DOCSLIB.ORG

UK Space Facilities Review 2017 16/10/17

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
UK Space Facilities Review 2017 16/10/17 Evaluation strategy valuation strategy August 2015 UK Space Facilities Review December 2017 Page 3 of 189 UK Space Facilities Review 2017 16/10/17 Table of Contents FOREWORD..................................................................................................................... 10 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 11 1.1 Scope ........................................................................................................................................ 11 1.2 Background ............................................................................................................................... 12 1.3 Reference Documents .............................................................................................................. 12 2 STUDY METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................ 13 2.1 Target Organisations ................................................................................................................ 14 2.2 Initial Survey Questions ............................................................................................................ 14 3 SURVEY .................................................................................................................... 16 3.1 ABSL / EnerSys, Culham ............................................................................................................ 17 3.1.1 ABSL / EnerSys Company Background 17 3.1.2 ABSL’s COTS Approach to Battery Design 17 3.1.3 ABSL Facilities 17 3.1.4 ABSL View on Facilities 18 3.2 Airborne Engineering Ltd, Westcott ......................................................................................... 18 3.2.1 AEL Company Background 19 3.2.2 AEL Propulsion Test Facilities 19 3.2.3 AEL View on Facilities 19 3.3 Airbus DS Portsmouth .............................................................................................................. 19 3.3.1 ADS-P Facilities Background 20 3.3.2 ADS-P Vibration Facilities 20 3.3.3 ADS-P Shock and Drop Test Facilities 21 3.3.4 ADS-P Clean Rooms 22 3.3.5 ADS-P Thermal Vacuum Facilities 22 3.3.6 ADS-P EMC Testing Facilities 23 3.3.7 ADS-P Space Electronics Manufacturing Facilities 24 3.3.8 ADS-P View on Facilities 25 3.4 Airbus DS Stevenage ................................................................................................................. 25 3.4.1 ADS-S Company Background 25 3.4.2 ADS-S Mass Properties and Structural Test Facilities 26 3.4.3 ADS-S Vibration Facilities 26 3.4.4 ADS-S Shock Test Facility 27 3.4.5 ADS-S Clean Rooms 28 3.4.6 ADS-S Thermal Vacuum Facilities 28 3.4.7 ADS-S RF Testing Facilities 29 3.4.8 ADS-S Propulsion Activities 30 3.4.9 ADS-S Thermal Design and Manufacturing Facility 30 3.4.10 ADS-S View on Facilities 31 3.5 Airbus Group Innovations, Newport and Bristol ...................................................................... 32 3.5.1 Airbus Group Innovations Background 32 3.5.2 Airbus Group Innovations Facilities 32 3.5.3 Airbus Group Innovations View on Facilities 32 3.6 AVS-UK, Harwell ....................................................................................................................... 33 3.6.1 AVS-UK Company Background 33 3.6.2 AVS-UK View on Facilities 33 3.7 3C Test Ltd, Silverstone ............................................................................................................ 34 3.7.1 3C Company Profile 34 3.7.2 3C Test EMC Facilities 34 3.7.3 3C Test View on Facilities 34 Page 4 of 189 UK Space Facilities Review 2017 16/10/17 3.8 Cardiff University ...................................................................................................................... 35 3.8.1 Cardiff University Background 35 3.8.2 Astronomy and Earth Observation Instrumentation Group (AIG) 35 3.8.3 AIG Facilities 36 3.8.4 Gas Turbine Research Centre (GTRC) 38 3.8.5 GTRC Facilities 39 3.8.6 Cardiff University View on Facilities 40 3.9 Clyde Space, Glasgow ............................................................................................................... 41 3.9.1 Clyde Space Company Background 41 3.9.2 Clyde Space In-house Facilities 42 3.9.3 Clyde Space View on Facilities 42 3.10 Cobham RAD Solutions, Harwell............................................................................................... 42 3.10.1 Cobham Company Background 43 3.10.2 Cobham Radiation Test Facilities 43 3.10.3 Cobham View on Facilities 44 3.11 COM DEV International (now part of Honeywell), Aylesbury and Edinburgh .......................... 45 3.11.1 COM DEV Company Background 45 3.11.2 COM DEV Satellite Products 45 3.11.3 COM DEV Vibration Facilities 46 3.11.4 COM DEV Thermal and Thermal Vacuum Test Facilities 46 3.11.5 COM DEV Clean Room Facilities 47 3.11.6 COM DEV RF Testing Facilities 48 3.11.7 COM DEV Space Electronics Manufacturing Facilities 49 3.11.8 COM DEV View on Facilities 50 3.12 Cranfield University, Cranfield and Shrivenham ...................................................................... 50 3.12.1 Cranfield University Background 51 3.12.2 Cranfield Space Research Centre 51 3.12.3 Cranfield SRC Facilities 52 3.12.4 Other Cranfield Facilities for Space Research 52 3.12.5 Shrivenham Campus – Propulsion Research 52 3.12.6 Cranfield View on Facilities 53 3.13 Cyth Systems, Didcot ................................................................................................................ 54 3.13.1 Cyth Company Background 54 3.13.2 Cyth Potential Pyro-Shock Facility 54 3.13.3 Cyth View on Facilities 54 3.14 Deimos UK, Harwell .................................................................................................................. 55 3.14.1 Deimos Company Background 55 3.14.2 Deimos View on Facilities 55 3.15 Element Materials Technology, Wimborne and Hull ............................................................... 56 3.15.1 Element Company Background 56 3.15.2 Element Vibration Facilities, Wimborne 56 3.15.3 Element Shock Testing Facilities, Wimborne 57 3.15.4 Element RF Testing Facilities, Hull 57 3.15.5 Element View on Facilities 57 3.16 ESR Technology, Warrington .................................................................................................... 57 3.16.1 ESR Technology Company Background 58 3.16.2 ESR Clean Room 58 3.16.3 ESR Thermal Vacuum Facilities 58 3.16.4 ESR Specialist Manufacturing Facilities 59 3.16.5 ESR View on Facilities 60 3.17 European Astrotech Ltd, Westcott ........................................................................................... 61 3.17.1 EAL Company Background 61 3.17.2 EAL Propulsion Activities and Facilities 61 Page 5 of 189 UK Space Facilities Review 2017 16/10/17 3.17.3 EAL View on Facilities 61 3.18 Falcon Project Ltd, Westcott .................................................................................................... 62 3.18.1 Falcon Project Company Background 62 3.18.2 Falcon Facilities 63 3.18.3 Falcon View on Facilities 63 3.19 Glyndŵr University St Asaph .................................................................................................... 63 3.19.1 Glyndŵr University Background 64 3.19.2 Glyndŵr University St Asaph 64 3.19.3 Glyndŵr University St Asaph Capabilities and Expertise 64 3.19.4 Other Capabilities 66 3.19.5 Glyndŵr University St Asaph Optical Fabrication and Verification Facilities 67 3.19.6 Glyndŵr University View on Facilities 68 3.20 Imperial College London ........................................................................................................... 69 3.20.1 Imperial College Background 69 3.20.2 Space Magnetometer Calibration Facility 69 3.20.3 Earth Observation and Characterisation Facility, EOCF 70 3.20.4 Imperial View on Facilities 70 3.21 International Space Propulsion (ISP), Marlborough ................................................................. 71 3.21.1 ISP Company Background 71 3.21.2 ISP Propulsion System Expertise 71 3.21.3 ISP View on Facilities 72 3.22 Intertek, Leatherhead ............................................................................................................... 73 3.22.1 Intertek Company Background 73 3.22.2 Intertek Leatherhead, EMC test facilities 73 3.22.3 Intertek Leatherhead Environmental Test Facilities 73 3.22.4 Intertek View on Facilities 73 3.23 ISVR’s Rayleigh Laboratories, Southampton ............................................................................ 74 3.23.1 ISVR Company Background 74 3.23.2 ISVR’s Rayleigh Laboratories 74 3.23.3 ISVR View on Facilities 75 3.24 Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co UK (LMSSC-UK), Harwell ................................................. 76 3.24.1 LMSSC-UK Company Background 76 3.24.2 LMSSC-UK Possible Expansion 76 3.24.3 LMSSC-UK View on Facilities 76 3.25 Magna Parva, Leicester ............................................................................................................ 77 3.25.1 Magna Parva Company Background 77 3.25.2 Magna Parva Manufacturing and Test Facilities 77 3.25.3 Magna Parva View on Facilities 77 3.26 Mars Space, Southampton ....................................................................................................... 78 3.26.1 Mars Space Company Background 78 3.26.2 Mars Space Propulsion Test Facilities 78 3.26.3 Mars Space View on Facilities 79 3.27 Moog UK, Westcott .................................................................................................................. 80 3.27.1
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The BRITE-Constellation Nanosatellite Space Mission and Its First Scientific Results
    EPJ Web of Conferences 160, 01001 (2017) DOI: 10.1051/epjconf/201716001001 Seismology of the Sun and the Distant Stars II The BRITE-Constellation Nanosatellite Space Mission And Its First Scientific Results G. Handler1,, A. Pigulski2, W. W. Weiss3, A.F.J.Moffat4, R. Kuschnig3,5, G. A. Wade6, P. Orleanski´ 7, S. M. Rucinski´ 8, O. Koudelka5, R. Smolec1, K. Zwintz9, J. M. Matthews10, A. Popowicz11, D. Baade12, C. Neiner13, A. A. Pamyatnykh1, J. Rowe14, and A. Schwarzenberg-Czerny1 1Nicolaus Copernicus Astronomical Center, Bartycka 18, 00-716 Warsaw, Poland 2Instytut Astronomiczny, Uniwersytet Wrocławski, ul. Kopernika 11, 51-622 Wrocław, Poland 3Institute for Astrophysics, Universität Wien, Türkenschanzstrasse 17, A-1180 Wien, Austria 4Départment de physique, Université de Montréal, C. P. 6128, Succ. Centre-Ville, Montréal, QC H3C 3J7, Canada 5Institut für Kommunikationsnetze und Satellitenkommunikation, Inffeldgasse 12/I, 8010 Graz, Austria 6Department of Physics, Royal Military College of Canada, PO Box 17000, Stn Forces, Kingston, ON K7K 7B4, Canada 7Centrum Badan´ Kosmicznych, Polska Akademia Nauk, Bartycka 18A, 00-716 Warszawa, Poland 8Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, University of Toronto, 50 St. George Street, Toronto, ON M5S 3H4, Canada 9Institut für Astro- und Teilchenphysik, Universität Innsbruck, Technikerstrasse 25/8, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria 10Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T1Z1, Canada 11Silesian University of Technology, Institute of Automatic Control, Gliwice, Akademicka 16, Poland 12European Organisation for Astronomical Research in the Southern Hemisphere, Karl-Schwarzschild-Str. 2, 85748 Garching b. München, Germany 13LESIA, Observatoire de Paris, PSL Research University, CNRS, Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ. Paris 06, Univ. Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, 5 place Jules Janssen, F-92195 Meudon, France 14Institut de recherche sur les exoplanétes, iREx, Département de physique, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, H3C 3J7, Canada Abstract.
    [Show full text]
  • Radiation Exposure and Mission Strategies for Interplanetary Manned Mission
    Radiation Exposure and Mission Strategies for Interplanetary Manned Mission Radiation Hazard and Space Weather Warning System WP 5000 Final Version: 14 December 2004 Compiled by Claire Foullon1, Andrew Holmes-Siedle2, Norma Bock Crosby1, Daniel Heynderickx1 1 Belgian Institute for Space Aeronomy Ringlaan-3-Avenue Circulaire 1180 Brussels, Belgium 2 REM OXFORD Ltd. 64A Acre End St. Eynsham, Oxford OX29 4PD, England INTRODUCTION Radiation protection is a prime issue for space station operations, for extended missions to planets in our solar system (e.g. Mars), or for a return visit to the Moon. The radiation environment encountered by solar system missions mainly consists of the following components: 1. Trapped radiation in the Earth’s Van Allen Belts and in the magnetosphere of Jupiter 2. Galactic Cosmic Ray (GCR) background radiation 3. Solar Energetic Particle Events – Solar Proton Events (SPEs) Along with the continuous GCR background, SPEs constitute the main hazard for interplanetary missions. Up to now, prediction of SPE events is not possible. Future interplanetary manned missions will need to consider solar activity (e.g. solar flares, coronal mass ejections, …) very carefully due to the obvious detrimental effects of radiation on humans. Very high doses during the transit phase of a mission can result in radiation sickness or even death. This is equally true for extended visits to surfaces of other planets (for example to Mars) and moons lacking a strong magnetic field capable of deflecting solar particles. The risk of developing cancer several years after a mission is somewhat more difficult to quantify, but must also be considered in mission planning.
    [Show full text]
  • 18Th EANA Conference European Astrobiology Network Association
    18th EANA Conference European Astrobiology Network Association Abstract book 24-28 September 2018 Freie Universität Berlin, Germany Sponsors: Detectability of biosignatures in martian sedimentary systems A. H. Stevens1, A. McDonald2, and C. S. Cockell1 (1) UK Centre for Astrobiology, University of Edinburgh, UK ([email protected]) (2) Bioimaging Facility, School of Engineering, University of Edinburgh, UK Presentation: Tuesday 12:45-13:00 Session: Traces of life, biosignatures, life detection Abstract: Some of the most promising potential sampling sites for astrobiology are the numerous sedimentary areas on Mars such as those explored by MSL. As sedimentary systems have a high relative likelihood to have been habitable in the past and are known on Earth to preserve biosignatures well, the remains of martian sedimentary systems are an attractive target for exploration, for example by sample return caching rovers [1]. To learn how best to look for evidence of life in these environments, we must carefully understand their context. While recent measurements have raised the upper limit for organic carbon measured in martian sediments [2], our exploration to date shows no evidence for a terrestrial-like biosphere on Mars. We used an analogue of a martian mudstone (Y-Mars[3]) to investigate how best to look for biosignatures in martian sedimentary environments. The mudstone was inoculated with a relevant microbial community and cultured over several months under martian conditions to select for the most Mars-relevant microbes. We sequenced the microbial community over a number of transfers to try and understand what types microbes might be expected to exist in these environments and assess whether they might leave behind any specific biosignatures.
    [Show full text]
  • 6 FOTON RETRIEVABLE CAPSULES This Section Is Aimed at Providing New and Experienced Users with Basic Utilisation Information Regarding Foton Retrievable Capsules
    6 FOTON RETRIEVABLE CAPSULES This section is aimed at providing new and experienced users with basic utilisation information regarding Foton retrievable capsules. It begins with an introduction to the Foton capsule. 6.1 Introduction to Foton Capsules 6.1.1 What Are Foton Capsules? Foton capsules (Figure 6-1 and Figure 6-2) are unmanned, retrievable capsules, derived from the design of the 1960’s Soviet Vostok manned spacecraft and the Zenit military reconnaissance satellite. These capsules are very similar to the Bion and Resurs-F satellites introduced by the Soviets in the 1970’s, for biological research and Earth natural resources investigation, respectively. The first Foton capsule was launched in 1985 as Cosmos 1645 and only with the fourth launch in 1988 was the spacecraft officially designated Foton (Foton-4). These capsules are launched into near-circular, low-earth orbits by a Soyuz-U rocket, providing researchers with gravity levels less than 10 -5 g, for missions lasting approximately 2 weeks. The earlier Foton missions were conceived primarily for materials science research, but later missions also began to include experiments in the fields of fluid physics, biology and radiation dosimetry. ESA’s participation in the Foton programme began in 1991 with a protein crystallisation experiment on-board Foton-7, followed by a further 35 experiments up to and including the Foton- 12 mission in 1999. In 2002, ESA provided a large number of experiments for the Foton-M1 mission (the first flight of an upgraded version of the Foton spacecraft). This mission ended in disaster when the Soyuz launcher rocket exploded shortly after lift-off due to a malfunction in one of its engines.
    [Show full text]
  • The Space Exposure Platforms BIOPAN and EXPOSE to Study
    The space exposure platforms BIOPAN and EXPOSE to study living organisms in space Wolfgang Schulte (1), Pietro Baglioni (2), René Demets (2), Ralf von Heise-Rotenburg (1), Petra Rettberg (3) (1) Kayser-Threde GmbH, Wolfratshauser Str. 48, 81379 Munich, Germany, [email protected], Phone: +49-89-72495-225, Fax: +49-89-72495-215; [email protected], Phone: +49-89-72495-341, Fax: +49-89-72495-215 (2) European Space Agency ESA/ESTEC, Keplerlaan 1, 2201 AZ Noordwijk, The Netherlands, [email protected], Phone + 31-71-565-3856, Fax +31-71-565-3141; [email protected], Phone +31-71-565-5081, Fax +31-71-565-3141 (3) German Aerospace Center (DLR e.V.), Institute of Aerospace Medicine, Linder Höhe, 51147 Köln, Germany, [email protected], Phone +49-2203-601-4637, Fax +49-2203-61970 BIOPAN and EXPOSE are two European space exposure platforms, developed for the European Space Agency by Kayser-Threde GmbH, Munich/Germany to offer flight opportunities to the science community of exo/astrobiology research in low earth orbit. Both platforms are conceived for the research on the behaviour of living organisms in the environment of space and on simulated conditions of other planets (Mars). The conditions for a possible transfer of life between planets can be studied. Both facilities can also be used for materials and components validation and as test bed for advanced technologies envisaged for future exploration missions (radio-protection, miniaturized devices, electronic components). Since 1992 BIOPAN has flown five times aboard the Russian FOTON re-entry cap- sule.
    [Show full text]
  • DRAGON - 8U Nanosatellite Orbital Deployer
    DRAGON - 8U Nanosatellite Orbital Deployer Marcin Dobrowolski*, Jerzy Grygorczuk*Â ÃB_*, Marta Tokarz* and Maciej Borys* Abstract The Space Research Centre of the Polish Academy of Sciences (SRC PAS) together with Astronika company have developed an Orbital Deployer called DRAGON for ejection of the Polish scientific nanosatellite BRITE-PL Heweliusz (Fig. 1). The device has three unique mechanisms including an adopted and scaled lock and release mechanism from the ESA Rosetta mission MUPUS instrument. This paper discusses major design restrictions of the deployer, unique design features, and lessons learned from development through testing. Introduction BRITE Constellation is a group of scientific nanosatellites whose purpose is to study oscillations in the light intensity of the most luminous stars (brighter than magnitude +3.5) in our galaxy. The observations will have a precision at least 10 times better than achievable using ground-based observations. The BRITE (BRight Target Explorer) mission formed by Austria, Canada and Poland will send to space a constellation of six nanosatelites, two from each country. BRITE-PL satellite is based on the Generic Nanosatellite Bus (GNB) from the Canadian SFL/UTIAS (Space Flight Laboratory / University of Toronto, Institute for Aerospace Studies). The spacecraft are to use the SFL XPOD (Experimental Push Out Deployer) as a separation system. Figure 1. DRAGON Orbital Deployer and BRITE-PL Heweliusz Spacecraft (in a safety box) * Space Research Centre of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland ! " # 487 The first scientific satellite, BRITE-PL Lem, is a modified version of the original SFL design. The second one, BRITE-PL Heweliusz, has the significant changes – it carries additional technological experiments implemented by SRC PAS.
    [Show full text]
  • Abstract Booklet
    ESA SCI Science Workshop #13 1–3 December 2020 Virtual Meeting Abstracts Organising Committee: Guillaume Bélanger, Georgina Graham, Oliver Hall, Michael Küppers, Erik Kuulkers, Olivier Witasse. SSW#13 PROGRAMME (all times are in CET) 1 DEC 2020 PART 1 Moderator: Oliver Hall 14:30-14:40 - Welcome - Markus Kissler-Patig [10] 14:40-15:00 - Introduction of new RFs & YGTs (Pre-recorded) [20] 15:00-15:30 - Invited talk: Solar Orbiter - Daniel Mueller [20+10] 15:30-15:45 - A CME whodunit in preparation for Solar Orbiter - Alexander James et al. [10+5] 15:45-16:00 - Poster viewing/discussion in Gathertown [15] 16:00-16:30 - break PART 2 Moderator: Georgina Graham 16:30-17:00 - Intro new H/DIV SCI-SC and presentation of SCI-ence budget - Gaitee Hussain [20+10] 17:00-17:15 - Searching for signs of life with the ExoMars Rover: why the mission is how it is - Jorge Vago & Elliot Sefton-Nash [10+5] 17:15-17:30 - Posters summary/advertisement talk - Solar System - Matt Taylor & Anik de Groof [15] 17:30-17:45 - Posters summary/advertisement talk - Astronomy/Fundamental Physics - Peter Kretschmar & Oliver Jennrich [15] 17:45-18:00 - Accreting black holes seen through XMM-Newton - Andrew Lobban et al. [10+5] 2 DEC 2020 PART 1 Moderator: Tereza Jerabkova 14:30-15:00 - Invited talk: BepiColombo: comprehensive exploration of Mercury - Johannes Benkhoff [20+10] 15:00-15:15 - ESA communications and PR, interactive session - Kai Noeske [15] 15:15-15:30 - Segmentation of coronal features to understand the Solar EIV and UV irradiance variability - Joe Zender [10+5] 15:30-15:45 - Spectrophotometry to study icy surfaces - Anezina Solomonidou et al.
    [Show full text]
  • BRITE – One Year in Orbit
    BRITE – One Year in Orbit O. Koudelka, M.Unterberger, P.Romano Graz University of Technology W.Weiss, R.Kuschnig University of Vienna Professor Horst Cerjak, 19.12.2005 BRITE 2014 1 Contents • Scientific Goals • Mission Description • Commissioning • Science Data Collection • Summary Professor Horst Cerjak, 19.12.2005 BRITE 2014 2 BRITE (BRIght Target Explorer) • Nanosatellite constellation • 6 spacecraft • Austria (BRITE-Austria/TUGSAT-1 & UniBRITE) • Poland (BRITE-PL1 „Lem“ & BRITE-PL2 „Heweliusz“) • Canada (BRITE-CAN1 „Toronto“ & BRITE-CAN2 „Montreal“) • Dedicated to a challenging astereoseismological mission Professor Horst Cerjak, 19.12.2005 BRITE 2014 3 Scientific Goals • Photometric measurement of brightness and temperature variations of massive luminous stars (magnitude +4) • 2 spectral ranges (blue and red) • Time series collection per target: >100 days • Mission duration: at least 2 years Professor Horst Cerjak, 19.12.2005 BRITE 2014 4 BRITE Targets • Bright, massive stars • eject enriched gasses into interstellar medium (ISM) • heavy elements critical for formation of future stars, terrestrial planets, organics • Hot luminous hydrogen-burning stars (O to F stars) • Cool luminous stars: Asymptotic Giant Branch (AGB) stars, cool giants and cool supergiants • Search for pulsations • structure • ages Professor Horst Cerjak, 19.12.2005 BRITE 2014 5 Target Selection • BRITE Executive Science Team (BEST) • Scientists from Austria, Canada, Poland • BEST defines targets • Commands for spacecraft prepared and uploaded by the operations
    [Show full text]
  • Organics Exposure in Orbit (Oreocube): a Next-Generation Space Exposure Platform Andreas Elsaesser,*,† Richard C
    ¡ ¢ £ ¤ ¥ ¦ § ¤ ¡ Article pubs.acs.org/Langmuir Organics Exposure in Orbit (OREOcube): A Next-Generation Space Exposure Platform Andreas Elsaesser,*,† Richard C. Quinn, *,‡ Pascale Ehrenfreund, † Andrew L. Mattioda, § Antonio J. Ricco, *,§ Jason Alonzo,‡,∥ Alex Breitenbach, ‡,⊥ Yee Kim Chan, ‡,⊥ Aurelien Fresneau, † Farid Salama,§ and Orlando Santos§ †Leiden Institute of Chemistry, Leiden University, Leiden 2333CC, The Netherlands ‡Carl Sagan Center, SETI Institute, NASA Ames Research Center, Mo ffett Field, California 94035, United States §NASA Ames Research Center, Mo ffett Field, California 94035, United States ∥Department of Physics and Astronomy, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, California 91768, United States ⊥San Jose State University, San Jose, California 95112, United States ' © ABSTRACT: The OREOcube (ORganics Exposure in Orbit / & cube) experiment on the International Space Station (ISS) will investigate the effects of solar and cosmic radiation on organic %# fi % % thin lms supported on inorganic substrates. Probing the $ # − " kinetics of structural changes and photomodulated organic ! inorganic interactions with real-time in situ UV −visible $ ) spectroscopy, this experiment will investigate the role played © ! by solid mineral surfaces in the (photo)chemical evolution, . transport, and distribution of organics in our solar system and beyond. In preparation for the OREOcube ISS experiment, we report here laboratory measurements of the photostability of © fi fi - thin lms of the 9,10-anthraquinone derivative anthraru n (51 $ , fi nm thick) layered upon ultrathin lms of iron oxides magnetite + and hematite (4 nm thick), as well as supported directly on fused silica. During irradiation with UV and visible light simulating * the photon flux and spectral distribution on the surface of Mars, anthraru fin/iron oxide bilayer thin films were exposed to CO 2 ¨ (800 Pa), the main constituent (and pressure) of the martian atmosphere.
    [Show full text]
  • Financial Operational Losses in Space Launch
    UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA GRADUATE COLLEGE FINANCIAL OPERATIONAL LOSSES IN SPACE LAUNCH A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY By TOM ROBERT BOONE, IV Norman, Oklahoma 2017 FINANCIAL OPERATIONAL LOSSES IN SPACE LAUNCH A DISSERTATION APPROVED FOR THE SCHOOL OF AEROSPACE AND MECHANICAL ENGINEERING BY Dr. David Miller, Chair Dr. Alfred Striz Dr. Peter Attar Dr. Zahed Siddique Dr. Mukremin Kilic c Copyright by TOM ROBERT BOONE, IV 2017 All rights reserved. \For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it?" Luke 14:28, KJV Contents 1 Introduction1 1.1 Overview of Operational Losses...................2 1.2 Structure of Dissertation.......................4 2 Literature Review9 3 Payload Trends 17 4 Launch Vehicle Trends 28 5 Capability of Launch Vehicles 40 6 Wastage of Launch Vehicle Capacity 49 7 Optimal Usage of Launch Vehicles 59 8 Optimal Arrangement of Payloads 75 9 Risk of Multiple Payload Launches 95 10 Conclusions 101 10.1 Review of Dissertation........................ 101 10.2 Future Work.............................. 106 Bibliography 108 A Payload Database 114 B Launch Vehicle Database 157 iv List of Figures 3.1 Payloads By Orbit, 2000-2013.................... 20 3.2 Payload Mass By Orbit, 2000-2013................. 21 3.3 Number of Payloads of Mass, 2000-2013.............. 21 3.4 Total Mass of Payloads in kg by Individual Mass, 2000-2013... 22 3.5 Number of LEO Payloads of Mass, 2000-2013........... 22 3.6 Number of GEO Payloads of Mass, 2000-2013..........
    [Show full text]
  • Changes to the Database for May 1, 2021 Release This Version of the Database Includes Launches Through April 30, 2021
    Changes to the Database for May 1, 2021 Release This version of the Database includes launches through April 30, 2021. There are currently 4,084 active satellites in the database. The changes to this version of the database include: • The addition of 836 satellites • The deletion of 124 satellites • The addition of and corrections to some satellite data Satellites Deleted from Database for May 1, 2021 Release Quetzal-1 – 1998-057RK ChubuSat 1 – 2014-070C Lacrosse/Onyx 3 (USA 133) – 1997-064A TSUBAME – 2014-070E Diwata-1 – 1998-067HT GRIFEX – 2015-003D HaloSat – 1998-067NX Tianwang 1C – 2015-051B UiTMSAT-1 – 1998-067PD Fox-1A – 2015-058D Maya-1 -- 1998-067PE ChubuSat 2 – 2016-012B Tanyusha No. 3 – 1998-067PJ ChubuSat 3 – 2016-012C Tanyusha No. 4 – 1998-067PK AIST-2D – 2016-026B Catsat-2 -- 1998-067PV ÑuSat-1 – 2016-033B Delphini – 1998-067PW ÑuSat-2 – 2016-033C Catsat-1 – 1998-067PZ Dove 2p-6 – 2016-040H IOD-1 GEMS – 1998-067QK Dove 2p-10 – 2016-040P SWIATOWID – 1998-067QM Dove 2p-12 – 2016-040R NARSSCUBE-1 – 1998-067QX Beesat-4 – 2016-040W TechEdSat-10 – 1998-067RQ Dove 3p-51 – 2017-008E Radsat-U – 1998-067RF Dove 3p-79 – 2017-008AN ABS-7 – 1999-046A Dove 3p-86 – 2017-008AP Nimiq-2 – 2002-062A Dove 3p-35 – 2017-008AT DirecTV-7S – 2004-016A Dove 3p-68 – 2017-008BH Apstar-6 – 2005-012A Dove 3p-14 – 2017-008BS Sinah-1 – 2005-043D Dove 3p-20 – 2017-008C MTSAT-2 – 2006-004A Dove 3p-77 – 2017-008CF INSAT-4CR – 2007-037A Dove 3p-47 – 2017-008CN Yubileiny – 2008-025A Dove 3p-81 – 2017-008CZ AIST-2 – 2013-015D Dove 3p-87 – 2017-008DA Yaogan-18
    [Show full text]
  • Astrochemistry on the EXPOSE/ISS and BIOPAN/Foton Experiments
    Highlights of Astronomy, Volume 15 XXVIIth IAU General Assembly, August 2009 c International Astronomical Union 2010 Ian F. Corbett, ed. doi:10.1017/S174392131001094X Astrochemistry on the EXPOSE/ISS and BIOPAN/Foton experiments H. Cottin1,Y.Y.Guan1, P. Coll1,D.Coscia1,N.Fray1,F.Macari1, F. Stalport1,F.Raulin1,C.Szopa2, D. Chaput3,M.Viso4, M. Bertrand5, A. Chabin5,F.Westall5 and A. Brack5 1 LISA (Univ. Paris 7 & Paris 12, CNRS), av. du Gal de Gaulle, 94010 Cr´eteil Cedex, France email: [email protected] 2 LATMOS-IPSL (UPMC, UVSQ, CNRS), 4 place Jussieu, 75005 Paris Cedex, France 3 CNES, Centre Spatial de Toulouse, 18 avenue Edouard Belin, 31401 Toulouse Cedex 9, France 4 CNES, 2 place Maurice Quentin, 75039 Paris Cedex 01, France 5 CBM (CNRS), rue Charles-Sadron, 45071 Orl´eans Cedex 2, France Abstract. We describe three space experiments designed to expose to space conditions, and more specifically to solar UV radiation, selected samples of organic and mineral material. Solar UV radiation is a major source of energy for initiating chemical evolution towards complex organic structures but it can also photodissociate the most elaborate molecules. Thus, Solar UV can erase the organic traces of past life on the surface of planets, such as Mars (Oro & Holzer 1979), destroy organic molecules present on meteorites, Barbier et al. 1998, influence the production of distributed sources in comets (Cottin et al. 2004) or initiate chemistry in Titan’s atmosphere (Sagan & Thompson 1984). In the interstellar medium, the UV radiation field emitted by stars in the galaxy is also responsible for the chemical evolution and the extraordinary diversity of detected organic molecules.
    [Show full text]