Paper Reference No: SSC02-X-1

Kodiak Star – The Mission, the Challenges, the Success A look at Lesson’s Learned from the first orbital flight from Alaska

Garrett Lee Skrobot, National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Abstract AIAA/USU conference on Small Satellites with representatives from National The Kodiak Star was a fast paced mission Aeronautics and Space Administration utilizing a number of first flight items (NASA) and the United States Air Force including a payload upper deck, a light (USAF). The resulting payload band separation system, and a method of compliment included USAF sponsored deploying multiple payloads from the small satellites and a NASA sponsored launch vehicle. The total integration time payload, which were other wise without a for this mission was 10-months from a ride to space. Agreements were developed novel remote launch complex. The and feasibility studies performed to mission configuration consisted of three establish the mission. Multinational Air force Payloads (PICOSat, PCSat, groups were required to achieve the Sapphire) and one NASA sponsored integration of this complement of payload, Starshine 3. On September 29, payloads. This mission required the 2001, at 6.40p.m. ADT the Kodiak Star involvement of two government mission successfully lifted off from the organizations, one international company, Kodiak Launch Complex and 2-hours and and one domestic company with two 40 minutes later, the complete teams, two colleges and one private entity. complement of spacecraft successfully Since the mission itself was designed to separated. The success of this mission is require a short integration period, clear attributed to teamwork amongst communication amongst all parties was multinational groups, early identification essential. Lessons learned from the and resolution to problems, and focus on a mission included the ability to form a team goal of launching the Kodiak Star in a environment early in the integration, minimum time frame, 10 months. understanding the flow of communication

and information, and implementing this Introduction approach through launch. The team The Kodiak Star mission initial environment and interaction were key to discussions occurred during the 14th

1 the success of the mission of the Kodiak with fluctuations in solar extreme Star. ultraviolet radiation. Previous Starshine During the 10-month integration period, spacecraft were free flyers released from Kodiak Star experienced several the Shuttle cargo bay and were restricted challenges that could have jeopardized the to a low earth orbit and inclination. With mission. Issues and concerns were a ride on the Athena I from Kodiak addressed quickly. It was agreed early in Alaska, Starshine would be able to achieve the process that any problems must be a much higher orbit with a greater corrected expeditiously and retest inclination. This would give Starshine 3 a successfully completed within the greater coverage area over the earth for designed schedule. These components increased sighting around the world. were essential to the successful completion of the mission. The Mission In October 2000, NASA agreed to sponsor Background of the Mission Starshine 3 on the Athena vehicle with the Air Force complement of experimental The Kodiak Star mission was a unique spacecraft. The Kodiak mission would mission from the very start, in that the consist of two co-primary payloads team would be flying the first orbital (PICOSat for the USAF and the NASA launch vehicle from a remote site in sponsored Starshine 3). The PCSat (US Alaska with a diverse team. It was Navel Academy) and Sapphire formulated at a lunch meeting during the th (Washington University- St Louis) 14 Small Sat Conference, where the spacecraft would be classified as USAF and NASA started discussing a secondary payloads on the mission. The possible complement of three Air Force primary mission requirement was to place payloads on an Athena I. An Athena PICOSat (built by Surrey Inc. of Great launch vehicle became available when the Britain) at 800km with an inclination of NASA VCL spacecraft experienced 67° and release Starshine3 at an altitude of technical difficulties and was de- 500km. The only requirement for the two manifested from that vehicle. NASA remaining secondary spacecraft was to be Headquarters took the lead in searching placed in orbit somewhere in space. Since for a NASA spacecraft that matched the PICOSat had the highest altitude as a profile of the mission. After the search for requirement, and to reduce risk to the a NASA suitable payload for the mission other spacecraft, PICOSat was selected to was unsuccessful, NASA worked with the be the first spacecraft deployed. PCSat and Air Force for a complement of payloads. Sapphire were selected to deploy next. During the negotiation with the USAF, the PCSat was designed with long “tape Starshine project approached NASA about measure” antennas that were coiled up the possibility of launching Starshine 3 on under the spacecraft when mated to their the Athena mission. Starshine 3 is the third separation adapter. At separation, these in a series of spacecraft built with the help antennas would deploy and required a of students from around the world. The large area for clearance as PCSat separated Starshine 3 mission is to measure upper from the Payload Upper Deck. With this in atmospheric density by measuring the rate mind, it was determined to separate of orbital decay of mirrored satellite and Sapphire after PICOSat. This would correlate variations in atmospheric density eliminate the risk of the PCSat’s antenna

2 impacting Sapphire as it deployed. Once maneuver to lower the orbit from 800km the Sapphire spacecraft was separated, a circular to 500km circular (Figure 1) and delay was built into the software to give prepared for the separation of Starshine 3. some time before PCSat separated. After Upon Starshine 3 separation, the OMA the PCSat spacecraft separated from the performed a Collision Contamination Payload Upper Deck, the Lockheed Martin Avoidance Maneuver (CCAM), to assure Astronautics (LMA) Orbital Adjust that it would not re-contact the spacecraft. Module (OAM) performed an orbit change

Figure 1

Kodiak Star Mission Design

PICOSat, Sapphire, PCSat 800 km

500 km

Incl = 67 deg

StarShine 3

PICOSat PCSat Sapphire Starshine Mass (kg) 67 15 22 91 Orbit Alt Range (km) 650-1100 200-1400 500-1100 ?-500 Desired Orbit Alt (km) 8 0 0 1100 110 0 5 00 Orbit Inclination (deg) 50-70 40-90 40-90 ? Desired In clin ation (deg) 5 5 9 0 9 0 polar

Schedule integration flow timeline to reduce schedule by 14-20 months without One of the greatest challenges facing the compromising normal analyses, testing Kodiak Star team was schedule and and reviews. The mission was initiated 18 timing. This mission had a very aggressive October 2000 with a launch date set for 10-month integration schedule as August 31, 2001. compared to the normal integration flows for NASA missions of 24 – 30 months. The goal of the team was to streamline the

3

Figure 2

Kodiak Star Integration

2000 2001 TASK Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Kickoff/ MIWG/GOWG 10/18 12/13 1/11 3/8 5/9 7/11 GORR Launch Site 11/2 KLC Site Visit 5/1 5/30 Mobile Range Equip on KLC System 10/19 7/30 Analysis/Integration Spacecraft Fit Check 3/13 3/20 Athena Stack ing 6/1 6/19 Athena Processing 6/19 9/29 Starshine Mate to PUD 7/30 Sapphire Mate to PUD 8/8 PCSat Mate to PUD 8/9 PICOSat Mate to PUD 8/15 Encapsulation 9/4 Encap. Assembly Stack 9/5 Peer Team Review 5/4 5/25 MDR I MDR II Mission Dress 8/3 8/13 Rehearsal KSC Center Director 8/30 Review

Flight Readness Review 9/16 for ILC on 9/22

Launch Readness 9/19 Review for ILC on 9/22

ILC - Intial 8/28 ILC - Pre 9/11 9/17 ILC - Post 9/11 9/22 Solar Flares 9/24 ILC - Launch 9/29

The Challenges which consisted of the Space Test Program (STP) from the Department of The Team Defense (DoD), which was responsible for Even though the Kodiak Star team itself PICOSat, PCSat, and Sapphire. The was one of the major reasons for the NASA sponsored spacecraft Starshine 3 success of the mission, it was one of the was managed by Professor Gil Moore of challenges as well. The Kodiak Star team the Starshine Project. Lockheed Martin organization was developed with NASA was the launch service provider for the KSC as the nucleus with five different Athena I and was contracted to perform organizations matrixed to NASA (Figure launch site activation. The Alaskan 3). NASA KSC was responsible for the Aerospace Development Corporation Mission and Launch Management function (AADC) managed the Kodiak Launch during the integration flow. Spacecraft Complex. The other organizations on the customers interface with the NASA team, team were NASA’s Wallops Flight

4 Facility who was responsible for ground weather forecasting and prediction during and flight safety, and the 45th Space Wing testing and launch countdown. Weather Officer, who was responsible for Figure 3

Kodiak Star Team Organizations

MISSION & LAUNCH NASA CUSTOMER MANAGEMENT STARSHINE 3 Starshine SATELLITE DoD Project Space Test NASA CUSTOMER Program SATELLITES: NASA -PCSAT Kennedy Space th -PICOSAT 45 Wing -SAPPHIRE Center Weather Officer

Lockheed NASA Martin Wallops Flight Facility RANGE SAFETY & AADC RANGE OPERATIONS NASA CONTRACTOR ATHENA I LAUNCH VEHICLE & LAUNCH SITE INTEGRATION KODIAK LAUNCH COMPLEX

The NASA Mission Integration Team the Chief and Vehicle engineer to resolve (MIT) consisted of four interacting issues during integration. The Launch elements of which had independent Service Integration Manager is responsible responsibility for the Mission (Figure 4). for launch site activities and ground The Mission Integration Manager (MIM) integration processes for the spacecraft. is responsible for the complete mission The last element to the NASA MIT is the integration effort and oversees the other Launch Service Manager who manages the three elements. The Integration Engineer contracts and budget between NASA and (IE) leads the engineering effort for the the Launch Service Provider and other integration of the spacecraft to the launch required entities. vehicle. The IE also works closely with

5

Figure 4

Kodiak Star Mission Integration Team

LSP Starshine ELV Launch LMA Project/ Services STP Denver Safety & Mission Resident NASA/KSC NASA Flight Mgmt Office MIM Contracts Assurance Office KSC Vehicle Systems NASA/KSC NASA/KSC Launch NASA ELV IE LSM Sites Engineering KSC Budget Operations Division Mission Division Analysis NASA/KSC S/C LSIM Systems Comm.& Engineer Telemetry S/C Launch Range Site Safety Shading / green color indicates external to Team NASA ELV Project Office

environmental testing of the adapter before it was going to be used for flight due to the The Payload Upper Deck extremely short schedule. This caused the The first hurdle to overcome was to LMA team to design the deck to factor of determine how to place four spacecraft on safety of 2.0 ultimate, making the deck top of a rocket that was designed for one. heavier than necessary, but eliminating the The first requirement was to identify the need for a structural qualification testing. maximum usable envelope within the Since the individual placement of the payload fairing. After studying the spacecraft would also factor into the deck envelopes and separation systems of each design, a study on the placement of the of the spacecraft, it was determined that a spacecraft was performed. A ground rule platform would have to be developed to for the study was that none of the accommodate the four spacecraft. This spacecraft could encounter any other platform would then have to be attached to spacecraft during ascent and separation. In the existing LMA VCL payload adapter. addition, the deployment sequence of each The size and shape of the deck would have spacecraft would have to be determined. to be designed and qualified by analysis to Kodiak Star was established as to be a co- meet the scheduled Initial Launch primary mission, with PICOSat being the Capability (ILC). There was to be no

6 primary for the USAF and Starshine 3, first, then Sapphire, PCSat and finally primary for NASA. Starshine 3 had the Starshine 3. This approach successfully greatest mass requirements for the mission reduced the risk of re-contact with the and was larger than the other spacecraft. other spacecraft at separation. Starshine 3 was spherical, with a diameter With this information, the NASA/LMA of 36-inch and covered with reflective team started the design of what was to be mirrors. This led the team to place called the Payload Upper Deck (PUD). Starshine 3 in the center of the deck on the The PUD took the shape of an ironing thrust axis of the Athena. With Starshine board with Starshine in the middle, in the middle of the deck and the other PICOSat on the small narrow end and spacecraft positioned on the outer edges, if Sapphire and PCSat next to each other on Starshine was to be released first there was the wide end (Figure 5). Since three of the a major risk of re-contact with the other four spacecraft were using tape measures three spacecraft if the tip-off angle was too as their antenna systems, the clocking and great. Therefore, taking all of these factors position of the spacecraft was critical to into consideration, the order of avoid contacting a fellow spacecraft. deployment was finalized as PICOSat

Figure 5 – Spacecraft configuration on the Payload Upper Deck

The design of the PUD was completed in of the CLA revealed a low frequency January 2001 and was sent out for response in the PUD that was being manufacturing so it would be ready to coupled into the spacecraft, generating support a spacecraft fit check and unacceptable spacecraft loads. It appeared separation test. Since the integration cycle as though the PUD was inducing a large was short, LMA had to perform Coupled bending excitation into the spacecraft. To Loads Analysis (CLA), in parallel with the reduce this unacceptable load, the PUD PUD being manufactured. The first run had to be stiffened to eliminate the

7 bending and rotation movement. The The Starshine Project selected Planetary PUD was stiffened utilizing four System Corporation’s (PSC) 26-inch additional struts attached to the corners of Lightband system as the attachment and the PUD which increased the PUD separation system. This was the first space response, lowering the loads to the flight for this system and thus would have spacecrafts. to establish that it was designed and tested to proper qualification levels before The Launch Site integration onto the Athena. Prior to One of the unique parts of the Kodiak Star integration, NASA, NRL and PSC mission was the Launch Site. It is located engineers required a full qualification at the tip of Narrow Cape on the southeast program to be performed by PSC on the side of Kodiak Island. The Launch site is Lightband to include vibration, thermal approximately 42 miles from Kodiak city vacuum, and shock testing. where the majority of the lodging is During thermal vacuum (1x10-6 available. The 42-miles from Kodiak City Torr) to the launch site is predominantly cycling, one of the two Lightband systems volcanic rock roads with sharp turns and failed to separate. This test was performed steep grades. With rain, these volcanic just four weeks before the scheduled mate rocks would easily puncture vehicle tires of the Lightband and Starshine3 spacecraft causing frequent delays. The commute onto the Payload Upper Deck. The failure was accentuated by spectacular vistas of the Lightband system was traced to the (including drops of over 500 feet a few De-tensioner unit, where nickel chromium feet from the edge of the road). . wires were melting when the separation signal was sent. This potential failure The Launch site was built by AADC and mode and assignable cause was discovered consisted of a Launch complex, enclosed during vacuum chamber testing. NASA service tower with stand, and umbilical KSC sent a Thermal Analyst from the tower. It was capable of to servicing the Mission Integration team along with Athena during integration and check out electrical engineers from NRL to help PSC independent of the weather. resolve the issue of the melting of the The Spacecraft was processed in the nickel chromium wire. After a complete Payload Processing Facility (PPF) about 1 review of the failure it was concluded that mile from the launch site. This facility was the supply current from the Athena that capable of maintaining a class 100,000 initiates the Lightband had, to be regulated clean room environment, which was to 1.86 A +/- 0.0.03A. Because the Athena sufficient to meet the 100,000 class electrical system could not practically requirement for the Starshine 3. The clean implement a current limiter in the room environment (Class 100,000) was available time, a current limiter was added the most stringent requirement for the four to the De-tensioner assembly. A custom spacecraft. made current limiter was designed by NRL and PSC engineers. This current The Launch Control Center (LLC) is limiter was capable of controlling the located at the entrance to the launch site, current levels delivered to the Lightband where launch countdown activities are separation system. The entire separation performed and office space for the team is system was re-qualification tested two provided. weeks prior to the spacecraft to mate in Lightband Qualification Kodiak. Following addition of the current

8 limiter to the Lightband, two retests of the was unable to release once the signal was Flight and spare 26 inch Lightband were sent by the test conductor. After the conducted in the Thermal vacuum system spacecraft was secured, it was removed to verify the design. Another 20 subsystem from the PUD and an investigation was tests of the current limiter/de-tensioner conducted to understand why the NEA circuit were separately completed in failed to release. After the investigation another thermal vacuum test. Lockheed was performed, the NEA separation bolt engineers verified the acceptability of the was determined to be the source of the current limiter circuit at the same time failure. Upon investigation, it was found using flight duplicate hardware. The that cold-welding between parts within the Starshine 3 payload, with the integrated NEA device was occurring. The part was Lightband, was then shipped to Kodiak for removed and a new NEA separation bolt integration without delaying the schedule. was installed using a modified installation Following successful separation, telemetry procedure and the test was successfully from Starshine-3 verified the Lightband repeated. Again, a quick identification to met the spin-up requirement of 5 degrees a problem and expedited resolution did not /second. The novel design of the current impact the program schedule. limiter resulted in an expedited test and Mission Requirements successful completion of the Lightband qualification without a significant impact System requirements for the mission had on the program timing. to be identified at the beginning of the integration flow to verify that each NEA Actuator requirement could be met. The A high fidelity mockup of each spacecraft requirements for each spacecraft began to and the fight separation system was be identified at the first Mission required to perform a fit check and Integration Working Group held in separation/shock test at Lockheed Martin October 2000. These requirements would in Denver. The fit check would be be used to design the mission and any performed on the newly completed mission unique hardware that would be Payload Upper Deck that was designed necessary. Since this was a reduced and built by LMA to accommodate the integration flow, each of the Spacecraft compliment of payloads. The test would presented their specifications for mass install each of the payloads in a reverse properties, moments of inertia, and order in which they were to be deployed. product of inertia at the meeting. Once Each of the Spacecraft was required to these requirements were recorded, each bring the flight separation hardware to spacecraft would have to deliver their verify the correct interface between the spacecraft within these specifications. It PUD and the spacecraft. The separation was agreed that if the weight of the test was designed to simulate a micro spacecraft were below their required gravity condition by using a set of counter value, they would have to add ballast to weights and pulleys. This would allow the get them to their required weight. If any of test team to monitor the behavior of each the spacecraft were over the weight spacecraft at separation in a simulated requirement, LMA had a small safety micro gravity condition. factor, which could be utilized if necessary. From this point forward, no During the separation test of PCSat the further changes were made in the NEA actuator, which held the spacecraft, spacecraft specifications.

9 Collision Avoidance between Spacecraft passage to violate the 1 meter envelop for each spacecraft. The USAF Space Test The Kennedy Space Center ELV mission Program office was notified of this analysis branch identified the potential of finding. Since the only mitigation of this collision between the Sapphire and PCSat risk was to redesign the collision spacecraft due to characteristics of the avoidance maneuver, which would result original Kodiak Star flight design. The in a launch delay, STP opted to accept this original flight design had the separation low risk and proceed to launch. events of these two spacecraft spaced by only 10 seconds, effectively pointing in Loads the same attitude, with the PCSat Because of the Payload Upper Deck, separation speed being greater than NASA/KSC had to work closely with Sapphire. Since such a risk assessment Lockheed Martin Astronautic to was not part of the accelerated Lockheed understand the true design loads for the Martin integration schedule, NASA spacecraft. During the Final Design Loads assumed the responsibility to quantify the Cycle, the PUD dynamics created loads risk and derive a mitigation plan. that exceeded the Interface Control A Monte-Carlo orbit propagation Document using the standard Athena technique proposed by KSC Mission Coupled loads analysis procedure. This Analysis Branch (MAB) was used to resulted in LMA adopting a new examine each part of this analysis task. It methodology for the VLC. During the was shown that the original flight design analysis, LMA discovered that the produced a 100% probability that Sapphire Spectral Gust forcing function was and PCSat would be within 10 meters of adversely coupling with the PUD each other shortly after deployment (first dynamics. This resulted in LMA changing 100 seconds). Additional analyses their frequency domain analysis. Upon determined that this proximity risk could investigation, KSC considered this be greatly reduced by waiting 60 seconds approach un-conservative so KSC between the Sapphire and PCSat recommended a return to the frequency separation events. This added time domain analysis but with a different gust allowed the Athena upper stage to spectrum. passively reorient to a different attitude The Kodiak Star spacecraft fundamental due to the impulse imparted from the frequencies were higher than usual. Sapphire separation event. Further Therefore, a special Center of Gravity analyses verified that this new flight Load Factor (CGLF) study was performed. sequence resulted in a low proximity risk This study provided design load data for on subsequent orbit passes. Hence, to spacecraft with fundamental frequencies ensure mission success, NASA directed beyond the CLA range. Typically, CGLF LMA to increase the time between the are superceded by CLA, but several of the Sapphire and PCSat separation events spacecraft primary model frequencies are from 10 to 60 seconds. above the CLA analysis regime. For these For completeness, the proximity risk cases, LMA generated high frequency analysis was expanded to include center of gravity load factors and which PICOSat. This examination revealed a became the governing qualification significant proximity risk between requirements for primary structure. PICOSat and Sapphire at first orbit

10 ITAR – The International Traffic in Arms mobile range support for the mission. KSC Regulation (ITAR) issue was one the selected the NASA Wallops Flight Facility biggest programmatic obstacles during the (WFF) to provide ground and flight safety mission. Due to a late start in the ITAR support for the Kodiak Star mission. process and short integration time of the Along with this task, the Wallops Flight mission, it was difficult to get the proper Facility provided real-time vehicle performance data for the first 440 seconds ITAR paper work in place to conduct of the flight and during the first pass over meetings with all parties present. Kodiak. For WFF to perform their task Presentations by Lockheed Martin had to they would have to set up two sites for be edited to comply with ITAR radars and command vans. The first site regulations. Attendance by personal from would be on Kodiak at the launch site and Surrey, the PICOSat manufacture, was would have 10-foot, 18-foot telemetry, and limited during the meetings to prevent radar antennas, which would feed to the their exposure to sensitive material. A key control van located, near the Launch lesson of learned for expediting this Control Center. The second site would be procedure in the future is to start the located at Cordova, AK. The Cordova site paperwork process as soon as possible and would house a 7-meter radar antenna with have one point of contact for the process. a command mobile van, which was tied to Ordnance – The ordnance used for the the control van at Kodiak. Due to the pyro test and for launch was shipped over weather condition on Cordova, much of from Great Britain for use by PICOSat. the preparation work to support the The ordnance arrived into the country with antenna and installation of the vans had to few problems, however returning the be completed before the winter months. unused pyro proved more difficult. The paperwork needs to be in place well in Weather advance of the shipment. Kodiak Island is located between the Shelikof Strait and the Pacific Ocean with Orbital Debris Reports - Orbital Debris the Gulf of Alaska just to the North. This Report development is typically the location and the terrain of the island can responsibility of the spacecraft develop unique weather patterns not organization on the mission, KSC supports typically seen at either east or west coast in validating launch vehicle inputs. Since launch sites. The common weather pattern KSC was assigned overall mission at the launch site was three or four days of management responsibility for the rain followed by a day or two of clear Starshine3 spacecraft, KSC was weather. With this unique weather pattern, responsible for the orbital debris report for the Weather Officer for the Kodiak Star this spacecraft. This report is very labor mission kept a calendar to track the intensive so KSC contracted Lockheed weather conditions at potential launch Martin to perform the report in parallel times each day. Shown in Figure 6, the with the development of the Launch KLC Weather Constraint Status calendar Vehicle report. for September indicated only 11 days in Range Support – At the time the the month of September were suitable configuration of the Kodiak Launch Site (shown in green) for launch. The first did not have built in Range facilities for launch attempt for the mission was on the mission flow from the site. Knowing September 22 but due to radar problem at this, NASA KSC would have to acquire the Cordova site the attempt for the day

11 was scrubbed. September 24 through 29 avionics. It took four and half days for the were red due to one of the largest solar eV level to decrease from 1x104 eV/meter flare activity periods on record. Such high to 1eV/meter which is the acceptable level levels of charged particles had a high for the next launch attempt. potential of adversely affecting the Athena

Figure 6

KLC Weather Constraint Status September 2001

SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY 1

23 4 5 678 Cumulus Cloud Rule Ceiling < 5000 ft Ceiling Dist Wx Rule < 5000 ft Thick Cloud Rule 91011 12131415

Ceiling < 5000 ft Ceiling < 5000 ft Vis < 2 Miles Vis < 2 Miles Ceiling < 5000 ft Ceiling < 5000 ft Dist Wx Rule Dist Wx Rule Possible Thick Cloud Ceiling < 5000 ft Ceiling < 5000 ft Thick Cloud Rule Thick Cloud Rule Thick Cloud Rule Rule 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Cumulus Winds > 35 kts Cloud Ceiling < 5000 ft Ceiling < 5000 ft Rule Vis < 2 Miles Thick Cloud Rule Ceiling Ceiling < 5000 ft Dist Wx Rule < 5000 ft Thick Cloud Rule 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Launch

Ceiling < 5000 ft Solar Constraint Solar Constraint Solar Constraint Solar Constraint Solar Constraint Solar

The Success transmit once the vehicle crosses over a tracking station. This was the case for both Mission Performance – The LMA Athena PCSat and Starshine. On the first pass over I performed flawlessly in placing the four Kodiak, the PCSat separation was Kodiak Star spacecraft in their desired confirmed. The mission plan had Starshine orbits. PICOSat and Sapphire separation separating over the South Pacific and then telemetry was received real time during retransmitting data during the second pass the pass over Malindi, Kenya (Figure 7). over Malindi (approximately 2 hours and PCSat separation occurred immediately 43 minutes into the flight). However, the after the spacecraft was out of range of the Starshine3 spacecraft confirmation came a Malindi tracking station but the OAM little earlier then the Malindi pass. This avionics of the Athena has the capability was made possible by the worldwide to store the separation events and re-

12 Starshine network. While in Kodiak, the Antarctica, spacecraft signal was received Starshine Project Manager Gil Moore was by the hand held receiver and confirmation talking on the phone with a person in was relayed back to Gil Moore at the Antarctica who was using a hand held Kodiak launch site by telephone. The final receiver. At separation, the Starshine 3 confirmation came when the Athena OAM spacecraft started sending data packets, passed over the Malindi tracking station which were received by ham radio and the stored data for the Starshine 3 operators around the world. Once separation was received and confirmed. Starshine 3 passed within sight of

Figure 7. Flight Profile of the Kodiak Star Mission

13 Public Relations – The Kodiak team did built, it is important to clearly define the more than place four spacecraft in orbit current state of qualification of pre- while visiting Kodiak, Alaska. One other existing launch hardware. Early important job that needed to be performed requirements definition, validation and was outreach to the people of Kodiak, to base lining would minimize requirement inform and generate interest on what was change as the mission maturity going on at the launch site. NASA Verification/validation of the spacecraft participated in the Kodiak Town Borough requirements will have to be performed meeting to answer questions about the before being selected for a short turn-on, Kodiak Star launch and inform people L-12 month or secondary mission about what to expect during the mission Communication – The communication on processing. Several members of the this mission was excellent and was Kodiak Star team conducted classes in the reflected in the achievement of the goal. Kodiak school systems and many of the Communication was facilitated by a Kodiak students polished mirrors for the central focal point, in this casa KSC. NASA sponsored Starshine 3 spacecraft. Because of the size of the Kodiak team, Any chance the team had to talk about the central coordination was essential to keep mission with local residents was well organizations tied together. received. ITAR – Any mission that will interface Team Environment – Being able to with an international party will have to develop and maintain the team start the ITAR processes as quickly as environment on Kodiak Star mission was possible to avoid any loss of the key to its success. Having four communication or delay. different spacecraft, each with their own support teams with identified requirements Ordnance – When sending and receiving and ways to maintain them throughout the ordnance from an international party, mission was incredible. Each member of coordination of the shipping and Customs team had a job to perform and they needs must be identified and addressed in performed it at the best of there ability. advance to reduce risk of delay. Everyone on the team had the “Can Do” New Separation System –A flight proven attitude that no matter what issue arose, it separation system would have minimized was addressed and corrected before the the risk to the mission and reduce the issue became a major problem and could amount of review performed, especially result in a delay in the mission schedule for a mission with a tight timeline and and timing. The Kodiak Star Mission already facing significant integration team was truly an example of total team challenges. integration. Launch Site – Being the first orbital user of the launch site resulted in many The Lessons Learned logistical challenges for the team. Shipment would have to be delivered to Spacecraft Maturity – During the initial Kodiak by air and then trucked out to the phase of information gathering, it quickly site. It is prudent to think ahead to what became clear that expectations of team you will need during processing and bring members were varied. This variance led it with you. Normal FedEx over night took to misunderstandings as to what 2 days to arrive on the island. constitutes completion. If the spacecraft is

14 Performing Analysis and Manufacturing strong and still have it all come together in Hardware in Parallel – Before hardware a very short time. is designed for a mission, make sure good spacecraft models are in place. Reduction in risk can be achieved by designing in Reference stiffness and additional design margin up 1. Tutera, D. Jr., “Kodiak-Star Spacecraft front. Proximity Risk Analysis.” Range Support - A mobile range can be Technical Memorandum ELVL- located in a remote area to support a 2001-0026215, January 2002 launch, as long adequate planning, 2. Yunis, I., Review of the Loads and coordination, and early team involvement Qualification of Kodiak Star are implemented. This will reduce risk of a Spacecraft, Technical Memorandum launch date move due to the range not ELVL-2001-0025436 Revision A, being ready. August 2001 Summary The Kodiak Star Mission was very challenging and offers significant lesson for future missions. A multinational fully integrated team had the opportunity to perform a truly first of a kind mission from a new launch complex with a unique manifest of experimental spacecraft. The integration goal of 10-months was met utilizing quick identification of the issues, and determining innovative ways to solve the problems. The design of the Payload Upper Deck to accommodate the 4- spacecraft was truly unique. Perform a 2- orbit separation of the spacecraft at two different orbits had never been performed by Athena I. The remoteness of the launch site resulted in a high emphasis on planning of shipments and deliveries so that the timetable would not be affected. Finally, the ability of the Kodiak team to utilize a remote range to provide ground and flight safety support for the launch was a difficult task. Additional innovative analyses performed on collision avoidance and coupled loads performed by the team reduced the risk of failure to the mission The single must key element to the success of Kodiak Star was the ability to communicate with a team well over 600

15