DOCSLIB.ORG

Thirty Years of Outer Solar System Exploration Planning and Execution

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Thirty Years of Outer Solar System Exploration Planning and Execution True Cost in Technology Projected Cost in Millions Millions $ - True Cost Base Drivers FY75$ Development Year for Fixed $ Only New Frontiers Space Science Space Science Resolution NASA Space System Solar System SSES Disposition Remarks Required to in the Solar Science "Vision Project Number Name (1975) Exploration Division Recommendations Enterprise Enterprise Implemented Type Transportation Illustrative Implemented Implemented ers Total Total Notes (September System RTG Core Strategic Plan Strategic Plan Mission Flight Dates Launch Vehicle Launch Total (October 2001) Enable Mission" Prometheus Return (1975) Lander Strategic Plan (1991) (1994) Sample Program Requires Requires (1997) (2000) 2003) ("Decadal and Core 1991-2000 1986-1990 1981-1985 Advanced 1976-1980 Propulsion Penetromet (October 2001) Survey") Studies 1081 Jupiter Galileo in transit to <COMPLETED> Galileo Probe Strategic Titan IIIE/Centaur 1980 Shuttle / PAM D 1989 100 55 50 205 Galileo Probe Atmospheric Jupiter; Measure- w/Galileo Orbiter completed; impact Probes Jupiter Jupiter Probe Galileo (approve 1082 Saturn Saturn Probe - Shuttle/IIUS 1984 150 20 5 175 Saturn Atmospheric Discovery 2 candidate Atmospheric complement Cassini Probes Probes robe - Saturn Flyby/P 1083 Titan Orbiter Titan Organic Titan Explorer Shuttle/Tug 1991 200 100 300 Titan Explorer - Nuclear Thermal Planning requires Titan Explorer - Study w/Penetrometer Explorer post-2005 post-2007 Huygens followon Rocket and/or successful completion Case 16 aerocapture of Huygens mission 1 and advanced propulsion and/or aerocapture 1084 Uranus Uranus Orbiter/Probe - Shuttle/Tug 1984 200 35 235 Uranus Atmospheric Nuclear Thermal "Reasonable" (<~15 Atmospheric candidate for FY99- Probe Rocket and/or yr) flight times require Probe 1 FY03 aerocapture Jupiter flyby obe - Uranus Flyby/Pr 1091 Jupiter Orbiters, Galileo in transit to Galileo in Galileo Europa Galileo Strategic Shuttle/US or Titan 1985 Shuttle / PAM D 1989 135 45 180 1401 1992 Galileo Europa spinning/3-axis Jupiter operation in Jupiter Mission (Galileo III/Centaur Mission (Galileo orbit Extended Mission) Extended Mission) - Orbiter Galileo (approve completed Jupiter Grand Tour - Measure- Jupiter Jupiter Polar INSIDE Jupiter - Discovery INSIDE Jupiter - Solar System Medium Jupiter Icy Moons candidate for FY99- Orbiter post-2007 Phase II Phase II Discovery 3. Jupiter Polar Orbiter Orbiter (JIMO) FY03 Discovery competition - not with Probes competition selected Europa Orbiter - Europa Orbiter Europa Orbiter - Payload competition Solar System Large 1. derived from cancelled awaiting selection; Europa Geophysical Galileo price estimate over Orbiter magnetometry $1B results Europa Lander - Europa Lander Europa Lander Nuclear Thermal follow Europa Rocket needed; Orbiter post-2005 extreme radiation environment; RTG Europa Europa Subsurface needed for power; subsurface Explorer specialized, major Explorer post- ATD needed 2007; follow Europa Lander Io Volcanic Io Orbiter Observer - derived ? from Galileo and ?????? Measure-Jupiter 1092 Titan Lander Huygens in Huygensconcept in transit Huygens in transit Huygens/ESA Strategic Shuttle/Tug 2000 Titan IV 1997 700 700 ESA Huygens in transit with development with Cassini with Cassini SRMU/Centaur Cassini 1 adar w/Cassini Titan Probe/R 1093 Uranus Orbiter Shuttle/Tug 1995 350 350 Uranus Orbiter Nuclear Thermal Decreased interest Rocket and/or following Voyager 2 aerocapture flyby of Neptune and Triton; 98 deg 1 inclination restricts equatorial plane capture to equinox arrivals 1096 Saturn Orbiter Cassini Orbiter in Cassini in transit Cassini in transit Cassini Strategic Shuttle/Tug 1986 Titan IV 1997 200 100 300 1457 1992 Cassini in transit with Solar System Small 2. development with Huygens with Huygens SRMU/Centaur Huygens Cassini Extended w/Huygens Saturn Orbiter - Supplement mission Saturn Ring Saturn Ring Observer Nuclear Thermal Multiple maneuvering Observer post- Rocket and/or Nuclear capabilities seen as 2007 Electric Propulsio0n driver for NEP development 1097 Neptune Orbiter Pluto Flyby/Neptune Neptune Orbiter Shuttle/Tug/SEP 2000 450 450 Neptune Orbiter Nuclear Thermal "Reasonable" (<~15 Neptune Orbiter with Orbiter - recommended post-2007 Rocket and/or yr) flight times require Probes - Study Case for 1996 aerocapture Jupiter flyby; capture 17 requires nuclear stage 1 or aerocapture ballute in unknown environment Pluto Fast Flyby Pluto/Kuiper Pluto-Kuiper Pluto Kuiper Belt Discovery II New Horizons now in Solar System Express Express competition prototype development Medium 1. Kuiper- Belt Pluto Explorer; New Horizons selected for flight 1107 Jupiter-Saturn <COMPLETED> Voyager 1 and Strategic Titan IIIE/Centaur x 2 1977 Titan 1977 350 350 776 1992 Voyager planetary Flyby Voyager 2 IIIE/Centaur x 2 encounters completed r 1 and 2 flybys Voyage 1108 Uranus Flyby <COMPLETED> Voyager 2 Strategic Titan IIIE/Centaur 1979 Titan IIIE / 1977 165 15 180 Centaur Voyager 2 flyby completed 1109 Neptune Flyby Voyager 2 flyby <COMPLETED> Voyager 2 Strategic Titan IIIE/Centaur 1992 Titan IIIE / 1977 50 175 225 completed Centaur Genesis in transit Genesis Discovery Delta II 2001 Genesis Cost Genesis in transit Total Cost in 615 755 500 1780 3650 Millions of FY75$ Mission in Possible Discovery 11 February 2005 Mission OPAG Meeting #1 Bethesda, MD Required technology 1 development or Possible Discovery candidate with larger completed or in launched but not not currently mission candidate mission lifecycle completion phase available Sample landing yet at target cost cap handling, capability propulsion associated Radioactive acquisition, power supply Automomous Non-chemical Colors denote Penetration of regolith, sample manipulation, in technologies are ??????? Denotes questionable as enabling versus enhancing Science Goals Help Drive NASA Exploration Space Exploration has historically been aligned with an outward …with the idea look …. that humans would follow 11 February 2005 OPAG Meeting #1 Bethesda, MD 2 How Good Is Our Crystal Ball For Space Technology? Large-scale projects were predicted in the late 1940s and early 1950s Space stations were staging grounds for multiple-vehicle voyages to the Moon and Mars BUT … Reality lay in small instrumented probes - and then in the “Moon race” Following Apollo, the Shuttle held promise for “easy access to space.” Fiscal realities and the end of the cold war have led to slower gains 11 February 2005 OPAG Meeting #1 Bethesda, MD 3 Future Predictions Can be Misleading… [Cartoon from 1907] IN 1950. “Why, there’s an automobile! How funny it looks!” “Yes.11 February That’s 2005old fossil JonesOPAG - Meetingsays he #1 can Bethesda,’t stand MD these newfangled notions.4 ” …Or Fullfilling But not as easily as we had thought 11 February 2005 OPAG Meeting #1 Bethesda, MD 5 The Devil is ALWAYS in the Details Say, I think I see where we went off. Isn’t eight times seven fifty-six? 11 February 2005 OPAG Meeting #1 Bethesda, MD 6 For Any Mission There Are Four Key Elements • Science the case for going • Technology the means to go • Strategy all agree to go • Programmatics money in place A well-thought-out systems approach incorporating all key elements is required to promote and accomplish a successful exploration plan 11 February 2005 OPAG Meeting #1 Bethesda, MD 7 The Robotic Probe Vision (or “Do we need Astronauts?”) Launch a probe to a target Probe returns knowledge - not data BUT without return of all data, how is the knowledge to be validated? Return of all data requires large bandwidth Drives receiver and transmitter sizes and transmitter power “Compression” leaves doubts of data fidelity Luna 24 Data return drives power and, hence, mass Mass drives propulsion …Did we REALLY think EVERYTHING Apollo 17 through ahead of time, though? 11 February 2005 OPAG Meeting #1 Bethesda, MD 8 The Technology Element • Propulsion Systems • Power Systems • Communications Systems • Spacecraft Architecture • Instrumentation – mass – power – data downlink 11 February 2005 OPAG Meeting #1 Bethesda, MD 9 Propulsion Issues for Robotic Missions Equatorial Object escape speed (km/s) Earth 11.18 Venus 10.36 Mars 5.02 Mercury 4.25 Moon 2.38 • Going to the outer solar system and into orbit • Landing on any solid planet (Mercury through Pluto + minor bodies) - high thrust required • Sample returns to Earth - high thrust required 11 February 2005 OPAG Meeting #1 Bethesda, MD 10 High Thrust Requires Thermal Rockets For a chemical biprop system Isp ~ 320s --> vexhaust = 3.1 km/s For a cryogenic biprop Isp ~ 420s --> vexhaust = 4.1 km/s For a nuclear thermal system Isp ~ 900s --> vexhaust = 8.8 km/s LH2 storage is an issue LOX and hydrazine is a possibility Integrated systems studies are required All targets are also effectively vacuum environments - notable exception of Titan What works for the Moon can work for all cases - most stressing is Ganymede of 2.74 km/s (versus 2.38 km/s for the Moon) 11 February 2005 OPAG Meeting #1 Bethesda, MD 11 Propulsion Systems Status Chemical propulsion remains the primary propulsive means and is the only current high- thrust option Large ΔV at low thrust in the inner solar system now seen as “enabling” for multiple advanced exploration missions BUT… Solar Electric Propulsion tested (DS-1) but currently limited by specific mass (~65 kg/kW) of power plant Nuclear Electric Propulsion has similar limitations and requires extensive (reactor) development (min. size?) Aerocapture - braking into planetary orbits -
Recommended publications
  • Information Summaries

    Information Summaries

    TIROS 8 12/21/63 Delta-22 TIROS-H (A-53) 17B S National Aeronautics and TIROS 9 1/22/65 Delta-28 TIROS-I (A-54) 17A S Space Administration TIROS Operational 2TIROS 10 7/1/65 Delta-32 OT-1 17B S John F. Kennedy Space Center 2ESSA 1 2/3/66 Delta-36 OT-3 (TOS) 17A S Information Summaries 2 2 ESSA 2 2/28/66 Delta-37 OT-2 (TOS) 17B S 2ESSA 3 10/2/66 2Delta-41 TOS-A 1SLC-2E S PMS 031 (KSC) OSO (Orbiting Solar Observatories) Lunar and Planetary 2ESSA 4 1/26/67 2Delta-45 TOS-B 1SLC-2E S June 1999 OSO 1 3/7/62 Delta-8 OSO-A (S-16) 17A S 2ESSA 5 4/20/67 2Delta-48 TOS-C 1SLC-2E S OSO 2 2/3/65 Delta-29 OSO-B2 (S-17) 17B S Mission Launch Launch Payload Launch 2ESSA 6 11/10/67 2Delta-54 TOS-D 1SLC-2E S OSO 8/25/65 Delta-33 OSO-C 17B U Name Date Vehicle Code Pad Results 2ESSA 7 8/16/68 2Delta-58 TOS-E 1SLC-2E S OSO 3 3/8/67 Delta-46 OSO-E1 17A S 2ESSA 8 12/15/68 2Delta-62 TOS-F 1SLC-2E S OSO 4 10/18/67 Delta-53 OSO-D 17B S PIONEER (Lunar) 2ESSA 9 2/26/69 2Delta-67 TOS-G 17B S OSO 5 1/22/69 Delta-64 OSO-F 17B S Pioneer 1 10/11/58 Thor-Able-1 –– 17A U Major NASA 2 1 OSO 6/PAC 8/9/69 Delta-72 OSO-G/PAC 17A S Pioneer 2 11/8/58 Thor-Able-2 –– 17A U IMPROVED TIROS OPERATIONAL 2 1 OSO 7/TETR 3 9/29/71 Delta-85 OSO-H/TETR-D 17A S Pioneer 3 12/6/58 Juno II AM-11 –– 5 U 3ITOS 1/OSCAR 5 1/23/70 2Delta-76 1TIROS-M/OSCAR 1SLC-2W S 2 OSO 8 6/21/75 Delta-112 OSO-1 17B S Pioneer 4 3/3/59 Juno II AM-14 –– 5 S 3NOAA 1 12/11/70 2Delta-81 ITOS-A 1SLC-2W S Launches Pioneer 11/26/59 Atlas-Able-1 –– 14 U 3ITOS 10/21/71 2Delta-86 ITOS-B 1SLC-2E U OGO (Orbiting Geophysical
  • Centaur D-1A Pamphlet (1973)

    Centaur D-1A Pamphlet (1973)

    • l:Intf.LN3~ UO!S!A!O 9:JedsoJ8t/ J!eAUOJ ''o'l:I3N3~ S:::ml\l'o'NAC ... ) Imagination has been the hallmark of the Cen­ taur program since its inception. Centaur was the vehicle selected to satisfy man's quest for knowledge in space. Already it has sent Survey­ or to probe the moon's surface. Mariner to chart the planet Mars, the Orbiti ng Astronomical Observatory to scan the stars without inter­ ference from the earth's atmosphere, and Pioneer to Jupiter and beyond. Centaur will also be called upon to launch other spacecraft to continue to unlock the secrets of the planets, such as Mariner for Venus and Mercury in 1973, Viking Orbiter/Lander spacecraft to Mars in 1975, and advanced Mariners to Jupiter and Saturn in 1977. Centaur has not only flown scientific missions but also ones with application for solving more tangible problems, such as Applications Tech­ nology Satellites and the Intelsat communica­ tions satellite. Centaur has also been chosen to deliver domestic and military communication satellites to synchronous orbit beginning in 1975. Because man's curiosity will never be satisfied, Convair Aerospace stands ready to respond to the challenges of tomorrow with the same imag­ inative design and quality craftsmanship embod­ ied in Centaur. K. E. Newton Vice President & Program Director Launch Vehicle Programs CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Introduction A little over a decade ago, Centaur began the first evolutionary steps from conventional Centaur Structure and Major Systems 3 Structure 4 rocketry to the high-energy-fueled vehicles of Propulsion 5 oxygen/hydrogen. Centaur faced numerous Reaction Control 6 problems, many of them demanding solutions Guidance 7 beyond the then current state of the art.
  • Aeronautics and Space Report of the President

    Aeronautics and Space Report of the President

    Aeronautics and Space Report of the President 1971 Activities NOTE TO READERS: ALL PRINTED PAGES ARE INCLUDED, UNNUMBERED BLANK PAGES DURING SCANNING AND QUALITY CONTROL CHECK HAVE BEEN DELETED Aeronautics and Space Report of the President 197 I Activities i W Executive Office of the President National Aeronautics and Space Council Washington, D.C. 20502 PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE OF TRANSMITTAL To the Congress of the United States: I am pleased to transmit herewith a report of our national progress in aero- nautics and space activities during 1971. This report shows that we have made forward strides toward each of the six objectives which I set forth for a balanced space program in my statement of March 7, 1970. Aided by the improvements we have made in mobility, our explorers on the moon last summer produced new, exciting and useful evidence on the structure and origin of the moon. Several phenomena which they uncovered are now under study. Our unmanned nearby observation of Mars is similarly valuable and significant for the advancement of science. During 1971, we gave added emphasis to aeronautics activities which contribute substantially to improved travel conditions, safety and security, and we gained in- creasing recognition that space and aeronautical research serves in many ways to keep us in the forefront of man’s technological achievements. There can be little doubt that the investments we are now making in explora- tions of the unknown are but a prelude to the accomplishments of mankind in future generations. THEWHITE HOUSE, March 1972 iii Table of Contents Page Page I . Progress Toward U.S.
  • Deep Space Chronicle Deep Space Chronicle: a Chronology of Deep Space and Planetary Probes, 1958–2000 | Asifa

    Deep Space Chronicle Deep Space Chronicle: a Chronology of Deep Space and Planetary Probes, 1958–2000 | Asifa

    dsc_cover (Converted)-1 8/6/02 10:33 AM Page 1 Deep Space Chronicle Deep Space Chronicle: A Chronology ofDeep Space and Planetary Probes, 1958–2000 |Asif A.Siddiqi National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA SP-2002-4524 A Chronology of Deep Space and Planetary Probes 1958–2000 Asif A. Siddiqi NASA SP-2002-4524 Monographs in Aerospace History Number 24 dsc_cover (Converted)-1 8/6/02 10:33 AM Page 2 Cover photo: A montage of planetary images taken by Mariner 10, the Mars Global Surveyor Orbiter, Voyager 1, and Voyager 2, all managed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. Included (from top to bottom) are images of Mercury, Venus, Earth (and Moon), Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune. The inner planets (Mercury, Venus, Earth and its Moon, and Mars) and the outer planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune) are roughly to scale to each other. NASA SP-2002-4524 Deep Space Chronicle A Chronology of Deep Space and Planetary Probes 1958–2000 ASIF A. SIDDIQI Monographs in Aerospace History Number 24 June 2002 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Office of External Relations NASA History Office Washington, DC 20546-0001 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Siddiqi, Asif A., 1966­ Deep space chronicle: a chronology of deep space and planetary probes, 1958-2000 / by Asif A. Siddiqi. p.cm. – (Monographs in aerospace history; no. 24) (NASA SP; 2002-4524) Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Space flight—History—20th century. I. Title. II. Series. III. NASA SP; 4524 TL 790.S53 2002 629.4’1’0904—dc21 2001044012 Table of Contents Foreword by Roger D.
  • Desind Finding

    Desind Finding

    NATIONAL AIR AND SPACE ARCHIVES Herbert Stephen Desind Collection Accession No. 1997-0014 NASM 9A00657 National Air and Space Museum Smithsonian Institution Washington, DC Brian D. Nicklas © Smithsonian Institution, 2003 NASM Archives Desind Collection 1997-0014 Herbert Stephen Desind Collection 109 Cubic Feet, 305 Boxes Biographical Note Herbert Stephen Desind was a Washington, DC area native born on January 15, 1945, raised in Silver Spring, Maryland and educated at the University of Maryland. He obtained his BA degree in Communications at Maryland in 1967, and began working in the local public schools as a science teacher. At the time of his death, in October 1992, he was a high school teacher and a freelance writer/lecturer on spaceflight. Desind also was an avid model rocketeer, specializing in using the Estes Cineroc, a model rocket with an 8mm movie camera mounted in the nose. To many members of the National Association of Rocketry (NAR), he was known as “Mr. Cineroc.” His extensive requests worldwide for information and photographs of rocketry programs even led to a visit from FBI agents who asked him about the nature of his activities. Mr. Desind used the collection to support his writings in NAR publications, and his building scale model rockets for NAR competitions. Desind also used the material in the classroom, and in promoting model rocket clubs to foster an interest in spaceflight among his students. Desind entered the NASA Teacher in Space program in 1985, but it is not clear how far along his submission rose in the selection process. He was not a semi-finalist, although he had a strong application.
  • Voyager Mission Description.*

    Voyager Mission Description.*

    Space Science Reviews 21(1977) 77-101. All Rights Reserved. Copyright ©1977 Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Boston, London. Reprinted with permission of Kluwer Academic Publishers. This material is posted here with permission of Kluwer Academic Publishers (Kluwer). Such permission of Kluwer does not in any way imply Kluwer endorsement of any PDS product or service. Internal or personal use of this material is permitted. However, permission to reprint/republish this material for advertising or promotional purposes or for creating new collective works for resale or redistribution must be obtained from Kluwer. By choosing to view this document, you agree to all provisions of the copyright laws protecting it. VOYAGER MISSION DESCRIPTION.* E. C. KOHLHASE and P. A. PENZO California Institute of Technology, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., U.S.A. (Preprint, March 1977) * Prepared Under Contract No. NAS7-100, National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Abstract. The Voyager Project, managed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, involves the launching of two advanced spacecraft to explore the Jovian and Saturnian systems, as well as interplanetary space. The one- month launch period opens on August 20, 1977 with arrivals at Jupiter in March and July of 1979, and at Saturn in November of 1980 and August of 1981. Gravity-assist swingbys of Jupiter are utilized in order to reduce the launch energy demands needed to reach Saturn. In addition, a gravity-assist targeting option at Saturn will be maintained on the second-arriving Voyager for a possible continuation on to Uranus, with arrival in January of 1986. Flight through the Jovian and Saturnian systems will achieve close to moderate flyby encounter with several of the natural satellites, including special flyby geometry conditions for Io and Titan, as well as an Earth occultation of the spacecraft's radio signal by the rings of Saturn.
  • Table of Contents

    Table of Contents

    THE CAPE Military Space Operations 1971-1992 by Mark C. Cleary 45th Space Wing History Office Table of Contents Preface Chapter I -USAF Space Organizations and Programs Table of Contents Section 1 - Air Force Systems Command and Subordinate Space Agencies at Cape Canaveral Section 2 - The Creation of Air Force Space Command and Transfer of Air Force Space Resources Section 3 - Defense Department Involvement in the Space Shuttle Section 4 - Air Force Space Launch Vehicles: SCOUT, THOR, ATLAS and TITAN Section 5 - Early Space Shuttle Flights Section 6 - Origins of the TITAN IV Program Section 7 - Development of the ATLAS II and DELTA II Launch Vehicles and the TITAN IV/CENTAUR Upper Stage Section 8 - Space Shuttle Support of Military Payloads Section 9 - U.S. and Soviet Military Space Competition in the 1970s and 1980s Chapter II - TITAN and Shuttle Military Space Operations Section 1 - 6555th Aerospace Test Group Responsibilities Section 2 - Launch Squadron Supervision of Military Space Operations in the 1990s Section 3 - TITAN IV Launch Contractors and Eastern Range Support Contractors Section 4 - Quality Assurance and Payload Processing Agencies Section 5 - TITAN IIIC Military Space Missions after 1970 Section 6 - TITAN 34D Military Space Operations and Facilities at the Cape Section 7 - TITAN IV Program Activation and Completion of the TITAN 34D Program Section 8 - TITAN IV Operations after First Launch Section 9 - Space Shuttle Military Missions Chapter III - Medium and Light Military Space Operations Section 1 - Medium Launch Vehicle and Payload Operations Section 2 - Evolution of the NAVSTAR Global Positioning System and Development of the DELTA II Section 3 - DELTA II Processing and Flight Features Section 4 - NAVSTAR II Global Positioning System Missions Section 5 - Strategic Defense Initiative Missions and the NATO IVA Mission Section 6 - ATLAS/CENTAUR Missions at the Cape Section 7 - Modification of Cape Facilities for ATLAS II/CENTAUR Operations Section 8 - ATLAS II/CENTAUR Missions Section 9 - STARBIRD and RED TIGRESS Operations Section 10 - U.S.
  • RL10 Engine Ability to Transition from Atlas to Shuttle/Centaur Program

    RL10 Engine Ability to Transition from Atlas to Shuttle/Centaur Program

    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20150008246 2019-08-31T10:40:24+00:00Z NASA/TM—2015-218736 RL10 Engine Ability to Transition From Atlas to Shuttle/Centaur Program Joseph F. Baumeister Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio April 2015 NASA STI Program . in Profi le Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated • CONTRACTOR REPORT. Scientifi c and to the advancement of aeronautics and space science. technical fi ndings by NASA-sponsored The NASA Scientifi c and Technical Information (STI) contractors and grantees. Program plays a key part in helping NASA maintain this important role. • CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected papers from scientifi c and technical conferences, symposia, seminars, or other The NASA STI Program operates under the auspices meetings sponsored or co-sponsored by NASA. of the Agency Chief Information Offi cer. It collects, organizes, provides for archiving, and disseminates • SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientifi c, NASA’s STI. The NASA STI Program provides access technical, or historical information from to the NASA Technical Report Server—Registered NASA programs, projects, and missions, often (NTRS Reg) and NASA Technical Report Server— concerned with subjects having substantial Public (NTRS) thus providing one of the largest public interest. collections of aeronautical and space science STI in the world. Results are published in both non-NASA • TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. English- channels and by NASA in the NASA STI Report language translations of foreign scientifi c and Series, which includes the following report types: technical material pertinent to NASA’s mission. • TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of For more information about the NASA STI completed research or a major signifi cant phase program, see the following: of research that present the results of NASA programs and include extensive data or theoretical • Access the NASA STI program home page at analysis.
  • Rocketry Index a “Catalog” of All the Hobby Rockets

    Rocketry Index a “Catalog” of All the Hobby Rockets

    and Present The Rocketry Index A “Catalog” of all the hobby rockets... ever! (or at least as many as I could manage!) Compiled and Edited by John A. Lee OSL Revision: 13.01 Contents Introductory Materials............................................................... 43 What Is “The Rocketry Index?”........................................................43 What Gets Included With the Rockets ..............................................45 What Gets Included With the Companies .........................................47 Company Information .................................................................................... 47 Company Statement ....................................................................................... 47 Rocketeers’ Views of the Companies.............................................................. 47 Master Lists ................................................................................................... 47 Family Groups...................................................................................49 Patriarchal Families ...................................................................................... 49 Always Ready Rocketry Families ..................................................................... 50 ARR Basic Blues Family .................................................................................................... 50 Art Applewhite Families ................................................................................... 50 Applewhite Cinco Family .................................................................................................
  • M2M Connectivity It's All About Location No Sky View? Forrester +

    M2M Connectivity It's All About Location No Sky View? Forrester +

    Worldwide Satellite Magazine May 2012 SatMagazineSatMagazine M2M Connectivity It’s All About Location No Sky View? Forrester + Heyman Bragging Rights The Failed Hire Improving STEM SatMagazine — May 2012 — Vol. 5, #2 Publishing Operations InfoBeam Silvano Payne ......................................Publisher + Writer A Successful Antenna Unfurling (Harris) .............. Page 08 Hartley G. Lesser ...................................Editorial Director Pattie Waldt ............................................ Executive Editor Jill Durfee .................... Sales Director, Editorial Assistant SES’ Hulk ................................................................ Page 08 Donald McGee ...................................Production Manager Simon Payne ................................. Development Manager Dual Solutions (Yahsat) ........................................ Page 08 Mike Antonovich ....Contributing Editor, SatBroadcasting Maxime Baudry ...................................Contributing Editor Chris Forrester ...........Senior Contributing Editor, Europe Antenna Approvals (Thrane & Thrane) ................. Page 10 Alan Gottlieb ...................... Contributing Editor, Maritime Bob Gough .......... Senior Contributing Editor Asia-Pacific Joining Forces (Astrium Services + Hisdesat) ..... Page 10 Richard Dutchik ..................................Contributing Editor Jos Heyman .........................................Contributing Editor CAPEX Impact On FSS Operators (NSR) ............... Page 11 Dan Makinster......................................
  • Typical Spacecraft Contents

    Typical Spacecraft Contents

    Appendix A: Typical Spacecraft This appendix contains descriptions and images of a dozen spacecraft selected from the many that are currently operating in interplanetary space or have successfully completed their missions, plus one that is now preparing for launch. Included is at least one representative of each of the eight spacecraft classifications described in Chapter 7 (see page 243). The scheme of limiting coverage of each spacecraft to a two-page spread in this appendix allows the reader to easily compare the various craft, their specifications, their missions, and their classifications, but it does not allow room to list all of a spacecraft’s activities, discoveries and questions raised; indeed entire books can and have been written on each. Complete profiles of these and other spacecraft are, how- ever, readily available at a single web site: http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary. Contents: Spacecraft Classification Page Voyager Flyby 294 New Horizons Flyby 296 Spitzer Observatory 298 Chandra Observatory 300 Galileo Orbiter 302 Cassini Orbiter 304 Messenger Orbiter 306 Huygens Atmospheric 308 Phoenix Lander 310 Mars Science Laboratory Rover (launch: 2009) 312 Deep Impact Penetrator 314 Deep Space 1 Engineering 316 294 Appendix A: Typical Spacecraft The Voyager Spacecraft Fig. A.1. Each Voyager spacecraft measures about 8.5 meters from the end of the science boom across the spacecraft to the end of the RTG boom. The magnetometer boom is 13 meters long. Courtesy NASA/JPL. Classification: Flyby spacecraft Mission: Encounter giant outer planets and explore heliosphere Named: For their journeys Summary: The two similar spacecraft flew by Jupiter and Saturn.
  • Preparation of Papers for AIAA Technical Conferences

    Preparation of Papers for AIAA Technical Conferences

    Reflections on Centaur Upper Stage Integration by the NASA Lewis (Glenn) Research Center Scott R. Graham* NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio 44135 The NASA Glenn (then Lewis) Research Center (GRC) led several expendable launch vehicle (ELV) projects from 1963 to 1998, most notably the Centaur upper stage. These major, comprehensive projects included system management, system development, integration (both payload and stage), and launch operations. The integration role that GRC pioneered was truly unique and highly successful. Its philosophy, scope, and content were not just invaluable to the missions and vehicles it supported, but also had significant Agency- wide benefits. An overview of the NASA Lewis Research Center (now the NASA Glenn Research Center) philosophy on ELV integration is provided, focusing on Atlas/Centaur, Titan/Centaur, and Shuttle/Centaur vehicles and programs. The necessity of having a stable, highly technically competent in-house staff is discussed. Significant depth of technical penetration of contractor work is another critical component. Functioning as a cohesive team was more than a concept: GRC senior management, NASA Headquarters, contractors, payload users, and all staff worked together. The scope, content, and history of launch vehicle integration at GRC are broadly discussed. Payload integration is compared to stage development integration in terms of engineering and organization. Finally, the transition from buying launch vehicles to buying launch services is discussed, and thoughts on future possibilities