DOCSLIB.ORG

Engineering Design Challenges: Spacecraft Structures Educator Guide

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Engineering Design Challenges: Spacecraft Structures Educator Guide National Aeronautics and Space Administration Spacecraft Structures A Lesson in Engineering engineering is out of this world Cover Illustrations: Artist concepts of NASA’s Space Launch System and the launch pad at Kennedy Space Center. Authors (Original) Nick Haddad, TERC Harold McWilliams, TERC Paul Wagoner, TERC Authors (Update) Twila Schneider: Marshall Space Flight Center, Space Launch System Program, ASRC Federal John Weis: Marshall Space Flight Center, Office of STEM Engagement Design, Layout and Graphics (Update) Kevin O’Brien: Marshall Space Flight Center, Space Launch System Program, Media Fusion, Inc. Table of Contents 1. Overview ........................................................................................................................................... 1 2. Next Generation Science Standards ................................................................................................ 2 3. Common Core State Standards for Mathematics ............................................................................ 4 4. Background Space Launch System .............................................................................................................. 5 Spacecraft Structures ............................................................................................................... 9 5. Teacher Preparation Materials for Students ............................................................................................................. 12 Build the Launcher .................................................................................................................. 13 Build the Rockets .................................................................................................................... 15 Practice Launching a Rocket .................................................................................................. 15 Prepare the Classroom ........................................................................................................... 16 Teaching Strategies for an Engineering Design Challenge ..................................................... 17 Helping Students Understand the Design Process ................................................................ 18 6. Classroom Sessions Session 1 ................................................................................................................................ 19 Session 2 ................................................................................................................................ 23 Sessions 3 and 4 .................................................................................................................... 26 Session 5 ................................................................................................................................ 29 Session 6 ................................................................................................................................ 31 Linking Design Strategies and Observations to Science Concepts ....................................... 32 7. Modifications and Extensions ....................................................................................................... 40 8. Appendices A. Resources .......................................................................................................................... 41 B. Handouts and Recording Sheets ....................................................................................... 42 which represents low-Earth orbit. Then they 1. Overview design, build, and test their own structure designs. They revise their designs over Space Transportation several design sessions, trying to maintain or increase the strength and reduce the weight of NASA engineers at Marshall Space Flight their structure. They document their designs Center, along with their partners at other with sketches and written descriptions. As a NASA centers and in private industry, are culmination, students compile their results into designing and building the next generation a poster and present them to the class. of rockets and spacecraft to transport cargo, equipment, and human explorers to space. Known collectively as Deep Space Exploration Systems, the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket, the Orion spacecraft, and ground systems at Kennedy Space Center are carrying out a bold vision of human space exploration. Space Policy Directive 1 (SPD-1), signed in December 2017, provides for a U.S.-led, integrated program with private sector partners for a human return to the Figure 1. Model thrust structure. Moon, followed by missions to Mars and beyond. This design challenge focuses on the Time Required SLS rocket, an advanced launch vehicle that provides the foundation for human exploration The design challenge can be carried out in six beyond Earth’s orbit. 45-minute class periods, but you could easily extend it for twice that length of time. We Connecting to Engineering provide some ideas for extensions at the end and Science of the guide. You will need to invest 4 – 8 hours gathering The Engineering Design Challenge connects the materials, building the test stand, trying students with the work of NASA engineers by out your own designs, reading the guide, and engaging them in similar design challenges of preparing the classroom. their own. With some simple and inexpensive materials, you, the teacher, can lead an Value to Students exciting unit that focuses on a specific problem that NASA engineers must solve This activity will provide your students with and the process they use to solve it. In the the opportunity to solve a challenge based on classroom, students design, build, test, and a real-world problem that is part of the space revise their own solutions to problems that program and to use creativity, cleverness, share fundamental science and engineering and scientific knowledge in doing so. During issues with the challenges facing NASA these activities, students will have many engineers. opportunities to learn about forces, structures, and energy transfer. The culminating activity The Design Challenge gives students an opportunity to develop their presentation and communication skills. The challenge: Build a model thrust structure (Figure 1) that is as light as possible, yet Research Opportunities strong enough to withstand the load of a “launch to orbit” three times. Students first Appendix A (p. 41) of this guide includes many determine the amount of force needed to web sites where students can obtain additional launch a model rocket to 3.3 feet [1 meter (m)], information. 1 2. Next Generation Science CROSS-CUTTING CONCEPTS: Standards Engineering, Technology, and Science on Society and the Natural World MS-ETS1 – Engineering Design HS-ETS1 – Engineering Design STANDARDS: STANDARDS: MS-ETS1-1: Define the criteria and constraints of a design problem with sufficient precision HS-ETS1-2: Design a solution to a complex to ensure a successful solution, taking into real-world problem by breaking it down into account relevant scientific principles and smaller, more manageable problems that can potential impacts on people and the natural be solved through engineering. environment that may limit possible solutions. HS-ETS1-3: Evaluate a solution to a complex MS-ETS1-2: Evaluate competing design real-world problem based on prioritized criteria solutions using a systematic process to and trade-offs that account for a range of determine how well they meet the criteria and constraints, including cost, safety, reliability, constraints of the problem. and aesthetics, as well as possible social, cultural, and environmental impacts. MS-ETS1-3: Analyze data from tests to determine similarities and differences among DISCIPLINARY CORE IDEA: several design solutions to identify the best characteristics of each that can be combined ETS1.B: When evaluating solutions it is into a new solution to better meet the criteria important to take into account a range of for success. constraints including cost, safety, reliability and aesthetics, and to consider social, cultural MS-ETS1-4: Develop a model to generate and environmental impacts. data for iterative testing and modification of a proposed object, tool, or process such that an CROSS-CUTTING CONCEPTS: optimal design can be achieved. Engineering, Technology, and Science on Society and the Natural World DISCIPLINARY CORE IDEA: ETS1.A: The more precisely a design task’s MS-PS2 – Motion and Stability: Forces criteria and constraints can be defined, the and Interactions more likely it is that the designed solution will STANDARDS: be successful. Specification of constraints includes consideration of scientific principles MS-PS2-1: Apply Newton’s Third Law to and other relevant knowledge that is likely to design a solution to a problem involving the limit possible solutions. motion of two colliding objects. ETS1.B: A solution needs to be tested, and MS-PS2-2: Plan an investigation to provide then modified on the basis of the test results, evidence that the change in an object’s motion in order to improve it. depends on the sum of the forces on the object and the mass of the object. ETS1.C: Although one design may not perform the best across all tests, identifying the MS-PS3-5: Construct, use, and present characteristics of the design that performed arguments to support the claim that when the the best in each test can provide useful kinetic energy of an object changes, energy is information for the redesign process—that transferred to or from the object. is, some of those characteristics
Load more

Recommended publications
  • L AUNCH SYSTEMS Databk7 Collected.Book Page 18 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM Databk7 Collected.Book Page 19 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM
    databk7_collected.book Page 17 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM CHAPTER TWO L AUNCH SYSTEMS databk7_collected.book Page 18 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM databk7_collected.book Page 19 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM CHAPTER TWO L AUNCH SYSTEMS Introduction Launch systems provide access to space, necessary for the majority of NASA’s activities. During the decade from 1989–1998, NASA used two types of launch systems, one consisting of several families of expendable launch vehicles (ELV) and the second consisting of the world’s only partially reusable launch system—the Space Shuttle. A significant challenge NASA faced during the decade was the development of technologies needed to design and implement a new reusable launch system that would prove less expensive than the Shuttle. Although some attempts seemed promising, none succeeded. This chapter addresses most subjects relating to access to space and space transportation. It discusses and describes ELVs, the Space Shuttle in its launch vehicle function, and NASA’s attempts to develop new launch systems. Tables relating to each launch vehicle’s characteristics are included. The other functions of the Space Shuttle—as a scientific laboratory, staging area for repair missions, and a prime element of the Space Station program—are discussed in the next chapter, Human Spaceflight. This chapter also provides a brief review of launch systems in the past decade, an overview of policy relating to launch systems, a summary of the management of NASA’s launch systems programs, and tables of funding data. The Last Decade Reviewed (1979–1988) From 1979 through 1988, NASA used families of ELVs that had seen service during the previous decade.
    [Show full text]
  • A Pictorial History of Rockets
    he mighty space rockets of today are the result A Pictorial Tof more than 2,000 years of invention, experi- mentation, and discovery. First by observation and inspiration and then by methodical research, the History of foundations for modern rocketry were laid. Rockets Building upon the experience of two millennia, new rockets will expand human presence in space back to the Moon and Mars. These new rockets will be versatile. They will support Earth orbital missions, such as the International Space Station, and off- world missions millions of kilometers from home. Already, travel to the stars is possible. Robotic spacecraft are on their way into interstellar space as you read this. Someday, they will be followed by human explorers. Often lost in the shadows of time, early rocket pioneers “pushed the envelope” by creating rocket- propelled devices for land, sea, air, and space. When the scientific principles governing motion were discovered, rockets graduated from toys and novelties to serious devices for commerce, war, travel, and research. This work led to many of the most amazing discoveries of our time. The vignettes that follow provide a small sampling of stories from the history of rockets. They form a rocket time line that includes critical developments and interesting sidelines. In some cases, one story leads to another, and in others, the stories are inter- esting diversions from the path. They portray the inspirations that ultimately led to us taking our first steps into outer space. NASA’s new Space Launch System (SLS), commercial launch systems, and the rockets that follow owe much of their success to the accomplishments presented here.
    [Show full text]
  • The New American Space Age: a Progress Report on Human Spaceflight the New American Space Age: a Progress Report on Human Spaceflight the International Space
    The New American Space Age: A PROGRESS REPORT ON HUMAN SpaCEFLIGHT The New American Space Age: A Progress Report on Human Spaceflight The International Space Station: the largest international scientific and engineering achievement in human history. The New American Space Age: A Progress Report on Human Spaceflight Lately, it seems the public cannot get enough of space! The recent hit movie “Gravity” not only won 7 Academy Awards – it was a runaway box office success, no doubt inspiring young future scientists, engineers and mathematicians just as “2001: A Space Odyssey” did more than 40 years ago. “Cosmos,” a PBS series on the origins of the universe from the 1980s, has been updated to include the latest discoveries – and funded by a major television network in primetime. And let’s not forget the terrific online videos of science experiments from former International Space Station Commander Chris Hadfield that were viewed by millions of people online. Clearly, the American public is eager to carry the torch of space exploration again. Thankfully, NASA and the space industry are building a host of new vehicles that will do just that. American industry is hard at work developing new commercial transportation services to suborbital altitudes and even low Earth orbit. NASA and the space industry are also building vehicles to take astronauts beyond low Earth orbit for the first time since the Apollo program. Meanwhile, in the U.S. National Lab on the space station, unprecedented research in zero-g is paving the way for Earth breakthroughs in genetics, gerontology, new vaccines and much more.
    [Show full text]
  • First Stage of a Highly Reliable Reusable Launch System
    First Stage of a Highly Reliable Reusable Launch System * $ Kurt J. Kloesel , Jonathan B. Pickrelf, and Emily L. Sayles NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, California, 93523-0273 Michael Wright § NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, 20771-0001 Darin Marriott** Embry-Riddle University, Prescott, Arizona, 86301-3720 Dr. Leo Hollandtf General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems Division, San Diego, California, 92121-1194 Dr. Stephen Kuznetsov$$ Power Superconductor Applications Corporation, New Castle, Pennsylvania, 16101-5241 Electromagnetic launch assist has the potential to provide a highly reliable reusable first stage to a space access system infrastructure at a lower overall cost. This paper explores the benefits of a smaller system that adds the advantages of a high specific impulse air-breathing stage and supersonic launch speeds. The method of virtual specific impulse is introduced as a tool to emphasize the gains afforded by launch assist. Analysis shows launch assist can provide a 278-s virtual specific impulse for a first-stage solid rocket. Additional trajectory analysis demonstrates that a system composed of a launch-assisted first-stage ramjet plus a bipropellant second stage can provide a 48-percent gross lift-off weight reduction versus an all-rocket system. The combination of high-speed linear induction motors and ramjets is identified, as the enabling technologies and benchtop prototypes are investigated. The high-speed response of a standard 60 Hz linear induction motor was tested with a pulse width modulated variable frequency drive to 150 Hz using a 10-lb load, achieving 150 mph. A 300-Hz stator-compensated linear induction motor was constructed and static-tested to 1900 lbf average.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternatives for Future U.S. Space-Launch Capabilities Pub
    CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE A CBO STUDY OCTOBER 2006 Alternatives for Future U.S. Space-Launch Capabilities Pub. No. 2568 A CBO STUDY Alternatives for Future U.S. Space-Launch Capabilities October 2006 The Congress of the United States O Congressional Budget Office Note Unless otherwise indicated, all years referred to in this study are federal fiscal years, and all dollar amounts are expressed in 2006 dollars of budget authority. Preface Currently available launch vehicles have the capacity to lift payloads into low earth orbit that weigh up to about 25 metric tons, which is the requirement for almost all of the commercial and governmental payloads expected to be launched into orbit over the next 10 to 15 years. However, the launch vehicles needed to support the return of humans to the moon, which has been called for under the Bush Administration’s Vision for Space Exploration, may be required to lift payloads into orbit that weigh in excess of 100 metric tons and, as a result, may constitute a unique demand for launch services. What alternatives might be pursued to develop and procure the type of launch vehicles neces- sary for conducting manned lunar missions, and how much would those alternatives cost? This Congressional Budget Office (CBO) study—prepared at the request of the Ranking Member of the House Budget Committee—examines those questions. The analysis presents six alternative programs for developing launchers and estimates their costs under the assump- tion that manned lunar missions will commence in either 2018 or 2020. In keeping with CBO’s mandate to provide impartial analysis, the study makes no recommendations.
    [Show full text]
  • Soviet Reusable Space Systems Program: Implications for Space Operations in the 1990S
    ) (I ' ·-·.;;;;:, .. Dire.ctorate of . ttJ _)\ Intelligence . G0 Soviet Reusable Space Systems Program: Implications for Space Operations in the 1990s An Intelligence Assessment SOV 88-10061 sw 88-/IJOj6 Stpu'"hu J9RR Copy Warning Notice Intelligence Sources or Methods Involved (WNINTEL) National &curity Unauthorized Disclosure Information Subject to Criminal Sanctions Oissc:mination Control Abbr~riations NOFORN (NFJ Not releasable to foreien nationals NOSONTR~_CT_CN_C_I ___~N_o_t~re_lc_•_s•_b_le_t~o_c_M_l~rz~~-o_rs_o.,.r~c_o~nl_rz_c~lo_r~/c_o_ns_u_h_z_nt_s PROP IN (PRJ Caution-proprietary inform;.tion involved OR CON (OCJ Dissemination and Cltraction of inform.1tion ---···----------,--,---,---.,.---------,-----controlled by oricinator REl___ This inform3.tion h.u been :~uthorizcd for release to ... ___________,_ __ W_N ______ --:----- WNI ~TEL-Intcllia:cncc sources or mel hods involved A microfiche copy o( I his docu- Clauillcd bl men! is available front OIR/ Declassify: OADR DLB (~82-7177~ printed copies Derived from muhiplc sources from CPAS/IMC(~&l-HOJ; or AIM request to uscrid CPASIMCJ. Rceulu rcccip! of 01 reports can be am need chrouch CPAS/IMC. All material on this ~r:c . --·-------------------- is Unclassified. ') / ' Directorate or lntdligrocc Soviet Reusable Space Systems Program: Implications for Space Operations in the 1990s An lntdligcnce Assessment This paper was prepared b ,Qflicc of Soviet Anal)'sis. an<'.- ~f Science and Weapons Rescare #:ontributions fro. t?_o~ . Comments znd queries arc welcome and may be dircctcdl\0 . or to . USWR. J yrf sov 88-10061 SWS8-100l6 Scpumba 1933 I ' Soviet Reusable Space Systems Program: Implications for Space Operations in the_l990! Key Judgments The Soviets arc developing at least one, and possibly two, reusable space llffurmation availabl~ systems.
    [Show full text]
  • A Conceptual Analysis of Spacecraft Air Launch Methods
    A Conceptual Analysis of Spacecraft Air Launch Methods Rebecca A. Mitchell1 Department of Aerospace Engineering Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80303 Air launch spacecraft have numerous advantages over traditional vertical launch configurations. There are five categories of air launch configurations: captive on top, captive on bottom, towed, aerial refueled, and internally carried. Numerous vehicles have been designed within these five groups, although not all are feasible with current technology. An analysis of mass savings shows that air launch systems can significantly reduce required liftoff mass as compared to vertical launch systems. Nomenclature Δv = change in velocity (m/s) µ = gravitational parameter (km3/s2) CG = Center of Gravity CP = Center of Pressure 2 g0 = standard gravity (m/s ) h = altitude (m) Isp = specific impulse (s) ISS = International Space Station LEO = Low Earth Orbit mf = final vehicle mass (kg) mi = initial vehicle mass (kg) mprop = propellant mass (kg) MR = mass ratio NASA = National Aeronautics and Space Administration r = orbital radius (km) 1 M.S. Student in Bioastronautics, [email protected] 1 T/W = thrust-to-weight ratio v = velocity (m/s) vc = carrier aircraft velocity (m/s) I. Introduction T HE cost of launching into space is often measured by the change in velocity required to reach the destination orbit, known as delta-v or Δv. The change in velocity is related to the required propellant mass by the ideal rocket equation: 푚푖 훥푣 = 퐼푠푝 ∗ 0 ∗ ln ( ) (1) 푚푓 where Isp is the specific impulse, g0 is standard gravity, mi initial mass, and mf is final mass. Specific impulse, measured in seconds, is the amount of time that a unit weight of a propellant can produce a unit weight of thrust.
    [Show full text]
  • Proliferated Commercial Satellite Constellations Implications for National Security
    Soyuz-2.1b rocket lifts off from Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan, together with 34 OneWeb communication satellites (Courtesy Roscosmos) Proliferated Commercial Satellite Constellations Implications for National Security By Matthew A. Hallex and Travis S. Cottom he falling costs of space launch Commercial space actors—from tiny of these endeavors will result in new and the increasing capabilities of startups to companies backed by bil- space-based services, including global T small satellites have enabled the lions of dollars of private investment— broadband Internet coverage broadcast emergence of radically new space archi- are pursuing these new architectures from orbit and high-revisit overhead tectures—proliferated constellations to disrupt traditional business models imagery of much of the Earth’s surface. made up of dozens, hundreds, or even for commercial Earth observation and The effects of proliferated con- thousands of satellites in low orbits. satellite communications. The success stellations will not be confined to the commercial sector. The exponential in- crease in the number of satellites on orbit Matthew A. Hallex is a Research Staff Member at the Institute for Defense Analyses. Travis S. Cottom is will shape the future military operating a Research Associate at the Institute for Defense Analyses. environment in space. The increase in 20 Forum / Proliferated Commercial Satellite Constellations JFQ 97, 2nd Quarter 2020 the availability of satellite imagery and Table 1. Planned Proliferated Communications Constellations communications bandwidth on the open Satellite Operator Proposed Satellites Satellite Design Life (Years) market will also affect the operating environment in the ground, maritime, OneWeb > 2,000 7–10 and air domains, offering new capabilities SpaceX Starlink ~ 12,000 5–7 that can address hard problems facing Boeing > 3,000 10–15 the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The 2019 Joint Agency Commercial Imagery Evaluation—Land Remote
    2019 Joint Agency Commercial Imagery Evaluation— Land Remote Sensing Satellite Compendium Joint Agency Commercial Imagery Evaluation NASA • NGA • NOAA • USDA • USGS Circular 1455 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover. Image of Landsat 8 satellite over North America. Source: AGI’s System Tool Kit. Facing page. In shallow waters surrounding the Tyuleniy Archipelago in the Caspian Sea, chunks of ice were the artists. The 3-meter-deep water makes the dark green vegetation on the sea bottom visible. The lines scratched in that vegetation were caused by ice chunks, pushed upward and downward by wind and currents, scouring the sea floor. 2019 Joint Agency Commercial Imagery Evaluation—Land Remote Sensing Satellite Compendium By Jon B. Christopherson, Shankar N. Ramaseri Chandra, and Joel Q. Quanbeck Circular 1455 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior DAVID BERNHARDT, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey James F. Reilly II, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2019 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit https://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit https://store.usgs.gov. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials JACIE as noted in the text.
    [Show full text]
  • A Sample AMS Latex File
    Lappas, V. (2018): JoSS, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 753–772 (Peer-reviewed article available at www.jossonline.com) www.DeepakPublishing.com www. JoSSonline.com Trade-Offs and Optimization of Air-Assisted Launch Vehicles for Small Satellites Vaios Lappas, Ph.D. Department of Mechanical Engineering and Aeronautics, University of Patras, Greece Patras, Greece Abstract A number of recent studies have focused on the conceptual development of an air-assisted launch vehicle for small payloads in the nano- and micro-satellite class (0–100 kg) of small satellites. These studies address a growing trend toward the use of smaller satellites in the spacecraft industry, with an emphasis on reduced time between project conception and launch. Also, a key motivation for developing a next-generation micro launch vehicle responds to a thus far unanswered need for responsive access to space. Air-assisted launch vehicles can be integral components to a system that would allow reducing, sometimes significantly, the mass of expendable launch vehicles (due to the aircraft’s initial velocity, the optimization of the engine nozzle expansion ratio, the reduction of losses attributable to altitude, etc.). However, such a launcher concept is constrained in mass and volume by the aircraft type, and requires a dedicated architecture and specific technologies and technology. Many studies have been performed worldwide, particularly in Europe, to select the most promising concepts, considering existing European technology and available aircraft. One of the major challenges that this paper seeks to address is the difficulty in making fair trade-offs among the various launch scenarios/options for small satellites. Therefore, to launch small satellites (<100 kg) in low Earth orbit (LEO), it is of interest to analyze and compare the various air-assisted launch vehicle options available and explore the advantages and disadvantages of these designs.
    [Show full text]
  • National Spaceport Network Development Plan
    SPfciCEPORT ALLIANCE National Spaceport Network Development Plan Prepared by the Global Spaceport Alliance for the Office of Spaceports Office of Commercial Space Transportation Federal Aviation Administration June 1, 2020 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Space has become an indispensable part of everyday life in the 21st century, supporting not only our nation's military and intelligence capabilities, but also communications, navigation, weather forecasting, agriculture, financial transactions, disaster response, and even entertainment. The Eastern Range, located at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida, and the Western Range, located at Vandenberg Air Force Base, California, have served as the military's primary launch sites for space launches and missile tests for more than 60 years. Many NASA and commercial space missions have also been conducted from those locations. Recently however, a number of commercial spaceports have been established by state and local governments, or by private companies, based on a desire to take advantage of the growing space economy, to minimize the federal regulatory burden, and to provide additional launch opportunities for civil and commercial space missions. The development of a National Spaceport Network, consisting of current and prospective commercial spaceports, government-owned-and-operated launch & landing sites, and privately- owned-and-operated launch & landing sites, offers an opportunity to increase the safety, capacity, efficiency, and resiliency of the nation's space operations. Such a network could provide the framework for formal or informal public-private partnerships between federal, state, and local governments; the aerospace industry; and academia. A key component of the operation of a successful network of spaceports is federal funding for infrastructure development.
    [Show full text]
  • Report to Congress on FAA Evaluation of Commercial Human
    FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION Report to Congress: FAA Evaluation of Commercial Human Space Flight Safety Frameworks and Key Industry Indicators U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act (CSLCA), Public Law 114-90, Section 111(5); 51 USC § 50905(c)(5), (6) Contents I. Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................... 1 II. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 2 III. State of the Commercial Human Space Flight Industry ........................................................... 4 IV. Safety Framework Stakeholders ............................................................................................... 6 V. Current Legislative and Regulatory Framework for Safety of Human Space Flight ................. 7 VI. Benefits of a Safety Framework ............................................................................................. 10 VII. Elements and Leadership of Safety Frameworks .................................................................. 11 VIII. Industry and Government Readiness Indicators .................................................................. 15 IX. Progress of the Industry in Developing Voluntary Industry Consensus Standards ................ 24 X. Summary .................................................................................................................................. 36 I. Executive Summary This
    [Show full text]