DOCSLIB.ORG

Disrupting Launch Systems

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Disrupting Launch Systems DISRUPTING LAUNCH SYSTEMS THE RISE OF SPACEX AND EUROPEAN ACCESS TO SPACE Thesis submitted to the International Space University in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the M. Sc. Degree in Space Studies August 2017 Thesis author: Paul Wohrer Thesis supervisor: Prof. Jean-Jacques Favier International Space University 1 Abstract The rise of SpaceX as a major launch provider has been the most surprising evolution of the launch sector during the past decade. It forced incumbent industrial actors to adapt their business model to face this new competitor. European actors are particularly threatened today, since European Autonomous Access to Space highly depends on the competitive edge of the Ariane launcher family. This study argues that the framework of analysis which best describes the events leading to the current situation is the theory of disruptive innovation. The study uses this framework to analyse the reusability technology promoted by new actors of the launch industry. The study argues that, while concurring with most analysis that the price advantage of reused launchers remains questionable, the most important advantage of this technology is the convenience it could confer to launch systems customers. The study offers two recommendations to European actors willing to maintain European Autonomous Access to Space. The first one aims at allocating resources toward a commercial exploitation of the Vega small launch system, to disrupt the growing market of small satellites and strengthen ties with Italian partners in the launcher program. The second aims at increasing the perception of European launchers as strategic assets, to avoid their commoditization. The recommendation entails developing an autonomous European capacity to launch astronauts into space, which could strengthen the ties between France and Germany as well as lead to a rationalization of the geo-return principle. This capability would use Ariane launchers and provide European actors with a powerful diplomatic tool. Paul Wohrer ii MSS-Year B Thesis 2017 International Space University 2 Acknowledgements This work would not have existed without the outstanding support of my project supervisor Jean-Jacques Favier. I deeply thank him for his patience, dedication and for giving me the opportunity of shaping my curiosity into a structured project. Furthermore, he believed in my capacity to tackle this exciting topic and provided the material conditions to initiate it. I extend him my deepest gratitude. John Logsdon, professor emeritus, generously welcomed me at the Space Policy Institute during my trip to the United States, and opened the doors of the most interesting space executives to me. He also allowed me to witness SpaceX’s CRS 10 launch from Cape Canaveral, which was one of the most intense and exciting moments of my life. For the opportunities he provided me, for his invaluable experience and wisdom in all space-related matters, I extend him my deepest and most sincere gratitude. I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Xavier Pasco, director of the Foundation for Strategic Research, who offered me the opportunity to achieve my thesis in fantastic conditions, and allowed me to expand my knowledge and perception of space challenges. Many of the challenges faced during the writing of this work are due to the own limitations of its author. His biggest assets were by far the benevolence and patience of his interlocutors, who accepted to be interviewed for this thesis. These exceptional individuals helped shaping the somewhat naïve and idealistic perception of the issues in space launch into a more pertinent understanding of the actual forces at play. I therefore wish to deeply thank all of them: • David Quancard, Chief Operating Officer at Arianegroup • Christophe Bonnal, Senior Expert at CNES • Alain Dupas, Physicist • Olivier Becu, Program Manager at ESA • Johann Dietrich Woerner, General Director of ESA • Louis Laurent, Senior Vice President- Advisor to the CEO for Strategic Affairs, Arianespace • John Logsdon, Founder, Professor Emeritus of Political Science and International Affairs at the Space Policy Institute • Jean-Jacques Tortora, Director of the European Space Policy Institute • Clay Mowry, Vice President – Sales, Marketing and Customer Experience, Blue Origin • Phil Mc Alister, Special Assistant for Program Analysis at NASA • Lori Garver, General Manager at Air Line Pilots Association and former Deputy Administrator of NASA • Marc Timm, program executive at NASA • Scott Pace, Director of the Space Policy Institute and executive secretary of the National Space Council • William R. Claybaugh, Business Management Consultant • Wiener Kernisan, President of Arianespace, Inc. • Ken Lee, Senior Vice President of Space Systems at Intelsat Paul Wohrer iii MSS-Year B Thesis 2017 International Space University • Léonard Pineau, Cost Estimation and Project Control Engineer at CNES • Jérôme Vila, Assistant Director Research and Future Programs, Space Launchers at CNES • Victor Nikolaev, CEO of Starsem • Pascale Ehrenfreund, Chair of the DLR Executive Board and Research Professor at the Space Policy Institute • Pascal Bultel, Reusable Launchers M.R.O, Arianegroup • Thilo Kranz, Program Executive at ESA • An executive from SpaceX who requested anonymity • An executive from United Launch Alliance who requested anonymity • An executive from ESA who requested anonymity I wish to finally extend my gratitude to the members of my family who immensely contributed to the achievement of this thesis: Dominique Wohrer and José Alberro, who kindly housed my during my stay in Washington DC, and Laurent Samuel who inspired me to read about disruptive innovation. Paul Wohrer iv MSS-Year B Thesis 2017 International Space University 3 Table of contents 1 Abstract ...................................................................................................................... ii 2 Acknowledgements ................................................................................................... iii 4 List of Acronyms ....................................................................................................... vii 5 List of tables ............................................................................................................ viii 6 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1 7 Motivation .................................................................................................................. 2 8 Methodology .............................................................................................................. 2 8.1 Interviews of Space Executives ........................................................................................ 2 8.2 Review of related work ................................................................................................... 3 8.3 Challenges ...................................................................................................................... 3 9 Structure of the thesis ................................................................................................ 4 10 The emergence of a threat ...................................................................................... 4 10.1 The 1980s, the rise of Ariane and the Shuttle .................................................................. 4 10.2 The 1990s, Ariane 4, EELV and international joint ventures ............................................. 6 10.3 The 2000s, Ariane 5 and American step-down ................................................................. 8 10.4 Space X and New Space ................................................................................................. 10 10.4.1 Elon Musk and Space X ................................................................................................ 10 10.4.2 Space X ........................................................................................................................ 10 10.4.3 Falcon 1 ....................................................................................................................... 11 10.4.4 Falcon 9 ....................................................................................................................... 11 10.5 The European reaction .................................................................................................. 12 11 What is a launch system? ...................................................................................... 14 11.1 Nation-states and supranational entities ...................................................................... 14 11.1.1 United States ............................................................................................................... 14 11.1.2 France .......................................................................................................................... 15 11.1.3 Germany ...................................................................................................................... 15 11.1.4 Italy .............................................................................................................................. 16 11.1.5 European Union .......................................................................................................... 17 11.2 Space agencies .............................................................................................................. 17 11.2.1 NASA ...........................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Validation of Wind Tunnel Test and Cfd Techniques for Retro-Propulsion (Retpro): Overview on a Project Within the Future Launchers Preparatory Programme (Flpp)
    VALIDATION OF WIND TUNNEL TEST AND CFD TECHNIQUES FOR RETRO-PROPULSION (RETPRO): OVERVIEW ON A PROJECT WITHIN THE FUTURE LAUNCHERS PREPARATORY PROGRAMME (FLPP) D. Kirchheck, A. Marwege, J. Klevanski, J. Riehmer, A. Gulhan¨ German Aerospace Center (DLR) Supersonic and Hypersonic Technologies Department Cologne, Germany S. Karl O. Gloth German Aerospace Center (DLR) enGits GmbH Spacecraft Department Todtnau, Germany Gottingen,¨ Germany ABSTRACT and landing (VTVL) spacecraft, assisted by retro-propulsion. Up to now, in Europe, knowledge and expertise in that field, The RETPRO project is a 2-years activity, led by the Ger- though constantly growing, is still limited. Systematic stud- man Aerospace Center (DLR) in the frame of ESA’s Future ies were conducted to compare concepts for possible future Launchers Preparatory Program (FLPP), to close the gap of European launchers [2, 3], and activities on detailed inves- knowledge on aerodynamics and aero-thermodynamics of tigations of system components of VTVL re-usable launch retro-propulsion assisted landings for future concepts in Eu- vehicles (RLV) recently started in the RETALT project [4, 5]. rope. The paper gives an overview on the goals, strategy, and Nevertheless, validated knowledge on the aerodynamic current status of the project, aiming for the validation of inno- and aerothermal characteristics of such vehicles is still lim- vative WTT and CFD tools for retro-propulsion applications. ited to a small amount of experimental and numerical inves- Index Terms— RETPRO, retro-propulsion, launcher tigations mostly on lower altitude VTVL trajectories, e. g. aero-thermodynamics, wind tunnel testing, CFD validation within the CALLISTO project [6, 7, 8]. Other studies were conducted to analyze the aerothermodynamics of a simplified generic Falcon 9 geometry during its re-entry and landing 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Call for M5 Missions
    ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use M5 Call - Technical Annex Prepared by SCI-F Reference ESA-SCI-F-ESTEC-TN-2016-002 Issue 1 Revision 0 Date of Issue 25/04/2016 Status Issued Document Type Distribution ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use Table of contents: 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Scope of document ................................................................................................................................................................ 3 1.2 Reference documents .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 List of acronyms ..................................................................................................................................................................... 3 2 General Guidelines ................................................................................................................ 6 3 Analysis of some potential mission profiles ........................................................................... 7 3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................. 7 3.2 Current European launchers ...........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • SPEAKERS TRANSPORTATION CONFERENCE FAA COMMERCIAL SPACE 15TH ANNUAL John R
    15TH ANNUAL FAA COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION CONFERENCE SPEAKERS COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION http://www.faa.gov/go/ast 15-16 FEBRUARY 2012 HQ-12-0163.INDD John R. Allen Christine Anderson Dr. John R. Allen serves as the Program Executive for Crew Health Christine Anderson is the Executive Director of the New Mexico and Safety at NASA Headquarters, Washington DC, where he Spaceport Authority. She is responsible for the development oversees the space medicine activities conducted at the Johnson and operation of the first purpose-built commercial spaceport-- Space Center, Houston, Texas. Dr. Allen received a B.A. in Speech Spaceport America. She is a recently retired Air Force civilian Communication from the University of Maryland (1975), a M.A. with 30 years service. She was a member of the Senior Executive in Audiology/Speech Pathology from The Catholic University Service, the civilian equivalent of the military rank of General of America (1977), and a Ph.D. in Audiology and Bioacoustics officer. Anderson was the founding Director of the Space from Baylor College of Medicine (1996). Upon completion of Vehicles Directorate at the Air Force Research Laboratory, Kirtland his Master’s degree, he worked for the Easter Seals Treatment Air Force Base, New Mexico. She also served as the Director Center in Rockville, Maryland as an audiologist and speech- of the Space Technology Directorate at the Air Force Phillips language pathologist and received certification in both areas. Laboratory at Kirtland, and as the Director of the Military Satellite He joined the US Air Force in 1980, serving as Chief, Audiology Communications Joint Program Office at the Air Force Space at Andrews AFB, Maryland, and at the Wiesbaden Medical and Missile Systems Center in Los Angeles where she directed Center, Germany, and as Chief, Otolaryngology Services at the the development, acquisition and execution of a $50 billion Aeromedical Consultation Service, Brooks AFB, Texas, where portfolio.
    [Show full text]
  • Numerical Investigation of a 7-Element GOX/GCH4 Subscale Combustion Chamber
    DOI: 10.13009/EUCASS2017-173 7TH EUROPEAN CONFERENCE FOR AERONAUTICS AND AEROSPACE SCIENCES (EUCASS) Numerical Investigation of a 7-Element GOX/GCH4 Subscale Combustion Chamber ? ? ? Daniel Eiringhaus †, Daniel Rahn‡, Hendrik Riedmann , Oliver Knab and Oskar Haidn‡ ?ArianeGroup Robert-Koch-Straße 1, 82024 Taufkirchen, Germany ‡Institute of Turbomachinery and Flight Propulsion (LTF), Technische Universität München (TUM) Boltzmannstr. 15, 85748 Garching, Germany [email protected] †Corresponding author Abstract For future liquid rocket engines methane has become the focus of several studies on alternative fuels in the western hemisphere. At ArianeGroup numerical simulation tools have been established as a powerful instrument in the design process. In order to achieve the same confidence level for CH4/O2 as for H2/O2 combustion, the applied numerical models have to be adapted and validated against sufficient test data. At the Chair of Space Propulsion at the Technical University of Munich (TUM) several combustion cham- bers have been designed and tests at different operating points have been conducted. In this paper one of these subscale combustion chambers with calorimetric cooling and seven shear coaxial injection elements running on gaseous methane and oxygen is used to examine ArianeGroup’s in-house tools for combustion chamber performance analysis. 1. Introduction Current development programs in many space-faring nations focus on launchers utilizing a propellant combination of liquid oxygen (LOX) and liquid methane (CH4). In Europe, hydrocarbons have been identified as an alternative fuel in the frame of the Future Launcher Preparatory Programme (FLPP).14, 23 Major industrial development of methane / oxy- gen rocket engines is ongoing in the United States at SpaceX with the Raptor engine (staged combustion), at Blue Origin with the BE-4 engine (staged combustion) and in Europe at ArianeGroup with the Prometheus engine (gas gen- erator).
    [Show full text]
  • Qualification Over Ariane's Lifetime
    r bulletin 94 — may 1998 Qualification Over Ariane’s Lifetime A. González Blázquez Directorate of Launchers, ESA, Paris M. Eymard Groupe Programme CNES/Arianespace, Evry, France Introduction Similarly, the RL10 engine on the Centaur stage The primary objectives of the qualification of the Atlas launcher has been the subject of an activities performed during the operational ongoing improvement programme. About 5000 lifetime of a launcher are: tests were performed before the first flight, and – to verify the qualification status of the vehicle 4000 during the subsequent ten years. – to resolve any technical problems relating to subsystem operations on the ground or in On-going qualification activities of a similar flight. nature were started for the Ariane-3 and 4 launchers in 1986, and for Ariane-5 in 1996. Before focussing on the European family of They can be classified into two main launchers, it is perhaps informative to review categories: ‘regular’ and ‘one-off’. just one or two of the US efforts in the area of solid and liquid propulsion in order to put the Ariane-3/4 accompanying activities Ariane-related activities into context. Regular activities These activities are mainly devoted to In principle, the development programme for a launcher ends with the verification of the qualification status of the qualification phase, after which it enters operational service. In various launcher subsystems. They include the practice, however, the assessment of a launcher’s reliability is a following work packages: continuing process and qualification-type activities proceed, as an – Periodic sampling of engines: one HM7 and extension of the development programme (as is done in aeronautics), one Viking per year, tested to the limits of the over the course of the vehicle’s lifetime.
    [Show full text]
  • Project Number: JMW-USC1
    Project Number: JMW-USC1 Department of Social Science and Policy Studies THE FUTURE OF UNMANNED SPACE: A SPECULATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE COMMERCIAL MARKET An Interactive Qualifying Project Report: Submitted to the Faculty of the WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Science by ______________________________ Peter Brayshaw ______________________________ Brooks Farnham ______________________________ Jon Leslie December 16, 2004 _____________________________ ________________________________ Professor John M. Wilkes, Advisor Professor Peter Campisano, Co-Advisor Abstract: This report is one of many which deal with the unmanned space race. It is a prediction of who will have the greatest competitive advantage in the commercial market over the next 25 years, based on historical analogy. Background information on Russia, China, Japan, the United States and the European Space Agency, including the launch vehicles and launch services each provides, is covered. The new prospect of space platforms is also investigated. 2 Table of Contents Abstract: ...................................................................................................... 2 Table of Contents ......................................................................................... 3 Introduction ................................................................................................. 5 Literature Review ...................................................................................... 5 Project
    [Show full text]
  • Reusable Suborbital Market Characterization
    Reusable Suborbital Market Characterization Prepared by The Tauri Group for Space Florida March 2011 Introduction Purpose: Define and characterize the markets reusable suborbital vehicles will address Goals Define market categories Identify market drivers Characterize current activities Provide basis for future market forecasting (Note that this study is not a forecast) Benefits Shared understanding improves quality and productivity of industry discourse A consistent taxonomy enables communications across the community, with Congress, press, and investors Accessible information helps industry participants assess opportunities, plan and coordinate activities, seek funding, and budget Proprietary www.taurigroup.com 2 Agenda Methodology Suborbital spaceflight attributes and vehicles Value proposition Characterization and analysis of markets Commercial human spaceflight Basic and applied research Aerospace technology test and demonstration Remote sensing Education Media & PR Point-to-point transportation Conclusions Proprietary www.taurigroup.com 3 Methodology Literature review and data Analysis and findings collection Vehicles Articles, reports, and publications Payload types Available launch and research Markets datasets Opportunities Applicable payloads Challenges Initial customers Users Interviews Economic buyers Researchers Launch service providers Funding agencies Potential commercial customers Users Proprietary www.taurigroup.com 4 Reusable Suborbital Vehicles Industry catalyzed by Ansari X
    [Show full text]
  • IAC-17-D2.4.3 Page 1 of 18 IAC-17
    68th International Astronautical Congress (IAC), Adelaide, Australia, 25-29 September 2017. Copyright ©2017 by DLR-SART. Published by the IAF, with permission and released to the IAF to publish in all forms. IAC-17- D2.4.3 Evaluation of Future Ariane Reusable VTOL Booster stages Etienne Dumonta*, Sven Stapperta, Tobias Eckerb, Jascha Wilkena, Sebastian Karlb, Sven Krummena, Martin Sippela a Department of Space Launcher Systems Analysis (SART), Institute of Space Systems, German Aerospace Center (DLR), Robert Hooke Straße 7, 28359 Bremen, Germany b Department of Spacecraft, Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow Technology, German Aerospace Center (DLR), Bunsenstraße 10, 37073 Gottingen, Germany *[email protected] Abstract Reusability is anticipated to strongly impact the launch service market if sufficient reliability and low refurbishment costs can be achieved. DLR is performing an extensive study on return methods for a reusable booster stage for a future launch vehicle. The present study focuses on the vertical take-off and vertical landing (VTOL) method. First, a restitution of a flight of Falcon 9 is presented in order to assess the accuracy of the tools used. Then, the preliminary designs of different variants of a future Ariane launch vehicle with a reusable VTOL booster stage are described. The proposed launch vehicle is capable of launching a seven ton satellite into a geostationary transfer orbit (GTO) from the European spaceport in Kourou. Different stagings and propellants (LOx/LH2, LOx/LCH4, LOx/LC3H8, subcooled LOx/LCH4) are considered, evaluated and compared. First sizing of a broad range of launcher versions are based on structural index derived from existing stages.
    [Show full text]
  • NASA Flight Opportunities Space Technology Mission Directorate
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration Flight Opportunities Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) NASA’s Flight Opportunities program strives to advance the operational readiness of innovative space technologies while also stimulating the development and utilization of the U.S. commercial spaceflight industry, particularly for the suborbital and small How to launch vehicle markets. Since its initiation in 2010, the program has provided affordable Access Flight access to relevant space-like environments for over 100 payloads across a variety of Opportunities flight platforms. There are currently two paths for accessing flight test opportunities: Space Technology Research, Development, Demonstration, and Infusion (REDDI) External researchers can compete for flight funding through the REDDI NASA Research Announcement (NRA). Awardees receive a grant allowing them to directly purchase flights from U.S. commercial flight vendors that best meet their needs. The solicitation is biannual. Suborbital Reusable High-Altitude Balloon Parabolic Aircraft Launch Vehicles (sRLV) Systems These platforms enable NASA Internal Call for sRLVs enable a wide variety of These systems facilitate impact investigation of short-term Payloads experiments, such as testing studies on extended exposure exposure to reduced gravity, This path facilitates algorithms for landing or to cold, atmosphere, and with typical missions flying suborbital flight hazard avoidance, or evaluating radiation. In addition, high approximately 40 parabolas demonstrations for the response of systems to altitude balloons enable testing providing several seconds of technologies under microgravity. of sensors and instruments for reduced gravity during the flight. development by NASA and a variety of applications. other government agencies. Typical parabolic vehicles include Typical vehicles include Blue Zero G’s G-FORCE ONE.
    [Show full text]
  • Rocket Propulsion Fundamentals 2
    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20140002716 2019-08-29T14:36:45+00:00Z Liquid Propulsion Systems – Evolution & Advancements Launch Vehicle Propulsion & Systems LPTC Liquid Propulsion Technical Committee Rick Ballard Liquid Engine Systems Lead SLS Liquid Engines Office NASA / MSFC All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted, unless for course participation and to a paid course student, in any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of AIAA and/or course instructor. Contact the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Professional Development Program, Suite 500, 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Reston, VA 20191-4344 Modules 1. Rocket Propulsion Fundamentals 2. LRE Applications 3. Liquid Propellants 4. Engine Power Cycles 5. Engine Components Module 1: Rocket Propulsion TOPICS Fundamentals • Thrust • Specific Impulse • Mixture Ratio • Isp vs. MR • Density vs. Isp • Propellant Mass vs. Volume Warning: Contents deal with math, • Area Ratio physics and thermodynamics. Be afraid…be very afraid… Terms A Area a Acceleration F Force (thrust) g Gravity constant (32.2 ft/sec2) I Impulse m Mass P Pressure Subscripts t Time a Ambient T Temperature c Chamber e Exit V Velocity o Initial state r Reaction ∆ Delta / Difference s Stagnation sp Specific ε Area Ratio t Throat or Total γ Ratio of specific heats Thrust (1/3) Rocket thrust can be explained using Newton’s 2nd and 3rd laws of motion. 2nd Law: a force applied to a body is equal to the mass of the body and its acceleration in the direction of the force.
    [Show full text]
  • L AUNCH SYSTEMS Databk7 Collected.Book Page 18 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM Databk7 Collected.Book Page 19 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM
    databk7_collected.book Page 17 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM CHAPTER TWO L AUNCH SYSTEMS databk7_collected.book Page 18 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM databk7_collected.book Page 19 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM CHAPTER TWO L AUNCH SYSTEMS Introduction Launch systems provide access to space, necessary for the majority of NASA’s activities. During the decade from 1989–1998, NASA used two types of launch systems, one consisting of several families of expendable launch vehicles (ELV) and the second consisting of the world’s only partially reusable launch system—the Space Shuttle. A significant challenge NASA faced during the decade was the development of technologies needed to design and implement a new reusable launch system that would prove less expensive than the Shuttle. Although some attempts seemed promising, none succeeded. This chapter addresses most subjects relating to access to space and space transportation. It discusses and describes ELVs, the Space Shuttle in its launch vehicle function, and NASA’s attempts to develop new launch systems. Tables relating to each launch vehicle’s characteristics are included. The other functions of the Space Shuttle—as a scientific laboratory, staging area for repair missions, and a prime element of the Space Station program—are discussed in the next chapter, Human Spaceflight. This chapter also provides a brief review of launch systems in the past decade, an overview of policy relating to launch systems, a summary of the management of NASA’s launch systems programs, and tables of funding data. The Last Decade Reviewed (1979–1988) From 1979 through 1988, NASA used families of ELVs that had seen service during the previous decade.
    [Show full text]
  • Hi-Rel Solutions for Space Launch Vehicles a Single Network for All
    © Airbus Safran Launchers 2016 © A Single Network for All Data Traffic Hi-Rel Solutions for Space Launch Vehicles www.tttech.com/space We are delighted that our network solution based on Deterministic Ethernet is providing a very powerful platform “ simplifying the electronic architectures of launch vehicles worldwide! Georg Kopetz, Member of the Executive Board, TTTech Computertechnik AG ” Over the last 25 years, space launch vehicle designs have utilized several different solutions for their on-board data handling. For the safety-critical command and control data, the very robust MIL-1553 bus served as a standard solution, originally designed as a military avionic data bus. For redundancy purposes, this widespread standard enforces two MIL-1553 buses running in parallel. This fact creates the first challenge, namely managing redundant fieldbuses in software and in parallel separate channels for additional data, e.g. telemetry. The second challenge arises from increasing data rates: MIL-1553 is limited to 1 Mbit/s, while there actually is both a need for higher control data rates and an interest in new types of sensors like video cameras. Adding more field buses would be possible, but would increase both weight and software complexity as well as qualification efforts. Finally, despite the need for higher bandwidth and a simplified network, no system cost increase can be tolerated, as in recent years the market for launch vehicles has become extremely competitive. This has led launch vehicle manufacturers worldwide to look for automotive or industrial solutions in order to reduce the cost of the electronics used throughout their vehicles. © Airbus Safran Launchers 2015 After several years of research funded by the ► French space agency (CNES) and afterwards by PROJECT ▼ the European Space Agency (ESA), architectures Launcher avionics A GLANCE AT based on TTEthernet are considered a great fit ► CHALLENGE for launch vehicles.
    [Show full text]