Lunar Capability Concept Review (LCCR)

Home , Altair (rocket stage), Altair (spacecraft)

Transportation Systems Only

June 18 – 20, 2008 Report to the PSS LCCR Agenda

Date Time Topic Presenter June 18 8:00 – 8:15 am Welcome / Introduction Hanley / Muirhead 8:15 – 9:00 am 01: LCCR Overview Knotts 9:00 – 9:15 am 02: Lunar Requirements Summary Knotts 9:15 – 10:00 am 03: CxAT_Lunar Study Process Joosten 10:00 – 11:00 am 04: LSS Concepts Culbert 11:00 – 11:30 am Lunch 11:30 am – 2:00 pm 05: Altair System Hansen / Connolly 2:00 – 4:30 pm 06: Ares V System Creech 4:30 – 5:30 pm 07: Ground Operations Quinn June 19 8:00 – 8:30 pm 08: Ares V and Altair Margins Strategies and Basis Muirhead 8:30 – 10:30 am 09: Integrated Performance and Mission Design Martinez 10:30 am – 12:30 pm 10: Strategic Analysis Falker 12:30 – 1:00 pm Lunch 1:00 – 3:00 pm 11: HLR POD Architecture Drake 3:00 – 5:00 pm 12: LCCR Product Summary and Forward Plan Parkinson 5:00 – 5:30 pm 13: Architecture Summary and Next Steps Muirhead June 20 8:00 – 9:00 am 14: MCR Wrap-up – Altair Hansen / Graham 9:00 – 10:00 am 15: MCR Wrap-up – Ares V Creech 10:00 – 10:30 am 16: LCCR Success Criteria Review Knotts 10:30 – 11:00 am Summary / Conclusions Hanley 11:00 – 11:30 am Board Discussion

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 00: LCCR Agenda Page 2 Components of Program Constellation

Earth Departure Stage

Crew Exploration Vehicle

Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle Lunar Crew Launch Lander Vehicle

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 05: Altair System Page 3 Typical Lunar Reference Mission

MOON

Vehicles are not to scale.

Ascent Stage 100 km Lander Performs LOI Expended Low Lunar Orbit

Earth Departure Stage Expended Service Low Module Earth Expended Orbit CEV

Direct Entry EDS, Lander Land Landing EARTH June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 05: Altair System Page 4 Background

VSE Global VSE Exploration Strategy

ESASESAS LAT1LAT1

LAT2LAT2

CxAT Lunar

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 03: CxAT_Lunar Study Process Page 5 LCCR Scope

♦ LCCR will define a Point of Departure (POD)* transportation architecture for the CxP Lunar Capability including capabilities to: • Deliver and return crew to the surface of the moon for short durations, i.e. Human Lunar Return (HLR) • Enable establishment of a lunar outpost ♦ This review focuses on the conceptual designs and key driving requirements for Ares V and Altair (crewed and cargo) ♦ This review assumes the capabilities of Ares I and Orion for the lunar missions ♦ This review will show how the POD transportation architecture, including EVA and Ground Ops, supports a range of mission campaigns and possible surface architecture solutions • Specific Lunar Surface Systems definition is not part of this review

*This is a POD transportation architecture and NOT the final baseline

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 01: LCCR Overview Page 6 CxP L2 Lunar Design Reference Missions

• DRM 1 : Lunar Sortie Crew DRM − This mission lands anywhere on the Moon, uses only on-board consumables, and leaves within ~1 week. This mission enables exploration of high-interest science sites, scouting of Lunar Outpost locations, technology development objectives, and the capability to perform EVAs. • DRM 2 : Uncrewed Cargo Lander DRM − Used to support an Outpost, help build one, or merely preposition assets for a subsequent Sortie Lander, this uncrewed mission lands anywhere on the Moon, and has enough resources to sustain itself until a component of the Lunar Surface Systems takes over. • DRM 3 : Visiting Lunar Outpost Expedition DRM − Analogous to an assembly flight to ISS, this mission lands at the site of a complete Outpost or one under construction, and allows crewmembers to extend their stay by using assets of the Outpost rather than only what is carried onboard their Lander. • DRM 4 : Resident Lunar Outpost Expedition DRM − Realizing one of the goals of US Space Policy, this mission allows a sustained human presence on the surface of the Moon, since it follows a single crew of four to the surface, transitions them to a habitat at an Outpost, and gets them back to Earth after transitioning over to a replacement crew. • DRM 5 : Outpost Remote DRM − This mission is separated in function from the other DRMs by focusing only on those Lunar Surface Systems which need to operate without human intervention, either because humans are not present to operate them, or the task is more easily performed in an autonomous or automatic manner.

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 02: LCCR Requirements Summary Page 7 Building on a Foundation of Proven Technologies - Launch Vehicle Comparisons - 122 m (400 ft) PPBE Submit (51.0.39)

Crew Altair

91 m Lunar (300 ft) Orion Earth Departure Lander Stage (EDS) (1 J–2X)

234.5 t (517.0k lbm) LOX/LH S-IVB 2 (1 J–2 engine) Upper Stage 108.9 t (1 J–2X) (240.0k lbm) 61 m 137.1 t (200 ft) LOX/LH2 (302.2k lbm) LOX/LH 2 S-II (5 J–2 engines) Core Stage 453.6 t 5-Segment Overall Vehicle Height, m (ft) (5 RS–68B Engines) (1,000.0k lb ) Reusable m 1,435.5 t LOX/LH Solid Rocket (3,164.8k lb ) 2 30 m Booster m (100 ft) LOX/LH (RSRB) 2 S-IC (5 F–1) 2 5-Segment 1,769.0 t RSRBs (3,900.0k lbm) LOX/RP-1

0 Space Shuttle Ares I Ares V Saturn V Height: 56 m (184 ft) Height: 99 m (325 ft) Height: 110 m (361 ft) Height: 111 m (364 ft) Gross Liftoff Mass: Gross Liftoff Mass: Gross Liftoff Mass: Gross Liftoff Mass: 3,374.9 t (7,440.3k lbm) 2,041.2 t (4,500.0k lbm) 927.1 t (2,043.9k lbm) 2,948.4 t (6,500.0k lbm) Payload Capability: Payload Capability: Payload Capability: Payload Capability: 63.6 t (140.2k lb ) to TLI (with Ares I) 25.0 t (55.1k lbm) 25.6 t (56.5k lbm) m 44.9 t (99.0k lbm) to TLI 55.6 t (122.6k lb ) to Direct TLI to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) to LEO m 118.8 t (262.0k lbm) to LEO DAC 2 TR 5 143.4 t (316.1k lbm) to LEO June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 06: Ares V System Page 8 Ares V Trade Space

Common Design Features Core Standard Core Opt. Core Length / Booster W/ 5 RS-68 6 Core Engines Composite Dry Structures for Core Stage, EDS & 51.0.39 +5.0 t 51.0.46 Spacers: 1 Shroud 5 Segment PBAN Metallic Cryo Tanks for Core Steel Case Stage & EDS Reusable 63.6 t 68.6 t +6.1 t +6.1 t RS-68B Performance:

51.0.40 +5.0 t 51.0.47 Spacers: 1 Isp = 414.2 sec 5 Segment Thrust = 797k lbf @ vac HTPB Composite Case J-2X Performance: Expendable 69.7 t 74.7 t Isp = 448.0 sec -2.3 t -3.6 t Thrust = 294k lbf @ vac 51.0.41 +3.7 t 51.0.48 Spacers: 0 5.5 Segment Shroud Dimensions: PBAN Barrel Dia. = 10 m Steel Case Usable Dia. = 8.8 m Reusable 67.4 t 71.1 t Barrel Length = 9.7 m

LCCR Initial Reference 1.5 Launch TLI Capability

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 03: CxAT_Lunar Study Process Page 9 Recommendations

♦ Approach • Applied Margins/Reserves Methodology to Altair & Ares V (net loss of architecture “performance”) • Developed higher fidelity mission analysis techniques (net gain of architecture “performance") ♦ Result • Lunar Architecture still requires ~12% additional performance Higher performance Ares V Cargo • Optimized options required

Crew • Altair prop loading and Optimized Altair Wet Mass loiter requirements Delta-V determined Altair Wet Mass Post-LOI Loiter Time

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 03: CxAT_Lunar Study Process Page 10 Recommended New Point of Departure - Vehicle 51.0.48 -

♦ Vehicle 51.0.48 recommended • 6 Engine Core, 5.5 Segment PBAN Steel Case 21.7 m

10 m Booster • Provides Architecture Closure with Margin

23.2 m ♦ Recommend Maintaining Vehicle 51.0.47 with Composite HTPB Booster as Ares V Option • Final Decision on Ares V Booster at Constellation Lunar SRR (2010) 10 m 116.2 m • Additional Performance Capability if needed for Margin or requirements • Allows for competitive acquisition environment for 71.3 m booster

58.7 m ♦ Near Term Plan to Maintain Booster Options • Fund key technology areas: composite cases, HTPB propellant characterization • Competitive Phase 1 Industry Studies

NOTE: These are MEAN numbers

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 06: Ares V System Page 11 Summary

♦ Ares V Initial 2008 Capability (51.0.39) exceeds Saturn Capability by ~30% ♦ Ares V LCCR analysis focused on meeting lunar requirements and developing margin ♦ Ares V is sensitive to Loiter, Attitude, Power, and Altitude requirements in addition to payload performance ♦ Recommended new POD Ares V can meet current HLR requirements with ~6 t of Margin • Additional budget required (~$1.7BRY) for the 5.5 Segment PBAN Booster and 6 Engine Core • Plan to maintain new composite HTPB booster as an option ♦ Additional analysis required to determine Ares V PLOM and PLOC contributions for CARD recommendations

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 06: Ares V System Page 12 Altair Lunar Lander

♦ 4 crew to and from the surface • Seven days on the surface • Lunar outpost crew rotation ♦ Global access capability ♦ Anytime return to Earth ♦ Capability to land 14 to 17 metric tons of dedicated cargo ♦ Airlock for surface activities ♦ Descent stage: • Liquid oxygen / liquid hydrogen propulsion ♦ Ascent stage: • Hypergolic Propellants or Liquid oxygen/methane

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 05: Altair System Page 13 Configuration Variants

Sortie Variant Outpost Variant 45,000 kg 45,000 kg Descent Module Descent Module Ascent Module Ascent Module Airlock

Avionics Power Mass Available for Payload Structures and Mechanisms

Manager's Reserve Propulsion

Thermal Control Life Support Cargo Variant Other 53,600 kg

Non-Propellant Fluids Descent Module Cargo on Upper Deck

Propellant Sortie Mission Lander June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 05: Altair System Page 14 Design Approach

♦ Project examined the multitude of concepts developed in the post-ESAS era, took lessons learned and began to develop a real design.

♦ Altair took a true risk informed design approach, starting with a minimum functionality design and adding from there to reduce risk.

♦ Lunar Design Analysis Cycle (LDAC) 1 developed a “minimum functional” vehicle. • “Minimum Functionality” is a design philosophy that begins with a vehicle that will perform the mission, and no more than that • Does not consider contingencies • Does not have added redundancy (“single string” approach) • Provides early, critical insight into the overall viability of the end-to-end architecture • Provides a starting point to make informed cost/risk trades and consciously buy down risk • A “Minimum Functionality” vehicle is NOT a design that would ever be contemplated as a “flyable” design!

♦ LDAC-2 determined the most significant contributors to loss of crew (LOC) and the optimum cost/risk trades to reduce those risks.

♦ LDAC-3 (current LDAC) is assessing biggest contributors to loss of mission (LOM) and optimum cost/risk trades to reduce those risks.

♦ Goal of the design process is to do enough real design work to understand and develop the requirements for SRR.

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 05: Altair System Page 15 LDAC-2 Overview

♦ The initial Lander Design and Analysis Cycles (May-November 2007) created a “minimal functionality” lander design that serves as a baseline upon which to add safety, reliability and functionality back into the design with known changes to performance, cost and risk. ♦ LDAC-2 completed in May 2008. Goal was to “buy down” Loss of Crew (LOC) risks. ♦ “Spent” approximately 1.3 t to buy down loss of crew (LOC) risks. ♦ “Spent” an additional 680kg on design maturity. Sum of System Contributions to LOC/ Mass Available for Payload 1.8E-01 4000 1 in 6 Individual Subsystem 1.6E-01 3652 kg 3500 Contribution to LOC: 1.4E-01 Events\Hazards 3000 Life Support 1.2E-01 2500 Thermal 1.0E-01 Propulsion 2000 Structures and Mechanisms P(LOC)

8.0E-02 (kg) mass 1671 kg Power 1500 6.0E-02 Avionics

1000 4.0E-02 Mass Available for Payload 500 kg minimum payload 2.0E-02 500 1 in 206 0.0E+00 0 LDAC-1 LDAC-2 June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 05: Altair System Page 16 Launch Shroud

♦ Packaging the lander within the Ares V launch shroud is akin to building a “ship in a bottle” ♦ Ares V descent stage structure and landing gear designed to package within a 10 meter launch shroud (8.8 meter diameter dynamic envelope)

Migration of Structural Configuration to 10m Shroud LDAC1-Delta & LDAC2 Configurations ♦ Key features – Assumed 8.8m Dynamic Envelope (but not a hard number) – Scaled LDAC1 -Delta w/No Major Configuration Changes AM Tanks Airlock – Incorporated Updates for 10m Shroud & For Increased ΔV with RCS – Single CAD Update, Two Analysis Cases (10m & 10m + V) Δ Placeholder Modified – AL and AM Global Geometry Unchanged Structure Hatch – Items that Did Change (or that were matured) Include • resized propellant tanks, engine mounts • modified tank support scheme • added realistic clearances for plumbing, radiators, insulation, struts • Refined AM/DM separation and AM/AL separation/tunnel Details • Some hatch details • Descent stage is now “Clocked ” 45 o with respect to AM • Deck Height = 5.9m (upgrade to 10m shroud) , 6.2m (shroud + ΔV) ♦ Mass impact 9.5m – 10m Shroud Migration Adds +46 kg (DS Truss -44.3 kg, EDSA +90.6 kg) 9.5m Modified – Increased V Adds +217 kg (+164.4 kg DS Truss, EDSA +52.67 kg) Δ Cone Supports – +47 kg Due to Combination of both 10m Shroud & Increased ΔV – TOTAL MASS INCREASE: 310 kg LDAC2 7-Apr-2008 NASA Internal Only Your Initials Here / 2 LDAC1-Δ

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 05: Altair System7-Apr-2008 NASA Internal Only Your Initials HPageere / 3 17 Payload Shroud Current Design Concept

Point of Departure Leading Candidate Mass: 9.1 t (20.0k lbm) (Biconic) (Ogive) POD Geometry: Biconic Design: Quad sector Barrel Diameter: 10 m (33 ft) Barrel Length: 9.7 m (32 ft) Total Length: 22 m (72ft)

Quad Sector Design

Frangible Joint Horizontal Separation

• Composite sandwich construction (Carbon- Epoxy face sheets, Al honeycomb core) • Painted cork TPS bonded to outer face sheet with RTV • Payload access ports for maintenance, payload consumables and environmental Thrust Rail Vertical Separation System control (while on ground) Payload umbilical separation June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 06: Ares V System Page 18 Ares V Shroud Encapsulation Issues

♦ Shroud quad sector configuration will likely preclude partial encapsulation in SSPF ♦ Shroud Encapsulation risks are the same for all 51 Series Ares V variants ♦ GO and Ares V teams will continue to study shroud ground processing alternatives.

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 07: Ground Operations Page 19 Temporal Availability Contour Plots

♦ Temporal availability contour plots show the availability of lunar landing sites over the lunar nodal cycle.

♦ The following plots reflect both global sortie mission availability for the Altair alone as well as for the integrated Orion/Altair mission.

♦ The following proposed ESAS landing sites are indicated in the contours:

Landing Site Latitude Longitude Notes ------A. South Pole 89.9 S 180 W (LAC 144) rim of Shackleton B. Far side SPA floor 54 S 162 W (LAC 133) near Bose C. Orientale basin floor 19 S 88 W (LAC 91) near Kopff D. Oceanus Procellarum 3 S 43 W (LAC 75) inside Flamsteed P E. Mare Smythii 2.5 N 86.5 E (LAC 63) near Peek F. W/NW Tranquilitatis 8 N 21 E (LAC 60) north of Arago G. Rima Bode 13 N 3.9 W (LAC 59) near Bode vent system H. Aristarchus plateau 26 N 49 W (LAC 39) north of Cobra Head I. Central far side highlands 26 N 178 E (LAC 50) near Dante J. North Pole 89.5 N 91 E (LAC 1) rim of Peary B

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 09: Integrated Performance and Mission Design Page 20 Global Access/LOI Δ-V/LLO loiter

♦ Access to all lunar landing sites (“global access”) requires a combination of additional LOI Δ-V, pre-descent LLO loiter, and post-ascent LLO loiter • Minimum energy LLO maneuvers are sufficient for polar outpost missions ♦ Altair to size tanks for 1000 m/sec LOI maneuver, load consumables for 4 additional days of LLO loiter

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 05: Altair System Page 21 Global Sortie Mission Sequence

DE-ORBIT ASCENT EI IC: Post- TLI LOI-1 Ascent LEO PDI TO DOCK Landing Site Pre-TEI Epoch LOI-3 Specified Earth-Moon Specified Extended Moon-Earth Transfer Loiter Transfer

3-Burn 1-day 3-7 Day 1-day 3-Burn LOI Loiter Surface Stay Loiter TEI

TCM’s Post- LOI TCM’s Extended RENDEZVOUS ASCENT TEI-1 TEI-3 Loiter IN LEO PLANE GIVEN: CHANGE Epoch Landing Site LAT/LONG TLI Window Duration LLO ORBIT MAINTENANCE Trans-Lunar Time of Flight Post-LOI Extended Loiter Pre-TEI Extended Loiter Trans-Earth Time of Flight ACTIVE VEHICLES: Entry Interface Conditions 1. ORION ACTIVE 2. ALTAIR ACTIVE DETERMINE: 3. EDS ACTIVE Required Propellant Mass for EDS, Altair, and Orion Vehicles. June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 09: Integrated Performance and Mission Design Page 22 Greater Than Zero Temporal Coverage

1000 m/s LOI ΔV Capability ♦ In order to ensure global lunar surface access, the following minimum mission architecture conditions were determined to be sufficient for providing access to all lunar landing sites at some epoch during the lunar nodal cycle*: • 48 HR LOI and TEI flight times Altair • 5 days of extended LOI loiter Only • 3 days of extended TEI loiter

♦ For these conditions the Altair can provide access to the worst case landing sites ~8% of the time.

♦ For the integrated capability, this provides for access to the worst case integrated landing sites ~5% of the time. Integrated Altair and Orion

* To the resolution of the MAPP data and given the assumptions in the MAPP analysis (e.g., no Earth perturbations assumed in LOI and TEI 3-burn maneuvers).

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 09: Integrated Performance and Mission Design Page 23 LDAC-2 Configuration

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 05: Altair System Page 24 Vehicle Architecture

♦ Three Primary Elements Airlock • Descent Module − Provides propulsion for TCMs, LOI, and powered descent − Provides power during lunar transit, Ascent descent, and surface operations Module − Serves as platform for lunar landing and liftoff of ascent module • Ascent Module − Provides propulsion for ascent from lunar surface after surface mission − Provides habitable volume for four during descent, surface, and ascent operations − Contains cockpit and majority of avionics • Airlock − Accommodates two crew per ingress / egress cycle Descent − Connected to ascent module via Module short tunnel − Remains with descent module on lunar surface after ascent module liftoff

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 05: Altair System Page 25 Altair LDAC-2 Sortie Vehicle Configuration

LIDS AM RCS Thruster Star Tracker and Comm. Pod (x4) Antenna (x2)

Docking Window Airlock (x2) AM Fuel Tank (x2) AM-Airlock Connecting Forward Facing AM Oxidizer Tank (x2) Structure Window (x2) Airlock Pressurant Tank (x2) AM Connecting Egress Avionics Structure Hatch Platforms (x2) (Remains on DM) AM Main Engine

Avionics Thermal Insulation boxes (x2) DM LH2 Fuel Life Support Tank (x4) Oxygen Tank Pressurant Landing Leg Tank (x2) (x4) DM RCS Thruster Pod (x4)

Radiator (x2)

LOX Tank Support Cone (x4) RCS Tanks Problem: central location of DM Main Engine capsule = bad visibility.

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 05: Altair System Page 26 Altair Key Messages

♦ Current design demonstrates a lander design that closes within the Constellation transportation architecture

♦ Altair has investigated a wide breadth of lander concepts, using lessons learned to influence the current design concept ♦ Altair has undertaken a process that begins with minimum functionality and buys back safety, reliability and additional capabilities with known performance, cost and risk impacts ♦ The Altair team is using this design process to help develop good requirements ♦ Design process (particularly risk based design approach) is resulting in a smart government design team ♦ Altair has used its bottoms-up design work to inform sizing of landers for transportation architecture trades ♦ Altair has developed a detailed bottoms-up cost estimate

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 05: Altair System Page 27 Sample Return Mass Considerations Nominal return mass: 100 kg. Note that Apollo 17 returned 110.5 kg of sample. “The PSS views the sample mass allocation in the current exploration architecture for geological sample return as too low to support the top science objectives. We are asking that CAPTEM undertake a study of this issue with specific recommendations for sample return specifications.” Tempe Workshop, 2007. CAPTEM: Minimum of 230 kg total return mass, but noted that on the basis of simple extrapolation of the Apollo 17 mission, sample return mass could be as much as 800 kg. The recent Lunar Surface Scenarios workshop estimated that a 7-day sortie mission with 4 crew and 8 EVAs could collect 306 kg of samples. 100100 kgkg ISIS NOTNOT ENOUGHENOUGH June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 05: Altair System Page 28 Sample Return Mass Considerations

LCCRLCCR ActionAction Items:Items: StochasticStochastic modelingmodeling ofof samplesample returnreturn massmass onon thethe AltairAltair ascentascent stage;stage; StudyStudy ofof OrionOrion volumevolume capacitycapacity forfor increasingincreasing returnreturn samplesample mass.mass.

AtAt thethe momentmoment therethere isis 1.61.6 metricmetric tonstons ofof reservereserve massmass onon Altair,Altair, notnot includingincluding PMR.PMR.

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 05: Altair System Page 29 LCCR & The Surface Architecture (not part of this LCCR) Can the Constellation transportation system (Ares, Orion & Altair) support the deployment and operations of a lunar outpost?

Is the POD cargo Do the surface Have solutions for capacity to the systems fit in the unloading cargo to lunar surface Ares-5 shroud and the surface been enough?Can on the Altair deck? identified?

Element Mass (t) Lander Mass (t) LCT (Lunar Communications Terminal) 0.32 Baseline Capability 14.60 2 - Crew Mobility Chassis 2.13 2 - Pressurized Crew Cab 6.13 Mobile Power Unit 0.85 OTSE - Davit 0.16 Capabilitiy 14.60 OPS - ISRU system - H2 Reduction (0.5t) - TS3 0.24 Excavation - H2 Reduction (0.5t) - TS3 0.05 Logistics Category Carried Packaging Total Pressurized 0.420 0.080 0.500 Science 0.69 Unpressurized 1.911 1.560 3.471 Logistics 3.97 Oxygen 0.000 0.000 0.000 Total 14.55 Nitrogen 0.000 0.000 0.000 Capability 14.60 Water 0.000 0.000 0.000 Difference 0.05 Logistics 2.331 1.640 3.971  Yes  Yes  Yes

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 04: LSS Concepts Page 30 Oxygen Extraction from Regolith ISRU Large Radiator panels hoppers fold down for RESOLVE hold 1 launch day’s Subscale O2 regolith Extraction and Functional Description: Volatile release Hoppers reactor raised to allow Perform lunar regolith excavation and dumping Regolith H2 of spent Processing handling, oxygen extraction from regolith into CMC regolith, and oxygen storage and TS 2/3 O2 Production System H2O with Storage and Thermal Processing delivery, and support lander Control O Storage propellant scavenging and water 2 st 1 Gen O2 Production System production. For flexibility, two 1/2- (660 kg/yr ) for Field Demo, Nov. 08 scale plants will be delivered and 2 sets of excavation tools. Regolith Excavation and Movement

Scoop lifts • Total O Produced = 1000 kg/yr 11 kg regolith/scoop 2 (38 scoops to fill hoppers for day) Area Clear Blade on CMC • Mass per O2 plant = 219 kg Cratos Excavator Bucketwheel Excavator • Power per plant = 3.93 kW Excavation and O2 Plant mounted on mobile • Total Regolith = 415 kg/day chassis • Excavation Tools = 42.7 kg (each) 1 t of oxygen per year requires a regolith excavation rate of <1/2 cup per minute! (1% efficiency - 70% light) • Excavation Time = <1 hr/day

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 04: LSS Concepts Page 31 Surface Architectures Assessed

Three surface architectures were developed in support of LCCR: • Rapid Outpost Buildup (TS-1) − Deliver as much outpost capability as soon as transportation system permits − Full-up outpost based on the recommendations from LAT-2. − Substantial robustness through element duplication • Initial Mobility Emphasis (TS-2) − Temper outpost build-up based on affordability with initial emphasis on mobility capabilities − Full-up outpost has less volume and limited eclipse operating capability than TS1 − Robustness achieved through functional reallocation − Assumed water scavenging • Initial Habitation Emphasis (TS-3) − Temper outpost build-up based on affordability with initial emphasis on core habitation & exploration capabilities − Full-up outpost has less volume and limited eclipse operating capability than TS1 − Robustness achieved through functional reallocation − Assumed water scavenging Surface Systems Review in 2010

June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 04: LSS Concepts Page 32 Lunar Transportation Architecture Recommendations

♦ Ares-V • Maximize commonality between Lunar and Initial Capabilities: Ares-V 51.0.48 − 6 engine core, 5.5 segment PBAN steel case booster − Provides architecture closure with additional margin − High commonality with Ares I • Continue to study the benefits/risk of improved performance: Ares-V 51.0.47 − Final decision on Ares V booster at Program SRR (6/2010) − Additional performance capability if needed for margin or requirements − Allows for competitive acquisition environment for booster − Requires further study and technology investment funding ♦ Altair • Provide a robust capability to support Lunar Outpost Missions: − Optimize for crew missions (500 kg + airlock with crew) − Lander cargo delivery: ~ 14,500 kg in cargo only mode • Size the system for global access while allowing future mission and system flexibility − Size Altair tanks for 1,000 m/s LOI delta-v − Size for an additional 4 days of Low-Lunar Orbit loiter (site specific) • Retain adequate margins: − ~1,000 kg Program reserve at TLI − Minimum of 40% total Altair margin/reserve ♦ Orion • Continue to mature Orion vehicle concept • Maintain strong emphasis on mass control − Continue to hold Orion control mass to 20,185 kg at TLI • Increase emphasis on evolution of Orion Block 2 to support lunar Outpost missions June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 13: Architecture Summary and Next Steps Page 33 DRMs/Mission Key Driving Requirements Mapping Lunar Sortie Design Reference Mission

MOON Altair • Crew of 2-4 + 500 kg (1,102 lb ) cargo m 7 d Ascent • Global Access ♦ A TBD or TBR is associated with 1,881 m/s (6,171 ft/s) • Landing accuracy ≤100 m (328 ft) with 95% this requirement accuracy (♦) • 373 (♦) hrs crew support 100 kg (220 lbm) pressurized return payload • Airlock functionality TBD hrs post lunar ascent Multi-Mission Phase Requirements • LOC ≤ 1 in 250 (♦) • Anytime Abort • LOM ≤ 1 in 75 (♦) • LOC ≤ 1 in 100 • LOM ≤ 1 in 20 Descent ΔV 2,030 m/s (6,660 ft/s) LH2/LO2 descent engine restartable/throttleable

LLO 100 km (54nm) Altair ΔV for LOI Altair Performs LOI 1,000 m/s (3,281 ft/s) 3-burn LOI TEI 1,492 m/s (4,895 ft/s) 1,000 m/s (3,281 ft/s) 1-4 days Altair LLO loiter (Tanks sized for 1, 560 m/s (5,118 m/s) (Propellant load for 950 m/s)

Altair TLI Injected Control Mass 45 t (99,200 lb ) m Orion EVA Mass Allocation 171.5 kg (378.0 lbm) • Orion TLI Control Mass 20,185 kg (44,500 lbm) FCE Mass Allocation 133.8 kg (295.0 lbm) • FCE & EVA Mass Allocation 675 kg (1,488 lbs) • Orion 382 kg (842) unpressurized cargo EDS TLI Injection Capability 66.1 t (145,726 lbm) + 5 t reserve • 21.1 days crew support • LOC ≤ 1 in 200 EDS Performs TLI 3,175 m/s (10,417 ft/s) • LOM ≤ 1 in 50

ERO 241km (130nm)

-20x185 km (-11x100 nm), 29º

Ares-I Delivered Mass 23.6 t (52,070 lbm) Direct or Skip Entry 4 days LEO loiter

905 t (2M lbm) 3,698 t (8.2 Mlb ) m Ares V • 4 launches per year (6 launches per year) • Weather exclusive launch availability TBD Water Landing • 2 5.5 sebment SRBs; 6 RS-68B • LOC ≤ 1 in 37,000 EARTH • LOM (vehicle) ≤ 1 in 125 ≥ 90 min. 1 - 5 d ~4d 1-5d 7 d 1d June 18 - 20, 2008 Section 13: Architecture Summary and Next Steps <5.8d Page 34