DOCSLIB.ORG

Engineering Design Challenges: Spacecraft Structures Educator Guide

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

National Aeronautics and Space Administration Spacecraft Structures A Lesson in Engineering engineering is out of this world Cover Illustrations: Artist concepts of NASA’s Space Launch System and the launch pad at Kennedy Space Center. Authors (Original) Nick Haddad, TERC Harold McWilliams, TERC Paul Wagoner, TERC Authors (Update) Twila Schneider: Marshall Space Flight Center, Space Launch System Program, ASRC Federal John Weis: Marshall Space Flight Center, Office of STEM Engagement Design, Layout and Graphics (Update) Kevin O’Brien: Marshall Space Flight Center, Space Launch System Program, Media Fusion, Inc. Table of Contents 1. Overview ........................................................................................................................................... 1 2. Next Generation Science Standards ................................................................................................ 2 3. Common Core State Standards for Mathematics ............................................................................ 4 4. Background Space Launch System .............................................................................................................. 5 Spacecraft Structures ............................................................................................................... 9 5. Teacher Preparation Materials for Students ............................................................................................................. 12 Build the Launcher .................................................................................................................. 13 Build the Rockets .................................................................................................................... 15 Practice Launching a Rocket .................................................................................................. 15 Prepare the Classroom ........................................................................................................... 16 Teaching Strategies for an Engineering Design Challenge ..................................................... 17 Helping Students Understand the Design Process ................................................................ 18 6. Classroom Sessions Session 1 ................................................................................................................................ 19 Session 2 ................................................................................................................................ 23 Sessions 3 and 4 .................................................................................................................... 26 Session 5 ................................................................................................................................ 29 Session 6 ................................................................................................................................ 31 Linking Design Strategies and Observations to Science Concepts ....................................... 32 7. Modifications and Extensions ....................................................................................................... 40 8. Appendices A. Resources .......................................................................................................................... 41 B. Handouts and Recording Sheets ....................................................................................... 42 which represents low-Earth orbit. Then they 1. Overview design, build, and test their own structure designs. They revise their designs over Space Transportation several design sessions, trying to maintain or increase the strength and reduce the weight of NASA engineers at Marshall Space Flight their structure. They document their designs Center, along with their partners at other with sketches and written descriptions. As a NASA centers and in private industry, are culmination, students compile their results into designing and building the next generation a poster and present them to the class. of rockets and spacecraft to transport cargo, equipment, and human explorers to space. Known collectively as Deep Space Exploration Systems, the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket, the Orion spacecraft, and ground systems at Kennedy Space Center are carrying out a bold vision of human space exploration. Space Policy Directive 1 (SPD-1), signed in December 2017, provides for a U.S.-led, integrated program with private sector partners for a human return to the Figure 1. Model thrust structure. Moon, followed by missions to Mars and beyond. This design challenge focuses on the Time Required SLS rocket, an advanced launch vehicle that provides the foundation for human exploration The design challenge can be carried out in six beyond Earth’s orbit. 45-minute class periods, but you could easily extend it for twice that length of time. We Connecting to Engineering provide some ideas for extensions at the end and Science of the guide. You will need to invest 4 – 8 hours gathering The Engineering Design Challenge connects the materials, building the test stand, trying students with the work of NASA engineers by out your own designs, reading the guide, and engaging them in similar design challenges of preparing the classroom. their own. With some simple and inexpensive materials, you, the teacher, can lead an Value to Students exciting unit that focuses on a specific problem that NASA engineers must solve This activity will provide your students with and the process they use to solve it. In the the opportunity to solve a challenge based on classroom, students design, build, test, and a real-world problem that is part of the space revise their own solutions to problems that program and to use creativity, cleverness, share fundamental science and engineering and scientific knowledge in doing so. During issues with the challenges facing NASA these activities, students will have many engineers. opportunities to learn about forces, structures, and energy transfer. The culminating activity The Design Challenge gives students an opportunity to develop their presentation and communication skills. The challenge: Build a model thrust structure (Figure 1) that is as light as possible, yet Research Opportunities strong enough to withstand the load of a “launch to orbit” three times. Students first Appendix A (p. 41) of this guide includes many determine the amount of force needed to web sites where students can obtain additional launch a model rocket to 3.3 feet [1 meter (m)], information. 1 2. Next Generation Science CROSS-CUTTING CONCEPTS: Standards Engineering, Technology, and Science on Society and the Natural World MS-ETS1 – Engineering Design HS-ETS1 – Engineering Design STANDARDS: STANDARDS: MS-ETS1-1: Define the criteria and constraints of a design problem with sufficient precision HS-ETS1-2: Design a solution to a complex to ensure a successful solution, taking into real-world problem by breaking it down into account relevant scientific principles and smaller, more manageable problems that can potential impacts on people and the natural be solved through engineering. environment that may limit possible solutions. HS-ETS1-3: Evaluate a solution to a complex MS-ETS1-2: Evaluate competing design real-world problem based on prioritized criteria solutions using a systematic process to and trade-offs that account for a range of determine how well they meet the criteria and constraints, including cost, safety, reliability, constraints of the problem. and aesthetics, as well as possible social, cultural, and environmental impacts. MS-ETS1-3: Analyze data from tests to determine similarities and differences among DISCIPLINARY CORE IDEA: several design solutions to identify the best characteristics of each that can be combined ETS1.B: When evaluating solutions it is into a new solution to better meet the criteria important to take into account a range of for success. constraints including cost, safety, reliability and aesthetics, and to consider social, cultural MS-ETS1-4: Develop a model to generate and environmental impacts. data for iterative testing and modification of a proposed object, tool, or process such that an CROSS-CUTTING CONCEPTS: optimal design can be achieved. Engineering, Technology, and Science on Society and the Natural World DISCIPLINARY CORE IDEA: ETS1.A: The more precisely a design task’s MS-PS2 – Motion and Stability: Forces criteria and constraints can be defined, the and Interactions more likely it is that the designed solution will STANDARDS: be successful. Specification of constraints includes consideration of scientific principles MS-PS2-1: Apply Newton’s Third Law to and other relevant knowledge that is likely to design a solution to a problem involving the limit possible solutions. motion of two colliding objects. ETS1.B: A solution needs to be tested, and MS-PS2-2: Plan an investigation to provide then modified on the basis of the test results, evidence that the change in an object’s motion in order to improve it. depends on the sum of the forces on the object and the mass of the object. ETS1.C: Although one design may not perform the best across all tests, identifying the MS-PS3-5: Construct, use, and present characteristics of the design that performed arguments to support the claim that when the the best in each test can provide useful kinetic energy of an object changes, energy is information for the redesign process—that transferred to or from the object. is, some of those characteristics
Recommended publications
  • Vulcan Centaur

    Vulcan Centaur

    VULCAN CENTAUR The Vulcan Centaur rocket design leverages the flight-proven success of the Delta IV and Atlas V launch vehicles while introducing new technologies and innovative features to ensure a reliable and aordable space launch service. Vulcan Centaur will service a diverse range of markets including 225 ft commercial, civil, science, cargo and national security space customers. 1 The spacecraft is encapsulated in a 5.4-m- (17.7-ft-) diameter payload fairing (PLF), a sandwich composite structure made with a vented aluminum-honeycomb core and graphite-epoxy face sheets. The bisector (two-piece shell) PLF encapsulates the spacecraft. The payload attach fitting (PAF) is a similar sandwich composite structure creating the mating interface from spacecraft to second stage. The PLF separates using a debris-free horizontal and vertical separation system with 2 200 ft spring packs and frangible joint assembly. The payload fairing is available in the 15.5-m (51-ft) standard and 21.3-m (70-ft) 1 long configurations. The Centaur upper stage is 5.4 m (17.7 ft) in diameter and 3 11.7 m (38.5 ft) long with a 120,000-lb propellant capacity. Its propellant tanks are constructed of pressure-stabilized, corrosion-resistant stainless steel. Centaur is a liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen-fueled vehicle, with two RL10C 4 engines. The Vulcan Centaur Heavy vehicle, flies the upgraded 2 Centaur using RL10CX engines with nozzle extensions. The 5 175 ft cryogenic tanks are insulated with spray-on foam insulation (SOFI) to manage boil o of cryogens during flight. An aft equipment shelf provides the structural mountings for vehicle electronics.
  • Space Launch System (Sls) Motors

    Space Launch System (Sls) Motors

    Propulsion Products Catalog SPACE LAUNCH SYSTEM (SLS) MOTORS For NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS), Northrop Grumman manufactures the five-segment SLS heavy- lift boosters, the booster separation motors (BSM), and the Launch Abort System’s (LAS) launch abort motor and attitude control motor. The SLS five-segment booster is the largest solid rocket motor ever built for flight. The SLS booster shares some design heritage with flight-proven four-segment space shuttle reusable solid rocket motors (RSRM), but generates 20 percent greater average thrust and 24 percent greater total impulse. While space shuttle RSRM production has ended, sustained booster production for SLS helps provide cost savings and access to reliable material sources. Designed to push the spent RSRMs safely away from the space shuttle, Northrop Grumman BSMs were rigorously qualified for human space flight and successfully used on the last fifteen space shuttle missions. These same motors are a critical part of NASA’s SLS. Four BSMs are installed in the forward frustum of each five-segment booster and four are installed in the aft skirt, for a total of 16 BSMs per launch. The launch abort motor is an integral part of NASA’s LAS. The LAS is designed to safely pull the Orion crew module away from the SLS launch vehicle in the event of an emergency on the launch pad or during ascent. Northrop Grumman is on contract to Lockheed Martin to build the abort motor and attitude control motor—Lockheed is the prime contractor for building the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle designed for use on NASA’s SLS.
  • Rocket Nozzles: 75 Years of Research and Development

    Rocket Nozzles: 75 Years of Research and Development

    Sådhanå Ó (2021) 46:76 Indian Academy of Sciences https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-021-01584-6Sadhana(0123456789().,-volV)FT3](0123456789().,-volV) Rocket nozzles: 75 years of research and development SHIVANG KHARE1 and UJJWAL K SAHA2,* 1 Department of Energy and Process Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7491 Trondheim, Norway 2 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati, Guwahati 781039, India e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] MS received 28 August 2020; revised 20 December 2020; accepted 28 January 2021 Abstract. The nozzle forms a large segment of the rocket engine structure, and as a whole, the performance of a rocket largely depends upon its aerodynamic design. The principal parameters in this context are the shape of the nozzle contour and the nozzle area expansion ratio. A careful shaping of the nozzle contour can lead to a high gain in its performance. As a consequence of intensive research, the design and the shape of rocket nozzles have undergone a series of development over the last several decades. The notable among them are conical, bell, plug, expansion-deflection and dual bell nozzles, besides the recently developed multi nozzle grid. However, to the best of authors’ knowledge, no article has reviewed the entire group of nozzles in a systematic and comprehensive manner. This paper aims to review and bring all such development in one single frame. The article mainly focuses on the aerodynamic aspects of all the rocket nozzles developed till date and summarizes the major findings covering their design, development, utilization, benefits and limitations.
  • The SKYLON Spaceplane

    The SKYLON Spaceplane

    The SKYLON Spaceplane Borg K.⇤ and Matula E.⇤ University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, 80309, USA This report outlines the major technical aspects of the SKYLON spaceplane as a final project for the ASEN 5053 class. The SKYLON spaceplane is designed as a single stage to orbit vehicle capable of lifting 15 mT to LEO from a 5.5 km runway and returning to land at the same location. It is powered by a unique engine design that combines an air- breathing and rocket mode into a single engine. This is achieved through the use of a novel lightweight heat exchanger that has been demonstrated on a reduced scale. The program has received funding from the UK government and ESA to build a full scale prototype of the engine as it’s next step. The project is technically feasible but will need to overcome some manufacturing issues and high start-up costs. This report is not intended for publication or commercial use. Nomenclature SSTO Single Stage To Orbit REL Reaction Engines Ltd UK United Kingdom LEO Low Earth Orbit SABRE Synergetic Air-Breathing Rocket Engine SOMA SKYLON Orbital Maneuvering Assembly HOTOL Horizontal Take-O↵and Landing NASP National Aerospace Program GT OW Gross Take-O↵Weight MECO Main Engine Cut-O↵ LACE Liquid Air Cooled Engine RCS Reaction Control System MLI Multi-Layer Insulation mT Tonne I. Introduction The SKYLON spaceplane is a single stage to orbit concept vehicle being developed by Reaction Engines Ltd in the United Kingdom. It is designed to take o↵and land on a runway delivering 15 mT of payload into LEO, in the current D-1 configuration.
  • 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

    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.
  • Status of the Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster

    Status of the Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster

    The Space Congress® Proceedings 1980 (17th) A New Era In Technology Apr 1st, 8:00 AM Status of The Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster William P. Horton Solid Rocket Booster Engineering Office, George C. Marshall Space Flight Center, Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings Scholarly Commons Citation Horton, William P., "Status of The Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster" (1980). The Space Congress® Proceedings. 3. https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings/proceedings-1980-17th/session-1/3 This Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Space Congress® Proceedings by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STATUS OF THE SPACE SHUTTLE SOLID ROCKET BOOSTER William P. Horton, Chief Engineer Solid Rocket Booster Engineering Office George C. Marshall Space Flight Center, AL 35812 ABSTRACT discuss retrieval and refurbishment plans for Booster reuse, and will address Booster status Two Solid Rocket Boosters provide the primary for multimission use. first stage thrust for the Space Shuttle. These Boosters, the largest and most powerful solid rocket vehicles to meet established man- BOOSTER CONFIGURATION rated design criteria, are unique in that they are also designed to be recovered, refurbished, It is appropriate to review the Booster config­ and reused. uration before describing the mission profile. The Booster is 150 feet long and is 148 inches The first SRB f s have been stacked on the in diameter (Figure 1), The inert weight Mobile Launch Platform at the Kennedy Space is 186,000 pounds and the propellant weight is Center and are ready to be mated with the approximately 1.1 million pounds for each External Tank and Orbiter in preparation for Booster.
  • Atlas V Cutaway Poster

    Atlas V Cutaway Poster

    ATLAS V Since 2002, Atlas V rockets have delivered vital national security, science and exploration, and commercial missions for customers across the globe including the U.S. Air Force, the National Reconnaissance Oice and NASA. 225 ft The spacecraft is encapsulated in either a 5-m (17.8-ft) or a 4-m (13.8-ft) diameter payload fairing (PLF). The 4-m-diameter PLF is a bisector (two-piece shell) fairing consisting of aluminum skin/stringer construction with vertical split-line longerons. The Atlas V 400 series oers three payload fairing options: the large (LPF, shown at left), the extended (EPF) and the extra extended (XPF). The 5-m PLF is a sandwich composite structure made with a vented aluminum-honeycomb core and graphite-epoxy face sheets. The bisector (two-piece shell) PLF encapsulates both the Centaur upper stage and the spacecraft, which separates using a debris-free pyrotechnic actuating 200 ft system. Payload clearance and vehicle structural stability are enhanced by the all-aluminum forward load reactor (FLR), which centers the PLF around the Centaur upper stage and shares payload shear loading. The Atlas V 500 series oers 1 three payload fairing options: the short (shown at left), medium 18 and long. 1 1 The Centaur upper stage is 3.1 m (10 ft) in diameter and 12.7 m (41.6 ft) long. Its propellant tanks are constructed of pressure-stabilized, corrosion-resistant stainless steel. Centaur is a liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen-fueled vehicle. It uses a single RL10 engine producing 99.2 kN (22,300 lbf) of thrust.
  • Abstract US Patent References

    Abstract US Patent References

    Architecture for Reusable Responsive Exploration Systems: ARES - Platform and Reusable Responsive Architecture for Innovative Space Exploration: PRAISE (Part 1) PATENT PENDING Abstract A comprehensive Modular Reusable Responsive Space Exploration Platform (Architecture) composed of multiple modular reusable elements such that the assemblies can be flexibly configured into systems for low earth orbits launches and for long-range exploration such as orbits to moon, Lagrange points and others. This platform & architecture is named as Architecture for Reusable Responsive Exploration System (acronym ARES) / Platform and Reusable Responsive Architecture for Innovative Space Exploration (acronym PRAISE), in short ARES/PRAISE or simply ARES. It is also known as Alpha Spaces Architecture and Platform (acronym ASAP), in short as “αPlatform” or “αArchitecture”, or “αAres”. As an example, the configuration involves reusable lightweight wing, core stage, (optional booster stages) combination of expendable upper stage and reusable crew capsule. Further, the expendable upper stage can be re-used to serve as in-orbit fuel depots and for other innovative uses. This is first part of the multi part patent application. Inventor: Atreya, Dinesh S. US Patent References US Patent 6158693 - Recoverable booster stage and recovery method US Patent 4878637 - Modular space station US Patent 6726154 - Reusable space access launch vehicle system US Patent 6113032 - Delivering liquid propellant in a reusable booster stage US Patent 4557444 - Aerospace vehicle US Patent 4880187 - Multipurpose modular spacecraft US Patent 4452412 - Space shuttle with rail system and aft thrust structure securing solid rocket boosters to external tank US Patent 4802639 - Horizontal-takeoff transatmospheric launch system US Patent 4884770 - Earth-to-orbit vehicle providing a reusable orbital stage US Patent 4265416 - Orbiter/launch system U.S.
  • A Pictorial History of Rockets

    A Pictorial History of Rockets

    he mighty space rockets of today are the result A Pictorial Tof more than 2,000 years of invention, experi- mentation, and discovery. First by observation and inspiration and then by methodical research, the History of foundations for modern rocketry were laid. Rockets Building upon the experience of two millennia, new rockets will expand human presence in space back to the Moon and Mars. These new rockets will be versatile. They will support Earth orbital missions, such as the International Space Station, and off- world missions millions of kilometers from home. Already, travel to the stars is possible. Robotic spacecraft are on their way into interstellar space as you read this. Someday, they will be followed by human explorers. Often lost in the shadows of time, early rocket pioneers “pushed the envelope” by creating rocket- propelled devices for land, sea, air, and space. When the scientific principles governing motion were discovered, rockets graduated from toys and novelties to serious devices for commerce, war, travel, and research. This work led to many of the most amazing discoveries of our time. The vignettes that follow provide a small sampling of stories from the history of rockets. They form a rocket time line that includes critical developments and interesting sidelines. In some cases, one story leads to another, and in others, the stories are inter- esting diversions from the path. They portray the inspirations that ultimately led to us taking our first steps into outer space. NASA’s new Space Launch System (SLS), commercial launch systems, and the rockets that follow owe much of their success to the accomplishments presented here.
  • Control of NASA's Space Launch System

    Control of NASA's Space Launch System

    Success Stories FOR CONTROL Control of NASA’s Space Launch System The flight control system for the NASA Space Launch System (SLS) employs a control architecture that evolved from Saturn, Space Shuttle, and Ares I-X while also incorporating modern enhancements. This control system, baselined for the first unmanned launch, has been verified and successfully flight-tested on the Ares I-X rocket and an F/A-18 aircraft. The development of the launch vehicle itself came on the heels of the Space Shuttle retirement in 2011 and will deliver more payload to orbit and produce more thrust than any other vehicle, past or present, opening the way to new frontiers of space exploration as it carries the Orion crew vehicle, equipment, and experiments into new territories. The initial 70-metric-ton vehicle consists of four RS-25 core stage engines from the Space Shuttle inventory, two five-segment solid rocket boosters that are advanced versions of the Space Shuttle boosters, and a core stage that resembles the External Tank and carries the liquid propellant while also serving as the vehicle’s structural backbone. Just above SLS’s core stage is the Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS), based on the payload motor used by the Delta IV Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV). Challenges of Controlling the Space Launch System As with all large launch vehicles, the SLS control system must balance the competing needs of maximizing performance while maintaining robustness to limitations in preflight models. With its high thrust, large size, and multistructural load paths, SLS exhibits a high degree of structural flexion with nonplanar characteristics.
  • Launch Vehicle Control Center Architectures

    Launch Vehicle Control Center Architectures

    Launch Vehicle Control Center Architectures Michael D. Watson1, Amy Epps2, and Van Woodruff3 NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL 35812 Michael Jacob Vachon4 NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX 77058 Julio Monreal5 European Space Agency, Launchers Directorate, Paris, France Marl Levesque6 United Launch Alliance, Vandenberg AFB and Randall Williams7 and Tom McLaughlin8 Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA 90245 Launch vehicles within the international community vary greatly in their configuration and processing. Each launch site has a unique processing flow based on the specific launch vehicle configuration. Launch and flight operations are managed through a set of control centers associated with each launch site. Each launch site has a control center for launch operations; however flight operations support varies from being co-located with the launch site to being shared with the space vehicle control center. There is also a nuance of some having an engineering support center which may be co-located with either the launch or flight control center, or in a separate geographical location altogether. A survey of control center architectures is presented for various launch vehicles including the NASA Space Launch System (SLS), United Launch Alliance (ULA) Atlas V and Delta IV, and the European Space Agency (ESA) Ariane 5. Each of these control center architectures shares some similarities in basic structure while differences in functional distribution also exist. The driving functions which lead to these factors are considered and a model of control center architectures is proposed which supports these commonalities and variations. I. INTRODUCTION Launch vehicles in both Europe and the United States have been operating successfully for several decades.
  • Evolved Expendable Launch Operations at Cape Canaveral, 2002-2009

    Evolved Expendable Launch Operations at Cape Canaveral, 2002-2009

    EVOLVED EXPENDABLE LAUNCH OPERATIONS AT CAPE CANAVERAL 2002 – 2009 by Mark C. Cleary 45th SPACE WING History Office PREFACE This study addresses ATLAS V and DELTA IV Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) operations at Cape Canaveral, Florida. It features all the EELV missions launched from the Cape through the end of Calendar Year (CY) 2009. In addition, the first chapter provides an overview of the EELV effort in the 1990s, summaries of EELV contracts and requests for facilities at Cape Canaveral, deactivation and/or reconstruction of launch complexes 37 and 41 to support EELV operations, typical EELV flight profiles, and military supervision of EELV space operations. The lion’s share of this work highlights EELV launch campaigns and the outcome of each flight through the end of 2009. To avoid confusion, ATLAS V missions are presented in Chapter II, and DELTA IV missions appear in Chapter III. Furthermore, missions are placed in three categories within each chapter: 1) commercial, 2) civilian agency, and 3) military space operations. All EELV customers employ commercial launch contractors to put their respective payloads into orbit. Consequently, the type of agency sponsoring a payload (the Air Force, NASA, NOAA or a commercial satellite company) determines where its mission summary is placed. Range officials mark all launch times in Greenwich Mean Time, as indicated by a “Z” at various points in the narrative. Unfortunately, the convention creates a one-day discrepancy between the local date reported by the media and the “Z” time’s date whenever the launch occurs late at night, but before midnight. (This proved true for seven of the military ATLAS V and DELTA IV missions presented here.) In any event, competent authorities have reviewed all the material presented in this study, and it is releasable to the general public.