DOCSLIB.ORG

Steffy NRO-AIAA Conference Paper–Steffy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Steffy NRO-AIAA Conference Paper–Steffy Taurus II Development Status of a Medium-Class Launch Vehicle for ISS Cargo and Satellite Delivery David Steffy Orbital Sciences Corporation 15 July 2008 Innovation You Can Count On™ UNCLASSIFIEDUNCLASSIFIED / /Orbital Orbital Sciences Sciences Proprietary Proprietary 1 Orbital’s Space and Strategic Launch Vehicles Pegasus XL Minotaur I Taurus XL Minotaur IV Taurus II KEI OBV Minotaur II Minotaur III Space Launch Vehicles Strategic Launch Vehicles z 172 Space and Strategic Launch Vehicles Produced During 25-Year Period ¾ 102 Vehicles Built and Delivered in Last 18 Years (1990-2008) ¾ 70 Vehicles Under Contract for Deliveries in Next 7 Years (2008-2014) z Capable of Orbital, Suborbital and Earth Escape Launches ¾ 500 kg to 6,000 kg Payloads to Low-Altitude Orbits ¾ ICBM-Class Interceptors and Long-Range Targets z Operated from 7 Launch Sites (4 CONUS, 3 Other) UNCLASSIFIED / Orbital Sciences Proprietary 2 Taurus II Program Highlights z Designed to Provide Delta II-Class Payload Performance at All-Inclusive Launch Prices of ~$65 Million With High Mission Reliability and Responsiveness ¾ Orbital Is Applying Its Well-Established Engineering, Manufacturing, Supplier Management, Mission Assurance and Program Management Capabilities to Develop, Qualify, Produce and Operate the Taurus II Vehicle ¾ Taurus II Is Based on a High-TRL Design to Minimize Development and Early- Flight Risk, While Also Using Selected Non-Traditional Suppliers and a Lean Fixed Infrastructure to Maintain Attractive Launch Costs z Designing to Provide Launch Services for a Variety of Different Missions ¾ NASA Science/Planetary and Space Station Resupply; NASA Cat. 3 Reliability ¾ DoD/IC Gapfillers, Demos, Space Superiority, and Medium-Class Missions ¾ Operationally Responsive Space ¾ Commercial LEO and GEO z Taurus II Is On Schedule for Its First Launch(es) in Late 2010 and Will Be Capable of Supporting Up to 6 Launches per Year By 2012 z Orbital and Our Partners Are Investing ∼$200 Million of Our Own Capital to Fund Taurus II Development, Support Equipment, Production Inventory and Launch Site Infrastructure Taurus II Will Be Ready to Fill the Medium-Class Satellite “Launch Gap” by 2010 UNCLASSIFIED / Orbital Sciences Proprietary 3 Taurus II Vehicle Overview Program Goals 3.9 m Fairing (Orbital) • Minimize Development NRE -- Select High TRL Components or Components Already Under Development • Minimize Recurring Costs -- Eliminated Strap-on Booster Rockets Castor 30 Stage 2 Motor • Meet or Exceed Delta II Performance Parameters -- Drove (ATK) Environments, Payload Volumes, and Performance • Minimize Launch Site Infrastructure – Use Horizontal Integration/Spartan Pad Concept • Design for High Reliability -- Use Heritage Components 3.9 m Propellant Tanks/ Stage 1 Core Vehicle Mass and Dimensions: (Yuzhnoye) • Gross Liftoff Mass: 290,000 kg • Vehicle Length: 40.5 Meters • Vehicle Diameter: 3.9 Meters • Payload Fairing Diameter: 3.9 Meters Dual LOX/RP AJ26 Engines (Aerojet) UNCLASSIFIED / Orbital Sciences Proprietary 4 Stage 1 Overview LOX/Kerosene Propulsion Using Existing AJ26 Engines • Avoids High Cost and Handling Difficulties of Solids or Strap-ons • Engines Offer High Performance with Extensive Test History • Stage Core Build on Existing Tooling with Heritage Design and Components • Constant Vehicle Configuration Throughout Atmospheric Flight UNCLASSIFIED / Orbital Sciences Proprietary 5 Vehicle Upper Stack z Composite Upper Stack Similar to Other Orbital Vehicles ¾ Typical Composite/Honeycomb Structures Produced by Orbital’s Trusted Heritage Suppliers ¾ Castor 30 Motor Developed by ATK as Shortened Castor 120 Payload Fairing ¾ Existing Avionics, Separation Systems and Payload Attitude Control Components Cone z Optional Bipropellant Orbit Raising Kit Fairing ¾ Provides Precision Injection or Additional Avionics Sep Joint Burns for Higher Orbits Cylinder z Payload Fairing Accommodations Motor Cone/ Stage 2 Fairing Ext. ¾ 3.5 m Inside Diameter Fairing Cylinder Extension 3 Sep Joint ¾ 50 m Volume Cylinder Motor S1 Sep Cone Stage 1 Joint UNCLASSIFIED / Orbital Sciences Proprietary 6 Orbital’s Avionics System Uses Flight-Proven Hardware and Software UNCLASSIFIED / Orbital Sciences Proprietary 7 Taurus II LEO Mission Performance 7000 2 COTS Reference Orbit 200 km, 51.6 ° 8. 7° 2 6000 -S ta ge 2 51.6° 3-Stage 8.7 ° 3 + -Stage 5000 5 1. 6° 2 -S ta ge S 4000 un Sync hronous 3-Stage Payload Capability (kg) Capability Payload 3000 NASA LSP Reference Capabilities Su n S ync hro nou 2000 s 2 -St age 1000 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Circular Orbit Altitude (km) UNCLASSIFIED / Orbital Sciences Proprietary 8 Wallops Flight Facility Launch Complex Liquid Fueling Horizontal Integration Medium-Class Facility Processing Facility Launch Pad (New) (New) (Taurus II, Etc.) Small-Class (Upgraded) Launch Pad (Minotaur, Etc.) Payload Processing (Existing) Facility (Bldg H-100) 7 Miles Minimum Launch Site Infrastructure Adaptable to Multiple Sites z Horizontal Processing Leverages Existing Facilities and Minimizes On-Pad Time ¾ Transport/Erect Concept Avoids a Fixed Umbilical Tower and Service Tower ¾ Inherently Better Payload Protection from Hazardous Environments z Orbital’s Standard EGSE Augmented to Control Mobile Fueling Pump Skid z Partially Relocatable Fuel/LOX/Gas Systems Minimize Standing Infrastructure and O&M Costs UNCLASSIFIED / Orbital Sciences Proprietary 9 Taurus II Ground Concept of Operations Operations Use Horizontal Processing and Minimal Pad Infrastructure z Vehicle and Payload Processed at Horizontal Integration Processing Facility z Transporter/Erector Rolls Integrated Stack to Pad z Stack Erected Hydraulically (Forces Reacted through Pad Deck) z Erector Doubles as Umbilical Mast (No Need for Mobile or Fixed Service Towers) z Pad Provides Launch Mount, Flame Trench, and Fuel/Oxidizer/Pressurant/Air Storage z One Day from Vertical to Launch UNCLASSIFIED / Orbital Sciences Proprietary 10 Taurus II Program Master Schedule Phase/Event 2007 2008 2009 2010 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Approval to Proceed 4/2 Preliminary Design Phase Taurus II Vehicle PDR 2/14 Critical Design Phase CDR Schedule Margin (1 Month) Taurus II Vehicle CDR 12/15 Hardware/Software Qualification Phase Stage 1 Engine (AJ-26) Qualification Testing 10/1 Stage 2 Motor (Castor-30) Static Fire Test 5/9 Stage 1 System Qualification Testing 9/1 Launch Site Buildup and Activation 5/1 Pathfinder Vehicle Operations Flight 1 Vehicle Integration and Test Flight 1 Schedule Margin (2 Months) Flight 1 ILC (Unassigned) 10/15 Flight 2 ILC (COTS Demo) 12/15 Today (Month 15 of 45) UNCLASSIFIED / Orbital Sciences Proprietary 11 Taurus II Early-Flight Confidence z Excellent Reliability Record Reflects Conservative Engineering, Aggressive Supplier Management, and Disciplined Manufacturing/Test Processes ¾ 25 Consecutive Pegasus Launches Fully Successful Over 10-Year Period ¾ All 14 Minotaur Launches Fully Successful Over 7-Year Period ¾ All 6 OBV Launches Fully Successful Over 4-Year Period UNCLASSIFIED / Orbital Sciences Proprietary 12 Taurus II Production and Supply Assurance Plan z Vehicle Production and Launch Site Plan for First 6 Years of Operations ¾ 2010-2012: 6-7 Vehicles to Be Built and Launched Planned Missions Include 4-5 COTS/CRS, 2 Others One Launch Site Activated (Wallops Flight Facility) ¾ 2013-2015: 12-14 Vehicles to Be Built and Launched Planned Missions Include 6-7 CRS, 5-7 Others Second Launch Site Activated If Required (Vandenberg AFB or Cape Canaveral AFS) z Stage 1 Main Engine Supply (Aerojet/NDK) ¾ Orbital Purchasing 3 Flight Sets and Has Right of First Refusal on 15 More Sets (36 Engines Total) in Aerojet’s Sacramento, California Inventory ¾ Orbital and Aerojet Expect to Conclude the Purchase of an Additional 15 Flight Sets (30 Engines) from NDK’s Samara, Russia Inventory z Stage 1 Tanks, Lines and Structure Supply (Yuzhnoye/Yuzhmash) ¾ First Flight Units and Qualification Unit Now Under Contract ¾ Three-Unit U.S. Inventory to Be Established by 2011 and Maintained Thereafter UNCLASSIFIED / Orbital Sciences Proprietary 13 Wallops in 2011: From the Eastern Shore to ISS Horizontal Integration & Processing Facility H-100 (WFF Main Base) Cygnus/Cargo Module Processing at WFF Taurus II Launch from Pad 0A Cygnus Rendezvous With ISS UNCLASSIFIED / Orbital Sciences Proprietary 14 Contact Information David Steffy Senior Vice President Advanced Program Group (703) 433-6057 [email protected] Kurt Eberly Deputy Program Director Launch Systems Group (703) 433-6024 [email protected] Orbital Sciences Corporation 21839 Atlantic Blvd Dulles VA, 20166 UNCLASSIFIED / Orbital Sciences Proprietary 15.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Launch and Deployment Analysis for a Small, MEO, Technology Demonstration Satellite
    46th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit AIAA 2008-1131 7 – 10 January 20006, Reno, Nevada Launch and Deployment Analysis for a Small, MEO, Technology Demonstration Satellite Stephen A. Whitmore* and Tyson K. Smith† Utah State University, Logan, UT, 84322-4130 A trade study investigating the economics, mass budget, and concept of operations for delivery of a small technology-demonstration satellite to a medium-altitude earth orbit is presented. The mission requires payload deployment at a 19,000 km orbit altitude and an inclination of 55o. Because the payload is a technology demonstrator and not part of an operational mission, launch and deployment costs are a paramount consideration. The payload includes classified technologies; consequently a USA licensed launch system is mandated. A preliminary trade analysis is performed where all available options for FAA-licensed US launch systems are considered. The preliminary trade study selects the Orbital Sciences Minotaur V launch vehicle, derived from the decommissioned Peacekeeper missile system, as the most favorable option for payload delivery. To meet mission objectives the Minotaur V configuration is modified, replacing the baseline 5th stage ATK-37FM motor with the significantly smaller ATK Star 27. The proposed design change enables payload delivery to the required orbit without using a 6th stage kick motor. End-to-end mass budgets are calculated, and a concept of operations is presented. Monte-Carlo simulations are used to characterize the expected accuracy of the final orbit.
    [Show full text]
  • Paranoid Narcissism! Miguel Cullen
    Paranoid Narcissism! Miguel Cullen La Serpiente de Cascabel They drank up dreams like feni smoked them like Humboldt County needles primed syringes with delicacy cross-haired their sternums with ​fuckin’ black magic markers. Their intimacy sunk itself into new ruins – barriers, faint and intricate, like autistic fantasies of subway maps. Down in the catacombs: she was a mermaid, with a mirror and a comb using a vampire who saw in the dark to guide her ​ and a ​serpiente de cascabel, a snake with a bell hanging from its tail and in it a pixie, with a wand, hovering in its own venom-green aureole of sprayed poison. He was a donkey, with a needle and a tail ​ like a scorpion: (scorpions glow in the ​black light) and a gorgon-rasta with glowworms in his hair, seeing through his third, lidless eye. In the dark mine, he felt himself as if by a wide river, lit in orange and the waves were all messages from friends ​ clangouring down from the ​nigredo plane-leaf bells in the wash of song. In the dank, fetid tunnels, the scorpion massacred the mermaid’s only way of seeing, driving a poison shaft through the vampire heart, while she used used her mirror to deal with the dreadlocks cutting off his hair and combing glowing worms into rounds around the scorpions, so they committed suicide the dread was still alive though, and met the Minotaur with a piercing glare, turning it to salt, and then pus, like a snail in its ringed shell. While Bottom and our fair mermaid, were ever deeper entranced, with each sprinkle of fairy dust, ​ before the jaws of the ​serpiente injected its venom through the tooth-hole passing horrific cramps through each muscle giving the heart tachycardia, its deep-sown capillaries shafted with the liquid.
    [Show full text]
  • Worldwide Satellite Magazine January 2014 Satmagazine
    Worldwide Satellite Magazine January 2014 SatMagazine Hosted Payloads Small Satellites Success In The Making Spaceflight Clyde Space NASA + DoD ORS-3 Mission Planet Labs (upcoming “flock” launch) Skybox Imaging ExactEarth Plus: Heyman + Sadtler Cover Image: SHERPA™ —Hosted Payload and In Space Transportation Solution. Image courtesy of Spaceflight. SatMagazine January 2014 Publishing Operations Senior Contributors This Issue’s Authors Silvano Payne, Publisher + Writer Mike Antonovich, ATEME Anne Marie Beckerle Hartley G. Lesser, Editorial Director Tony Bardo, Hughes Curt Blake Richard Dutchik Twyman Clements Pattie Waldt, Executive Editor Chris Forrester, Broadgate Publications Jos Heyman Jill Durfee, Sales Director, Editorial Assistant Karl Fuchs, iDirect Government Services Aaron Hoover Simon Payne, Development Director Bob Gough, Carrick Communications Adam Kemp Jos Heyman, TIROS Space Information Hartley Lesser Donald McGee, Production Manager David Leichner, Gilat Satellite Networks Philip Miller Dan Makinster, Technical Advisor Giles Peeters, Track24 Defence Bert Sadtler Bert Sadtler, Boxwood Executive Search Professor Wayne Shroma Kelli Trifonovitch Pattie Waldt InfoBeam Karen Wentworth European Space Agency—A Billion Pixels For The Stars, 4 Bolivia + China: TKSat-1 Away, 10 NAB + JD Events—Showmanship, 10 NASA + Orbital These Cubes Don’t Melt Under Fire, 12 Features Advertiser Index New Launch Options For Small Satellite Companies, 18 Advantech Wireless, 5 Harris Corporation, 3 By Curt Blake, Spaceflight Inc Arabsat Satellite, 11 MITEQ Inc., 39 Arianespace, cover (1) Nat’l Assoc. of Broadcasters (NAB), 52 Small Satellites—Making Their Way, 20 Asia Broadcast Satellite, 13 NewSat Limited, 7 Clyde Space, 22 AvL Technologies, 21 Novotronik, 17 ORS-3 Mission (NASA + DoD), 23 Comtech EF Data, 49 Singapore Exhibition Services, 35 University of Hawai’i at Manoa—Ho’oponopono-2, 23 CPI Satcom Products, 19 Teledyne Paradise Datacom, 9 University of Kentucky—KySat-2, 24 Dubai World Trade Centre, 43 W.
    [Show full text]
  • Behind Text.” Should Automatically to Edge (8.5 X 11)
    Insert Cover jpeg here. Make wrapping “Behind Text.” Should automatically to edge (8.5 x 11). JEFFREY C. BOULWARE Jeffrey C. Boulware is a senior project engineer in The Aerospace Corporation’s National Systems Group where he conducts strategic planning for long-term enterprise acquisitions. Prior to joining Aerospace in January 2018, he served as a civil servant in the Air Force’s ICBM System Directorate in key leadership positions related to the modernization and sustainment of ICBM weapon systems. He holds a master’s degree in military operational art and science from Air University and a Ph.D. in mechanical and aerospace engineering from Utah State University. ABOUT THE CENTER FOR SPACE POLICY AND STRATEGY The Center for Space Policy and Strategy is dedicated to shaping the future by providing nonpartisan research and strategic analysis to decisionmakers. The Center is part of The Aerospace Corporation, a nonprofit organization that advises the government on complex space enterprise and systems engineering problems. The views expressed in this publication are solely those of the author(s), and do not necessarily reflect those of The Aerospace Corporation, its management, or its customers. For more information, go to www.aerospace.org/policy or email [email protected]. Summary The options for post-retirement uses of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) are controlled by Title 51, Section 50134, of the U.S. Code. This policy prohibits the transfer of ICBM systems to private industry for commercial space launch purposes. Advocates for change would like to create a low-cost launch service provider whereas opponents to changing the policy argue this would unbalance the commercial launch market and stifle innovation from emerging companies.
    [Show full text]
  • Disrupting Launch Systems
    DISRUPTING LAUNCH SYSTEMS THE RISE OF SPACEX AND EUROPEAN ACCESS TO SPACE Thesis submitted to the International Space University in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the M. Sc. Degree in Space Studies August 2017 Thesis author: Paul Wohrer Thesis supervisor: Prof. Jean-Jacques Favier International Space University 1 Abstract The rise of SpaceX as a major launch provider has been the most surprising evolution of the launch sector during the past decade. It forced incumbent industrial actors to adapt their business model to face this new competitor. European actors are particularly threatened today, since European Autonomous Access to Space highly depends on the competitive edge of the Ariane launcher family. This study argues that the framework of analysis which best describes the events leading to the current situation is the theory of disruptive innovation. The study uses this framework to analyse the reusability technology promoted by new actors of the launch industry. The study argues that, while concurring with most analysis that the price advantage of reused launchers remains questionable, the most important advantage of this technology is the convenience it could confer to launch systems customers. The study offers two recommendations to European actors willing to maintain European Autonomous Access to Space. The first one aims at allocating resources toward a commercial exploitation of the Vega small launch system, to disrupt the growing market of small satellites and strengthen ties with Italian partners in the launcher program. The second aims at increasing the perception of European launchers as strategic assets, to avoid their commoditization. The recommendation entails developing an autonomous European capacity to launch astronauts into space, which could strengthen the ties between France and Germany as well as lead to a rationalization of the geo-return principle.
    [Show full text]
  • DEPARTMENT of TRANSPORTATION Federal
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration Office of Commercial Space Transportation Adoption of the Environmental Assessment And Finding of No Significant Impact For The Orbital/Sub-Orbital Program Summary The U.S. Air Force (USAF) acted as the lead agency, and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) was a cooperating agency, in the preparation of the July 2006 Final Environmental Assessment for the Orbital/Sub-Orbital Program (EA or 2006 EA; USAF 2006 1), which analyzed the potential environmental impacts of implementing the Orbital/Sub-Orbital Program (OSP). Under the OSP, the USAF would develop a new family of launch vehicles using surplus Minuteman (MM) II and Peacekeeper (PK) Inter- Continental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) rocket motors (along with commercial upper stages) to support orbital launches of both small and micro-satellites, and sub-orbital-trajectory missions. The MM-derived launch vehicles include the Minotaur I or Minotaur II vehicles and MM-derived target launch vehicles, and the PK-derived launch vehicles include the Minotaur IV launch vehicle and the OSP Heavy target launch vehicle. All OSP launches would be conducted from an existing government range and/or commercial spaceport located at Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB), CA; Kodiak Launch Complex, AK (now known as Pacific Spaceport Complex Alaska); Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS), FL; and Wallops Flight Facility, VA. The USAF issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the 2006 EA on 24 July, 2006. The Missile Defense Agency and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration also participated as cooperating agencies in the preparation of the EA. The EA was prepared in accordance with the National 1 United States Air Force (USAF).
    [Show full text]
  • SECURITY INDEX No
    INTERNATIONAL EDITION SECURITY INDEX No. 2 (82), SUMMER/FALL 2007 The results of PIR Center's work are of particular interest for the Sergei Lavrov A Russian country's foreign policy agencies, given the relapses into a policy of the Journal on unilateral use of force that have caused small countries to feel that International security is scarce and pushed large countries towards increasing Security weapons procurement. The continuing stagnation in the area of disarmament, though no fault of Russia, along with the increasing potential for conflict in the world as a whole are causes for concern. SECURITYSECURITY Russia has inherited the tradition of fighting for disarmament. Gennady Evstafiev The decrease in its activities in this area has ended. There is every reason to expect that Russia will present proposals aimed, if not at stopping, then at least at slowing the most dangerous aspirations of those who believe that there are neither commonsensical nor other limits to their ambitions. IN EX INNo. 2 (82), EX SinoRussian relations are not only more complicated, but also more Dmitri Trenin DDPublisher: PIR Center — Center for Policy Studies (Russia) Summer/Fall 2007 contradictory than they appear in the speeches of the Russian president and the Chinese Communist Party chairman. Russia's leaders, whatever they say publicly and however strongly they suspect the United States of trying to drive a wedge into "model" SinoRussian relations, will not Gennady Evstafiev DISARMAMENT RETURNS accept a strategic bloc with China. Demographic threats could be woven into the discourse of the March Graeme P. Herd Andrei Frolov IRAN'S DELIVERY SYSTEMS CAPABILITIES 2008 presidential campaign.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Orbital Sciences Corporation
    8-LSG-Generic No License-0044 Orbital Space Launch & The Changing Landscape of Commercial Space May 2012 John Steinmeyer © 2012 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. 1 8-LSG-Generic No License-0044 st Alan Shepard – 1 American In Space Mercury Redstone Rocket Launch - May 5, 1961 Freedom 7 Mission 15-minute Suborbital Flight Altitude of 116 statute miles (187 km) Splashdown point 302 statute miles (486 km) down range in Atlantic Ocean Also Later Became Apollo 14 Commander and the 5th Person to Walk on the Moon © 2012 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. 2 8-LSG-Generic No License-0044 Yuri Gagarin – 1st Man in Space Vostok-3KA (Vostok 1) launch, April 12, 1961 Mission Duration – 108 minutes One Orbit Sergey Korolyov General Designer © 2012 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. 3 8-LSG-Generic No License-0044 America’s Achievements In Space Developed a Series of Higher Performing Launch Vehicles, Culminating in Saturn V, the Most Powerful Rocket Ever Produced Executed a Well Planed Series of Missions Concurrent with Launch Vehicle Development Which Enabled Manned Expeditions to the Moon Developed Manned Orbiting Laboratories, First Skylab and Then, Though Collaboration, the International Space Station Developed a Partially Reusable Launch System to Support Station Development and Habitation Which Made 135 Flights with a 98.5% Success Record Developed a Series of Expendable Launch Vehicles to Support Deployment of USAF and National Security Systems An Extensive Series of Robotic and Exploratory Missions to Better Understand our Planet, Our Solar System, our Galaxy, and Universe By Extension, Supported Unprecedented Technological Development in Information Systems, Electronics, Life Support and Countless Other Areas, and Stimulated Technology Education © 2012 Orbital Sciences Corporation.
    [Show full text]
  • Minotaur V Space Launch Vehicle for Small, Cost-Effective Moon Exploration Missions
    SSC07-III-2 Minotaur V Space Launch Vehicle for Small, Cost-Effective Moon Exploration Missions Scott Schoneman Orbital Sciences Corporation 3380 S. Price Road, Chandler, AZ 85248; 480-814-6688 [email protected] Lou Amorosi Orbital Sciences Corporation 3380 S. Price Road, Chandler, AZ 85248; 480-814-6088 [email protected] Dan Cheke Orbital Sciences Corporation 3380 S. Price Road, Chandler, AZ 85248; 480-814-6304 [email protected] Mark Chadwick Orbital Sciences Corporation 3380 S. Price Road, Chandler, AZ 85248; 480-814-6704 [email protected] ABSTRACT The Minotaur family of launch vehicles has been proven to provide reliable, cost-effective, and responsive launch of U.S. Government-sponsored payloads for both space launch and suborbital applications. Since the initial mission of the Minotaur I space launch vehicle (SLV) in January 2000, thirteen Minotaur-family vehicles have successfully launched, including seven space launches and six suborbital targets. This heritage of success is now being extended to the Minotaur V SLV to facilitate high energy trajectories for small spacecraft, including supporting low-cost lunar exploration missions for a total recurring launch service cost of less than ~$30 million. Minotaur V is a 5-stage evolutionary version of the Minotaur IV SLV, adding the propulsive energy needed to support payloads up to 440 kg to Trans-Lunar Injection (TLI), 678 kg to Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit (GTO) and comparable performance to other high energy trajectories. The Minotaur V design leverages the flight proven heritage of the Minotaur family of launch vehicles, as well as the full spectrum of Orbital’s launch vehicle experience.
    [Show full text]
  • NASA Routine Payload Checklist (1 of 3)
    NASA Routine Payload Checklist (1 of 3) PROJECT NAME: DATE OF LAUNCH: PROJECT CONTACT: PHONE NUMBER: MAILSTOP: PROJECT START DATE: PROJECT LOCATION: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A. SAMPLE RETURN: YES NO 1. Would the candidate mission return a sample from an extraterrestrial body? B. RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS: YES NO 1. Would the candidate spacecraft carry radioactive materials in quantities that produce an A2 mission multiple value of 10 or more? Provide a copy of the Radioactive Materials On Board Report as per NPR 8715.3 with the ERP submittal C. LAUNCH AND LAUNCH VEHICLES: YES NO 1. Would the candidate spacecraft be launched on a vehicle and launch site combination other than those listed in Table C–1 below? 2. Would launch of the proposed mission exceed the approved or permitted annual launch rate for the particular launch vehicle or launch site? Comments: D. FACILITIES: YES NO 1. Would the candidate mission require the construction of any new facilities or substantial modification of existing facilities? Provide a brief description of the construction or modification required, including whether ground disturbance and/or excavation would occur: E. HEALTH AND SAFETY: YES NO 1. Would the candidate spacecraft utilize batteries, ordnance, hazardous propellant, radiofrequency transmitter power, or other subsystem components in quantities or levels exceeding the EPCs in Table C–2 below? 2. Would the expected risk of human casualty from spacecraft planned orbital reentry exceed the criteria specified by NASA Standard 8719.14? 3. Would the candidate spacecraft utilize any potentially hazardous material as part of a flight system whose type or amount precludes acquisition of the necessary permits prior to its use or is not included within the definition of the Envelope Payload Characteristics? 4.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Space Launch Vehicle
    Low Cost Spacelift to LEO, GTO, and Beyond Using the OSP-2 Minotaur IV Space Launch Vehicle Scott Schoneman, Lou Amorosi, Ron Willey, and Dan Cheke Orbital Sciences Corporation Launch Systems Group Chandler, AZ TM18582 Page 1 Agenda • Program Overview • Baseline Vehicle Description, Heritage, and Manifest • GTO Configurations and Performance • Summary TM18582 Page 2 OSP-2 Organizational Structure US Govm’t Customer / Sponsored Payload USAF SMC Det 12/RP Det 12 Technical & Ops Support OSP-2 Contractor Minuteman-based Peacekeeper-based Launch Vehicles Launch Vehicles Commonality • Avionics • GSE • Subsystems • Processes TM18582 Page 3 Minotaur Launch Vehicle Family TM18582 Page 4 Minotaur IV Is A Combination of Flight Proven Subsystems TM18582 Page 5 OSP Flight History Prior to First Minotaur IV TM18582 Page 6 Minotaur IV Uses Largely Flight Proven Components TM18582 Page 7 All But Three Components Have Direct Flight Heritage TM18582 Page 8 Common Object Oriented Software Supports Minotaur IV TM18582 Page 9 Minotaur IV Processing Flow Based on Taurus Experience • Launch Site Processing Derived from Minotaur and Taurus Operations • Payload Integration Independent of Booster Crane Lift Emplacement Of Boosters and GCA/Stage 4 Crane Lift Final Emplacement Pre-Launch Of Payload/ Verification Fairing Assembly Tests Payload Integration Transport to Launch Pad & Encapsulation TM18582 Page 10 Minotaur IV Performance 1735 kg to 185 km (3826 lbm to 100 nm) TM18582 Page 11 OSP Provides Consistent, Realistic Low Cost Performance • Minotaur Cost Has
    [Show full text]
  • Ors-3 Minotaur I Mission Overview
    ORS-3 MINOTAUR I MISSION OVERVIEW Provided by: Orbital Sciences Corporation November 2013 Launch Systems Group Minotaur I ORS-3 Mission Highlights LV: Minotaur I Launch Site: Wallops Flight Facility, VA Mission Orbit 500 km x 500 km, 40.5 inclination Mission Objectives Launch the Integrated Payload Stack (IPS) into a Circular Orbit for the Operationally Responsive Space (ORS) Office Deployment of STPSat-3 Satellite into a Circular Orbit for the Space Test Program (STP) Office Perform Collision Avoidance Maneuver following separation of the STPSat-3 Release 28 CubeSats from Two Integrated Loadpath CubeStack Structures (4, 6U NASA and 8, 3U Cal Poly PPOD’s Dispensers) Minotaur Launch Vehicle Background 25th Overall Minotaur Launch 11th Minotaur I Launch Overall 5th Minotaur I from Wallops USE, DUPLICATION AND DISCLOSURE OF THIS INFORMATION IS RESTRICTED ON THE TITLE PAGE. WARNING: Contains "Technical Data" as defined in the ITAR TM-23897 Page 2 Minotaur I Vehicle Configuration Overview USE, DUPLICATION AND DISCLOSURE OF THIS INFORMATION IS RESTRICTED ON THE TITLE PAGE. WARNING: Contains "Technical Data" as defined in the ITAR TM-23897 Page 3 ORS-3 Mission Trajectory and Timeline 400.68 kg Time Latitude Longitude Altitude Velocity Event (sec) (deg) (deg) (km) Range (km) (km/s) 1 S1 Ignition 0.00 37.83 -75.49 -0.01 0.00 0.00 2 Pitch Down 2.50 37.83 -75.49 0.02 0.00 0.03 3 Max Dynp 37.21 37.82 -75.43 10.65 5.38 0.74 4 S1SEP/S2IGN 61.36 37.78 -75.24 32.88 22.43 1.46 5 S2 Skirt SEP 77.90 37.74 -75.06 52.06 39.73 1.70 6 S2 Separation
    [Show full text]