DOCSLIB.ORG

Antares 200 Configuration Expendable Launch Vehicle at Wallops Flight Facility

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Antares 200 Configuration Expendable Launch Vehicle at Wallops Flight Facility DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ANTARES 200 CONFIGURATION EXPENDABLE LAUNCH VEHICLE AT WALLOPS FLIGHT FACILITY www.nasa.gov June 2015 Front cover image: The Antares Orb-2 launched the third Cygnus from Wallops Island, Virginia to the International Space Station on July 13, 2014. Photo Credit: Brea Reeves, NASA WFF Optical Systems Group Back cover image: The Antares Orb-D1 mission launched on September 18, 2013, from Wallops Island, Virginia, with the first Cygnus on board to rendezvous with the International Space Station. Photo Credit: Jamie Adkins, NASA WFF Optical Systems Group National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Space Flight Center Wallops Flight Facility Wallops Island, VA 23337 Reply to Attn of: 250.W June 2015 Dear Reader: This is the Draft Supplemental Environmental Assessment (Draft SEA) for NASA’s proposal to restore the Antares launch capability at Wallops Flight Facility (WFF), Accomack County, Virginia. Prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Draft SEA evaluates the environmental consequences of NASA’s authorizing the Virginia Commercial Space Flight Authority and Orbital ATK to process, static test fire, and launch an upgraded configuration (i.e., the “200” Configuration) of the Antares Expendable Launch Vehicle (ELV) from Mid- Atlantic Regional Spaceport Pad 0-A on south Wallops Island. In addition to the Proposed Action, the Draft SEA evaluates the No Action Alternative, under which processing, testing, and launch of the existing Antares ELV configuration (i.e., “100” Configuration) would continue. The Draft SEA is available for your review because public involvement is a very important part of the NEPA process. Should you desire, NASA respectfully requests that you review and provide written comments on the Draft SEA by August 3, 2015. Comments should be as specific as possible and should address distinct aspects of the Draft SEA document including alternatives or the adequacy of the environmental analysis. We will consider all comments received in preparing the Final SEA. An electronic version of the Draft SEA is available on the project website at: http://sites.wff.nasa.gov/code250/Antares_DSEA.html. The Draft SEA is also available for review at the Eastern Shore Public Library, Accomac, Virginia; the Chincoteague Island Library, Chincoteague Island, Virginia; and the NASA WFF Visitor’s Center, Route 175, Wallops Island, Virginia. A limited number of hard copies of the Draft SEA are available on a first request basis. Please direct all questions, requests for copies, and comments on the Draft SEA to Mr. Joshua Bundick of the WFF Environmental Office. He can be reached at one of the following: Mail: NASA Wallops Flight Facility Email: [email protected] Mailstop: 250.W Phone: (757) 824-2319 Wallops Island, VA 23337 Fax: (757) 824-1819 We look forward to hearing from you. Thank you for your participation in this process! DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ANTARES 200 CONFIGURATION EXPENDABLE LAUNCH VEHICLE AT WALLOPS FLIGHT FACILITY NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER WALLOPS FLIGHT FACILITY WALLOPS ISLAND, VIRGINIA 23337 Lead Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration Cooperating Agency: Federal Aviation Administration Office of Commercial Space Transportation Proposed Action: Processing, Static Fire, and Launch of the 200 Configuration Antares Expendable Launch Vehicle at Wallops Flight Facility For Further Information: Joshua A. Bundick Lead, Environmental Planning National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Space Flight Center Wallops Flight Facility Wallops Island, VA 23337 (757) 824-2319 [email protected] Date: June 2015 ABSTRACT This Supplemental Environmental Assessment (SEA) addresses the proposed processing, static fire, and launch of the 200 Configuration Antares Expendable Launch Vehicle (ELV) from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Goddard Space Flight Center’s Wallops Flight Facility (WFF), located in Accomack County, Virginia. The SEA has been prepared as a supplement to the 2009 Final Environmental Assessment Expansion of the Wallops Flight Facility Launch Range, and therefore focuses on the differences between the current Antares configuration at WFF and a proposed upgraded version (i.e., the 200 Configuration). Updated information regarding WFF’s environmental context is also provided, as appropriate. This SEA analyzes the potential direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects of two alternatives: the Proposed Action and the No Action Alternative. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Antares 200 Configuration Expendable Launch Vehicle at Wallops Flight Facility Table of Contents Table of Figures ......................................................................................................................... iii Table of Tables .......................................................................................................................... iii 1 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION .................................. 1-1 1.1 Background .......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1.1 Relationship to 2009 Final EA ............................................................................. 1-2 1.1.2 Cooperating Agency ............................................................................................ 1-2 1.2 Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action ......................................................... 1-3 1.2.1 Purpose ................................................................................................................. 1-3 1.2.2 Need ..................................................................................................................... 1-3 1.2.3 Cooperating Agency Purpose and Need .............................................................. 1-3 2 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES ............................................................... 2-1 2.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 No Action Alternative .......................................................................................... 2-1 2.3 Proposed Action ................................................................................................... 2-2 2.3.1 Antares 200 Configuration ELV .......................................................................... 2-2 2.3.2 Antares 200 Configuration Spacecraft ................................................................. 2-4 3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ......... 3-1 3.1 Physical Environment .......................................................................................... 3-3 3.1.1 Soils...................................................................................................................... 3-3 3.1.1.1 Affected Environment .................................................................................... 3-3 3.1.1.2 Environmental Consequences......................................................................... 3-3 3.1.2 Water Quality ....................................................................................................... 3-4 3.1.2.1 Affected Environment .................................................................................... 3-4 3.1.2.2 Environmental Consequences......................................................................... 3-4 3.1.3 Coastal Zone Management .................................................................................. 3-6 3.1.3.1 Regulatory Context ......................................................................................... 3-6 3.1.3.2 Affected Environment .................................................................................... 3-6 3.1.3.3 Environmental Consequences......................................................................... 3-6 Table of Contents i Antares 200 Configuration Expendable Launch Vehicle at Wallops Flight Facility 3.1.4 Air Quality ........................................................................................................... 3-7 3.1.4.1 Affected Environment .................................................................................... 3-7 3.1.4.2 Environmental Consequences......................................................................... 3-8 3.1.5 Noise .................................................................................................................. 3-10 3.1.5.1 Affected Environment .................................................................................. 3-10 3.1.5.2 Environmental Consequences....................................................................... 3-10 3.2 Biological Environment ..................................................................................... 3-16 3.2.1 Vegetation .......................................................................................................... 3-16 3.2.1.1 Affected Environment .................................................................................. 3-16 3.2.1.2 Environmental Consequences....................................................................... 3-16 3.2.2 Wildlife and Migratory Birds............................................................................. 3-17 3.2.2.1 Affected Environment .................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Orbital Lifetime Predictions
    Orbital LIFETIME PREDICTIONS An ASSESSMENT OF model-based BALLISTIC COEFfiCIENT ESTIMATIONS AND ADJUSTMENT FOR TEMPORAL DRAG co- EFfiCIENT VARIATIONS M.R. HaneVEER MSc Thesis Aerospace Engineering Orbital lifetime predictions An assessment of model-based ballistic coecient estimations and adjustment for temporal drag coecient variations by M.R. Haneveer to obtain the degree of Master of Science at the Delft University of Technology, to be defended publicly on Thursday June 1, 2017 at 14:00 PM. Student number: 4077334 Project duration: September 1, 2016 – June 1, 2017 Thesis committee: Dr. ir. E. N. Doornbos, TU Delft, supervisor Dr. ir. E. J. O. Schrama, TU Delft ir. K. J. Cowan MBA TU Delft An electronic version of this thesis is available at http://repository.tudelft.nl/. Summary Objects in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) experience low levels of drag due to the interaction with the outer layers of Earth’s atmosphere. The atmospheric drag reduces the velocity of the object, resulting in a gradual decrease in altitude. With each decayed kilometer the object enters denser portions of the atmosphere accelerating the orbit decay until eventually the object cannot sustain a stable orbit anymore and either crashes onto Earth’s surface or burns up in its atmosphere. The capability of predicting the time an object stays in orbit, whether that object is space junk or a satellite, allows for an estimate of its orbital lifetime - an estimate satellite op- erators work with to schedule science missions and commercial services, as well as use to prove compliance with international agreements stating no passively controlled object is to orbit in LEO longer than 25 years.
    [Show full text]
  • SGAC-Annual-Report-2014.Pdf
    ANNUAL REPORT SPACE GENERATION ADVISORY COUNCIL 2014 In support of the United Nations Programme on Space Applications A. TABLE OF CONTENTS A. Table of Contents 2 In support of the United Nations Programme B. Sponsors and Partners 4 on Space Applications 1. Introduction 10 1.1 About the SGAC 12 14 c/o European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) 1.2 Letter from the Co-chairs 15 Schwarzenbergplatz 6 1.3 Letter from the Executive Director 16 Vienna A-1030 1.4 SGAC output at a glance AUSTRIA 2. SGAC Background 22 2.1 History of the SGAC 24 26 [email protected] 2.2 Leadership and Structure 27 www.spacegeneration.org 2.3 Programme +41 1 718 11 18 30 3. The organisation in 2014 30 32 +43 1 718 11 18 99 3.1 Goal Achievement Review 3.2 SGAC Activity Highlights 36 42 © 2015 Space Generation Advisory Council 3.3 Space Generation Fusion Forum Report 3.4 Space Generation Congress Report 50 3.5 United Nations Report 62 3.6 SGAC Regional Workshops 66 3.7 SGAC Supported Events 68 3.8 Financial Summary 72 Acknowledgements 4. Projects 78 4.1 Project Outcomes and Highlights 80 The SGAC 2014 Annual Report was compiled and 4.2 Space Technologies for Disaster Management Project Group 81 edited by Minoo Rathansabapathy (South Africa/ 4.3 Near Earth Objects Project Group 82 Australia), Andrea Jaime (Spain), Laura Rose (USA) 4.4 Space Law and Policy Project Group 84 and Arno Geens (Belgium) with the assistance of 4.5 Commercial Space Project Group 86 Candice Goodwin (South Africa), Justin Park (USA), 4.6 Space Safety and Sustainability Project Group 88 Nikita Marwaha (United Kingdom), Dario Schor 4.7 Small Satellites Project Group 90 (Argentina/Canada), Leo Teeney (UK) and Abhijeet 4.8 Space Exploration Project Group 92 Kumar (Australia) in editing.
    [Show full text]
  • Commercial Orbital Transportation Services
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration Commercial Orbital Transportation Services A New Era in Spaceflight NASA/SP-2014-617 Commercial Orbital Transportation Services A New Era in Spaceflight On the cover: Background photo: The terminator—the line separating the sunlit side of Earth from the side in darkness—marks the changeover between day and night on the ground. By establishing government-industry partnerships, the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program marked a change from the traditional way NASA had worked. Inset photos, right: The COTS program supported two U.S. companies in their efforts to design and build transportation systems to carry cargo to low-Earth orbit. (Top photo—Credit: SpaceX) SpaceX launched its Falcon 9 rocket on May 22, 2012, from Cape Canaveral, Florida. (Second photo) Three days later, the company successfully completed the mission that sent its Dragon spacecraft to the Station. (Third photo—Credit: NASA/Bill Ingalls) Orbital Sciences Corp. sent its Antares rocket on its test flight on April 21, 2013, from a new launchpad on Virginia’s eastern shore. Later that year, the second Antares lifted off with Orbital’s cargo capsule, (Fourth photo) the Cygnus, that berthed with the ISS on September 29, 2013. Both companies successfully proved the capability to deliver cargo to the International Space Station by U.S. commercial companies and began a new era of spaceflight. ISS photo, center left: Benefiting from the success of the partnerships is the International Space Station, pictured as seen by the last Space Shuttle crew that visited the orbiting laboratory (July 19, 2011). More photos of the ISS are featured on the first pages of each chapter.
    [Show full text]
  • Precision Magnetometers for Aerospace Applications: a Review
    sensors Review Precision Magnetometers for Aerospace Applications: A Review James S. Bennett 1,† , Brian E. Vyhnalek 2,†, Hamish Greenall 1 , Elizabeth M. Bridge 1 , Fernando Gotardo 1 , Stefan Forstner 1 , Glen I. Harris 1 , Félix A. Miranda 2,* and Warwick P. Bowen 1,* 1 School of Mathematics and Physics, The University of Queensland, St. Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia; [email protected] (J.S.B.); [email protected] (H.G.); [email protected] (E.M.B.); [email protected] (F.G.); [email protected] (S.F.); [email protected] (G.I.H.) 2 NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, OH 44135, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] (F.A.M.); [email protected] (W.P.B.) † These authors contributed equally to this work. Abstract: Aerospace technologies are crucial for modern civilization; space-based infrastructure underpins weather forecasting, communications, terrestrial navigation and logistics, planetary observations, solar monitoring, and other indispensable capabilities. Extraplanetary exploration— including orbital surveys and (more recently) roving, flying, or submersible unmanned vehicles—is also a key scientific and technological frontier, believed by many to be paramount to the long-term survival and prosperity of humanity. All of these aerospace applications require reliable control of the craft and the ability to record high-precision measurements of physical quantities. Magnetometers deliver on both of these aspects and have been vital to the success of numerous missions. In this review Citation: Bennett, J.S.; Vyhnalek, paper, we provide an introduction to the relevant instruments and their applications.
    [Show full text]
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration
    9 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Ross B. Garelick Bell American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics HIGHLIGHTS • The President’s Budget Request for NASA in FY 2014 is $17.7 billion, $1.3 billion above the estimated FY 2013 level and $84 million below the enacted FY 2012 level. • NASA’s FY 2013 appropriations suffered two across-the-board reductions, a 1.877% rescission in the FY 2013 Continuing Appropriations, P.L. 113-6, and the forced 5% sequester required by the Budget Control Act of 2011. The President’s Budget Request for FY 2014 does not account for the expected sequester required by the Budget Control Act of 2011 on FY 2014 appropriations. • The Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle and Space Launch System, scheduled for their first combined test launch in 2018, with a target crew launch in 2021, are slightly reduced in funding the President’s FY 2014 Budget Request. • As of May 25, 2012, with Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX) having successfully completing its resupply mission to the ISS, commercial cargo has officially begun operations. SpaceX again resupplied the ISS on March 3, 3013. On April 22, 2013, Orbital Sciences Corporation successfully launched its Antares rocket from NASA’s Wallops Launch Facility on the coast of Virginia, another important milestone in creating a commercial market for cargo to the ISS. Orbital anticipates launching both the Antares rocket and the Cygnus capsule in the fall of 2013, and SpaceX, The Boeing Company, Sierra Nevada Corporation, and unfunded Blue Origin are working toward commercial crew missions to the ISS, with launches to begin in 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • PHONESAT IN-FLIGHT EXPERIENCE RESULTS V4
    PHONESAT IN-FLIGHT EXPERIENCE RESULTS Mr. Alberto Guillen Salas (1,2) [[email protected]] Mr. Watson Attai (1,2), Mr. Ken Y. Oyadomari (1,2), Mr. Cedric Priscal (1,2), Dr. Rogan S. Shimmin (1,2), Mr. Oriol Tintore Gazulla (1,2), Mr. Jasper L. Wolfe (1,2) (1) NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field (CA), United States (2)Stinger Ghaffarian Technologies (SGT,) Moffett Field (CA), United States ABSTRACT Over the last decade, consumer technology has vastly improved its performances, become more affordable and reduced its size. Modern day smartphones offer capabilities that enable us to figure out where we are, which way we are pointing, observe the world around us, and store and transmit this information to wherever we want. These capabilities are remarkably similar to those required for multi-million dollar satellites. The PhoneSat project at NASA Ames Research Center is building a series of CubeSat-size spacecrafts using an off-the-shelf smartphone as its on-board computer with the goal of showing just how simple and cheap space can be. Since the PhoneSat project started, different suborbital and orbital flight activities have proven the viability of this revolutionary approach. In early 2013, the PhoneSat project launched the first triage of PhoneSats into LEO. In the five day orbital life time, the nano-satellites flew the first functioning smartphone-based satellites (using the Nexus One and Nexus S phones), the cheapest satellite (a total parts cost below $3,500) and one of the fastest on-board processors (CPU speed of 1GHz). In this paper, an overview of the PhoneSat project as well as a summary of the in-flight experimental results is presented.
    [Show full text]
  • WORLD SPACECRAFT DIGEST by Jos Heyman 2013 Version: 1 January 2014 © Copyright Jos Heyman
    WORLD SPACECRAFT DIGEST by Jos Heyman 2013 Version: 1 January 2014 © Copyright Jos Heyman The spacecraft are listed, in the first instance, in the order of their International Designation, resulting in, with some exceptions, a date order. Spacecraft which did not receive an International Designation, being those spacecraft which failed to achieve orbit or those which were placed in a sub orbital trajectory, have been inserted in the date order. For each spacecraft the following information is provided: a. International Designation and NORAD number For each spacecraft the International Designation, as allocated by the International Committee on Space Research (COSPAR), has been used as the primary means to identify the spacecraft. This is followed by the NORAD catalogue number which has been assigned to each object in space, including debris etc., in a numerical sequence, rather than a chronoligical sequence. Normally no reference has been made to spent launch vehicles, capsules ejected by the spacecraft or fragments except where such have a unique identification which warrants consideration as a separate spacecraft or in other circumstances which warrants their mention. b. Name The most common name of the spacecraft has been quoted. In some cases, such as for US military spacecraft, the name may have been deduced from published information and may not necessarily be the official name. Alternative names have, however, been mentioned in the description and have also been included in the index. c. Country/International Agency For each spacecraft the name of the country or international agency which owned or had prime responsibility for the spacecraft, or in which the owner resided, has been included.
    [Show full text]
  • SATELLITE-BASED LASER COMMUNICATIONS EPIC Online Technology Meeting on Quarterly Briefing on New Space Communications and Monitoring
    SATELLITE-BASED LASER COMMUNICATIONS EPIC Online Technology Meeting on Quarterly Briefing on New Space Communications and Monitoring 31 MARCH 2021 CHRISTIAN FRHR. VON DER ROPP ABOUT ACCESS.SPACE is an industry body for the small satellite sector uniting 49 Christian von der Ropp companies and organizations globally Stuttgart, Germany Director & Co-Founder EPIC ONLINE TECHNOLOGY MEETING ON QUARTERLY BRIEFING ON NEW SPACE COMMUNICATIONS AND MONITORING, 31 MARCH 2021 COLLABORATION WITH EPIC • EPIC and ACCESS.SPACE today announce an MoU to collaborate and facilitate partnerships between both organizations‘ memberships. • Harnessing ecosystems and unlocking new opportunities for all members • Focussed on but not limited to laser communications EPIC ONLINE TECHNOLOGY MEETING ON QUARTERLY BRIEFING ON NEW SPACE COMMUNICATIONS AND MONITORING, 31 MARCH 2021 TERMINOLOGY Synonyms: • Free Space Optical Communications • Optical Satellite Communications • Laser Communications • Lasercomms • „Space Lasers“ EPIC ONLINE TECHNOLOGY MEETING ON QUARTERLY BRIEFING ON NEW SPACE COMMUNICATIONS AND MONITORING, 31 MARCH 2021 ACCESS.SPACE LASER-RELATED ACTIVITITES Formed in 2020 the Free Space Optical Communications Committee or FSOCC as a working group of ACCESS.SPACE is bringing together the supply chain and vendors of laser communication terminals with existing and future operators of the same with a view to promote collaboration and standardization. FSOCC Board of Chairs Christian Robert Brumley Sven Meyer-Brunswick Frhr. von der Ropp CEO at CommStar & C3PO at Company Director at Laser Light Mynaric ACCESS.SPACE Alliance Communications EPIC ONLINE TECHNOLOGY MEETING ON QUARTERLY BRIEFING ON NEW SPACE COMMUNICATIONS AND MONITORING, 31 MARCH 2021 FIBRE OPTICS VS. FREE SPACE OPTICS EPIC ONLINE TECHNOLOGY MEETING ON QUARTERLY BRIEFING ON NEW SPACE COMMUNICATIONS AND MONITORING, 31 MARCH 2021 BELL‘S ”PHOTOPHONE” AND INVENTION OF LASER fig.
    [Show full text]
  • Satellites Frequency List Update
    All Satellites Frequency List Update 30 Sept 2013, Latest Update by JE9PEL Satellite Number Uplink Downlink Beacon Mode Callsign Active ------------ ----- ----------- ----------- ------- ----------------- ------------ ------ AO-1 (Oscar-1) 00214 . 144.983 CW AO-2 (Oscar-2) 00305 . 144.983 CW AO-3 (Oscar-3) 01293 145.975-146.025 144.325-375 . SSB,CW AO-4 (Oscar-4) 01902 432.145-155 144.300-310 . SSB,CW AO-5 (Oscar-5) 04321 . 29.450 144.050 CW AO-6 (Phase-2A) 06236 145.900-999 29.450-550 . SSB,CW AO-7 (Phase-2B) 07530 145.850-950 29.400-500 29.502 A * AO-7 (Phase-2B) 07530 432.125-175 145.975-925 145.970 B,C * AO-7 (Phase-2B) 07530 . 2304.100 435.100 D(RTTY) AO-8 (Phase-2D) 10703 145.850-900 29.400-500 29.402 SSB,CW AO-8 (Phase-2D) 10703 145.900-999 435.200-100 435.095 SSB,CW UO-9 (UoSAT-1) 12888 . 145.825/435.025 2401.000 SSB,CW AO-10 (Phase-3B) 14129 435.030-180 145.975-825 145.810 SSB,CW UO-11 (UoSAT-2) 14781 . 145.826/435.025 2401.500 (V)FM,(S)PSK UOSAT-2 * MIR 16609 145.985 145.985 145.985 Packet R0MIR-1 RS-12 (Sputnik) 21089 21.210-250 29.410-450 29.408 SSB,CW RS-13 (Sputnik) 21089 21.260-300 145.860-900 145.862 SSB,CW AO-13 (Phase-3C) 19216 435.423-573 145.975-825 145.812 SSB,CW UO-14 (UoSAT-3) 20437 145.975 435.070 .
    [Show full text]
  • NASA Final Supplemental Environmental Assessment for the Antares 200 Configuration Expendable Launch Vehicle at Wallops Flight
    FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ANTARES 200 CONFIGURATION EXPENDABLE LAUNCH VEHICLE AT WALLOPS FLIGHT FACILITY www.nasa.gov September 2015 Front cover image: The Antares Orb-2 launched the third Cygnus from Wallops Island, Virginia to the International Space Station on July 13, 2014. Photo Credit: Brea Reeves, NASA WFF Optical Systems Group Back cover image: The Antares Orb-D1 mission launched on September 18, 2013, from Wallops Island, Virginia, with the first Cygnus on board to rendezvous with the International Space Station. Photo Credit: Jamie Adkins, NASA WFF Optical Systems Group FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ANTARES 200 CONFIGURATION EXPENDABLE LAUNCH VEHICLE AT WALLOPS FLIGHT FACILITY NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER WALLOPS FLIGHT FACILITY WALLOPS ISLAND, VIRGINIA 23337 Lead Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration Cooperating Agency: Federal Aviation Administration Office of Commercial Space Transportation Proposed Action: Processing, Static Fire, and Launch of the 200 Configuration Antares Expendable Launch Vehicle at Wallops Flight Facility For Further Information: Joshua A. Bundick Lead, Environmental Planning National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Space Flight Center Wallops Flight Facility Wallops Island, VA 23337 (757) 824-2319 [email protected] Date: September 2015 ABSTRACT This Supplemental Environmental Assessment (SEA) addresses the proposed processing, static fire, and launch of the 200 Configuration Antares Expendable Launch Vehicle (ELV) from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Goddard Space Flight Center’s Wallops Flight Facility (WFF), located in Accomack County, Virginia. The SEA has been prepared as a supplement to the 2009 Final Environmental Assessment Expansion of the Wallops Flight Facility Launch Range, and therefore focuses on the differences between the current Antares configuration (i.e., the “100” Configuration) at WFF and a proposed upgraded version (i.e., the “200” Configuration).
    [Show full text]
  • Probing the Universe with Space Based Low-Frequency Radio Measurements
    Probing the Universe with Space Based Low-Frequency Radio Measurements by Alexander M. Hegedus A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Atmospheric, Oceanic and Space Sciences and Scientific Computing) in The University of Michigan 2019 Doctoral Committee: Professor Justin Kasper, Chair Dr. Joseph Lazio, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Professor Michael Liemohn Professor Ward Manchester IV Associate Professor Shravan Veerapaneni Alexander M. Hegedus [email protected] ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6247-6934 ©Alexander M. Hegedus 2019 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to gratefully acknowledge all the mentorship I received from from NASA’s Jet Propul- sion Laboratory’s (JPL) Dr. Konstantin Belov, Dr. Nikta Amiri, Dr. Joseph Lazio, Dr. Andrew Romero-Wolf, Dr. Farah Alibay, and Melissa Soriano. I would also like to thank JPL’s Strategic University Research Partnership (SURP) Program, which funded over half of my time in graduate school. Part of this research was carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. I would also like to acknowledge the Network for Exploration and Space Science (NESS) team. They sparked my imagination with their plans of lunar radio science, providing great ideas and great camaraderie. This work was directly supported by the NASA Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute cooperative agreement number 80ARC017M0006, as part of the NESS team. Thank you to Dr. Justin Kasper, who picked me out of a stack, and in a single meeting exhibited such a flaming curiosity for universe that it convinced to come here for my PhD.
    [Show full text]
  • An FPGA-Based Adaptive Forward Error Correction Protocol for Cubesats
    An FPGA-based Adaptive Forward Error Correction Protocol for CubeSats by Sandile Mkhaliphi Thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Engineering (Electronic) in the Faculty of Engineering at Stellenbosch University Supervisor: Mnr. A. Barnard March 2017 Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za Declaration By submitting this thesis electronically, I declare that the entirety of the work contained therein is my own, original work, that I am the sole author thereof (save to the extent explic- itly otherwise stated), that reproduction and publication thereof by Stellenbosch University will not infringe any third party rights and that I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted it for obtaining any qualification. March 2017 Date: .......................................... Copyright © 2017 Stellenbosch University All rights reserved. i Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za Abstract CubeSats have become popular due to their simplified model that reduces development time and costs. The standard, however, suffers from limitations imposed by the small form factor. Research is undertaken at different levels to improve the performance of CubeSats, of which one is on the communication subsystem. The question is how the throughput per satellite-to-ground communication session can be improved using modified error correc- tion methods. Previous work at the ESL proposed a hybrid protocol design of the AX.25 and the FX.25, known as the AFX.25, whose simulation results suggested improved performance over pure protocol implementations. The AX.25 protocol has an error checking functionality but with- out error correction, so the FX.25 was introduced as a wrapper to the AX.25 to provide for error correction.
    [Show full text]