DOCSLIB.ORG

Athena Mission Planner’S Guide (MPG)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Athena Mission Planner’S Guide (MPG) Athena Mission Planner’s Guide (MPG) Release Date Date – –2326 January August 2012 2011 Published by: Athena Mission Planner’s Guide FOREWORD January 2012 This Athena Mission Planner’s Guide presents information regarding the Athena Launch Vehicle and related launch services. A range of vehicle configurations and performance capabilities are offered to allow optimum match to customer requirements at low cost. Information is presented in sufficient detail for preliminary assessment of the Athena family for your missions. This guide includes essential technical and programmatic information for preliminary mission planning and preliminary spacecraft design. Athena performance capability, environments and interfaces are described in sufficient detail to assess a first-order compatibility. A description of the spacecraft processing and launch facilities at our launch sites is also included. This guide also describes the operations and hardware flow for the spacecraft and launch vehicle leading to encapsulation, spacecraft mating and launch. This guide is subject to change and will be revised periodically. For inquiries, contact: Gregory J. Kehrl Athena Mission Manager Telephone: (303) 977-0310 Fax: (303) 971-3748 E-mail: [email protected] Postal Address: Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company P.O. Box 179 Denver, CO 80201-0179 MS H3005 Street Address: Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company 12257 S. Wadsworth Blvd. Littleton, CO 80125 MS H3005 i Athena Mission Planner’s Guide TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Summary .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Launch Services ............................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Advantages of Selecting Athena ...................................................................................... 2 1.4 Athena Launch System..................................................................................................... 2 1.4.1 Athena Launch Vehicles ........................................................................................... 2 1.4.2 Mission Design and Performance ............................................................................. 3 1.4.3 Spacecraft Interfaces ................................................................................................. 3 1.4.4 Environments ............................................................................................................ 3 1.4.5 Spacecraft and Launch Facilities .............................................................................. 3 1.4.6 Launch Campaign ..................................................................................................... 4 1.4.7 Mission Integration and Management ...................................................................... 4 1.4.8 System Enhancements .............................................................................................. 4 1.4.9 Supplemental Information ........................................................................................ 4 1.5 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 4 2.0 ATHENA LAUNCH SYSTEM ........................................................................................... 5 2.1 Athena Launch Vehicle Family........................................................................................ 5 2.2 Performance Capability .................................................................................................... 6 2.2.1 Performance Factors and Athena Specifications ...................................................... 6 2.2.2 Trajectory Design Optimization ............................................................................... 7 2.2.3 Low Earth Orbits....................................................................................................... 7 2.2.4 High Energy Mission Performance ........................................................................... 9 2.3 Orbit Injection Accuracy ................................................................................................ 11 2.4 Separation Control.......................................................................................................... 11 2.4.1 Attitude Rates and Stabilization.............................................................................. 11 2.4.2 Attitude Orientation and Pointing Accuracy........................................................... 12 2.4.3 Separation Velocity ................................................................................................. 12 2.5 Collision and Contamination Avoidance Maneuver (CCAM) ....................................... 12 3.0 SPACECRAFT INTERFACES ......................................................................................... 13 3.1 Spacecraft-to-Launch-Vehicle Interfaces ....................................................................... 13 3.1.1 Mechanical Interfaces—Payload Fairing ................................................................ 13 3.1.2 Mechanical Interfaces—Payload Adapters and Separation Systems...................... 16 ii Athena Mission Planner’s Guide 3.2 Spacecraft-to-Ground Interfaces .................................................................................... 24 3.2.1 Ground Support Equipment Interfaces ................................................................... 24 3.2.2 Utility Room Interfaces........................................................................................... 24 3.2.3 Launch Vehicle Control Van Interfaces ................................................................. 24 3.3 Range and System Safety Interfaces .............................................................................. 27 3.3.1 Requirements .......................................................................................................... 27 3.3.2 Applicability ........................................................................................................... 27 3.3.3 Safety ...................................................................................................................... 27 4.0 REQUIREMENTS AND ENVIRONMENTS .................................................................. 30 4.1 Prelaunch Environments ................................................................................................ 30 4.1.1 Loads and Load Factors .......................................................................................... 30 4.1.2 Cleanliness, Contamination Control, Temperature, and Humidity ......................... 30 4.1.3 Radiation and Electromagnetic Environments ........................................................ 31 4.1.4 Electrostatic Potential and Grounding .................................................................... 33 4.2 Launch and Flight Environments ................................................................................... 33 4.2.1 Loads and Load Factors .......................................................................................... 33 4.2.2 Low-Frequency Vibration ....................................................................................... 35 4.2.3 Random Vibration ................................................................................................... 35 4.2.4 Acoustics ................................................................................................................. 36 4.2.5 Shock....................................................................................................................... 38 4.2.6 Thermal ................................................................................................................... 38 4.2.7 Atmospheric Pressure Venting ............................................................................... 40 4.2.8 Contamination Control and Cleanliness ................................................................. 40 5.0 SPACECRAFT AND LAUNCH FACILITIES................................................................. 42 5.1 Cape Canaveral Air Force Station .................................................................................. 42 5.1.1 CCAFS Payload Processing Facilities .................................................................... 42 5.1.2 Launch Complex 46 ................................................................................................ 43 5.1.3 Support Facilities .................................................................................................... 43 5.1.4 Launch Control ....................................................................................................... 44 5.2 Kodiak Launch Complex ............................................................................................... 44 5.2.1 KLC Payload Processing Facilities ......................................................................... 46 6.0 LAUNCH CAMPAIGN..................................................................................................... 47 6.1 Vehicle Integration and Site Preparation ....................................................................... 47 6.1.1 Spacecraft-to-Launch Vehicle Integration .............................................................. 47 iii Athena Mission Planner’s Guide
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Launch and Deployment Analysis for a Small, MEO, Technology Demonstration Satellite
    46th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit AIAA 2008-1131 7 – 10 January 20006, Reno, Nevada Launch and Deployment Analysis for a Small, MEO, Technology Demonstration Satellite Stephen A. Whitmore* and Tyson K. Smith† Utah State University, Logan, UT, 84322-4130 A trade study investigating the economics, mass budget, and concept of operations for delivery of a small technology-demonstration satellite to a medium-altitude earth orbit is presented. The mission requires payload deployment at a 19,000 km orbit altitude and an inclination of 55o. Because the payload is a technology demonstrator and not part of an operational mission, launch and deployment costs are a paramount consideration. The payload includes classified technologies; consequently a USA licensed launch system is mandated. A preliminary trade analysis is performed where all available options for FAA-licensed US launch systems are considered. The preliminary trade study selects the Orbital Sciences Minotaur V launch vehicle, derived from the decommissioned Peacekeeper missile system, as the most favorable option for payload delivery. To meet mission objectives the Minotaur V configuration is modified, replacing the baseline 5th stage ATK-37FM motor with the significantly smaller ATK Star 27. The proposed design change enables payload delivery to the required orbit without using a 6th stage kick motor. End-to-end mass budgets are calculated, and a concept of operations is presented. Monte-Carlo simulations are used to characterize the expected accuracy of the final orbit.
    [Show full text]
  • ATHENA COMMUNITY NEWSLETTER #4 December 2017 Contents
    ATHENA COMMUNITY NEWSLETTER #4 December 2017 Contents Welcome.......................................................................................... 1 Fourth Announcement of Opportunity to join the Athena Community Working Groups/Topical Panels .................................................... 1 Discovery of Electromagnetic Counterparts to Gravitational Waves .......... 2 Athena Project Status .......................................................................... 2 News from the Instruments ................................................................. 4 News from the WFI ......................................................................... 4 News from X-IFU ............................................................................ 4 The SKA-Athena Synergy Exercise Coming to the End.............................. 6 Athena End-to-End Simulations ............................................................ 7 Unveiling the Hot, High Redshift Universe with the Athena WFI ................. 8 Athena Community People .................................................................. 9 Conferences ................................................................................... 10 Athena in Conferences (January-July 2018) ....................................... 10 Coming conferences of interest ...................................................... 10 Edited by Athena Community Office: F.J. Carrera, M.T. Ceballos, S. Martínez-Núñez, M.P. Monterde Instituto de Física de Cantabria (CSIC-UC) Avda Los Castros s/n 39005 Santander
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Learning from Other People's Mistakes
    Learning from Other People’s Mistakes Most satellite mishaps stem from engineering mistakes. To prevent the same errors from being repeated, Aerospace has compiled lessons that the space community should heed. Paul Cheng and Patrick Smith he computer onboard the Clementine spacecraft froze immediately after a thruster was commanded to fire. A “watchdog” algorithm designed to stop “It’s always the simple stuff the thrusters from excessive firing could not execute, and CTlementine’s fuel ran out. !e mission was lost. Based on that kills you…. With all the this incident, engineers working on the Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous (NEAR) program learned a key lesson: the testing systems, everything watchdog function should be hard-wired in case of a com- puter shutdown. As it happened, NEAR suffered a similar computer crash during which its thrusters fired thousands looked good.” of times, but each firing was instantly cut off by the still- —James Cantrell, main engineer operative watchdog timer. NEAR survived. As this example illustrates, insights from past anoma- for the joint U.S.-Russian Skipper lies are of considerable value to design engineers and other mission, which failed because program stakeholders. Information from failures (and near its solar panels were connected failures) can influence important design decisions and pre- vent the same mistakes from being made over and over. backward (Associated Press, 1996) Contrary to popular belief, satellites seldom fail because of poor workmanship or defective parts. Instead, most failures are caused by simple engineering errors, such as an over- looked requirement, a unit mix-up, or even a typo in a docu- ment.
    [Show full text]
  • Members' Meeting Package
    DPS Members Meeting 6 October 2011 Members Meeting Agenda Opening remarks Melissa McGrath Secretary’s report Athena Coustenis Treasurer’s report Diana Blaney EPO report Nick Schneider Webmaster report Tony Roman Hartmann Travel Grant recipients Dan Britt Professional Development Subcommittee report Rachel Mastrapa Federal Relations Subcommittee report Josh Emery Survey report Anne Verbiscer Icarus report Phil Nicholson Nominating Subcommittee member election Nantes Meeting report Olivier Grasset Future meetings report Melissa McGrath Press Officer report Vishnu Reddy Outgoing Chair remarks Melissa McGrath Incoming chair remarks Dan Britt New Business, discussion, questions Opening Remarks • Short reports, please hold questions until the end. Longer versions are posted on the DPS web site at: dps.aas.org/reports • Later in the meeting we’ll elect a new member of the Nominating Subcommittee. From our By Laws: "The Nominating Subcommittee is responsible for presenting to the DPS Secretary a list of candidates for DPS Officers and Committee members. At the business meeting each year, the DPS membership selects a new member for the Nominating Subcommittee, who serves a three-year term. In the third year of service, the member serves as Chair of the subcommittee." DPS Secretary’s Report Athena Coustenis Membership • Current active membership: 1358, same as last year at the same time (varying between 1100 and 1500). Non-US fraction 19% • Renew your membership and pay your dues TODAY and in any event before 31 December 2011 to avoid dropping from lists in Feb. – Pay your 2012 membership dues online at https://members.aas.org/ • Also, please take a moment to update your personal DPS member file.
    [Show full text]
  • LINDA TARBOX ELKINS-TANTON Curriculum Vitae August 2020
    LINDA TARBOX ELKINS-TANTON Curriculum Vitae August 2020 Managing Director, Interplanetary Initiative, Arizona State University Principal Investigator, NASA Psyche mission Co-founder, Beagle Learning Office: (480) 727-2451 | Mobile: (617) 784-3817 | [email protected] RESEARCH Terrestrial planetary formation and subsequent planetary evolution. Creation of effective interdisciplinary teams and their leadership for maximizing discovery. Inquiry and exploration learning and the reformation of education for the Information Age. My mission is to create a generation of problem-solvers. Research Achievements • The evolution of planetesimals includes partially differentiated and other complex compositional structures, explaining physical and compositional observations from meteorites and asteroids. • The Siberian flood basalts erupted most of their volume before the end-Permian extinction occurred; the magmatism released carbon, sulfur, and halocarbons sufficient to drive catastrophic global climate change; the flood basalts began with a world-record volume of volcaniclastics, many erupted as tuffs and burning a significant coal volume. • Magma ocean stages of terrestrial planet formation retained sufficient water to create habitable planets without additional water delivery (though that is inevitable as well), and the silicate differentiation produced by magma ocean solidification creates successful predictions about current- day Moon, Earth, Mercury, and Mars. • Drip magmatism: Lithospheric gravitational instabilities heat, melt, and produce magmatism while they sinK into the mantle; verified in Chile, in Tibet, in the Sierra Nevada, and in east Africa. • The productivity of questions can be rated using a rubric and scored successfully by artificial intelligence. EDUCATION PhD, Geology and Geophysics, MIT, 2002. Advisors: Timothy L. Grove and Bradford H. Hager. MS, Geochemistry, MIT, 1987. Advisor: Timothy L.
    [Show full text]
  • March 21–25, 2016
    FORTY-SEVENTH LUNAR AND PLANETARY SCIENCE CONFERENCE PROGRAM OF TECHNICAL SESSIONS MARCH 21–25, 2016 The Woodlands Waterway Marriott Hotel and Convention Center The Woodlands, Texas INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT Universities Space Research Association Lunar and Planetary Institute National Aeronautics and Space Administration CONFERENCE CO-CHAIRS Stephen Mackwell, Lunar and Planetary Institute Eileen Stansbery, NASA Johnson Space Center PROGRAM COMMITTEE CHAIRS David Draper, NASA Johnson Space Center Walter Kiefer, Lunar and Planetary Institute PROGRAM COMMITTEE P. Doug Archer, NASA Johnson Space Center Nicolas LeCorvec, Lunar and Planetary Institute Katherine Bermingham, University of Maryland Yo Matsubara, Smithsonian Institute Janice Bishop, SETI and NASA Ames Research Center Francis McCubbin, NASA Johnson Space Center Jeremy Boyce, University of California, Los Angeles Andrew Needham, Carnegie Institution of Washington Lisa Danielson, NASA Johnson Space Center Lan-Anh Nguyen, NASA Johnson Space Center Deepak Dhingra, University of Idaho Paul Niles, NASA Johnson Space Center Stephen Elardo, Carnegie Institution of Washington Dorothy Oehler, NASA Johnson Space Center Marc Fries, NASA Johnson Space Center D. Alex Patthoff, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Cyrena Goodrich, Lunar and Planetary Institute Elizabeth Rampe, Aerodyne Industries, Jacobs JETS at John Gruener, NASA Johnson Space Center NASA Johnson Space Center Justin Hagerty, U.S. Geological Survey Carol Raymond, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Lindsay Hays, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Paul Schenk,
    [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]
  • Space Almanac 2007
    2007 Space Almanac The US military space operation in facts and figures. Compiled by Tamar A. Mehuron, Associate Editor, and the staff of Air Force Magazine 74 AIR FORCE Magazine / August 2007 Space 0.05g 60,000 miles Geosynchronous Earth Orbit 22,300 miles Hard vacuum 1,000 miles Medium Earth Orbit begins 300 miles 0.95g 100 miles Low Earth Orbit begins 60 miles Astronaut wings awarded 50 miles Limit for ramjet engines 28 miles Limit for turbojet engines 20 miles Stratosphere begins 10 miles Illustration not to scale Artist’s conception by Erik Simonsen AIR FORCE Magazine / August 2007 75 US Military Missions in Space Space Support Space Force Enhancement Space Control Space Force Application Launch of satellites and other Provide satellite communica- Ensure freedom of action in space Provide capabilities for the ap- high-value payloads into space tions, navigation, weather infor- for the US and its allies and, plication of combat operations and operation of those satellites mation, missile warning, com- when directed, deny an adversary in, through, and from space to through a worldwide network of mand and control, and intel- freedom of action in space. influence the course and outcome ground stations. ligence to the warfighter. of conflict. US Space Funding Millions of constant Fiscal 2007 dollars 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Fiscal Year 59 62 65 68 71 74 77 80 83 86 89 92 95 98 01 04 Fiscal Year NASA DOD Other Total Fiscal Year NASA DOD Other Total 1959 1,841 3,457 240 5,538 1983 13,051 18,601 675 32,327 1960 3,205 3,892
    [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]
  • Planet Earth Taken by Hayabusa-2
    Space Science in JAXA Planet Earth May 15, 2017 taken by Hayabusa-2 Saku Tsuneta, PhD JAXA Vice President Director General, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science 2017 IAA Planetary Defense Conference, May 15-19,1 Tokyo 1 Brief Introduction of Space Science in JAXA Introduction of ISAS and JAXA • As a national center of space science & engineering research, ISAS carries out development and in-orbit operation of space science missions with other directorates of JAXA. • ISAS is an integral part of JAXA, and has close collaboration with other directorates such as Research and Development and Human Spaceflight Technology Directorates. • As an inter-university research institute, these activities are intimately carried out with universities and research institutes inside and outside Japan. ISAS always seeks for international collaboration. • Space science missions are proposed by researchers, and incubated by ISAS. ISAS plays a strategic role for mission selection primarily based on the bottom-up process, considering strategy of JAXA and national space policy. 3 JAXA recent science missions HAYABUSA 2003-2010 AKARI(ASTRO-F)2006-2011 KAGUYA（SELENE)2007-2009 Asteroid Explorer Infrared Astronomy Lunar Exploration IKAROS 2010 HAYABUSA2 2014-2020 M-V Rocket Asteroid Explorer Solar Sail SUZAKU(ASTRO-E2)2005- AKATSUKI 2010- X-Ray Astronomy Venus Meteorogy ARASE 2016- HINODE(SOLAR-B)2006- Van Allen belt Solar Observation Hisaki 2013 4 Planetary atmosphere Close ties between space science and space technology Space Technology Divisions Space
    [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]