DOCSLIB.ORG

2013 Commercial Space Transportation Forecasts

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Federal Aviation Administration 2013 Commercial Space Transportation Forecasts May 2013 FAA Commercial Space Transportation (AST) and the Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee (COMSTAC) • i • 2013 Commercial Space Transportation Forecasts 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: The Orbital Sciences Corporation’s Antares rocket is seen as it launches from Pad-0A of the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport at the NASA Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia, Sunday, April 21, 2013. Image Credit: NASA/Bill Ingalls 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 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . 1 COMSTAC 2013 COMMERCIAL GEOSYNCHRONOUS ORBIT LAUNCH DEMAND FORECAST . 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . 5 HISTORY OF THE REPORT . 6 FORECAST METHODOLOGY . .7 COMSTAC COMMERCIAL GSO LAUNCH DEMAND FORECAST RESULTS . 9 Addressable vs. Unaddressable . 9 Mass Classes. 10 Dual-Manifesting. 12 Near-Term Demand Forecast. 14 Comparison with Previous COMSTAC Forecasts . 15 COMSTAC DEMAND PROJECTION VS. ACTUAL LAUNCHES REALIZED . 16 Factors That Affect Satellite Launch Realization . .16 Projecting Actual Satellites Launched Using a Realization Factor. 17 FACTORS THAT MAY AFFECT FUTURE DEMAND. 18 Market Segments. .20 Impact of Hosted Payloads on the Commercial Satellite Industry . 22 Launch Service Providers. 23 Cooperation and Partnerships. .25 Regulatory Environment. 26 Financial Markets. .27 Space Insurance. 29 SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS . 29 2013 COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION FORECAST FOR NON-GEOSYNCHRONOUS ORBITS . 32 INTRODUCTION . 32 Report Purpose and Methodology. 32 Commercial NGSO Launch Industry Sectors. 33 Report Summary. 35 NGSO Payload MARkET SEGMENTS . 39 Commercial Telecommunication Satellites. 39 Commercial Remote Sensing Satellites. 48 Commercial Cargo and Crew Transportation Services . 55 Other Commercially Launched Satellites . 62 Technology Test and Demonstration Launches. 66 Microsatellites . 67 Satellite AND LAUNCH FORECAST TRENDS . 70 RISk FACTORS That AFFECT Satellite AND LAUNCH DEMAND. 75 Financial Uncertainty . 76 Political Uncertainty . .76 Technical Uncertainty. 77 • ii • • iii • 2013 Commercial Space Transportation Forecasts APPENDIX 1: HISTORICAL GSO satellites AND LAUNCHES . .78 APPENDIX 2: HISTORICAL NGSO MARkET ASSESSMENTS. 86 APPENDIX 3: VEHICLE SIZES AND ORBITS. .90 APPENDIX 4: MASS CLASSES FOR GSO AND NGSO payloads. 90 APPENDIX 5: summary OF secondary NGSO payloads LAUNCHED commercially . 91 APPENDIX 6: ACRONYMS . 94 List of Tables Table 1. Commercial Space Transportation Payload and Launch Forecasts. .2 Table 2. Forecast Commercial GSO Satellite and Launch Demand . 6 Table 3. 2013 GSO Forecast Team. .6 Table 4. Addressable and Unaddressable Satellites Since 2004 . 9 Table 5. Satellite Mass Class Categorization . 10 Table 6. Total Satellite Mass Launched per Year and Average Mass per Satellite. 10 Table 7. Trends in Satellite Mass Class Distribution. .11 Table 8. Commercial GSO Satellite Near-Term Manifest. 14 Table 9. ITAR-free Satellites. 26 Table 10. Survey Questionnaire Summary . 31 Table 11. Near-Term NGSO Manifest of Identified Primary Payloads . 38 Table 12. Narrowband Systems . 40 Table 13. Wideband Systems. 41 Table 14. Broadband Systems . .41 Table 15. FCC Telecommunication Licenses . 42 Table 16. Commercial Telecommunications Satellite Systems’ Design Life. .47 Table 17. NOAA Remote Sensing Licenses. .49 Table 18. Commercial Remote Sensing Systems. .50 Table 19. NASA Commercial Crew and Cargo Awards . 58 Table 20. Small Satellite Mass Classes . 67 Table 21. Micro and Smaller Satellites Launch in 2003-2012. 67 Table 22. Payload and Launch Projections . 71 Table 23. Distribution of Payload Masses in Near-Term Manifest . 73 Table 24. Distribution of Launches among Market Segments. 74 Table 25. Historical Addressable Commercial GSO Satellites Launched. 78 Table 26. Historical Unaddressable Commercial GSO Satellites Launched . 85 Table 27. Historical Payloads and Launches . 87 Table 28. Historical NGSO Payload and Launch Activities. 87 Table 29. Mass Classes for GSO and NGSO Payloads . 90 Table 30. Secondary NGSO Payloads Launched Commercially . .91 • iii • Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation List of Figures Figure 1. Combined 2013 GSO and NGSO Historical Launches and Launch Forecasts. 1 Figure 2. 2013 GSO Historical Launches and Launch Forecast. 2 Figure 3. Projected NGSO Launches from 2013-2022. 3 Figure 4. Forecast Commercial GSO Satellite and Launch Demand. .5 Figure 5. Addressable and Unaddressable Satellites since 2004. .9 Figure 6. Total Satellite Mass Launched per Year and Average Mass per Satellite. .11 Figure 7. Trends in Satellite Mass Class Distribution . 12 Figure 8. Dual Manifesting and Launch Demand . 13 Figure 9. Comparison of Annual Forecasts: 2004-2013. 15 Figure 10. Realization Factor. 18 Figure 11. Distribution of Forecasted Launched by Payload Segment and Vehicle Size . 35 Figure 12. Commercial NGSO Launch History and Projected Launch Plans. 36 Figure 13. Commercial Telecommunications Launch History and Projected Launch Plans . 39 Figure 14. Publicly Reported Globalstar Annual Revenue. 43 Figure 15. Publicly Reported Iridium Annual Revenue . 44 Figure 16. Publicly Reported ORBCOMM Annual Revenue . 45 Figure 17. Commercial Remote Sensing Launch History and Projected Launch Plans . 48 Figure 18. Commercial Cargo and Crew Transportation Services Launch History and Projected Launch Plans . 55 Figure 19. Forecast of COTS, CRS. and Commercial Crew Missions. 56 Figure 20. Other Commercially Launched Satellites Launch History and Projected Launch Plans . 63 Figure 21. Technology Test and Demonstration Launch History and Projected Launch Plans . 66 Figure 22. Microsatellites and Nanosatellites Launched in 2003-2012. 68 Figure 23. Microsatellites and Nanosatellites Launched by Vehicle, 2003-2012. .68 Figure 24. Payload Projections. .70 Figure 25. Launch Projections. 71 Figure 26. Launch Vehicle Projections . .74 • iv • • 1 • 2013 Commercial Space Transportation Forecasts EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation (FAA AST) and the Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee (COMSTAC) have prepared forecasts of global demand for commercial space launch services for the 10-year period from 2013 through 2022. The 2013 Commercial Space Transportation Forecasts report is in two sections: • The COMSTAC 2013 Commercial Geosynchronous Orbit (GSO) Launch Demand Forecast, which projects demand for commercial satellites that operate in GSO and the resulting commercial launch demand to GSO; and • The FAA’s 2013 Commercial Space Transportation Forecast for Non- Geosynchronous Orbits (NGSO), which projects commercial launch demand for satellites to NGSO, such as low Earth orbit (LEO), medium Earth orbit (MEO), elliptical (ELI) orbits, and external (EXT) orbits beyond the Earth. Together, the COMSTAC and FAA forecasts project an average annual demand of 31.2 commercial space launches worldwide from 2013 through 2022, up from 29.1 launches in the 2012 forecasts. The reports project an average of 18.2 commercial GSO launches and 13.0 NGSO launches for 2013 through 2022. Figure 1 shows the combined 2013 GSO and NGSO Historical Launches and Launch Forecast. Table 1 shows the number of payloads and launches projected from 2013 through 2022. It is important to distinguish between forecast demand and the number of satellites actually launched. Launch vehicle and satellite programs are complex, and susceptible to delays, which generally makes the forecast demand for launches the upper limit of actual launches in the near-term forecast. Figure 1. Combined 2013 GSO and NGSO Historical Launches and Launch Forecasts 45! 40! 35! NGSO ! 30! Launch ! ! Actual! 25! 2013 NGSO Launch Forecast! 20! Launches 15! 10! GSO Launch Actual! 2013 GSO Launch Forecast! 5! 0! 1993! 1995! 1997! 1999! 2001! 2003! 2005! 2007! 2009! 2011! 2013! 2015! 2017! 2019! 2021! • 1 • Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation Table 1. Commercial Space Transportation Payload and Launch Forecasts 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Total Avg . Payloads GSO Forecast (COMSTAC) 20 23 28 22 21 22 22 23 23 24 228 22.8 NGSO Forecast (FAA) 74 32 41 45 44 23 20 20 19 19 337 33.7 Total Satellites 94 55 69 67 65 45 42 43 42 43 565 56 .5 Launches GSO Medium-to-Heavy 16 18 23 17 17 17 18 18 19 19 182 18.2 NGSO Medium-to-Heavy
Recommended publications
  • China's Touch on the Moon

    China's Touch on the Moon

    commentary China’s touch on the Moon Long Xiao As well as being a milestone in technology, the Chang’e lunar exploration programme establishes China as a contributor to space science. With much still to learn about the Moon, fieldwork beyond Earth’s orbit must be an international effort. hen China’s Chang’e 3 spacecraft geological history of the landing site. touched down on the lunar High-resolution images have shown rocky Wsurface on 14 December 2013, terrain with outcrops of porphyritic basalt, it was the first soft landing on the Moon such as Loong Rock (Fig. 2). Analysis since the Soviet Union’s Luna 24 mission of data collected by the penetrating in 1976. Following on from the decades- Chang’e 3 radar should lead to identification of the old triumphs of the Luna missions and underlying layers of regolith, impact breccia NASA’s Apollo programme, the Chang’e and basalt. lunar exploration programme is leading the China’s robotic field geologist Yutu has charge of a new generation of exploration Basalt outcrop Yutu rover stalled in its traverse of the lunar surface, on the lunar surface. Much like the earlier but plans for the Chang’e 5 sample-return space programmes, the China National mission are moving forward. The primary Space Administration (CNSA) has been objective of the mission will be to return developing its capabilities and technologies 100 m 2 kg of samples from the surface and depths step by step in a series of Chang’e missions UNIVERSITY STATE © NASA/GSFC/ARIZONA of up to 2 m, probably also in the relatively of increasing ambition: orbiting and Figure 1 | The Chinese Chang’e 3 spacecraft and smooth northern Mare Imbrium.
  • The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2013

    The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2013

    Federal Aviation Administration The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2013 February 2014 About FAA \ NOTICE ###i# £\£\ ###ii# Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION. 1 YEAR AT A GLANCE ..............................................2 COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION 2013 YEAR IN REVIEW ........5 7 ORBITAL LAUNCH VEHICLES .....................................21 3 SUBORBITAL REUSABLE VEHICLES ...............................47 33 ON-ORBIT VEHICLES AND PLATFORMS ............................57 LAUNCH SITES .................................................65 COMMERCIAL VENTURES BEYOND EARTH ORBIT ...................79 44 REGULATION AND POLICY .......................................83 3 5 3 53 3 8599: : : ;55: 9 < 5; < 2013 COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION FORECASTS ..........89 4 3 4 : ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ...............................186 2013 WORLDWIDE ORBITAL LAUNCH EVENTS .....................192 DEFINITIONS ..................................................196 ###iii# £\£\ LIST OF FIGURES COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION YEAR IN REVIEW = =999 =99 = =3> =:9;> LAUNCH SITES = :< 2013 COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION FORECASTS =944 =4 =?4;9 =99493 =3 =:5= =< =;=9 =95;@3 =A =;=9 A 3 =994?: =9999 ? =54 =359 =:5 3 =<999= ? =99=5 ?3 =;>>99: =99 ? 3 ==9 ? 3: =3 =>3 =?: =3?: =:? : ###iv# LIST OF TABLES COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION YEAR IN REVIEW 99 : 3< :9=99< <99 ORBITAL LAUNCH VEHICLES 99 99 59595 593 SUBORBITAL REUSABLE VEHICLES 3 :5933 ON-ORBIT VEHICLES
  • → Space for Europe European Space Agency

    → Space for Europe European Space Agency

    number 153 | February 2013 bulletin → space for europe European Space Agency The European Space Agency was formed out of, and took over the rights and The ESA headquarters are in Paris. obligations of, the two earlier European space organisations – the European Space Research Organisation (ESRO) and the European Launcher Development The major establishments of ESA are: Organisation (ELDO). The Member States are Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the ESTEC, Noordwijk, Netherlands. Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. Canada is a Cooperating State. ESOC, Darmstadt, Germany. In the words of its Convention: the purpose of the Agency shall be to provide for ESRIN, Frascati, Italy. and to promote, for exclusively peaceful purposes, cooperation among European States in space research and technology and their space applications, with a view ESAC, Madrid, Spain. to their being used for scientific purposes and for operational space applications systems: Chairman of the Council: D. Williams (to Dec 2012) → by elaborating and implementing a long-term European space policy, by recommending space objectives to the Member States, and by concerting the Director General: J.-J. Dordain policies of the Member States with respect to other national and international organisations and institutions; → by elaborating and implementing activities and programmes in the space field; → by coordinating the European space programme and national programmes, and by integrating the latter progressively and as completely as possible into the European space programme, in particular as regards the development of applications satellites; → by elaborating and implementing the industrial policy appropriate to its programme and by recommending a coherent industrial policy to the Member States.
  • Satellite Systems

    Satellite Systems

    Chapter 18 REST-OF-WORLD (ROW) SATELLITE SYSTEMS For the longest time, space exploration was an exclusive club comprised of only two members, the United States and the Former Soviet Union. That has now changed due to a number of factors, among the more dominant being economics, advanced and improved technologies and national imperatives. Today, the number of nations with space programs has risen to over 40 and will continue to grow as the costs of spacelift and technology continue to decrease. RUSSIAN SATELLITE SYSTEMS The satellite section of the Russian In the post-Soviet era, Russia contin- space program continues to be predomi- ues its efforts to improve both its military nantly government in character, with and commercial space capabilities. most satellites dedicated either to civil/ These enhancements encompass both military applications (such as communi- orbital assets and ground-based space cations and meteorology) or exclusive support facilities. Russia has done some military missions (such as reconnaissance restructuring of its operating principles and targeting). A large portion of the regarding space. While these efforts have Russian space program is kept running by attempted not to detract from space-based launch services, boosters and launch support to military missions, economic sites, paid for by foreign commercial issues and costs have lead to a lowering companies. of Russian space-based capabilities in The most obvious change in Russian both orbital assets and ground station space activity in recent years has been the capabilities. decrease in space launches and corre- The influence of Glasnost on Russia's sponding payloads. Many of these space programs has been significant, but launches are for foreign payloads, not public announcements regarding space Russian.
  • Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 103/Thursday, May 28, 2020

    Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 103/Thursday, May 28, 2020

    32256 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 103 / Thursday, May 28, 2020 / Proposed Rules FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS closes-headquarters-open-window-and- presentation of data or arguments COMMISSION changes-hand-delivery-policy. already reflected in the presenter’s 7. During the time the Commission’s written comments, memoranda, or other 47 CFR Part 1 building is closed to the general public filings in the proceeding, the presenter [MD Docket Nos. 19–105; MD Docket Nos. and until further notice, if more than may provide citations to such data or 20–105; FCC 20–64; FRS 16780] one docket or rulemaking number arguments in his or her prior comments, appears in the caption of a proceeding, memoranda, or other filings (specifying Assessment and Collection of paper filers need not submit two the relevant page and/or paragraph Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2020. additional copies for each additional numbers where such data or arguments docket or rulemaking number; an can be found) in lieu of summarizing AGENCY: Federal Communications original and one copy are sufficient. them in the memorandum. Documents Commission. For detailed instructions for shown or given to Commission staff ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. submitting comments and additional during ex parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal information on the rulemaking process, must be filed consistent with section Communications Commission see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 1.1206(b) of the Commission’s rules. In (Commission) seeks comment on several section of this document. proceedings governed by section 1.49(f) proposals that will impact FY 2020 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: of the Commission’s rules or for which regulatory fees.
  • High Altitude Nuclear Detonations (HAND) Against Low Earth Orbit Satellites ("HALEOS")

    High Altitude Nuclear Detonations (HAND) Against Low Earth Orbit Satellites ("HALEOS")

    High Altitude Nuclear Detonations (HAND) Against Low Earth Orbit Satellites ("HALEOS") DTRA Advanced Systems and Concepts Office April 2001 1 3/23/01 SPONSOR: Defense Threat Reduction Agency - Dr. Jay Davis, Director Advanced Systems and Concepts Office - Dr. Randall S. Murch, Director BACKGROUND: The Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) was founded in 1998 to integrate and focus the capabilities of the Department of Defense (DoD) that address the weapons of mass destruction (WMD) threat. To assist the Agency in its primary mission, the Advanced Systems and Concepts Office (ASCO) develops and maintains and evolving analytical vision of necessary and sufficient capabilities to protect United States and Allied forces and citizens from WMD attack. ASCO is also charged by DoD and by the U.S. Government generally to identify gaps in these capabilities and initiate programs to fill them. It also provides support to the Threat Reduction Advisory Committee (TRAC), and its Panels, with timely, high quality research. SUPERVISING PROJECT OFFICER: Dr. John Parmentola, Chief, Advanced Operations and Systems Division, ASCO, DTRA, (703)-767-5705. The publication of this document does not indicate endorsement by the Department of Defense, nor should the contents be construed as reflecting the official position of the sponsoring agency. 1 Study Participants • DTRA/AS • RAND – John Parmentola – Peter Wilson – Thomas Killion – Roger Molander – William Durch – David Mussington – Terry Heuring – Richard Mesic – James Bonomo • DTRA/TD – Lewis Cohn • Logicon RDA – Les Palkuti – Glenn Kweder – Thomas Kennedy – Rob Mahoney – Kenneth Schwartz – Al Costantine – Balram Prasad • Mission Research Corp. – William White 2 3/23/01 2 Focus of This Briefing • Vulnerability of commercial and government-owned, unclassified satellite constellations in low earth orbit (LEO) to the effects of a high-altitude nuclear explosion.
  • 1998 Year in Review

    1998 Year in Review

    Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation (AST) January 1999 COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION: 1998 YEAR IN REVIEW Cover Photo Credits (from left): International Launch Services (1998). Image is of the Atlas 2AS launch on June 18, 1998, from Cape Canaveral Air Station. It successfully orbited the Intelsat 805 communications satellite for Intelsat. Boeing Corporation (1998). Image is of the Delta 2 7920 launch on September 8, 1998, from Vandenberg Air Force Base. It successfully orbited five Iridium communications satellites for Iridium LLP. Lockheed Martin Corporation (1998). Image is of the Athena 2 awaiting its maiden launch on January 6, 1998, from Spaceport Florida. It successfully deployed the NASA Lunar Prospector. Orbital Sciences Corporation (1998). Image is of the Taurus 1 launch from Vandenberg Air Force Base on February 10, 1998. It successfully orbited the Geosat Follow-On 1 military remote sensing satellite for the Department of Defense, two Orbcomm satellites and the Celestis 2 funerary payload for Celestis Corporation. Orbital Sciences Corporation (1998). Image is of the Pegasus XL launch on December 5, 1998, from Vandenberg Air Force Base. It successfully orbited the Sub-millimeter Wave Astronomy Satellite for the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory. 1998 YEAR IN REVIEW INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION In 1998, U.S. launch service providers conducted In addition, 1998 saw continuing demand for 22 launches licensed by the Federal Aviation launches to deploy the world’s first low Earth Administration (FAA), an increase of 29 percent orbit (LEO) communication systems. In 1998, over the 17 launches conducted in 1997. Of there were 17 commercial launches to LEO, 14 these 22, 17 were for commercial or international of which were for the Iridium, Globalstar, and customers, resulting in a 47 percent share of the Orbcomm LEO communications constellations.
  • STS-108/ISS-UF1 Quick-Look Data Spaceflight Now

    STS-108/ISS-UF1 Quick-Look Data Spaceflight Now

    STS-108/ISS-UF1 Quick-Look Data Spaceflight Now Rank/Seats STS-108 ISS-UF1 Family/TIS DOB STS-108 Hardware and Flight Data Commander Navy Capt. Dominic L. Gorie M/2 05/02/57 STS Mission STS-108/ISS-UF1 Up 44; STS-91,99 25.8 * Orbiter Endeavour (17th flight) Pilot/IV Navy Lt. Cmdr. Mark Kelly M/2 02/21/64 Payload Crew transfer; ISS resupply Up 37; Rookie 4.75 Launch 05:19:28 PM 12.05.01 MS1/EV1 Linda Godwin, Ph.D. M/2 07/02/52 Pad/MLP 39B/MLP1 Up/Down-5 49; STS-37,59,76 31.15 Prime TAL Zaragoza MS2/EV2/FE Daniel Tani M/0 02/01/61 Landing 01:03:00 PM 12.17.01 Up 40; Rookie 4.75 Landing Site Kennedy Space Center Duration 11/19:44 ISS-4 Air Force Col. Carl Walz M/2 09/06/55 Down-5 46; STS-51,65,79 39.25 Endeavour 167/13:26:34 ISS-4 CIS AF Col. Yuri Onufrienko M/3 02/06/61 STS Program 943/13:26:34 Down-6 40; Mir-21 197.75 ISS-4 Navy Capt. Daniel Bursch M/4 07/25/57 MECO Ha/Hp 169 X 40 nm Down-7 44; STS-51,68,77 35.85 OMS Ha/Hp 175 X 105 nm ISS Ha/Hp 235 X 229 (varies) ISS-3 Frank Culbertson M/5 05/15/49 Period 91.6 minutes Down-6 52; STS-38, 51,ISS-3 136.89 Inclination 51.6 degrees ISS-3 Mikhail Tyurin M/1 03/02/60 Velocity 17,212 mph Down-7 40; ISS-3 122.59 EOM Miles 4,467,219 miles ISS-3 CIS Lt.
  • The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2012

    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.
  • Thermal Design, Analysis and Test Validation of Turksat-3Usat Satellite

    Thermal Design, Analysis and Test Validation of Turksat-3Usat Satellite

    Journal of Thermal Engineering, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 468-482, March, 2021 Yildiz Technical University Press, Istanbul, Turkey THERMAL DESIGN, ANALYSIS AND TEST VALIDATION OF TURKSAT-3USAT SATELLITE Murat Bulut1,*, Nedim Sözbir2 ABSTRACT When CubeSat projects are a useful means by which universities can engage their students in space-related activities. TURKSAT-3USAT is a three-unit amateur radio CubeSat jointly developed by the Space Systems Design and Test Laboratory and the Radio Frequency Electronics Laboratory of Istanbul Technical University (ITU), in collaboration with TURKSAT, A.S. company as well as the Turkish Amateur Technology Organization. It was launched on April 26, 2013 as a secondary payload on a CZ-2D rocket from China’s Jiuquan Space Center to an altitude of approximately 680 km. The mission of the satellite has two primary goals: (1) to voice communication at Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and (2) to educate students by providing hands-on experience. TURKSAT-3USAT was designed to sustain a circular, near sun-synchronous LEO, and has dimensions of 10 x 10 x 34 cm3. Within the course of this paper, TURKSAT-3USAT’s thermal control will be addressed. TURKSAT-3USAT’s thermal control model was developed using ThermXL and ESATAN-TMS software. Using this model, temperature distributions of the CubeSat when subjected to various experimental conditions of interest were computed. Using a thermal vacuum chamber (TVAC), thermal cycling and bake-out testing were carried out on the flight model to verify the thermal design performance and check the mathematical model. Based on thermal analysis results, the temperature of equipment was within the allowable temperature range except for the batteries that were between 42.56 oC and -20.31 oC.
  • 59864 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 185/Wednesday, September 23

    59864 Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 185/Wednesday, September 23

    59864 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 185 / Wednesday, September 23, 2020 / Rules and Regulations FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS C. Congressional Review Act II. Report and Order COMMISSION 2. The Commission has determined, A. Allocating FTEs 47 CFR Part 1 and the Administrator of the Office of 5. In the FY 2020 NPRM, the Information and Regulatory Affairs, Commission proposed that non-auctions [MD Docket No. 20–105; FCC 20–120; FRS Office of Management and Budget, funded FTEs will be classified as direct 17050] concurs that these rules are non-major only if in one of the four core bureaus, under the Congressional Review Act, 5 i.e., in the Wireline Competition Assessment and Collection of U.S.C. 804(2). The Commission will Bureau, the Wireless Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2020 send a copy of this Report & Order to Telecommunications Bureau, the Media Congress and the Government Bureau, or the International Bureau. The AGENCY: Federal Communications indirect FTEs are from the following Commission. Accountability Office pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). bureaus and offices: Enforcement ACTION: Final rule. Bureau, Consumer and Governmental 3. In this Report and Order, we adopt Affairs Bureau, Public Safety and SUMMARY: In this document, the a schedule to collect the $339,000,000 Homeland Security Bureau, Chairman Commission revises its Schedule of in congressionally required regulatory and Commissioners’ offices, Office of Regulatory Fees to recover an amount of fees for fiscal year (FY) 2020. The the Managing Director, Office of General $339,000,000 that Congress has required regulatory fees for all payors are due in Counsel, Office of the Inspector General, the Commission to collect for fiscal year September 2020.
  • A B 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

    A B 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

    A B 1 Name of Satellite, Alternate Names Country of Operator/Owner 2 AcrimSat (Active Cavity Radiometer Irradiance Monitor) USA 3 Afristar USA 4 Agila 2 (Mabuhay 1) Philippines 5 Akebono (EXOS-D) Japan 6 ALOS (Advanced Land Observing Satellite; Daichi) Japan 7 Alsat-1 Algeria 8 Amazonas Brazil 9 AMC-1 (Americom 1, GE-1) USA 10 AMC-10 (Americom-10, GE 10) USA 11 AMC-11 (Americom-11, GE 11) USA 12 AMC-12 (Americom 12, Worldsat 2) USA 13 AMC-15 (Americom-15) USA 14 AMC-16 (Americom-16) USA 15 AMC-18 (Americom 18) USA 16 AMC-2 (Americom 2, GE-2) USA 17 AMC-23 (Worldsat 3) USA 18 AMC-3 (Americom 3, GE-3) USA 19 AMC-4 (Americom-4, GE-4) USA 20 AMC-5 (Americom-5, GE-5) USA 21 AMC-6 (Americom-6, GE-6) USA 22 AMC-7 (Americom-7, GE-7) USA 23 AMC-8 (Americom-8, GE-8, Aurora 3) USA 24 AMC-9 (Americom 9) USA 25 Amos 1 Israel 26 Amos 2 Israel 27 Amsat-Echo (Oscar 51, AO-51) USA 28 Amsat-Oscar 7 (AO-7) USA 29 Anik F1 Canada 30 Anik F1R Canada 31 Anik F2 Canada 32 Apstar 1 China (PR) 33 Apstar 1A (Apstar 3) China (PR) 34 Apstar 2R (Telstar 10) China (PR) 35 Apstar 6 China (PR) C D 1 Operator/Owner Users 2 NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Government 3 WorldSpace Corp. Commercial 4 Mabuhay Philippines Satellite Corp. Commercial 5 Institute of Space and Aeronautical Science, University of Tokyo Civilian Research 6 Earth Observation Research and Application Center/JAXA Japan 7 Centre National des Techniques Spatiales (CNTS) Government 8 Hispamar (subsidiary of Hispasat - Spain) Commercial 9 SES Americom (SES Global) Commercial