Publication Proc. of the First IAASS Conference "Space Safety, a New Beginning", Nice, France 25 - 27 October 2005, (ESA SP-599, December 2005) Editor: H. Lacoste Compiled by: L. Ouwehand Published and distributed by: ESA Publications Division ESTEC, Noordwijk, The Netherlands Printed in: The Netherlands Price: € ISBN No: 92-9092-910-3 ISSN No: Book: 0379-6566 CD-ROM: 1609-042X Copyright: © 2005 European Space Agency CONTENTS Welcome Address & Introduction T. Sgobba – IAASS President Session 1: Learning the Lessons Chair: J. Holsomback Co-Chair: D. Bohle Making Safety Matter 3 N. Vassberg GSLV-D1 Rocket Launch Abort on the Pad – An Experience 9 V. Krishnamurty, V.K. Srivastava & M. Annamalai Session 2: Assurance Processes Chair: Y. Mori Co-Chair: J. Wade Safety Auditing and Assessments 17 R. Goodin Assurance Process Mapping 25 J.S. Newman, S.M. Wander & D. Vecellio Implementation of Programmatic Quality and the Impact on Safety 33 D.T.
    [Show full text]
  • Spacex Launch Manifest
    Small Launchers and Small Satellites: Does Size Matter? Does Price Matter? Space Enterprise Council/CSIS - October 26, 2007 “... several ominous trends now compel a reassessment of the current business model for meeting the nation’s needs for military space capabilities.” Adm. Arthur K. Cebrowski (Ret.) Space Exploration Technologies Corporation Spacex.com One of the more worrisome trends, from a U.S. perspective, has been the declining influence of American vehicles in the global commercial launch market. Once one of the dominant players in the marketplace, the market share of U.S. -manufactured vehicles has declined because of the introduction of new vehicles and new competitors, such as Russia, which can offer launches at lower prices and/or with greater performance than their American counterparts. [The Declining Role in the U.S. Commercial Launch Industry, Futron, June 2005] Space Exploration Technologies Corporation Spacex com Current State of the World Launch Market French Firm Vaults Ahead In Civilian Rocket Market Russia Designs Spaceport -Wall Street Journal Complex for South Korea -Itar-Tass Brazil Fires Rocket in Bid to Revive Space Program India Plans to Double -Reuters Satellite Launches Within China to Map "Every Inch" MFuiltvi -ecoYuenatrrys -RIA Novosti of Moon Surface -Reuters Astronomers Call for Arab India to Orbit Israeli Space Agency Spy Satellite in -Arabian Business September -Space Daily China Looking For Military Advantage Over Russia Calls for Building U.S. Space Program Lunar Base -San Francisco Chronicle -Itar-Tass January 11, 2007 - Chinese SC-19 rams into a Chinese weather sat orbiting at 475 miles, scattering 1600 pieces of debris through low-Earth orbit.
    [Show full text]
  • FACT SHEET DESCRIPTION: the Second Annual Spacecom (Space
    FACT SHEET DESCRIPTION: The second annual SpaceCom (Space Commerce Conference and Exposition) is a powerful three-day event that focuses on the application of space technologies and access to space-based assets to drive game- changing advancements in terrestrial industries, including advanced manufacturing, agribusiness, energy, maritime and medical industries. The exposition unites aerospace industry executives, NASA representatives, cutting-edge entrepreneurs, business leaders and investors to explore new markets, forge partnerships and accelerate solutions to some of the most challenging problems faced on Earth. LOCATION: George R. Brown Convention Center 1001 Avenida de las Americas Houston, Texas 77010 DATE: Nov. 15-17, 2016 QUICK FACTS: SpaceCom 2016 at-a-glance: • Largest commercial space conference in the world • 2015 event drew 1,700 attendees from 32 countries • Speaker faculty of 101 top visionaries and leaders • Large attendance from NASA, representing each of its centers • More than 50 media representatives from around the world • Unique exposition floor with an opening reception, Innovation Theater, SpaceVR Experience, VIP meet and greets, Robotics Showcase, show floor tours and more • 100% renewal of 2015 Sponsors and an increase of 42% on the show floor • More than 65 exhibitors and 34 supporting organizations • Co-located Commercial Spaceport Summit attracting representatives from 16 world-wide spaceports. AGENDA: An interactive conference program coupled with a dynamic expo floor will highlight the ways space technologies cut across five target industries (advanced manufacturing, agribusiness, energy, maritime and medical) and will showcase examples of how business can capitalize on space and suborbital environments. Click here to view the full agenda online. KEYNOTES: Groundbreaking keynote sessions and feature presentations from the following will set the stage for discussions on the use of in-space capabilities to drive non-space industry productivity and profitability: • K.
    [Show full text]
  • Ordnance Safety Requirements for Space Launch Vehicles
    Ordnance Safety Requirements for Space Launch Vehicles Srinath. V. Iyengar, P.E.; United Launch Alliance; Denver, Colorado, USA Keywords: Ordnance, hazard, Safety, Atlas Introduction United Launch Alliance launches Atlas V from Cape Canaveral and Vandenberg Air Force launch facilities. Space launch vehicles such as Atlas V consist of various subsystems like pneumatics, propulsion, ordnance, avionics etc. The ordnance systems play a key role with instant activations to initiate various discrete events such as lift off, stage separations, spacecraft separation and flight termination if needed for public safety. Ordnance function is therefore essential for both mission success and uniquely for public safety. Ordnance hazards are present during prelaunch operations and during flight. Prevention of inadvertent activation and assured functioning are both important for safety. A major requirement is to provide a number of inhibits to prevent inadvertent activation. The number of required minimum inhibits depends on a critical or catastrophic consequence. Adequate qualification testing, lot acceptance testing and service life testing are essential for assured functioning. Operations at the launch ranges are controlled by Range Safety regulations like EWR 127-1 and AFSPCMAN 91-710. A number of military standards such as MIL-STD-1576, MIL-DTL-23659 and MIL-HDBK-1512 provide guidance for design and testing. The Department of Transportation provides requirements for safe ground transportation of ordnance. This paper reviews many of these requirements and their compliance approach. Atlas V Space Launch Vehicle Atlas launch vehicle has evolved over many years. Starting with an Atlas A in 1955, the version today is Atlas V. Figure 1 (Reference 1) shows the evolution over the years.
    [Show full text]
  • Potential Visitor Impact from One Rocket Launch (PDF)
    TO: Spaceport Camden FROM: The Center for Business Analytics and Economic Research DATE: October 5, 2020 SUBJECT: Potential Visitor Impact from One Rocket Launch Introduction Spaceport Camden is continuing to follow the development process required to become an operating commercial spaceport. This spaceport will focus on small-lift launch vehicles that typically cover rockets with a payload of 2,000 kg (4,400 lbs.) that go into low earth orbit (LEO).1 When these launches begin at Spaceport Camden, the majority of the economic impact will be generated by the direct operations of the businesses located at the spaceport and visitors who come to watch these launches. For the purposes of this memorandum, the Center for Business Analytics and Economic Research is focusing on the visitors who will come to watch or aid with the launches. Within the visitor segment, tourists who are willing to travel to watch a launch typically fall into two different market segments. First is the Space Enthusiasts’ market, which includes 10.8 percent of the U.S. population, and the other is the Educational Families’ market, which covers 4.9 percent of the U.S. population.2 Both of these markets are different than the adventure market that is interested in traveling to space as a space tourist.3 The space tourist market is not included in the economic impact segment of this analysis because the needs of these visitors are very different from those of the other types of visitors; however, given the potential for development within this market, CBAER has included an overview of the space tourism market within this memorandum.
    [Show full text]