DOCSLIB.ORG

The Starbooster System a Cargo Aircraft for Space

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Starbooster System a Cargo Aircraft for Space Starcraft Boosters, Inc. The StarBooster System A Cargo Aircraft for Space October 27, 1999 Starcraft Boosters, Inc. 3106 Beauchamp St. Houston, TX 77009 (713) 861-1960 :=/.4RBOu. / Part I - Table of Contents PART 1 - TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................... 1-1 PART 2 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......... ................................................................................. 2-1 THE STARBOOSTER VISION ..i ............................................................................................... 2-1 THE STARBOOSTER AIRCRAFT .............................................................................................. 2-1 StarBooster 200 .............................................................................................................. 2-2 StarBooster 350 .............................................................................................................. 2-3 StarBooster Growth Options ............................................................................................ 2-4 PART 3 - INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 3-1 THE STARBOOSTER APPROACH ............................................................................................... 3-1 THE STARBOOSTER FAMILY ..................................................................................................... 3-2 STARBOOSTER VEHICLE CONFIGURATION AND SYSTEM PERFORMANCE .................................... 3-3 StarBooster 200 ................................................................................................................. 3-4 StarBooster 350 ........................................................................................................... •...... 3-5 StarBooster Growth Options .............................................................................................. 3-5 PART 4 - REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT ............................................................................. 4-1 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY ................................................................................................. 4-1 REGULATION OF COMMERCIAL LAUNCH VEHICLES .................................................................... 4-2 BACKGROUND ON THE FAA's COMMERCIAL LAUNCH LICENSING HISTORY AND PROCESS ............ 4-3 GROWTH AND CURRENT STATUS OF LAUNCH INDUSTRY ............................................................ 4-4 CURRENT REVISIONS TO LICENSING REGULATIONS ................................................................... 4-5 LAUNCH LICENSE .................................................................................................................... 4-7 PROPOSED REQUIREMENTS FOR RLV MISSION LICENSE ........................................................... 4-7 PART 5 - THE STARBOOSTER FAMILY ................................................................................ 5-1 THE STARBOOSTER 200 SYSTEM ............................................................................................ 5-2 StarBooster 200 Vehicle Configuration ............................................................................... 5-2 StarBooster 200 Applications ............................................................................................. 5-3 StarBooster 200 Other Applications ................................................................................... 5-5 StarBooster 200 as a Liquid Flyback Booster Demonstrator .............................................. 5-5 StarBooster 200 Summary .................................................................................................. 5-6 STARBOOSTER 350 SYSTEM ................................................................................................... 5-7 StarBooster 350 Vehicle Configuration ............................................................................... 5-7 StarBooster 350 Applications ............................................................................................. 5-7 StarBooster 350 Summary ............................................................................................... 5-10 OTHER OPTIONS FOR THE STARBOOSTER RPM ..................................................................... 5-10 STARCORE I ......................................................................................................................... 5-10 StarCore II ........................................................................................................................ 5-11 STARBIRO I........................................................................................................................... 5-11 FUTURE ENHANCEMENTS ...................................................................................................... 5-12 StarBird II ......................................................................................................................... 5-12 STARBOOSTER SUB-SCALE VEHICLES ................................................................................... 5-12 PROSPECTIVE SCENARIOS FOR DEPLOYMENT ..................... _................................................... 5-12 ///ustrative Scenario Phase 1............................................................................................ 5-13 Starcraft Booster. Inc. ComDetition Sensitive ] 1-1 _ TJlFIBOu. I I=H Illustrative Scenario Phase II ............................................................................................ 5-14 Illustrative Scenario Phase III ........................................................................................... 5-15 VEHICLE FAMILY SUMMARY ................................................................................................... 5-16 PART 6 - STARBOOSTER VEHICLE OVERVIEW .................................................................. 6-1 THE STARBOOSTER VEHICLE CONCEPT .................................................................................... 6-1 THE STARBOOSTER AIRPLANE ................................................................................................. 6-2 StarBooster 200 Vehicle Configuration ............................................................................... 6-2 StarBooster 350 Vehicle Configuration ............................................................................... 6-3 THE STARBOOSTER PROPULSION MODULE .............................................................................. 6-3 Atlas III Expendable Launch Vehicle .................................................................................. 6-3 Zenit Expendable Launch Vehicle ...................................................................................... 6-4 AERODYNAMIC CONFIGURATION AND FLIGHT CONTROL ............................................................. 6-4 StarBooster 200 Wing Design ............................................................................................ 6-6 StarBooster 350 Wing Design ............................................................................................ 6-7 AIR-BREATHING PROPULSION .................................................................................................. 6-7 STARBIRD I VEHICLE CONFIGURATIONS.................................................................................... 6-8 STARBOOSTER SUBSYSTEMS .................................................................................................. 6-9 System Interdependence ................................................................................................... 6-9 INERT MASS ESTIMATES AND COMPARISONS .......................................................................... 6-11 STARBOOSTER 200 PERFORMANCE ....................................................................................... 6-11 Single StarBooster 200 with Athena II .............................................................................. 6-12 Dual StarBooster 200 with Athena II................................................................................. 6-12 Dual StarBooster 200's with StarCore I ............................................................................ 6-12 Dual StarBooster 200 with StarBird I ................................................................................ 6-13 STARBOOSTER 200 FLIGHT PROFILE ..................................................................................... 6-13 STARBOOSTER 350 PERFORMANCE ....................................................................................... 6-16 StarBooster 350 Performance Estimates, Methodology and Disclaimer ........................... 6-17 StarBooster 350 with Zenit 3 Second and Third Stages ................................................... 6-18 StarBooster 350 with Ikar ................................................................................................. 6-18 StarBooster 350 with Adane ............................................................................................. 6-19 StarBooster 350 with other Space Launch Vehicles ......................................................... 6-19 StarBooster 350 with StarCore II ...................................................................................... 6-20 StarBooster 350 for Space Tounsm ................................................................................. 6-21 StarBooster 350 with the VentureStar SSTO .................................................................... 6-21 StarBooster 350 with
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Aerospace Engine Data
    AEROSPACE ENGINE DATA Data for some concrete aerospace engines and their craft ................................................................................. 1 Data on rocket-engine types and comparison with large turbofans ................................................................... 1 Data on some large airliner engines ................................................................................................................... 2 Data on other aircraft engines and manufacturers .......................................................................................... 3 In this Appendix common to Aircraft propulsion and Space propulsion, data for thrust, weight, and specific fuel consumption, are presented for some different types of engines (Table 1), with some values of specific impulse and exit speed (Table 2), a plot of Mach number and specific impulse characteristic of different engine types (Fig. 1), and detailed characteristics of some modern turbofan engines, used in large airplanes (Table 3). DATA FOR SOME CONCRETE AEROSPACE ENGINES AND THEIR CRAFT Table 1. Thrust to weight ratio (F/W), for engines and their crafts, at take-off*, specific fuel consumption (TSFC), and initial and final mass of craft (intermediate values appear in [kN] when forces, and in tonnes [t] when masses). Engine Engine TSFC Whole craft Whole craft Whole craft mass, type thrust/weight (g/s)/kN type thrust/weight mini/mfin Trent 900 350/63=5.5 15.5 A380 4×350/5600=0.25 560/330=1.8 cruise 90/63=1.4 cruise 4×90/5000=0.1 CFM56-5A 110/23=4.8 16
    [Show full text]
  • 6. Chemical-Nuclear Propulsion MAE 342 2016
    2/12/20 Chemical/Nuclear Propulsion Space System Design, MAE 342, Princeton University Robert Stengel • Thermal rockets • Performance parameters • Propellants and propellant storage Copyright 2016 by Robert Stengel. All rights reserved. For educational use only. http://www.princeton.edu/~stengel/MAE342.html 1 1 Chemical (Thermal) Rockets • Liquid/Gas Propellant –Monopropellant • Cold gas • Catalytic decomposition –Bipropellant • Separate oxidizer and fuel • Hypergolic (spontaneous) • Solid Propellant ignition –Mixed oxidizer and fuel • External ignition –External ignition • Storage –Burn to completion – Ambient temperature and pressure • Hybrid Propellant – Cryogenic –Liquid oxidizer, solid fuel – Pressurized tank –Throttlable –Throttlable –Start/stop cycling –Start/stop cycling 2 2 1 2/12/20 Cold Gas Thruster (used with inert gas) Moog Divert/Attitude Thruster and Valve 3 3 Monopropellant Hydrazine Thruster Aerojet Rocketdyne • Catalytic decomposition produces thrust • Reliable • Low performance • Toxic 4 4 2 2/12/20 Bi-Propellant Rocket Motor Thrust / Motor Weight ~ 70:1 5 5 Hypergolic, Storable Liquid- Propellant Thruster Titan 2 • Spontaneous combustion • Reliable • Corrosive, toxic 6 6 3 2/12/20 Pressure-Fed and Turbopump Engine Cycles Pressure-Fed Gas-Generator Rocket Rocket Cycle Cycle, with Nozzle Cooling 7 7 Staged Combustion Engine Cycles Staged Combustion Full-Flow Staged Rocket Cycle Combustion Rocket Cycle 8 8 4 2/12/20 German V-2 Rocket Motor, Fuel Injectors, and Turbopump 9 9 Combustion Chamber Injectors 10 10 5 2/12/20
    [Show full text]
  • Enhancement of Volumetric Specific Impulse in HTPB/Ammonium Nitrate Mixed
    Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Plan B and other Reports Graduate Studies 12-2016 Enhancement of Volumetric Specific Impulse in TPB/H Ammonium Nitrate Mixed Hybrid Rocket Systems Jacob Ward Forsyth Utah State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/gradreports Part of the Propulsion and Power Commons Recommended Citation Forsyth, Jacob Ward, "Enhancement of Volumetric Specific Impulse in TPB/AmmoniumH Nitrate Mixed Hybrid Rocket Systems" (2016). All Graduate Plan B and other Reports. 876. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/gradreports/876 This Report is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Graduate Plan B and other Reports by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ENHANCEMENT OF VOLUMETRIC SPECIFIC IMPULSE IN HTPB/AMMONIUM NITRATE MIXED HYBRID ROCKET SYSTEMS by Jacob W. Forsyth A report submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Aerospace Engineering Approved: ______________________ ____________________ Stephen A. Whitmore Ph.D. David Geller Ph.D. Major Professor Committee Member ______________________ Rees Fullmer Ph.D. Committee Member UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY Logan, Utah 2016 ii Copyright © Jacob W. Forsyth 2016 All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Enhancement of Volumetric Specific Impulse in HTPB/Ammonium Nitrate Mixed Hybrid Rocket Systems by Jacob W. Forsyth, Master of Science Utah State University, 2016 Major Professor: Dr. Stephen A. Whitmore Department: Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Hybrid rocket systems are safer and have higher specific impulse than solid rockets. However, due to large oxidizer tanks and low regression rates, hybrid rockets have low volumetric efficiency and very long longitudinal profiles, which limit many of the applications for which hybrids can be used.
    [Show full text]
  • GLONASS Spacecraft
    INNO V AT IO N The task of designing and developing the GLONASS GLONASS spacecraft fell to the Scientific Production Association of Applied Mechan­ ics (Nauchno Proizvodstvennoe Ob"edinenie Spacecraft Prikladnoi Mekaniki or NPO PM) , located near Krasnoyarsk in Siberia. This major aero­ Nicholas L. Johnson space industrial complex was established in 1959 as a division of Sergei Korolev 's Kaman Sciences Corporation Expe1imental Design Bureau (Opytno Kon­ struktorskoe Byuro or OKB). (Korolev , among other notable achievements , led the Fourteen years after the launch of the effort to develop the Soviet Union's first first test spacecraft, the Russian Global Nav­ launch vehicle - the A launcher - which igation Satellite System (Global 'naya Navi­ placed Sputnik 1 into orbit.) The founding gatsionnaya Sputnikovaya Sistema or and current general director and chief GLONASS) program remains viable and designer is Mikhail Fyodorovich Reshetnev, essentially on schedule despite the economic one of only two still-active chief designers and political turmoil surrounding the final from Russia's fledgling 1950s-era space years of the Soviet Union and the emergence program. of the Commonwealth of Independent States A closed facility until the early 1990s, (CIS). By the summer of 1994, a total of 53 NPO PM has been responsible for all major GLONASS spacecraft had been successfully Russian operational communications, navi­ Despite the significant economic hardships deployed in nearly semisynchronous orbits; gation, and geodetic satellite systems to associated with the breakup of the Soviet Union of the 53 , nearly 12 had been normally oper­ date. Serial (or assembly-line) production of and the transition to a modern market economy, ational since the establishment of the Phase I some spacecraft, including Tsikada and Russia continues to develop its space programs, constellation in 1990.
    [Show full text]
  • The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2012
    Federal Aviation Administration The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2012 February 2013 About FAA 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 (2013) 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. • i • Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation Dear Colleague, 2012 was a very active year for the entire commercial space industry. In addition to all of the dramatic space transportation events, including the first-ever commercial mission flown to and from the International Space Station, the year was also a very busy one from the government’s perspective. It is clear that the level and pace of activity is beginning to increase significantly.
    [Show full text]
  • 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,
    [Show full text]
  • Space Industry
    Spring 2013 Industry Study Final Report Space Industry Dwight D. Eisenhower School for National Security and Resource Strategy National Defense University Fort McNair, Washington, D.C. 20319-5062 ii i 1 SPACE 2013 ABSTRACT: Today’s U.S. national security space systems enable vital functions such as strategic warning, global command and control, intelligence, and communications while also touching nearly every aspect of modern life - from personal navigation systems to receiving near real-time information from across the globe. However, American space power is not guaranteed – particularly as the nation enters an era of fiscal austerity and conflicting budget priorities. Significant challenges that must be addressed include limited federal funds, rising costs, and a fragile supply chain. Additionally, as the U.S. rebalances strategic focus to the Asia-Pacific, limited regional satellite communication capacity and potential vulnerabilities to U.S. space systems also pose a threat. To mitigate these challenges, this study recommends the U.S. Department of Defense implement a policy of selective disaggregation to improve space system resiliency and maintain a steady funding profile for national security satellites. However, such a strategy is not without costs: hoped for increases in national security space program affordability will likely not materialize over the long-term as savings realized in satellite manufacturing will simply shift cost and complexity to the ground equipment and launch segments. CDR Vince Baker, U.S. Navy Mr. Stephen Burke, Department of the Air Force Mr. Patrick Dunn, Department of State COL John Eggert, U.S. Army Dr. Ivy Estabrooke, Department of the Navy COL Gregory Graves, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Please Type Your Paper Title Here In
    Estimating the Reliability of a Soyuz Spacecraft Mission Michael G. Lutomskia*, Steven J. Farnham IIb, and Warren C. Grantb aNASA-JSC, Houston, TX – [email protected] bARES Corporation, Houston, TX Abstract: Once the US Space Shuttle retires in 2010, the Russian Soyuz Launcher and Soyuz Spacecraft will comprise the only means for crew transportation to and from the International Space Station (ISS). The U.S. Government and NASA have contracted for crew transportation services to the ISS with Russia. The resulting implications for the US space program including issues such as astronaut safety must be carefully considered. Are the astronauts and cosmonauts safer on the Soyuz than the Space Shuttle system? Is the Soyuz launch system more robust than the Space Shuttle? Is it safer to continue to fly the 30 year old Shuttle fleet for crew transportation and cargo resupply than the Soyuz? Should we extend the life of the Shuttle Program? How does the development of the Orion/Ares crew transportation system affect these decisions? The Soyuz launcher has been in operation for over 40 years. There have been only two loss of life incidents and two loss of mission incidents. Given that the most recent incident took place in 1983, how do we determine current reliability of the system? Do failures of unmanned Soyuz rockets impact the reliability of the currently operational man-rated launcher? Does the Soyuz exhibit characteristics that demonstrate reliability growth and how would that be reflected in future estimates of success? NASA’s next manned rocket and spacecraft development project is currently underway.
    [Show full text]
  • 1.1 a Survey of the Lightning Launch Commit Criteria
    1.1 A Survey Of The Lightning Launch Commit Criteria William P. Roeder and Todd M. McNamara 45th Weather Squadron, Patrick AFB, FL 1. 45 WS MISSION The 45th Weather Squadron (45 WS) provides comprehensive weather services to America’s space program at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) and NASA’s Kennedy Space Center (KSC) (Harms et al., 1999). These services include weather support for pre-launch, launch, post-launch, routine weather forecast, 24/7 watches/warnings, flight briefings, and special missions. A major part of the 45 WS support to launch is evaluating and forecasting the Lightning Launch Commit Criteria (LLCC) (Roeder et al., 1999) and User Launch Commit Criteria (Boyd et al., 1995). The LLCC protect against natural and rocket triggered lightning strikes to the in-flight rocket. The User Launch Commit Criteria include low level winds so the rocket doesn’t Figure 1. Average cloud-to-ground lighting flash density topple or get blown back into the launch pad 2 during launch, and ceiling and visibility so the (flashes/km •year) for the CONUS (1989–1993), corrected for detection efficiency. Data are from the ascending rocket can be tracked by camera to National Lightning Detection Network. Figure provided ensure it is on the correct trajectory. Launch by Dr. Richard Orville, Texas A&M University. customers include the DoD, NASA, and commercial customers for approximately 30 launches per year. The launch vehicles supported 2. INTRODUCTION TO THE LIGHTNING recently include Titan, Atlas, Delta, Athena, LAUNCH COMMIT CRITERIA Pegasus, and Space Shuttle space launch vehicles, and Trident ballistic missiles.
    [Show full text]
  • Developing the Space Shuttle1
    ****EU4 Chap 2 (161-192) 4/2/01 12:45 PM Page 161 Chapter Two Developing the Space Shuttle1 by Ray A. Williamson Early Concepts of a Reusable Launch Vehicle Spaceflight advocates have long dreamed of building reusable launchers because they offer relative operational simplicity and the potential of significantly reduced costs com- pared to expendable vehicles. However, they are also technologically much more difficult to achieve. German experimenters were the first to examine seriously what developing a reusable launch vehicle (RLV) might require. During the 1920s and 1930s, they argued the advantages and disadvantages of space transportation, but were far from having the technology to realize their dreams. Austrian engineer Eugen M. Sänger, for example, envi- sioned a rocket-powered bomber that would be launched from a rocket sled in Germany at a staging velocity of Mach 1.5. It would burn rocket fuel to propel it to Mach 10, then skip across the upper reaches of the atmosphere and drop a bomb on New York City. The high-flying vehicle would then continue to skip across the top of the atmosphere to land again near its takeoff point. This idea was never picked up by the German air force, but Sänger revived a civilian version of it after the war. In 1963, he proposed a two-stage vehi- cle in which a large aircraft booster would accelerate to supersonic speeds, carrying a rel- atively small RLV to high altitudes, where it would be launched into low-Earth orbit (LEO).2 Although his idea was advocated by Eurospace, the industrial consortium formed to promote the development of space activities, it was not seriously pursued until the mid- 1980s, when Dornier and other German companies began to explore the concept, only to drop it later as too expensive and technically risky.3 As Sänger’s concepts clearly illustrated, technological developments from several dif- ferent disciplines must converge to make an RLV feasible.
    [Show full text]
  • Microgravity and Macromolecular Crystallography Craig E
    CRYSTAL GROWTH & DESIGN 2001 VOL. 1, NO. 1 87-99 Review Microgravity and Macromolecular Crystallography Craig E. Kundrot,* Russell A. Judge, Marc L. Pusey, and Edward H. Snell Mail Code SD48 Biotechnology Science Group, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Alabama 35812 Received August 24, 2000 ABSTRACT: Macromolecular crystal growth is seen as an ideal experiment to make use of the reduced acceleration environment provided by an orbiting spacecraft. The experiments are small, are simply operated, and have a high potential scientific and economic impact. In this review we examine the theoretical reasons why microgravity is a beneficial environment for crystal growth and survey the history of experiments on the Space Shuttle Orbiter, on unmanned spacecraft, and on the Mir space station. The results of microgravity crystal growth are considerable when one realizes that the comparisons are always between few microgravity-based experiments and a large number of earth-based experiments. Finally, we outline the direction for optimizing the future use of orbiting platforms. 1. Introduction molecules, including viruses, proteins, DNA, RNA, and complexes of those molecules. In this review, the terms Macromolecular crystallography is a multidisciplinary protein or macromolecule are used to refer to this entire science involving the crystallization of a macromolecule range. or complex of macromolecules, followed by X-ray or The reduced acceleration environment of an orbiting neutron diffraction to determine the three-dimensional spacecraft has been posited as an ideal environment for structure. The structure provides a basis for under- biological crystal growth, since buoyancy-driven convec- standing function and enables the development of new tion and sedimentation are greatly reduced.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Liquid Propulsion System Needs in Support of The
    · m~-W Summary ofLiquid Propulsion System Needs in Support ofthe Constellation Program Terry Lorier, Program Manager, Space Propulsion Systems Development Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne Canoga Park, CA Phil Sumrall, AdvancedPlanning Manager, Ares Projects Office NASA Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville. AL Michael Baine, Ph.D., Orion Propulsion System Manager NASA Johnson Space Center Houston, TX Abstract In January 2004, the President ofthe United States established the Vision for Space Exploration (VSE) to complete the International Space Station, retire the Space Shuttle and develop its replacement, and expand the human presence on the Moon as a stepping stone to human exploration ofMars and worlds beyond. In response, NASA developed the Constellation Program, consisting ofthe components shown in Figure 1. This paper will summarize the manned spaceflight liquid propulsion system needs in support ofthe Constellation Program over the next 10 years. It will address all liquid engine needs to support human exploration from low Earth orbit (LEO) to the lunar surface, including an overview ofengines currently under contract, those baselined but not yet under contract, and those propulsion needs that have yet to be initiated. There may be additional engine needs for early demonstrators, but those will not be addressed as part ofthis paper. Also, other portions ofthe VSE architecture, including the planned Orion abort test boosters and the Lunar Precursor Robotic Program, are not addressed here as they either use solid motors or are focused on unmanned elements ofreturning humans to the Moon. Our Exploration Fleet What will the vehicles look like? Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle Figure 1. Constellation Program components I.
    [Show full text]