Constellation Program Overview

October 2008

hris Culbert anager, Lunar Surface Systems Project Office ASA/

EarthEarth DepartureDeparture OrionOrion -- StageStage CrewCrew ExplorationExploration VehicleVehicle AresAres VV -- HeavyHeavy LiftLift LaunchLaunch VehicleVehicle AltairAltair LunarLunar LanderLander

AresAres II -- CrewCrew LaunchLaunch VehicleVehicle Lunar Capabilities Concept Review

EstablishedEstablished Lunar Lunar Transportation Transportation EstablishEstablish Lunar Lunar Surface SurfaceArchitecturesArchitectures ArchitectureArchitecture Point Point of of Departure: Departure: StrategiesStrategies which: which: Satisfy NASA NGO’s to acceptable degree ProvidesProvides crew crew & & cargo cargo delivery delivery to to & & from from the the Satisfy NASA NGO’s to acceptable degree within acceptable schedule moonmoon within acceptable schedule Are consistent with capacity and capabilities ProvidesProvides capacity capacity and and ca capabilitiespabilities consistent consistent Are consistent with capacity and capabilities withwith candidate candidate surface surface architectures architectures ofof the the transportation transportation systems systems ProvidesProvides sufficient sufficient performance performance margins margins IncludeInclude set set of of options options fo for rvarious various prioritizations prioritizations of cost, schedule & risk RemainsRemains within within programmatic programmatic constraints constraints of cost, schedule & risk ResultsResults in in acceptable acceptable levels levels of of risk risk Transportation System Elements Instrument Unit Stack Integration • Primary Ares I control • 2M lb gross liftoff weight avionics system • 325 ft in length • NASA Design / • NASA-led Production CEV First Stage • Derived from current Shuttle RSRM/B Upper Stage Interstage • Five segments/Polybutadiene Acrylonitride (PBAN) propellant • 305k lb LOX/LH2 stage • Recoverable • 18 ft diameter • New forward adapter • Aluminum-Lithium (Al-Li) structures • Avionics upgrades • Instrument Unit and Interstage • ATK Launch Systems • Reaction Control System (RCS) / roll control for first stage flight • Primary Ares I control avionics system • NASA Design / Boeing Production

Upper Stage Engine

• Saturn J-2 derived engine (J-2X) • Expendable • Pratt and Whitney

DAC 2 TR 5 Orion Overview

Mission Summary Mission Summary Max Crew 4 (lunar), 6 (ISS) Element Mass Targets CrewedMax Crew Mission Duration 21.1 4 (lunar), days 6 (ISS) CM ISSCrewed GLOW Mission Limit Duration 27,676 21.1 days kg LunarISS GLOW GLOW Limit Limit 30,257 27,676 kg kg ISS: 9,525 kg TLILunar Control GLOW Mass Limit20,185 30,257 kg kg Lunar: 8,732 kg LoadedTLI Control SM Mass V (lunar) 1,492 20,185 m/s kg TankLoaded Sizing SM Delta Delta V V (lunar) (lunar)1,560 1,492 m/s m/s Tank Sizing Delta V (lunar) 1,560 m/s SA LAS 627 kg 7,260 kg ConfigurationConfiguration (606D) (606D) Pressurized Volume (Total) 19.4 m3 (686 ft3) Pressurized Volume (Total) 19.4 m3 (686 ft3) SM Propellant MMH/N2O4 SM Propellant MMH/N2O4 CM Propellant Hydrazine CM Propellant Hydrazine Payload (Pressurized Lunar Return) 100kg SM Payload (Pressurized Lunar Return) 100kg Radiator Area 20.25 m2 (218 ft2) ISS: 8,808 kg Radiator Area 20.25 m2 (218 ft2) CM Batteries 6 x 55 A-hr Lunar: 12,510 kg CM Batteries 6 x 55 A-hr Loaded CM Prop (Lunar) 146 kg Loaded CM Prop (Lunar) 146 kg SM Batteries 2 x 55 A-hr SM Batteries 2 x 55 A-hr SA Solar Array Diameter 5.84 m Solar Array Diameter 5.84 m (Jettisoned) Loaded SM Prop (Lunar) 8,185 kg Loaded SM Prop (Lunar) 8,185 kg 1,012 kg CEV +Z OME Isp (Mean) 326 s OME Isp (Mean) 326 s

Current Mass Estimates ISS GLOW: 25,779 kg (Predicted) CEV +X ISS Injected: 17,629 kg (Predicted) Orion Stack Lunar GLOW: 29,954 kg (Predicted) STA 1000.00 (Launch Configuration) Lunar Injected: 21,804 kg (Predicted) CLV I/F Lunar TLI: 19,927 kg (Predicted) Concept

Gross Lift Off Mass: 3,704.5 t (8,167.1k lbm) Lunar Integrated Stack Length: 116 m (381 ft) Payload Adapter

Solid Rocket Boosters (2) J–2X • Two recoverable 5.5-segment Payload Loiter Skirt PBAN-fueled, steel-casing Shroud Interstage boosters (derived from current Ares I first stage

Earth Departure Stage (EDS)

• One Saturn-derived J–2X LOX/LH2 engine (expendable) • 10 m (33 ft) diameter stage Two representative configurations shown • Aluminum-Lithium (Al-Li) tanks Multiple configurations for adding a 6th Engine being traded • Composite structures, Instrument Unit RS–68B and Interstage Engines • Primary Ares V avionics system Core Stage (6)

• Six Delta IV-derived RS–68B LOX/LH2 engines (expendable) • 10 m (33 ft) diameter stage • Composite structures • Aluminum-Lithium (Al-Li) tanks Altair

•4 crew to and from the surface • Seven days on the surface • Lunar outpost crew rotations •Global Access Capability •Anytime return to Earth • Capability to land 14 to 17 metric tons of dedicated cargo • Airlock for surface activities •Descent stage: • / liquid hydrogen propulsion • Ascent stage: • Hypergolic Propellants or Liquid oxygen/ Altair Crewed Vehicle Concept

Windows EVA Suit Storage Hammocks Umbilical Storage Lockers

EVA Hatch

Crew Display Monitor Hand Controls Storage Lockers Trash Bag Storage Airlock Module / Descent Module Adapter Lunar Sample Box

AM-Airlock Airlock Connecting Structure Thermal Insulation Airlock Avionics AM Connecting Egress boxes (x2) Structure Hatch DM LH2 Fuel (Remains on DM) Life Support Tank (x4) Oxygen Tank Pressurant Landing Leg Tank (x2) (x4)

DM RCS Thruster Pod (x4) LOX Tank Support Cone (x4) RCS Tanks DM Main Engine Radiator (x2) EVA System (Suit) is Integral

Science EVA System Architecture

Configuration 2 Suit is utilized for all phases of the lunar mission, i.e., transportation and lunar surface operations

LEA/Microgravity EVA Suit Lunar Surface EVA Suit (Configuration 1) (Configuration 2)

Change to soft rear Two ‘shortie‘ cores entry design

Shoulder bearing Common PLSS (8 Hr EVA) retained for mobility helmet Enhanced shoulder Removed mobility Body Seal Closure Common Waist Bearing lower arms IVA Gloves EVA Gloves

Removed Hip Multi-hip Bearing Bearings Rear entry hatch

TMG/MLI for relevant Thigh Disconnect Common environment – incl. Retained for legs/boots modularity boot covers

* Modular, reconfigurable, component-based architecture that meets various mission objectives Mission Key Driving Requirements

MOONMOON

Example of short stay Design Reference Mission 7 d Ascent 1,881 m/s (6,171 ft/s)

100 kg (220 lbm) pressurized return payload TBD hrs post lunar ascent

Descent ΔV 2,030 m/s (6,660 ft/s) LH2/LO2 descent engine restartable/throttleable LLO 100 km (54nm) Sizing: Altair ΔV for LOI Altair Performs LOI 1,000 m/s (3,281 ft/s) 3-burn LOI TEI 1,492 m/s (4,895 ft/s) 1,000 m/s (3,281 ft/s) 1-5 days Altair LLO loiter (Tanks sized for 1, 560 m/s (5,118 m/s) (Propellant load for 950 m/s)

Altair TLI Injected Control Mass 45 t (99,200 lb ) m Orion • Orion TLI Control Mass 20,185 kg (44,500 lbm)

EDS TLI Injection Capability 66.1 t (145,726 lbm) + 5 t reserve

EDS Performs TLI 3,175 m/s (10,417 ft/s)

ERO up to 241km (130nm), minimum 222 km, LEO attitude = Gravity Gradient

-20x185 km (-11x100 nm), 29º

Ares-I Delivered Mass 23.6 t (52,070 lbm) 4 days LEO loiter

EARTHEARTH ≥ 90 min. 1 - 5 d ~4d 1-5d 7 d 1d <5.8d Ares-V Extensibility to Mars Missions

51.00.47: Performance Summary • Architecture study conducted during 2007 51.00.47 Performance Summary 200 in parallel with LAT-1 and LAT-2 Performance Performance Margin Margin 175 9.0 13.7 Total = 158.5 t Total = 153.8 t • Key Emphasis: 150 ASE ASE 5.2 7.9 125 51.00.47 Gross – Update Mars reference architecture LEO Payload 161.8 Lander/Ballast 100 – Assess strategic linkages between lunar and Mars Allocation 89.6 Mass (t) 75 Lander/Ballast strategies and systems Allocation 136.9 50

• Assessments Included: Aero-Shroud 25 50.0

– Staging altitude 0 Reference 51.00.47 to 222km Dual-Use Aero Shroud to 407km Jettisoned Aero Shroud to 407km – Payload size (length and diameter) - Baseline vehicle flies to lower orbit than Dual Use Shroud mission [222km (120nmi) circ vs. 407km (220nmi) circ] - Baseline 51.00.47 LEO payload (EDS propellant and Lunar Lander) is reported as ‘Gross Payload’. - Vehicles are structurally sized to accommodate larger shrouds.

– Launch rate and frequency 5/30/2008 9:39:21 AM 4 – Delivery of both Mars payloads and using the Ares-V shroud as the Mars entry aeroshell 51.00.48: Performance Summary • Bottom Line: 51.00.48 Performance Summary 200

– Ares-V 51.xx series launch vehicles provide Performance Performance 175 Margin Margin 8.4 13.1 adequate performance (130+ t) Total = 151.5 t Total = 146.8 t 150

ASE ASE – Total number of Ares-V launches per Mars 4.8 125 51.00.48 Gross 7.6 LEO Payload mission: 7+ with a launch frequency of 30 days 154.3 100 Lander/Ballast Allocation

Mass (t) 83.6 or less 75 Lander/Ballast Allocation 130.8 – Shroud volume is a key driver (10 m x 30 m) 50

Aero-Shroud 25 • Further Assessments: 50.0 0 – Further refinement of Dual use shroud concept Reference 51.00.48 to 222km Dual-Use Aero Shroud to 407km Jettisoned Aero Shroud to 407km - Baseline vehicle flies to lower orbit than Dual Use Shroud mission [222km (120nmi) circ vs. 407km (220nmi) circ] - Baseline 51.00.48 LEO payload (EDS propellant and Lunar Lander) is reported as ‘Gross Payload’. – Further refinement of mission payload strategies - Vehicles are structurally sized to accommodate larger shrouds.

5/30/2008 9:39:21 AM and in-space transportation concepts 5 Surface Systems Outpost Capabilities

• Habitation systems that will support a crew of 4 for 180 days on the lunar surface • Demonstrated ability to produce ISRU based oxygen at a rate of 1 t per year • Unpressurized rovers that can be operated autonomously or by the crew • Pressurized roving systems that can travel for hundreds of kilometers from the Outpost • Power – at least 35 kW of net power production and storage for crewed eclipse periods • Surface based laboratory systems and instruments to meet science objectives • Sufficient functional redundancy to ensure safety and mission success DrivingDriving SurfaceSurface ArchitectureArchitecture CharacteristicsCharacteristics

Pervasive Mobility – Science enabler / range extender – Ability to adapt outpost elements to more locations on the lunar surface – Always something new to explore Mission Flexibility – Minimally functional outpost capability established as early as possible – Outpost can be built at any rate with steadily increasing capabilities: “go as you pay” – Outpost can recover rapidly from loss of elements (modular and reconfigurable) – Outpost buildup can be adjusted to accommodate changing science & mission priorities Global Connectivity – The ability to perform global lunar exploration via sorties and long distance roving – HD cameras & High bandwidth communications – International, commercial & university participation – Virtually connecting the above to engage scientists & the general population on both Globes Long Duration – More time for Science – Highly reliable systems – Minimize logistics needs • In-Situ Resource Utilization, recycling • Commonality, repair at board level – Outpost can be implemented to emulate Mars surface scenarios – Core technologies and operations applicable to Mars exploration ConceptualConceptual FullFull Lunar Lunar OutpostOutpost

1010 kWkW ArrayArray (net)(net)

22 kWkW ArrayArray (net)(net)

LogisticsLogistics PantryPantry HabitationHabitation Habitation PowerPower SupportSupport UnitUnit (PSU)(PSU) ElementElement Habitation ElementElement (( SupportsSupports // scavengesscavenges fromfrom SmallSmall PressurizedPressurized crewedcrewed landerslanders )) RoverRover (SPR)(SPR) PSUPSU (Facilitates(Facilitates SPRSPR dockingdocking && charging)charging)

CommonCommon AirlockAirlock WithWith LanderLander ATHLETEATHLETE ISRUISRU OxygenOxygen Long-distanceLong-distance ProductionProduction PlantPlant MobilityMobility SystemSystem (2)(2) UnpressurizedUnpressurized Rover Rover

Presentation date here 17 Surface Architectures Assessed

The various Surface systems can be combined in a very wide variety of options. Three surface architectures were developed in support of LCCR:

Rapid Outpost Buildup (Trade Space‐1) • Deliver as much outpost capability as soon as transportation system permits •Full‐up outpost based on the recommendations from LAT‐2. • Substantial robustness through element duplication

Initial Mobility Emphasis (Trade Space‐2) •Temper outpost build‐up based on affordability with initial emphasis on mobility capabilities •Full‐up outpost has less volume and limited eclipse operating capability than TS1 • Robustness achieved through functional reallocation

Initial Habitation Emphasis (Trade Space‐3) •Temper outpost build‐up based on affordability with initial emphasis on core habitation & exploration capabilities •Full‐up outpost has less volume and limited eclipse operating capability than TS1 • Robustness achieved through functional reallocation Lunar Transportation Figures of Merit

Performance Affordability Ability to support the DDT&E Mass to surface: crew & cargo Recurring Robustness of margins by system Budget wedge left for surface systems Surface coverage: global access Cost confidence

LCCR-M (Trade Set 2) Cx Level Sandchart Effects of Reducing Altair MR

Ares-V Options*, Altair Mass* vs. Surface Access - ->50% Temporal, 2nd TLI Opp, 1day Pre-TEI Loiter, +4 Days Post LOI Loiter Maximum LOI Loiter Case Lunar Surface Systems Ares V PMR Implications Program Reserves 100% Temporal, 5th TLI Opp 90% Temporal, 2nd TLI Opp 50% Temporal, 2nd TLI Opp $14,000 49500 (6 Days Extended Post-LOI Loiter; No Extended TEI Loiter) Altair 51.0.47=74.7 m T - 20.2 m T (Orion) - 5 m T (L3 PMR) = 49.5 m T EVA Ground Operations ♦ The various Ares V Options each have an impact to the Ares V $12,000 Program Integration 48500 950 m/s LOI ΔV Capability 1000 m/s LOI DV Capability Mission Ops Project Mark and the Ground Operations Project Mark Ares V Ares I $2,500 Orion Ares V PPBE10 Mark Ares V Project Spreads 47500 47139 kg, 1000 m/s $10,000 Total NOA PPBE10 Submit (51.0.39) $2,000 51.0.47 51.0.48 46500 51.0.40 offload prop & subtract 1mT MR $8,000 Altair $1,500 51.0.46 51.0.48=71.1 m T - 20.2 m T (Orion) - 5 mT (L3 PMR) = 45.9 mT RY $M subtract 1 mT MR Cargo Optimiz ed, Only RY $M 45500 subtract 1 mT MR Crew Optimized minus 1mT MR, sized for 1000 m/s, offload prop to $1,000 46264 kg, 891 m/s 950 m/s, + 4 days LOI loiter, 44757 kg, resultant Cargo = 14.7 mT $6,000 Crew Optimized, 45765 kg, 950 m/s $500 Altair Mass (kg) Mass Altair 44500 51.0.40=69.7m T - 20.2 m T (Orion) - 5 mT (L3 PMR) = 44.5 mT Phasing Challenge Relative to Mark Crew Optimized minus 1mT MR, sized for 950 m/s, + 4 $4,000 Crew Optimized, days LOI loiter, 43485 kg, resultant Cargo = 13.0 mT $0 44185 kg, 891 m/s 43500 FY0 6 FY07 FY0 8 FY09 FY1 0 FY11 FY1 2 FY1 3 FY1 4 FY1 5 FY16 FY1 7 FY18 FY1 9 FY2 0 add loiter add loiter 51.0.46=68.6mT - 20.2 mT (Orion) - 5 m T (L3 PMR) = 43.4 mT $800 43002 kg, Cargo Capability 12.9 mT $2,000 45.0.2 / 51.0.39 ROM Ground Ops Development (Portion of Mark) $700 42500 51.0.47 0 102030405060708090100 $600 51.0.48 51.0.40 * L3 Reserves applied to Ares-V and Altair, % Lunar Surface Access $0 $500 Integrated 51.0.46 Altair Masses include 860 kg spacecraft adapter FY08 FY10 FY12 FY14 FY16 FY18 FY20 FY22 FY24 FY26 FY28 FY30 Altair $400 Fiscal Year RY $Ms Note – Based on 4/24 Ground $300 Operations input. Update and st SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED (SBU) May 21 , 2008 Page 56 received 5/14 but not included CxAT_Lunar TIP 06 May 2008 $200 3 Orion in PMR analysis. Also $100 assumes 51.0.39 same impact as 45.0.2; to be refined $0 FY0 6 FY0 7 FY08 FY0 9 FY1 0 FY1 1 FY12 FY1 3 FY14 FY1 5 FY1 6 FY1 7 FY1 8 FY19 FY2 0 May 21st, 2008 SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED (SBU) Page 20 13

Risk Operations / Extensibility LOC / LOM Facilities impacts Technical performance risk Operational flows Schedule risk Mars feed-forward Commonality

Current Cx Confidence Level Through HLR Ground Systems Discriminators

(Alternate Ares V Option – 51.0.48) 3,500,000 ROM Development Costs thru 2020

3,000,000 Multiple cases TOTAL Program thru HLR (Phase Correlation) Trade Studies Attacked Risk Drivers of Minimal Functional Vehicle (aborts were “off the table”) 2,500,000 VIE Ares -V 51.xx Series Performance Allocated from 'Risk Over TIme Allocation' Calculated with 3500 iterations SRPE 2,000,000

Preliminary Results subject to revision during close‐out SPE 1,500,000 1 in 7 Results do not include placeholders 98.4' 98.4' Task Option Risk Build‐Up by Subsystem LPE 98.4'

100% 3.00E‐01 1,000,000 90% § Follow-on analysis of CxAT_Lunar 80% A MLE launch concepts applicability to Mars 70% 2.50E‐01 500,000 76.8' 76.2' 60% Operations 74.9' 50% § 51 series of Ares- V launch vehicles 2.00E‐01 0

40% provides better performance to LEO 33.0' Baseline 45.0.2 51.00.40 51.00.46 51.00.47 51.00.48 33.0' MMOD Note – 51.0.48 HLR confidence 408.9' 30% Li fe Sup por t 33.0' 408.4' Thermal 388.9' analysis assumes 51.0.39 1.50E‐01 20% LOC Propulsion Power § Use of off- loaded lunar- derivative uncertainty s-curve. Avi onics

Confidence Level (CDF) 10% 0% EDS reduces available shroud 1.00E‐01

70,000 75,000 80,000 85,000 90,000 95,000 100,000 105,000 110,000 233.7' 233.8' LDAC 2 volume 215.6' 192.5' 192.6' TY $M 179.1' 5.00E‐02 Baseline with 51.0.48 option Allocated Budget thru HLR 65% Confidence Level Increasing Mass for LOC/LOM mitigation § Payload shroud volume limits inhibit maximum performance to Mars 0.00E+00 Baseline 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1274 : 1273 : LD AC‐2 Design

Mass Increase [kg] CONSTELLATION GROUND OPERATIONS

51.00.40 51.00.47 51.00.48 Markers: Confidence Assumed Shroud: Jettison Shroud Allocated Budget (Through HLR)$ 83,796.65 25% Outer Diameter: 10 m 65% Confidence Level$ 90,311.50 65% Barrel Length: 18 m Payload to LEO (t) 126.4 136.9 130.8 Delta between $ 6,514.84 Overall Length: 30 m

st 18 Dual-Use Shroud May 21 , 2008 SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED (SBU) Page 8 For NASA Internal Use Only Payload (lander) to LEO (t) 79.0 89.6 83.6 Shroud to LEO (t) 50.0 50.0 50.0

LEO defined as 407 km circular 11 May 20, 2008 -- 10 Surface Scenario: Figures of Merit

A comprehensive set of high-level FOMs must cover four or five major areas:

– Affordability - Comparison(s) between the projected costs of the campaign and the projected budget

– Benefit - Measure(s) of the total worth or value produced by the campaign across all themes of interest; including benefit items (e.g. science, operation experience, and public engagement) and indirect benefit items (e.g. extensibility to other destinations, enablement of future lunar activities)

– Safety & Mission Assurance - Measure(s) expected losses due to the uncertainty or reliability of the system

– Programmatic Risk - Evaluation of the likelihood and consequence of changes in the performance of the campaign due to multiple types of programmatic uncertainty (component performance, technology development, schedule, budget, reliability, etc.)

– Sustainability - Measure(s) of the campaigns ability to maintain a level of value (or perceived value) over time that justifies continued investment in the program Campaign Sensitivity 1600 40000

1400 35000 Unallocated Lander Capacity Lander (kg) Unallocated

1200 410 390 30000 380 375 355 Objective 325 254 Determine sensitivity of campaign to 1000 25000 variations in sparing and maintenance mass requirements from current 800 1080 1080 1080 1080 1080 1080 1050 20000 baseline. 600 15000

400 10000

Assumptions 200 5000 L&M required for all elements Cumulative Crew Surface Time (days) 0 0 was varied by +/-10%, +/-25%, -50% -25% -10% 0 +10% +25% +50% +/-50%. 13807 kg 20542 kg 24350 kg 27392 kg 30053 kg 37607 kg 44088 kg Start Percent Change in L&M Mass (%), L&M + Container Mass (kg)

Campaign Behavior Logistics & Maintenance mass is a primary Reduction in L&M required will allow slight increases in crew days because of the reduction of pressurized L&M, driver on campaign performance. along with significant increases in available mass. Small decreases in L&M requirements lead to slight Campaign level analysis when combined with a losses of crew days and significant reduction in available mass. “bottoms-up” element level assessment is Large increases in L&M requirements result in significant required to yield a more refined L&M strategy. loss of crew days and available mass. GES Extensibility Objectives

- Crewed Mission Campaign Extensibility Objective Satisfaction - Cargo Mission Mission 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Objective 100% Satisfied Crew Duration 71428 85 180 180 180 180 180 180 180

Objective 50% Satisfied

Objective 0% Satisfied Key Elements Knowledge will continue to accrue after nominal objective is satisfied

Demonstrate curation and contamination control

Lab Demonstrate In-Situ Science Capabilities Understand impact of pres. and O2 conc. on health Understand effects of the space env. on crew health

Health Demonstrate long-term remote health care Provide a safe and enduring habitat Demonstrate assembly of habitat elements Demonstrate MMOD protection Demonstrate dust mitigation techniques Demonstrate fire detection and suppression

Habitat Demo/test radiation shielding Demonstrate closed loop life support systems Demo closed laundry/hygiene Demo thermal protection from night/day extremes Demo long-dist, pressurized mobility capability Demo mobility for unloading/moving elements Demo long-distance surface navigation Mobility Demo surface communications capability Demo a high performance EVA suit Demo sustained EVA schedules Demo long-distance EVA Navigation

EVA Demonstrate suit durability/repair activities Demo high use airlock or suitlock Demo robots that supplement activities Understand MTBF of equipment Test equipment repair techniques Repair Demo commonality and scavenging of spares Demo remote training systems Demo teleoperations capabilities Ops Learn how to best perform basic working tasks Demo production of ISRU Consumables Demo production of ISRU Propellant ISRU Demo ISRU excavation processes Demonstrate Solar Power System Demonstrate Nuclear Power System

Systems Cryo Fluid Storage and Distribution