DOCSLIB.ORG

Existing Space Access for Small Satellites

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Existing Space Access for Small Satellites Existing Space Access for small satellites Future technical trends and possibilities Space Economy in the Multipolar World SEMW2010 1st International Conference, Vilnius, Lithuania, October 6-8, 2010 CNES, Launchers Directorate (Evry, France) – M. Pons, C. Talbot 1 Launchers - Existing launchers - Some projects - quick zoom on MLA project 2 Future trends - Market analysis - Future opportunities SEMW2010 1st International Conference, Vilnius, Lithuania, October 6-8, 2010 All rights reserved © CNES (2010) Page 2 European launchers Europe will soon operate from French Guiana a new family of launchers : Ariane 5, in its last version (A5ECA) using a 14t cryogenic upper stage propelled by HM7 Soyuz, in its “1a” version, will be first launched from Guiana in 2011 Vega, the new developed rocket, will be launched from Kourou by end 2011 This family is adapted to European institutional and commercial needs with a complete coverage of the payloads between small to heavy payloads. SEMW2010 1st International Conference, Vilnius, Lithuania, October 6-8, 2010 All rights reserved © CNES (2010) Page 3 European launchers Current European offer : 200 kg 1.5T 5T Escape Performance ranges of European 400 kg 3T 10T GTO launchers and projects in relation to satellite masses. 200 kg 1.5T 5T MEO 10 kg 100 kg 500 kg 2T 5T 20T LEO Nano Micro Mini Small Medium Heavy Very Small Very Heavy Ariane 5 Vega Soyuz/G 9.5t GTO 1.4t SSO 3t GTO 20t ISS 4.5t SSO 5t Mars 1.5t Mars PERSEUS Project Vega+ project A5ME, BBL & NGL projects ? SEMW2010 1st International Conference, Vilnius, Lithuania, October 6-8, 2010 All rights reserved © CNES (2010) Page 4 How to launch very small sats European launchers Ariane 5 : ASAP-A5 8x 120 kg (600x600x710mm) Soyuz : ASAP-S 4x <200 kg (800x800x1000mm) 1x <400 kg (1500mm, H 1400mm) Vega : Vespa (devlpmt in progress…) 2x <200 kg (800x800x1000mm) 3x <200 kg (>900) + 1 small mini SEMW2010 1st International Conference, Vilnius, Lithuania, October 6-8, 2010 All rights reserved © CNES (2010) Page 5 How to launch very small sats US launchers Minotaur family (OSC) : LV Pegasus family (OSC) : derived from decommissioned operational airborne LV Falcon-1 (Space-X) : ballistic missiles (minuteman (ORS version : Raptor-1). « low cost » launcher ? II, Peacekeeper), operational Ground variant (Taurus) (M4&5 in development) Performance 200-400 kg Performances 200-400 LEO, and until 700 kg LEO Performances : kg LEO (Pegasus-XL) M1 500 kg LEO (Falcon-1E) M2 et M3 : « Target LV » M4 1500kg LEO, Falcon-1 price < 10M$ … M5: GTO compatible SEMW2010 1st International Conference, Vilnius, Lithuania, October 6-8, 2010 All rights reserved © CNES (2010) Page 6 US Responsive Space Operationally Responsive Space (USA) US ORS office vision SEMW2010 1st International Conference, Vilnius, Lithuania, October 6-8, 2010 All rights reserved © CNES (2010) Page 7 How to launch very small sats US launchers projects Quickreach (Air Launch LLC, FALCON program): Scorpius (Microcosm) Air launch concept “very low cost” LV (internally carried in a (modular and simple C-17 globalstar) … in conception using development advanced technologies) Performance : 400 kg Performance : 250 kg Numerous projects more or less LEO LEO (Sprite) ambitious… many airborne ideas. SEMW2010 1st International Conference, Vilnius, Lithuania, October 6-8, 2010 All rights reserved © CNES (2010) Page 8 Existing or future projects of launchers How to launch very small sats Russia Asia, Israël, .. India Numerous converted Missiles (SS18), operational : Dnepr, Rokot, Volna, Shtil ... Japan : M5, Epsilon 2013 ?, 1300 kg LEO April 2008 flight with 10 satellites Korea, Israel : several Several airborne projects airborne concepts in PSLV Core Alone (Air launch with Antonov, project 1 100 kg to SSO Ishim under Mig-31, etc.) China : projects in No known development development ? SEMW2010 1st International Conference, Vilnius, Lithuania, October 6-8, 2010 All rights reserved © CNES (2010) Page 9 interest for airborne concepts Airborne Launcher - initial mass function of drop conditions -25% (same orbit and performance obective) Shuttle 35 Mach 0.0 (0, 5, 10, 15, 20 km) Mach 0.8 - 10 km Ground ref. Mach 0.8 - 15 km -30% 30 Mach 0.8 - 20 km Quickreach Mach 2.0 - 15 km Mach 2.0 - 20 km Mach 3.0 - 20 km on-top Airline planes 25 -35% From Cargo Hold Pegasus under balloons Airline Subsonic sep. 20 planes Dedalus Fighter aircraft type -40% [t] Mass Launcher Initial under drones 15 MLA Supersonic sep. -45% Fighter Aircraft type 10 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 Virtual planes considered Flight Path Angle [°] -55% Gain on the initial mass of an airborne launcher compared Ishim to a classical ground take off (objective 300 kg in SSO) SEMW2010 1st International Conference, Vilnius, Lithuania, October 6-8, 2010 All rights reserved © CNES (2010) Page 11 Zoom on MLA concept ALD – demonstrator Performance ~ 0 P2-C0.6 4p0.3-P2-C0.6 P9-P2-C0.6 H12-P2-C0.6 2P3.8-P2-C0.6 MLA « compact » MLA « Trimaran » Horus / Falcon* Flex (1st stg reusable) Performance ~ 20-50 kg Performance ~ 150 kg Performance ~ 100-150 kg Performance ~ 100 kg SEMW2010 1st International Conference, Vilnius, Lithuania, October 6-8, 2010 All rights reserved © CNES (2010) Page 12 Market Study recent multiplication of micro satellite platforms increasing success of the associated applications - Numerous successful technology experiences based on microsats, for Science or Defense with gradual increase in instrument performance - Constant improvement of quality / price ratio - Rebirth of interest for constellations (Rapid eyes, Orbcomm2, numerous project worldwide…) and formation flying, - Increasing number of operational applications accessible : communications, intelligence gathering, early warning, space surveillance, different type of observation, etc., - Evidence of the vulnerability of the big space systems, - Increasing interest for the « Responsive Space » approach in the USA and other countries (China, etc.), which prefer small size in order to reduce global costs et delays, and facilitate the implementation of new technologies Tacsat-1 (USA, ORS) Microsat 70-100 (SSTL, GB): Myriade (Astrium/TAS): more 100 kg, conception & more than 20 satellites ordered than 15 satellites ordered (100- construction for 10M$ and (70-130 kg), now replaced by a 150 kg) et numerous projects … SEMW2010 less than 1 year new platform more flexible 1st International Conference, Vilnius, Lithuania, October 6-8, 2010 All rights reserved © CNES (2010) Page 13 Market Study Resolution des petits satellites d’observation lancés (1996-2006) et à lancer (2007-2009) par masses Resolution of small observation satellites launched (1996-2006) Resolution au sol (m) and to be launched (2007-2009) by mass 6 1996-2006 2007-2009 RapideyeGround resolution (m) 5 4 3 Razaksat (MACSAT) 2 Cartosat-2 1 Pleiades Svea GEOeye-1 Worldview 1 & 2 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 MassesSatellite des masses satellites (kg) (kg) Euroconsult pour la DLA du CNESEuroconsult – Etude for prospective CNES/DLA du – Prospectivemarché mondial study des of worldpetits marketsatellites for en small orbite LEO basse. satellites SEMW2010 1st International Conference, Vilnius, Lithuania, October 6-8, 2010 All rights reserved © CNES (2010) Page 14 Mini / Micro sats (10-500 kg) World Market # satellites réalisé prévu 50 45 Académiques 40 35 x 2 Institutionnels Européens 30 Commercial 25 20 15 10 Institutionnels Non Européens 5 0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 46% accessible to European services SEMW2010 1st International Conference, Vilnius, Lithuania, October 6-8, 2010 All rights reserved © CNES (2010) Page 15 First observations Offer for access to space for small satellites exists worldwide (Space-X Falcon-1, Pegasus, Taurus, Minotaur, Dnepr, Rockot, Volna, Shtill, PSLV and others … ), with known pros and cons. Solutions exist in Europe too (Vega, Soyuz via ASAP), less flexible but more economic. The small satellites market is growing year after year but it remains small and uncertain in Europe : if the accessible market is 10-12 / year, the probable part for a dedicated European LV is less than 50% (3-4 for <200 kg 1-2 for < 400 kg) Insufficient justification to develop a dedicated system Projects for small launchers exist, but no real development has started. SEMW2010 1st International Conference, Vilnius, Lithuania, October 6-8, 2010 All rights reserved © CNES (2010) Page 16 Market Study analysis of the present situation: - Micro-satellites have lower cost, but still lower performance, though increasing - Difficulties for launching : operations, orbit, delay, cost, … For launchers : - not enough governmental interest, at least in Europe - severe “low-cost” countries competition for new developments lead to - not enough industrial interest in Europe Not enough added value => no small launcher development => no micro-satellite market development Economical situation in the world shall probably take years to improve SEMW2010 1st International Conference, Vilnius, Lithuania, October 6-8, 2010 All rights reserved © CNES (2010) Page 17 Future trends What could create a new impulse ? => Potential new capacities exist with new system concepts GEO / constellation – GEO / UAV communication split of functions in between GEO, micro-sat, ground highly elliptical orbits possibilities …. => For new services which would take advantage of the specificities of small satellites => In which the need for launch may be different from the existing offer are micro-satellites only a smaller replica of bigger
Load more

Recommended publications
  • “Where Do I Start?” Rides to Space for Scientific and Academic Payloads
    SSC02-VII-06 “WHERE DO I START?” RIDES TO SPACE FOR SCIENTIFIC AND ACADEMIC PAYLOADS Matt Bille Tony Williams Tracy Martin Booz, Allen & Hamilton Booz, Allen & Hamilton Booz, Allen & Hamilton 1050 S. Academy Blvd. #148 1050 S. Academy Blvd. #148 1050 S. Academy Blvd. #148 Colorado Springs, CO 80910 Colorado Springs, CO 80910 Colorado Springs, CO 80910 719-570-3172 719-570-3109 719-570-3105 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT. The launch problem for small payloads is nowhere as serious as it is for scientific and academic users, who cannot tap the purchasing power available to spacecraft funded by the military and large corporations. The options available for the researcher at a university who has an instrument or a spacecraft are limited, sometimes depressingly so. Dedicated vehicles are usually unaffordable, and secondary payload opportunities require meeting a host of requirements, from payload design to timing to integration, dependent on the needs of the primary payload. In this paper, the authors survey the options available and answer the question, “Where do I start?” Sources of potential rides, including NASA, military, commercial, and non-U.S. programs and organizations were surveyed. The results are presented here, along with recommendations for an improved process which, at low cost, could improve the “matchmaking” system and simplify the obstacle course faced by spacecraft and instrument developers today. Introduction Who To Call First While the technology to reduce the size and The payload developer can start by approaching increase the capability of small scientific and two government programs which aim to help in academic satellites continues to advance, the providing rides to space.
    [Show full text]
  • In Flight Research on Aerothermodynamics (Atd) and Thermal Protection Systems (Tps) for Space Transportation Systems
    1 IN FLIGHT RESEARCH ON AEROTHERMODYNAMICS (ATD) AND THERMAL PROTECTION SYSTEMS (TPS) FOR SPACE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS Jean Muylaert (1) , M. Ivanov (2) ,V. A. Danilkin (2), C. Park (3), H. Ritter (1), G. Ortega (1) (1)ESA/ESTEC, Keplerlaan 1, 2200 AG Noordwijk, The Netherlands, Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] (2) ITAM Email : [email protected] (3) SRC-MDB Email: [email protected] (4) KAIST Email:CPark216 @kaist.ac.kr ABSTRACT The paper addresses a strategy to perform in flight such as wake closure, capsule shoulder heating and TPS gap / step micro aero effects could be analysed. research on Aerothermodynamics (ATD) and Thermal Protection Systems (TPS) taking advantage of the low 4. Aero-assist Hopping being a General Study cost VOLNA and SHTIL class of launchers. Programme (GSP) internal activity to assess the A series of flight test beds will be addressed and their feasibility of a low cost flight gathering data on aero- relevance discussed as to the gathering of critical braking and aero-assist strategies. Aerothermodynamic and TPS related data for design It is concluded that these low cost class of in flight tool qualification and associated physical model research initiatives are “the” way forwards to improve validation. the tools to be used for design of future re-entry space transportation systems. The paper reviews 4 initiatives, all of them of the class flying test beds and launched by the VOLNA launcher: 1. BACKGROUND 1. The EXPERT (European Experimental re-entry Test bed) project where the objective is to acquire hypersonic The design of space transportation systems is always flight data for improved understanding of natural and driven by worst case scenario’s involving estimations of roughness induced boundary layer transition, catalysis uncertainties associated with critical phenomena.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Launchers Between Commerce and Geopolitics
    The European Launchers between Commerce and Geopolitics Report 56 March 2016 Marco Aliberti Matteo Tugnoli Short title: ESPI Report 56 ISSN: 2218-0931 (print), 2076-6688 (online) Published in March 2016 Editor and publisher: European Space Policy Institute, ESPI Schwarzenbergplatz 6 • 1030 Vienna • Austria http://www.espi.or.at Tel. +43 1 7181118-0; Fax -99 Rights reserved – No part of this report may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or for any purpose with- out permission from ESPI. Citations and extracts to be published by other means are subject to mentioning “Source: ESPI Report 56; March 2016. All rights reserved” and sample transmission to ESPI before publishing. ESPI is not responsible for any losses, injury or damage caused to any person or property (including under contract, by negligence, product liability or otherwise) whether they may be direct or indirect, special, inciden- tal or consequential, resulting from the information contained in this publication. Design: Panthera.cc ESPI Report 56 2 March 2016 The European Launchers between Commerce and Geopolitics Table of Contents Executive Summary 5 1. Introduction 10 1.1 Access to Space at the Nexus of Commerce and Geopolitics 10 1.2 Objectives of the Report 12 1.3 Methodology and Structure 12 2. Access to Space in Europe 14 2.1 European Launchers: from Political Autonomy to Market Dominance 14 2.1.1 The Quest for European Independent Access to Space 14 2.1.3 European Launchers: the Current Family 16 2.1.3 The Working System: Launcher Strategy, Development and Exploitation 19 2.2 Preparing for the Future: the 2014 ESA Ministerial Council 22 2.2.1 The Path to the Ministerial 22 2.2.2 A Look at Europe’s Future Launchers and Infrastructure 26 2.2.3 A Revolution in Governance 30 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Redalyc.Status and Trends of Smallsats and Their Launch Vehicles
    Journal of Aerospace Technology and Management ISSN: 1984-9648 [email protected] Instituto de Aeronáutica e Espaço Brasil Wekerle, Timo; Bezerra Pessoa Filho, José; Vergueiro Loures da Costa, Luís Eduardo; Gonzaga Trabasso, Luís Status and Trends of Smallsats and Their Launch Vehicles — An Up-to-date Review Journal of Aerospace Technology and Management, vol. 9, núm. 3, julio-septiembre, 2017, pp. 269-286 Instituto de Aeronáutica e Espaço São Paulo, Brasil Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=309452133001 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative doi: 10.5028/jatm.v9i3.853 Status and Trends of Smallsats and Their Launch Vehicles — An Up-to-date Review Timo Wekerle1, José Bezerra Pessoa Filho2, Luís Eduardo Vergueiro Loures da Costa1, Luís Gonzaga Trabasso1 ABSTRACT: This paper presents an analysis of the scenario of small satellites and its correspondent launch vehicles. The INTRODUCTION miniaturization of electronics, together with reliability and performance increase as well as reduction of cost, have During the past 30 years, electronic devices have experienced allowed the use of commercials-off-the-shelf in the space industry, fostering the Smallsat use. An analysis of the enormous advancements in terms of performance, reliability and launched Smallsats during the last 20 years is accomplished lower prices. In the mid-80s, a USD 36 million supercomputer and the main factors for the Smallsat (r)evolution, outlined.
    [Show full text]
  • Russia Missile Chronology
    Russia Missile Chronology 2007-2000 NPO MASHINOSTROYENIYA | KBM | MAKEYEV DESIGN BUREAU | MITT | ZLATOUST MACHINE-BUILDING PLANT KHRUNICHEV | STRELA PRODUCTION ASSOCIATION | AAK PROGRESS | DMZ | NOVATOR | TsSKB-PROGRESS MKB RADUGA | ENERGOMASH | ISAYEV KB KHIMMASH | PLESETSK TEST SITE | SVOBODNYY COSMODROME 1999-1996 KRASNOYARSK MACHINE-BUILDING PLANT | MAKEYEV DESIGN BUREAU | MITT | AAK PROGRESS NOVATOR | SVOBODNYY COSMODROME Last update: March 2009 This annotated chronology is based on the data sources that follow each entry. Public sources often provide conflicting information on classified military programs. In some cases we are unable to resolve these discrepancies, in others we have deliberately refrained from doing so to highlight the potential influence of false or misleading information as it appeared over time. In many cases, we are unable to independently verify claims. Hence in reviewing this chronology, readers should take into account the credibility of the sources employed here. Inclusion in this chronology does not necessarily indicate that a particular development is of direct or indirect proliferation significance. Some entries provide international or domestic context for technological development and national policymaking. Moreover, some entries may refer to developments with positive consequences for nonproliferation 2007-2000: NPO MASHINOSTROYENIYA 28 August 2007 NPO MASHINOSTROYENIYA TO FORM CORPORATION NPO Mashinostroyeniya is set to form a vertically-integrated corporation, combining producers and designers of various supply and support elements. The new holding will absorb OAO Strela Production Association (PO Strela), OAO Permsky Zavod Mashinostroitel, OAO NPO Elektromekhaniki, OAO NII Elektromekhaniki, OAO Avangard, OAO Uralskiy NII Kompositsionnykh Materialov, and OAO Kontsern Granit-Elektron. While these entities have acted in coordination for some time, formation of the new corporation has yet to be finalized.
    [Show full text]
  • Sea-Launch for Small Satellites: an American/Russian Joint Venture
    I I SEA-LAUNCH FOR SMALL SATELLITES I AN AMERICAN/RUSSIAN JOINT VENTURE I by John E. Draim I Sea-Launch Investors, Inc. Fairfax. Virginia, I I Introduction I Abstract In the last half of the 1990's, there will be a This pap~r describes practical means of dramatic increase in the number of small and I. bypassing the two major impediments to the medium satellites being placed in Low Earth Orbit. commercial exploitation of space. These two Major contributors will be the Big- and Little- LEO impediments. or constraints, are the affordability. commercial communications satellite developers now I reliability. and availability of launch vehicles on the one hand. and the affordability. availability, and I flexibility of launch facilities on the other hand. As to the former, US launch vehicles are noted for their vying for the opportunity to develop satellite based technological complexity, their high cost, and their cellular phone services for vast areas not now I susceptibility to Single point failures. As to the covered by terrestrial cellular providers. Also, latter, our land launch facilities are costly, satellites will be orbited for various types of inadequate and congested. Schedule delays on one observation (landsat, oceanography, weather, ozone I launch cause delays for all succeeding launches sensors. etc.) It appears obvious that lower launch from a given launch pad. costs would also encourage an increase in the popularity of university and amateur scientific I The conversion of suitable military rockets satellites. Capitalizing on the obvious (as well as the (and specifically surplus SLBMs) into satellite launch not-so-obvious) advantages of the floating sea­ vehicles will use already paid-for assets and will launch, we can provide added flexibility with lower I minimize costs for new construction as well as cost than by merely continuing along the more rocket fuels and oxidizers.
    [Show full text]
  • Prospects for Affordable Access to Space for Small Payloads, 2003-2012
    SSC03-III-6 Prospects for Affordable Access to Space for Small Payloads, 2003-2012 Jeff Foust Futron Corporation 7315 Wisconsin Ave., Suite 900W Bethesda, MD 20814-3202, USA +1 301-347-3405 [email protected] Abstract. Affordable access to space has been one of the key issues in the history of space exploration. It is a particularly critical issue for small payloads, where the cost of launch can run many times more than the cost of the payload itself, making many projects financially infeasible. This paper surveys the vehicles in service today as well as those announced or under development in the next decade that can address the small payload market. This analysis includes the estimated launch costs, launch rates, and capacities of the vehicles, as well as the likelihood that vehicles under development will actually enter service. Three capacity models show that the number of launch opportunities on small launch vehicles range from 212 to 471 over the next decade, depending on the availability of a number of vehicles currently under development. The introduction of partially-reusable launch vehicle systems like RASCAL and Xerus offer the best prospects for providing low-cost launch services for small satellites. Introduction find sufficient payloads with whom to share Arguably the greatest challenge for small the launch.1 satellite projects has been obtaining launch services at affordable prices. While At the same time the launch market itself spacecraft can be built relatively has been in considerable turmoil. This inexpensively, often using student or turmoil stems from a sharp drop in launch volunteer labor, no such cost savings are demand in the last few years, triggered in available in the launch services sector.
    [Show full text]
  • Rocket Launchers for Small Satellites Ajey Lele and Tushar Shrivastav
    IDSA Issue Brief Rocket Launchers for Small Satellites Ajey Lele and Tushar Shrivastav February 4, 2016 Summary There are multiple ways of launching small satellites into the space. In recent times, there has been a growing focus on developing exclusive vehicles for the launch of a new generation of various categories of small satellites. This issue brief discusses various such efforts to develop small satellite launch vehicles, their importance and the future. ROCKET LAUNCHERS FOR SMALL SATELLITES Introduction The history of small satellites is as old as the history of satellites. In fact, the space age could be said to have begun with the launch of a small satellite, Sputnik-1, in 1957. Until almost the first decade of the 21st century, over 860 micro-satellites, 680 nano-satellites, and 38 pico-satellites were said to have been launched worldwide.1 Though there is no precise statistics available about the exact number of small satellites launched till date, the global interest in small satellites has been growing over the years owing to various factors. During the initial years of the development of space technologies, the focus was both on developing the satellites and the vehicles capable of launching them. Over a period of time, developments in technology allowed states to position satellites into different orbits. Developments in sensor technology further enhanced the utility of satellite applicability, from ‘a space based observational platform’ to a system as ‘a decision making tool’. Integration of such multipurpose platforms helps governments to take critical decision in various areas, ranging from agricultural planning to disaster management to military operations.
    [Show full text]
  • SIPRI Yearbook 2010: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security 334 MILITARY SPENDING and ARMAMENTS, 2009
    8. World nuclear forces SHANNON N. KILE, VITALY FEDCHENKO, BHARATH GOPALASWAMY AND HANS M. KRISTENSEN I. Introduction At the start of 2010 eight nuclear weapon states possessed more than 7500 operational nuclear weapons (see table 8.1). Almost 2000 of these are kept in a state of high operational alert. If all nuclear warheads are counted— operational warheads, spares, those in both active and inactive storage, and intact warheads scheduled for dismantlement—the United States, the Rus- sian Federation, the United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan and Israel together possess a total of more than 22 000 warheads. All five legally recognized nuclear weapon states, as defined by the 1968 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (Non-Proliferation Treaty, NPT)—China, France, Russia, the UK and the USA—appear deter- mined to remain nuclear powers and are either modernizing or about to modernize their nuclear forces.1 At the same time, Russia and the USA are in the process of reducing their operational nuclear forces from cold war levels as a result of two bilateral treaties—the 1991 Treaty on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (START Treaty) and the 2002 Treaty on Strategic Offensive Reductions (SORT).2 Sections II and III of this chapter discuss the composition of the deployed nuclear forces of the USA and Russia, respectively. The nuclear arsenals of the other three nuclear weapon states are considerably smaller, but all three states are either deploying new weapons or have announced their intention to do so. Sections IV–VI present data on the delivery vehicles and warhead stock- piles of the UK, France and China, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Quarterly Launch Report
    Commercial Space Transportation QUARTERLY LAUNCH REPORT Copyright © 2004 Mike Massee Featuring the launch results from the 3rd quarter 2004 and forecasts for the 4th quarter 2004 and 1st quarter 2005 Quarterly Report Topic: Overview of the U.S. Small Launch Industry 4th Quarter 2004 United States Department of Transportation • Federal Aviation Administration Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation 800 Independence Ave. SW • Room 331 Washington, D.C. 20591 Fourth Quarter 2004 Quarterly Launch Report 1 Introduction The Fourth Quarter 2004 Quarterly Launch Report features launch results from the third quarter of 2004 (July-September 2004) and forecasts for the fourth quarter of 2004 (October-December 2004) and first quarter of 2005 (January-March 2005). This report contains information on worldwide commercial, civil, and military orbital and commercial suborbital space launch events. Projected launches have been identified from open sources, including industry references, company manifests, periodicals, and government sources. Projected launches are subject to change. This report highlights commercial launch activities, classifying commercial launches as one or both of the following: • Internationally-competed launch events (i.e., launch opportunities considered available in principle to competitors in the international launch services market) • Any launches licensed by the Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation of the Federal Aviation Administration under 49 United States Code Subtitle IX, Chapter 701 (formerly the Commercial Space Launch Act) Special Note Previous Quarterly Launch Reports have focused solely on orbital launches. However, due to increased suborbital space activity in the United States, and the possibility that it may occur in other countries in the future, this and subsequent Quarterly Launch Reports will now record FAA-licensed and equivalent international suborbital launches in addition to orbital space activity.
    [Show full text]
  • Disruptive Technology 2
    Disruptive Technology 2 In their 1995 article, ``Disruptive Technologies: Catching the Wave,'' Harvard Business School professors Joseph Bower and Clayton Christensen define two categories ofnew technology: sustaining and disruptive. Sustaining technology relies on incremental improvements to an already established technology. A good example is the conventional petrol engine used in automobiles; the principle on which it works has not changed in over a hundred years, but a modern car engine is much more reliable and efficient than that ofa 1908 model-T Ford. Disruptive technology, on the other hand, is a revolutionary technology that suddenly, and often unexpectedly, displaces an established technology. Take, for instance, the rapid market takeover by digital cameras at the expense oflong-proven and firmly established film-photography technology. According to Bower and Chris- tensen, disruptive technology initially often lacks refinement, appeals to a limited number ofpeople, and may not yet have a proven practical application (the idea is further developed in Christensen's 1997 best-selling book, The Innovator's Dilemma). Tether technology has the potential to be a disruptive technology; ifit works as advertised, it could radically change spaceflight and make conventional rocket propulsion systems largely obsolete. Ifso, it would not be the first time in history that an experimental technology totally replaced older, much better established means oftransportation. New Machines After thousands of years of development, by the 19th century sailing ships had reached an incredible level ofsophistication. They were fast, their rigging could cope with a variety ofwind conditions, and their crews were trained to run the ships as best as possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Study “Affordable Space Missions” Executive Summary
    Study “Affordable Space Missions” Executive Summary 1 Compiled by: Prof. H. Jahn OS BA Study management Dr. E. Lorenz OS BA Manager System & Mission and Ground Segment Mr. W. Bärwald OS BA Manager Space Segment Dr. F. Lura FA BA Manager Test- & QS- Concepts With contributions from: Dr. B. Biering FA BA Dr. J. Block FA BS Mr. W. Fohrmann RB OP Mr. W. Häfker FA BA Dr. A. Herrmann SC BS Dr. U. Mittag ME KP Mr. Ch. Nitzschke RD BO Mr. J. Richter DFD NZ Mr. M. Sippel RA KP Mr. Th. Terzibaschian OS BA Mr. H. Venus OS BA Mr. H. Wüsten RB OP The study was ordered, funded, and promoted by the DLR program board “Technik für Raumfahrtsysteme” (Space Systems Technology) and especially by Mr. L. Fröbel. It can be obtained by contacting [email protected] or visiting the website http://www.dlr.de/os/ 2 Contents 1. Introduction 2. General Considerations 3. System & Mission 4. Space Segment 5. Ground Segment 6. Tests & Quality Assurance 7. Conclusions 8. References Appendix 1: Work Breakdown Structure 3 1. Introduction The study „Affordable Space Missions“ (ASM) started with the kick-off meeting on October 13/2004 and was finished with the final presentation on August 16/2005. Its goal is the investigation of the cost reduction problem for micro-satellite missions. The starting point was the question “How can we reduce micro-satellite costs by one order of magnitude at constant performance”. Foundations for that investigation are the experiences with the successful micro-satellite project BIRD [1] of the German Aerospace Center (DLR), the literature ([2]-[5], the conferences ESA 4S Symposium: Small Satellites, Systems and Services (La Rochelle, 2004) and 5th IAA Symposium on Small Satellites for Earth Observation (Berlin, 2005), and a visit at AMSAT in Marburg/Germany (2005).
    [Show full text]