Exploring Design and Policy Options for Orbital Infrastructure Projects by Lieutenant Junior Grade Benjamin L. Putbrese, U.S. Navy B.S. Aerospace Engineering United States Naval Academy, 2013 Submitted to the Engineering Systems Division in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Technology and Policy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology June 2015 ©2015 Benjamin L. Putbrese. All rights reserved. The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part in any medium now known or hereafter created. Signature of Author: ________________________________________________________________ Engineering Systems Division May 8, 2015 Certified by:_______________________________________________________________________ Daniel E. Hastings Cecil and Ida Green Education Professor of Engineering Systems and Aeronautics and Astronautics Thesis Supervisor Accepted by: _____________________________________________________________________ Dava J. Newman Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics and Engineering Systems Director, Technology and Policy Program 2 This work is sponsored by the United States Department of Defense under Contract FA8721-05- C-0002. Opinions, interpretations, conclusions and recommendations are those of the author and are not necessarily endorsed by the United States Government. 3 Exploring Design and Policy Options for Orbital Infrastructure Projects by Lieutenant Junior Grade Benjamin L. Putbrese, U.S. Navy Submitted to the Engineering Systems Division 8 May 2015 In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Technology and Policy ABSTRACT The space industry is currently at a significant inflection point. New economies are forming in low- Earth orbit (LEO), driven by miniaturization of technologies and the promise of lower launch costs, which should then allow many of these LEO systems to capitalize on designs incorporating smaller, shorter-lived spacecraft in highly-disaggregated constellations. Meanwhile, many spacecraft at geosynchronous orbit are continuing along a trend towards increasingly massive and longer-lasting satellites, and while they do represent some of the most exquisite, highest-performing satellites ever launched, some experts now feel that such trends are unsustainable and are beginning to place increasing strain on the underlying industry. To support current and future spacecraft, orbital infrastructures have been proposed as a means of providing on-orbit services to customer spacecraft and guiding space architectures towards more sustainable paradigms. In LEO, an infrastructure of communications and data relay spacecraft is envisioned as a means of aiding new and existing space enterprises in the areas of satellite connectivity and downlink capability. Meanwhile, an on-orbit servicing (OOS) infrastructure, located primarily in geosynchronous orbit, would provide services such as repair, rescue, refueling, and upgrading of customer spacecraft, in order to alleviate the identified space industry trends. Physics and cost modeling, as well as tradespace exploration, are used to identify optimal LEO infrastructure designs, while system dynamics modeling is used to assess the trends likely to occur in the overall space industry as OOS is incorporated into space architectures. The primary conclusion from the analysis of LEO infrastructure designs is that, when designing for global connectivity, there is an optimal design point between a small constellation of larger spacecraft and a very large constellation of small spacecraft, but this will also depend on the intended mission of the infrastructure and the number of customers expecting to be serviced. Then, for an OOS infrastructure, it is determined that relatively low costs and heavy incorporation of servicing capabilities into customer architectures are needed to ensure long-term sustainability of such a project. Finally, the policy implications for both infrastructure concepts are discussed, with a heavy focus on options for the funding and development regimes employed to implement the infrastructures, as well as the major political and legal implications expected to accompany these projects. Thesis Supervisor: Dr. Daniel E. Hastings Title: Cecil and Ida Green Education Professor of Engineering Systems and Aeronautics and Astronautics 4 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Assisting the author of this thesis was Dr. Daniel Hastings, whose deep knowledge and experience in space systems was crucial to the formulation, guidance, and ultimate delivery of this work. Also massively helpful in the completion of this thesis was Capt. Paul La Tour, USAF, who worked closely with the author for over a year on all of the modeling and methods employed to generate the final results. Dr. Sumanth Kaushik of MIT Lincoln Laboratory provided a wealth of knowledge and guidance throughout, as did Dr. Donna Rhodes, Dr. Adam Ross, and all of the researchers at MIT’s System Engineering Advancement Research Initiative (SEAri). Finally, the author would like to thank his parents, grandparents, brother, and sister for all of their loving support and encouragement. They have never been quite sure what the author has been up to since leaving home, and he hopes it stays that way. 6 Contents Figures and Tables .............................................................................................. 9 Introduction .......................................................................................................13 Research Questions and Hypotheses .................................................................................. 16 Background and Literature Review................................................................19 Defining Infrastructure........................................................................................................ 19 Global Positioning System (GPS) ................................................................................... 23 U.S. Interstate Highway System ..................................................................................... 25 U.S. National Airspace System (NAS) ........................................................................... 27 On-Orbit Servicing (OOS) .................................................................................................. 29 DARPA OOS Programs .................................................................................................. 30 NASA OOS Programs .................................................................................................... 32 OOS Case Study: Hubble Space Telescope .................................................................... 33 Future Potential for OOS ................................................................................................ 35 Orbital Communications and Data Relay Infrastructure .................................................... 38 TDRSS and EDRS .......................................................................................................... 38 LEO Infrastructure Concepts .......................................................................................... 40 Space Industry Trends......................................................................................................... 41 Space Policy ........................................................................................................................ 45 1967 Outer Space Treaty ................................................................................................ 45 Space Policy of the United States ................................................................................... 47 Space Industry Sectors .................................................................................................... 48 Methodology ......................................................................................................51 Assessing Designs for a LEO Communications and Data Relay Infrastructure ................. 51 Analysis Framework and Utility Function ...................................................................... 52 7 Physics and Cost Modeling ............................................................................................. 56 Tradespace Exploration .................................................................................................. 62 Validation of Physics and Cost Models .......................................................................... 66 Assessing On-Orbit Servicing: System Dynamics Approach ............................................. 69 System Dynamics Methodological Background ............................................................. 70 Incorporating Behavioral Economics Theories with System Dynamics ........................ 73 Level of Analysis and Modeling Boundary .................................................................... 76 Building the System Dynamics Model ........................................................................... 79 Major System Dynamics Model Structures .................................................................... 80 Using System Dynamics To Assess On-Orbit Servicing Effects ................................... 94 Results ................................................................................................................97 Case Study 1: LEO Communications and Data Relay Infrastructure with Global Coverage ..................................................................................................................................................