DOCSLIB.ORG

Behind Text.” Should Automatically to Edge (8.5 X 11)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Behind Text.” Should Automatically to Edge (8.5 X 11) Insert Cover jpeg here. Make wrapping “Behind Text.” Should automatically to edge (8.5 x 11). JEFFREY C. BOULWARE Jeffrey C. Boulware is a senior project engineer in The Aerospace Corporation’s National Systems Group where he conducts strategic planning for long-term enterprise acquisitions. Prior to joining Aerospace in January 2018, he served as a civil servant in the Air Force’s ICBM System Directorate in key leadership positions related to the modernization and sustainment of ICBM weapon systems. He holds a master’s degree in military operational art and science from Air University and a Ph.D. in mechanical and aerospace engineering from Utah State University. ABOUT THE CENTER FOR SPACE POLICY AND STRATEGY The Center for Space Policy and Strategy is dedicated to shaping the future by providing nonpartisan research and strategic analysis to decisionmakers. The Center is part of The Aerospace Corporation, a nonprofit organization that advises the government on complex space enterprise and systems engineering problems. The views expressed in this publication are solely those of the author(s), and do not necessarily reflect those of The Aerospace Corporation, its management, or its customers. For more information, go to www.aerospace.org/policy or email [email protected]. Summary The options for post-retirement uses of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) are controlled by Title 51, Section 50134, of the U.S. Code. This policy prohibits the transfer of ICBM systems to private industry for commercial space launch purposes. Advocates for change would like to create a low-cost launch service provider whereas opponents to changing the policy argue this would unbalance the commercial launch market and stifle innovation from emerging companies. While much of the debate has centered around these key points, not enough consideration has been made for other applications of ICBM systems after they are retired. This paper presents strategic options other than commercial space launch that would be advantageous to the U.S. government and the overall space industry. For the purposes of this paper, “ICBM” is defined as all components of the system excluding the warhead. Introduction The use of ICBM booster systemsa in the Before options for changes to commercial marketplace has been intensely debated for decades; unfortunately, this debate has not fully policy can be presented, the full considered other uses for these systems once they suite of opportunities for ICBM are retired. The fiscal year 2018 (FY18) National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) requires the booster systems must Secretary of Defense to “provide a briefing to the be explored. congressional defense committees on the range of options and recommendations for modification of the existing policy on the usage of ICBM motors for tremendous capabilities. This may be the most commercial sales that would support the domestic intuitive application, but advocates and opponents industrial base.”b,1 Before change options to policy for policy change should at least expand the scope can be presented, the full suite of opportunities for of their conversations to include other, corollary ICBM booster systems must be explored. Injecting uses that would not adversely impact the a commercial payload into orbit is one of many commercial market. These uses range from non-lift potential applications for vehicles with such applications to technology demonstrators, some of aFor the purposes of this paper, a “booster system” is considered as the casing, propellant, motor, flight controls, software, and any other subsystem required for each stage of ICBM flight operations. bThe term “motor” in the NDAA is interpreted as equivalent to, or a subset of, this paper’s use of the term “booster system.” 1 which do not even require a policy change for success of such an idea was proven through the approval. conversions of the Atlas, Delta (formerly Thor), and Titan systems. Opponents to commercial Although this paper does briefly acknowledge the repurposing claimed that saturating the commercial respective concerns regarding ICBMs within market with government-supplied systems had commercial applications, it is intended to highlight unfairly suppressed new providers and any a wider set of alternatives for post-retirement uses to proposed innovation. The surges in this debate support long-term, strategic planning. naturally corresponded to the retirement of ICBM and submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) Background systems over the years (Polaris and Poseidon in the The Debate 1990s, Peacekeeper (PK) in the early 2000s). After As shown in Figure 1, ICBM booster systems have the retirement of the space shuttle, NASA been transferred to the commercial space launch emphasized the importance of the commercial industry, oftentimes even before retirement from sector for its space launch needs, which led to military service. During the 1950s and 1960s, the emergent companies disrupting the status quo with intertwined development of ICBMs and space new models for business. Along with the debate launch vehicles was widely regarded as a mutually between the established and emergent companies,2,3 beneficial success. Later, when Cold War tensions the Air Force released a Request for Information eased during arms reductions in the 1970s and, then, (RFI) in August 2016 regarding the use of excess when the collapse of the Soviet Union occurred in ICBM motors for commercial space launches.4 1991, many argued that ICBMs should be During a Washington Space Business Roundtable repurposed for commercial applications. The luncheon in January 2018, Secretary of the Air Figure 1: Timeline showing ICBM systems in their respective eras and their commercial launch derivatives. 2 Force Heather Wilson commented that the Air Force a space transportation vehicle configuration, unless did not intend to change the current policy (1) it can certify that doing so would result in cost prohibiting their conversion for commercial use,5 savings to the government compared to commercial and an inquiry with a member of her staff in providers, (2) all mission requirements could be September 2018 confirmed that stance.6 met, (3) international obligations are upheld, and Nonetheless, the debate will undoubtedly rise again (4) the Secretary of Defense (or a designee) and the strategic options should at least be approves.9 This policy was reiterated in the 2013 considered today. The Air Force is modernizing its National Space Transportation Policy.10 The ICBM fleet to the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent international obligations referred to are the Missile (GBSD) system, which will replace its aging three- Technology Control Regime (MTCR), the Treaty on stage Minuteman III (MMIII) vehicle. With the the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, the New deployment of GBSD, several hundred of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), MMIII’s stage 1, 2, and 3 booster systems will be and the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty, as phased out of military service beginning in the late shown in Figure 2. In each of these partnerships, the 2020s.7 Commercial space launch market forecasts essential goals are the stabilization of the do not typically extend this far in the future;c,8 geopolitical environment and the non-proliferation however, history should be expected to repeat itself of technology that could be used to create and when the MMIII booster systems are retired. deliver nuclear weapons. Payload operators, whether from the government or commercial sectors, will pressure the Air Force to Overall, the policy dictates that excess ICBMs could allow the booster systems to be converted into a be retained only for government use or must be low-cost space launch system. Launch service destroyed. This paper is not intended to make an providers will point to a track record of innovation argument for or against any policy changes, but is and success with their homegrown systems that merely intended to present alternative applications would be jeopardized if the Air Force enabled a that could inform the options for change. market disruptor. Understanding and balancing the interests of both launch service providers and Trade Space Exploration payload operators is critical in developing The law prohibits using ICBM booster systems for alternative uses for ICBM booster systems. commercial launches but does allow using them for government missions under specific criteria. Many Legislation of the launch vehicles within the Minotaur series The prohibition of ICBMs in the commercial space offered by Northrop Grumman—Innovation launch sector began with the 1994 National Space Systems (formerly Orbital ATK) use government- Transportation Policy and was further codified by furnished PK and Minuteman II (MMII) booster the Commercial Space Act of 1998. Today, the systems converted to space launch purposes, and policy is stated in Title 51 of the U.S. Code, have shown a 100 percent success rate through “National and Commercial Space Programs,” and 26 orbital or suborbital launches as of August specifically Section 50134, “Use of excess 2017.11 These vehicles are restricted to government intercontinental ballistic missiles.” The statute says missions,12 and although they were originally that the federal government shall not convert or designed for the ICBM mission, the success rate transfer ownership of any excess former ICBMs into verifies their versatility. In the upcoming years, that cThe Federal Aviation Administration’s Annual Compendium of Commercial
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]
  • Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Support to Commercial Space Launch
    The Space Congress® Proceedings 2019 (46th) Light the Fire Jun 4th, 3:30 PM Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Support to Commercial Space Launch Thomas Ste. Marie Vice Commander, 45th Space Wing Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings Scholarly Commons Citation Ste. Marie, Thomas, "Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Support to Commercial Space Launch" (2019). The Space Congress® Proceedings. 31. https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings/proceedings-2019-46th/presentations/31 This Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Space Congress® Proceedings by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Support to Commercial Space Launch Colonel Thomas Ste. Marie Vice Commander, 45th Space Wing CCAFS Launch Customers: 2013 Complex 41: ULA Atlas V (CST-100) Complex 40: SpaceX Falcon 9 Complex 37: ULA Delta IV; Delta IV Heavy Complex 46: Space Florida, Navy* Skid Strip: NGIS Pegasus Atlantic Ocean: Navy Trident II* Black text – current programs; Blue text – in work; * – sub-orbital CCAFS Launch Customers: 2013 Complex 39B: NASA SLS Complex 41: ULA Atlas V (CST-100) Complex 40: SpaceX Falcon 9 Complex 37: ULA Delta IV; Delta IV Heavy NASA Space Launch System Launch Complex 39B February 4, 2013 Complex 46: Space Florida, Navy* Skid Strip: NGIS Pegasus Atlantic Ocean: Navy Trident II* Black text – current programs;
    [Show full text]
  • Small Space Launch: Origins & Challenges Lt Col Thomas H
    Small Space Launch: Origins & Challenges Lt Col Thomas H. Freeman, USAF, [email protected], (505)853-4750 Maj Jose Delarosa, USAF, [email protected], (505)846-4097 Launch Test Squadron, SMC/SDTW Small Space Launch: Origins The United States Space Situational Awareness capability continues to be a key element in obtaining and maintaining the high ground in space. Space Situational Awareness satellites are critical enablers for integrated air, ground and sea operations, and play an essential role in fighting and winning conflicts. The United States leads the world space community in spacecraft payload systems from the component level into spacecraft, and in the development of constellations of spacecraft. The United States’ position is founded upon continued government investment in research and development in space technology [1], which is clearly reflected in the Space Situational Awareness capabilities and the longevity of these missions. In the area of launch systems that support Space Situational Awareness, despite the recent development of small launch vehicles, the United States launch capability is dominated by an old, unresponsive and relatively expensive set of launchers [1] in the Expandable, Expendable Launch Vehicles (EELV) platforms; Delta IV and Atlas V. The EELV systems require an average of six to eight months from positioning on the launch table until liftoff [3]. Access to space requires maintaining a robust space transportation capability, founded on a rigorous industrial and technology base. The downturn of commercial space launch service use has undermined, for the time being, the ability of industry to recoup its significant investment in current launch systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Nasa's Acquisition of Commercial Launch Services
    FEBRUARY 17, 2011 AUDIT REPORT OFFICE OF AUDITS REVIEW OF NASA’S ACQUISITION OF COMMERCIAL LAUNCH SERVICES OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL National Aeronautics and Space Administration REPORT NO. IG-11-012 (ASSIGNMENT NO. A-09-011-00) Final report released by: Paul K. Martin Inspector General Acronyms COTS Commercial Orbital Transportation Services CRS Commercial Resupply Services DOD Department of Defense EELV Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle ELV Expendable Launch Vehicle ESMD Exploration Systems Mission Directorate GAO Government Accountability Office GLAST Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope IBEX Interstellar Boundary Explorer ICBM Intercontinental Ballistic Missile ICESat-II Ice, Cloud, and Land Elevation Satellite IDIQ Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite-Quantity ISS International Space Station LADEE Lunar Atmosphere and Dust Environment Explorer LCROSS Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite LRO Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter LSP Launch Services Program NLS NASA Launch Services OCO Orbiting Carbon Observatory OIG Office of Inspector General PPBE Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution SMAP Soil Moisture Active Passive SMD Science Mission Directorate SOMD Space Operations Mission Directorate ULA United Launch Alliance REPORT NO. IG-11-012 FEBRUARY 17, 2011 OVERVIEW REVIEW OF NASA’S ACQUISITION OF COMMERCIAL LAUNCH SERVICES The Issue Commercial U.S. launch services providers compete domestically and internationally for contracts to carry satellites and other payloads into orbit using unmanned, single-use vehicles known as expendable launch vehicles (ELVs). However, since the late 1990s the global commercial launch market has generally declined following the downturn in the telecommunications services industry, which was the primary customer of the commercial space industry. Given this trend, U.S. launch services providers struggling to remain economically viable have been bolstered by the Commercial Space Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-303), which requires NASA and other Federal agencies to plan missions and procure space transportation services from U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Spaceflight, Inc. General Payload Users Guide
    Spaceflight, Inc. SF‐2100‐PUG‐00001 Rev F 2015‐22‐15 Payload Users Guide Spaceflight, Inc. General Payload Users Guide 3415 S. 116th St, Suite 123 Tukwila, WA 98168 866.204.1707 spaceflightindustries.com i Spaceflight, Inc. SF‐2100‐PUG‐00001 Rev F 2015‐22‐15 Payload Users Guide Document Revision History Rev Approval Changes ECN No. Sections / Approved Pages CM Date A 2011‐09‐16 Initial Release Updated electrical interfaces and launch B 2012‐03‐30 environments C 2012‐07‐18 Official release Updated electrical interfaces and launch D 2013‐03‐05 environments, reformatted, and added to sections Updated organization and formatting, E 2014‐04‐15 added content on SHERPA, Mini‐SHERPA and ISS launches, updated RPA CG F 2015‐05‐22 Overall update ii Spaceflight, Inc. SF‐2100‐PUG‐00001 Rev F 2015‐22‐15 Payload Users Guide Table of Contents 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Document Overview ........................................................................................................................ 7 1.2 Spaceflight Overview ....................................................................................................................... 7 1.3 Hardware Overview ......................................................................................................................... 9 1.4 Mission Management Overview .................................................................................................... 10 2 Secondary
    [Show full text]
  • Minotaur I User's Guide
    This page left intentionally blank. Minotaur I User’s Guide Revision Summary TM-14025, Rev. D REVISION SUMMARY VERSION DOCUMENT DATE CHANGE PAGE 1.0 TM-14025 Mar 2002 Initial Release All 2.0 TM-14025A Oct 2004 Changes throughout. Major updates include All · Performance plots · Environments · Payload accommodations · Added 61 inch fairing option 3.0 TM-14025B Mar 2014 Extensively Revised All 3.1 TM-14025C Sep 2015 Updated to current Orbital ATK naming. All 3.2 TM-14025D Sep 2018 Branding update to Northrop Grumman. All 3.3 TM-14025D Sep 2020 Branding update. All Updated contact information. Release 3.3 September 2020 i Minotaur I User’s Guide Revision Summary TM-14025, Rev. D This page left intentionally blank. Release 3.3 September 2020 ii Minotaur I User’s Guide Preface TM-14025, Rev. D PREFACE This Minotaur I User's Guide is intended to familiarize potential space launch vehicle users with the Mino- taur I launch system, its capabilities and its associated services. All data provided herein is for reference purposes only and should not be used for mission specific analyses. Detailed analyses will be performed based on the requirements and characteristics of each specific mission. The launch services described herein are available for US Government sponsored missions via the United States Air Force (USAF) Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC), Advanced Systems and Development Directorate (SMC/AD), Rocket Systems Launch Program (SMC/ADSL). For technical information and additional copies of this User’s Guide, contact: Northrop Grumman
    [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]
  • Aas 14-281 Suborbital Intercept And
    AAS 14-281 SUBORBITAL INTERCEPT AND FRAGMENTATION OF ASTEROIDS WITH VERY SHORT WARNING TIMES Ryan Hupp,∗ Spencer Dewald,∗ and Bong Wiey The threat of an asteroid impact with very short warning times (e.g., 1 to 24 hrs) is a very probable, real danger to civilization, yet no viable countermeasures cur- rently exist. The utilization of an upgraded ICBM to deliver a hypervelocity as- teroid intercept vehicle (HAIV) carrying a nuclear explosive device (NED) on a suborbital interception trajectory is studied in this paper. Specifically, this paper focuses on determining the trajectory for maximizing the altitude of intercept. A hypothetical asteroid impact scenario is used as an example for determining sim- plified trajectory models. Other issues are also examined, including launch vehicle options, launch site placement, late intercept, and some undesirable side effects. It is shown that silo-based ICBMs with modest burnout velocities can be utilized for a suborbital asteroid intercept mission with an NED explosion at reasonably higher altitudes (> 2,500 km). However, further studies will be required in the following key areas: i) NED sizing for properly fragmenting small (50 to 150 m) asteroids, ii) the side effects caused by an NED explosion at an altitude of 2,500 km or higher, iii) the rapid launch readiness of existing or upgraded ICBMs for a suborbital asteroid intercept with short warning times (e.g., 1 to 24 hrs), and iv) precision ascent guidance and terminal intercept guidance. It is emphasized that if an earlier alert (e.g., > 1 week) can be assured, then an interplanetary inter- cept/fragmentation may become feasible, which requires an interplanetary launch vehicle.
    [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]
  • Minotaur I Users Guide
    ORBITAL SCIENCES CORPORATION January 2006 Minotaur I User’s Guide Release 2.1 Approved for Public Release Distribution Unlimited Copyright 2006 by Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. Minotaur I User’s Guide Revision Summary REVISION SUMMARY VERSION DOCUMENT DATE CHANGE PAGE 1.0 TM-14025 Mar 2002 Initial Release All 2.0 TM-14025A Oct 2004 Changes thoughout. Major updates include All • Performance plots • Environments • Payload accommodations • Added 61 inch fairing option 2.1 TM-14025B Jan 2006 General nomenclature, history, and administrative updates All (no technical updates) • Changed “Minotaur” to “Minotaur I” • Updated launch history • Corrected contact information Release 1.1 January 2006 ii Minotaur I User’s Guide Preface This Minotaur I User's Guide is intended to familiarize potential space launch vehicle users with the Minotaur I launch system, its capabilities and its associated services. All data provided herein is for reference purposes only and should not be used for mission specific analyses. Detailed analyses will be performed based on the requirements and characteristics of each specific mission. The launch services described herein are available for US Government sponsored missions via the United States Air Force (USAF) Space and Missile Systems Center, Detachment 12, Rocket Systems Launch Program (RSLP). Readers desiring further information on Minotaur I should contact the USAF Program Office: USAF SMC Det 12/RP 3548 Aberdeen Ave SE Kirtland AFB, NM 87117-5778 Telephone: (505) 846-8957 Fax: (505) 846-5152 Additional copies of this User's Guide and Technical information may also be requested from Orbital at: Orbital Suborbital Program - Mission Development Orbital Sciences Corporation Launch Systems Group 3380 S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2017
    Federal Aviation Administration The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2017 January 2017 Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2017 i Contents 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 (2017) Publication produced for FAA AST by The Tauri Group under contract. 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. ii Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2017 GENERAL CONTENTS Executive Summary 1 Introduction 5 Launch Vehicles 9 Launch and Reentry Sites 21 Payloads 35 2016 Launch Events 39 2017 Annual Commercial Space Transportation Forecast 45 Space Transportation Law and Policy 83 Appendices 89 Orbital Launch Vehicle Fact Sheets 100 iii Contents DETAILED CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .
    [Show full text]
  • Eurospace Position Paper on Aggregation of European Institutional Launch Services
    Eurospace position paper on aggregation of European institutional launch services Preamble Space is a strategic and multifaceted tool in daily-life for European governments, businesses and citizens: indeed, space-based applications support major crisis management, economic growth, innovation, employment and information access, resulting in a significant benefit for people, growth, employment and innovation. In order to keep the European autonomous access to space, it is thus essential for Europe to maintain its global leadership throughout the entire value chain of the space sector. With 82 successful Ariane 5 flights in a row and 11 flawless Vega flights out of 11 attempts from the Guiana Space Center, the current ESA-developed European fleet of Launchers is characterized by an unprecedented, worldwide recognized reliability. Arianespace, the European Launch Service Provider, has got more than 40 years of experience and competence in this sector and can count on a highly competitive industrial base with skilled workforce and recognized high level of expertise and excellence. Nonetheless, the current worldwide scenario is being severely challenged by an aggressive competition and asymmetries in access to the market: in particular, the size of captive markets and pricing policies are different from one space power to the other, resulting in an unbearable competitive disadvantage for the European launcher industry. The aggregation of all European institutional launch services is needed in order to counter such distortions and move towards a level-playing field to the benefit of Europe developed launchers. The current scenario - Analysis of asymmetries Arianespace’s business model relies on a significant success in the commercial and foreign institutional launch market.
    [Show full text]