DOCSLIB.ORG

The Role, Rationale, and Economics of a Shuttle Derived Cargo Vehicle

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Role, Rationale, and Economics of a Shuttle Derived Cargo Vehicle The Space Congress® Proceedings 1983 (20th) Space: The Next Twenty Years Apr 1st, 8:00 AM The Role, Rationale, and Economics of a Shuttle Derived Cargo Vehicle Frank L. Williams Director, Advanced Programs, Martin Marietta Aerospace, Denver Aerospace, Michoud Division, New Orleans, Louisiana J. R. Tewell Manager, Vehicle Systems, Martin Marietta Aerospace, Denver Aerospace, Michoud Division, New Orleans, Louisiana Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings Scholarly Commons Citation Williams, Frank L. and Tewell, J. R., "The Role, Rationale, and Economics of a Shuttle Derived Cargo Vehicle" (1983). The Space Congress® Proceedings. 2. https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings/proceedings-1983-20th/session-iic/2 This Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Space Congress® Proceedings by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE ROLE, RATIONALE AND ECONOMICS OF A * SHUTTLE DERIVED CARGO VEHICLE Frank L. Williams J. Robert Tewell Director, Advanced Programs Manager, Vehicle Systems Martin Marietta Aerospace Martin Marietta Aerospace Denver Aerospace Denver Aerospace Michoud Division Michoud Division New Orleans, Louisiana New Orleans, Louisiana ABSTRACT concepts will find operational use for several decades and that a number of factors The Space Transportation System is now will interact to produce specific operational and a new evolution of space derivatives of the original configuration. activities is emerging. Space is an international frontier and will be pursued The evolution of space launch vehicles in by many nations, individually and the past has been motivated by increasing collectively. Commercial exploitation of payload weights, volumes, and economics. space systems is increasing with This is reflected by Figure 1 in which international breadth. specific launch cost trends, developed by Messerschmitt-Bolkow-Blohm (MBB) for an ESA Launch services, formerly a government study, are shown. Therefore, it is provided function, also are encountering an reasonable to assume that the same evolution. International competition is motivations will govern the development of keen and plans proliferate for private launch vehicles in the Space Transportation industry involvement in this vital element System (STS) era. For example, there is an of the space flight scenario. increasing recognition that later in this decade, additional investments will be The United States has made good its required to support the growth in volume and commitment to develop and bring into weight of payloads to geosynchronous earth operational status a STS to meet its own orbit (GEO). To satisfy these future need as well as to provide launch services requirements, the U.S. space launch program to industry and other nations. lv! must remain economically attractive 'to be able to continue to support the growing U.S. The STS has tremendous growth potential commercial and international market. utilizing existing flight elements, production capacity, logistics systems and The four reusable Space Transportation launch/flight operations facilities. This System (STS) Orbiter vehicles now planned paper describes the growth potential, were originally expected to be able to place develops a rationale for a Shuttle Derived DOD and NASA payloads into low earth orbit Cargo Vehicle and illustrates its role as and have sufficient operational capability well as the economic implications of its to launch other domestic, foreign and addition to the STS inventory of launch international payloads. systems. However, current forecast of requirements INTRODUCTION and capability indicate that even the total capability of a five orbiter STS program, The United States is entering a new era in the ESA Ariane, and the continuation of some launch vehicles with the very successful of the current U.S. expendable launch completion of the design, development, test vehicle fleet will be marginal in meeting and evaluation (DDT&E) phase of the Space the requirements in the late 1980 f s and the Transportation System. It can be readily Free World's total launch capability will be projected, based on the history of launch inadequate to meet the demand of the 90 *s vehicles, that the shuttle configuration and beyond. will evolve over time, that its basic IIC-1 Accordingly, it is imperative that the LAUNCH VEHICLE AVAILABILITY possibilities for the evolution of the U.S. space launch, capabilities in the STS era be The Western World's space launch capability reviewed from the standpoint of maintaining currently consists of the STS, Titan, Delta, economica1 space opera ti ons • Atlas, Scout, ESA's Ariane, India's SLV-3, and Japan's N-l and N-2 launch vehicles. LAUNCH DEMMID .PROJECTIONS. The Scout and Scout class vehicles are not considered in this assessment because of the The 'NASA uses a space transportation Traffic relatively low performance capability in Model* formerly Mission 'Model, as support comparison to the others. Japan and India for planning and budgetary estimates which are each developing larger, Delta class list the launch site and the flight rate by launch vehicles which should be ready for user. Since the inception of the STS, the service in the early 1990's. model has been changed periodically to reflect the NASA's understanding of the user The purpose of this assessment is to community's needs and the availability of identify the availability of launch vehicles the STS to meet those needs. which could satisfy user's scheduled requirements through the year 2000. This STS model is sometimes misinterpreted to say that it portrays users 1 STS Assessment requirements. While it does incorporate the NASA's understanding of those requirements The NASA Space Transportation Operations as they can be satisfied by the STS, it is Traffic Model, 1 March 1982, has two options not required to cover the full breadth ofthe through 1994: a "24" option and a "40" users 1 needs - nor is that its purpose. The option. The 24 option builds through 1988 basic purpose is to assist the NASA to a maximum annual flight rate of 24 budgeting/planning function for the STS. flights per year with a fleet of 4 orbiters. The 40 option builds through 1991 Determination of the total requirements for to a maximum flight rate of 40 flights per space activity from the user's perspective year; however, this requires the funding of remains a much more elusive task. In the the fifth orbiter in FY 1983, which has not near term, 3 to 5 years, existing launch been approved to date. Both of these vehicle manifests can be used to establish options are shown on Figure 2. It is reasonably firm requirements. To this evident that neither option can satisfy the point , users have made sufficient user launch requirements with STS alone. commitments to be included on the schedule. Thus, one must consider additional Beyond 5 years, these requirements are expendable launch vehicles to accommodate usually not well enough defined to be the projected user demand. discussed outside of the particular user's ••organization. ELV Status For the purposes of this assessment, user Each ELV total launch rate availability, as requirements were developed primarily from shown in Figure 3, was determined using NASA and AIAA projections (References 1 and present production program plans, the 2)- A .summary of the projections are shown overall historical launch records, and In Figure 2. Two user requirements models launch rates consistent with the existing are shown - low and high - to bound the launch pads. ...anticipated demand. To provide a common base for comparison, Basically, the low model supports limited total launch rate for each ELV is plotted in new NASA space program starts, assuming Orbiter-equivalent terms. This equivalency funding constraints. The commercial portion was established by the AIAA (Reference 2). of low model Is dominated by the AIAA The resulting equivalent orbiter flights for --projection of a continued 19% annual growth each ELV are also shown in Figure 3. In communications on orbit capability — possibly a very conservative estimate. The Titan. The Titan is capable of a maximum high model considers a more favorable of 4 launches per year per launch pad. economic climate for and other civil There is one launch pad for the Titan IIIC international science (34D) at ETR and two launch pads at the , Including support of a manned Western Test Range (WTR) - one for Titan station. In the commercial IIIB (34B) and one for Titan HID (34D). environment, the high model projects a 20% Thus, a buildup to 12 flights per year is growth, starting in 1990, including possible. The current planning date of orbit materials processing and manufacturing* Titan termination is at the end of 1987. It HC-2 should be acknowledged however, that launch vehicle availability by 1990 for the commercial launchings of Titan are currently high model and by 1993 for the low model. in progress. While maintaining the current U.S. ELV fleet Delta. The Delta is to be phased out early to augment the STS appears to be a temporary in the STS era, but may sustain new life due solution, it is not a viable approach to to STS launch rate uncertainties and the meeting the user requirements in the 1990s. backed up launch demand for its services. A It is essential that an economical and total of 12 flights per year is the maximum responsive unmanned launch vehicle be anticipated for the Delta, using two launch developed to augment the STS. The most pads at ETR and one pad at WTR. Termination promising solution is a launch system based is planned for 1987. on existing STS elements, namely a Shuttle Derived Cargo Vehicle (SDCV). At las/Centaur. Atlas/Centaur is currently scheduled to support Intelsat missions SDCV CONFIGURATIONS through 1985 with no further committed missions; however, FleetSatCom is a strong All SDCV configurations presented here share potential customer through 1987.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Launch Options for the Future: a Buyer's Guide (Part 7 Of
    — Chapter 3 Enhanced Baseline CONTENTS , Page Improving the Shuttle . 27 Advanced Solid Rocket Motors (ASRMs) . 27 Liquid Rocket Boosters (LRBs) . 28 Lighter Tanks . 29 Improving Shuttle Ground Operations . 29 Improving Existing ELVs . 29 Delta . 30 Atlas-Centaur . ● ● . .* . 30 Titan . ● . ✎ ✎ . 30 Capability . ✎ . ✎ ✎ . ● ✎ ✎ . 30 Table 3-1. Theoretical Lift Capability of Enhanced U.S. Launch Systems. 31 Chapter 3 Enhanced Baseline The ENHANCED BASELINE option is the U.S. Government’s “Best Buy” if . it desires a space program with current or slightly greater levels of activity. By making in- cremental improvements to existing launch vehicles, production and launch facilities, the U.S. could increase its launch capacity to about 1.4 million pounds per year to LEO. The investment required would be low compared to building new vehicles; however, the ade- quacy of the resulting fleet resiliency and dependability is uncertain. This option would not provide the low launch costs (e.g. 10 percent of current costs) sought for SDI deploy- ment or an aggressive civilian space initiative, like a piloted mission to Mars, IMPROVING THE SHUTTLE The Shuttle, though a remarkable tech- . reducing the number of factory joints and nological achievement, never achieved its in- the number of parts, tended payload capacity and recent safety . designing the ASRMs so that the Space modifications have further degraded its per- Shuttle Main Engines no longer need to formance by approximately 4,800 pounds. be throttled during the region of maxi- Advanced Solid Rocket Motors (ASRMs) or mum dynamic pressure, Liquid Rocket Boosters (LRBs) have the potential to restore some of this perfor- ● replacing asbestos-bearing materials, mance; studies on both are underway.
    [Show full text]
  • Jacques Tiziou Space Collection
    Jacques Tiziou Space Collection Isaac Middleton and Melissa A. N. Keiser 2019 National Air and Space Museum Archives 14390 Air & Space Museum Parkway Chantilly, VA 20151 [email protected] https://airandspace.si.edu/archives Table of Contents Collection Overview ........................................................................................................ 1 Administrative Information .............................................................................................. 1 Biographical / Historical.................................................................................................... 1 Scope and Contents........................................................................................................ 2 Arrangement..................................................................................................................... 2 Names and Subjects ...................................................................................................... 2 Container Listing ............................................................................................................. 4 Series : Files, (bulk 1960-2011)............................................................................... 4 Series : Photography, (bulk 1960-2011)................................................................. 25 Jacques Tiziou Space Collection NASM.2018.0078 Collection Overview Repository: National Air and Space Museum Archives Title: Jacques Tiziou Space Collection Identifier: NASM.2018.0078 Date: (bulk 1960s through
    [Show full text]
  • Historian's Corner
    Historian’s Corner Ray Ziehm (POC) ([email protected] ) We are making some minor changes to the Historian’s writings for each addition of the STAR. Ray Ziehm has volunteered to take the lead in coordinating our quarterly write ups. He will be the only one listed under the officers for Historians. The individual contributors are well appreciated and are needed every year. We have in the past missed some Historian write ups, so having a lead coordinator should eliminate that. The individual writers will continue to be identified with their writings. Those of you that would like to write an article in the STAR for an item of historical interest should contact Ray at 303-784- 1413. Thanks, Bob Snodgress Ed Bock ([email protected] ) Atlas/Centaur Sale and Transition to Martin Marietta This Atlas Program history was originally presented at the Centaur 50th Anniversary celebration in San Diego by Ed Bock. It has been expanded with input from Tony Christensen to include the Centaur for Titan Program Transition. To appreciate this sale and transition, it’s necessary to understand the environment at General Dynamics Space Systems (GDSS) Division in the early 1990’s. The Commercial Atlas Program was inaugurated with the launch of AC-69, the first Atlas I, in July 1990. Atlas II was in development, and its first launch occurred in December 1991. GDSS was in the process of evaluating a Russian rocket engine (the RD-180) for its evolved Atlas. From mid 1990 to late 1993 there were 14 Atlas/Centaur launches, including three Atlas I failures.
    [Show full text]
  • N AS a Facts
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA’s Launch Services Program he Launch Services Program (LSP) manufacturing, launch operations and rockets for launching Earth-orbit and Twas established at Kennedy Space countdown management, and providing interplanetary missions. Center for NASA’s acquisition and added quality and mission assurance in In September 2010, NASA’s Launch program management of expendable lieu of the requirement for the launch Services (NLS) contract was extended launch vehicle (ELV) missions. A skillful service provider to obtain a commercial by the agency for 10 years, through NASA/contractor team is in place to launch license. 2020, with the award of four indefinite meet the mission of the Launch Ser- Primary launch sites are Cape Canav- delivery/indefinite quantity contracts. The vices Program, which exists to provide eral Air Force Station (CCAFS) in Florida, expendable launch vehicles that NASA leadership, expertise and cost-effective and Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB) has available for its science, Earth-orbit services in the commercial arena to in California. and interplanetary missions are United satisfy agencywide space transporta- Other launch locations are NASA’s Launch Alliance’s (ULA) Atlas V and tion requirements and maximize the Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia, the Delta II, Space X’s Falcon 1 and 9, opportunity for mission success. Kwajalein Atoll in the South Pacific’s Orbital Sciences Corp.’s Pegasus and facts The principal objectives of the LSP Republic of the Marshall Islands, and Taurus XL, and Lockheed Martin Space are to provide safe, reliable, cost-effec- Kodiak Island in Alaska. Systems Co.’s Athena I and II.
    [Show full text]
  • Titan Iv Requirements
    OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL TITAN IV REQUIREMENTS Report No. 94-089 April 21, 1994 Department of Defense Additional Copies To obtain additional copies of this report, contact the Secondary Reports Distribution Unit, Audit Planning and Technical Support Directorate, at (703) 614-6303 (DSN 224-6303) or FAX (703) 614-8542. Suggestions for Future Audits To suggest ideas for or to request future audits, contact the Planning and Coordination Branch, Audit Planning and Technical Support Directorate, at (703) 614-1868 (DSN 224-1868) or FAX (703) 614-8542. Ideas and requests can also be mailed to: Inspector General, Department of Defense OAIG-AUD (ATTN: APTS Audit Suggestions) 400 Army Navy Drive (Room 801) Arlington, Virginia 22202-2884 DoD Hotline To report fraud, waste, or abuse, call the DoD Hotline at (800) 424-9098 (DSN 223-5080) or write to the DoD Hotline, The Pentagon, Washington, D.C. 20301-1900. The identity of writers and callers is fully protected. Acronyms FYDP Future Years Defense Program IV&V Independent Verification and Validation OSD Office of the Secretary of Defense RFP Request for Proposal SLAG Space Launch Advisory Group SPO System Program Office SRM Solid Rocket Motor SRMU Solid Rocket Motor Upgrade INSPECTOR GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 400 ARMY NAVY DRIVE ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA 22202-2884 April 21, 1994 MEMORANDUM FOR ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE (FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND COMPTROLLER) SUBJECT: Audit Report on Titan IV Requirements (Report No. 94-089) We are providing this audit report for your review and comments. It discusses requirements for the Titan IV expendable launch vehicle and for independent validation and verification of critical computer resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Information Summary Assurance in Lieu of the Requirement for the Launch Service Provider Apollo Spacecraft to the Moon
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA’s Launch Services Program he Launch Services Program was established for mission success. at Kennedy Space Center for NASA’s acquisi- The principal objectives are to provide safe, reli- tion and program management of Expendable able, cost-effective and on-schedule processing, mission TLaunch Vehicle (ELV) missions. A skillful NASA/ analysis, and spacecraft integration and launch services contractor team is in place to meet the mission of the for NASA and NASA-sponsored payloads needing a Launch Services Program, which exists to provide mission on ELVs. leadership, expertise and cost-effective services in the The Launch Services Program is responsible for commercial arena to satisfy Agencywide space trans- NASA oversight of launch operations and countdown portation requirements and maximize the opportunity management, providing added quality and mission information summary assurance in lieu of the requirement for the launch service provider Apollo spacecraft to the Moon. to obtain a commercial launch license. The powerful Titan/Centaur combination carried large and Primary launch sites are Cape Canaveral Air Force Station complex robotic scientific explorers, such as the Vikings and Voyag- (CCAFS) in Florida, and Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB) in ers, to examine other planets in the 1970s. Among other missions, California. the Atlas/Agena vehicle sent several spacecraft to photograph and Other launch locations are NASA’s Wallops Island flight facil- then impact the Moon. Atlas/Centaur vehicles launched many of ity in Virginia, the North Pacific’s Kwajalein Atoll in the Republic of the larger spacecraft into Earth orbit and beyond. the Marshall Islands, and Kodiak Island in Alaska.
    [Show full text]
  • Ordnance Safety Requirements for Space Launch Vehicles
    Ordnance Safety Requirements for Space Launch Vehicles Srinath. V. Iyengar, P.E.; United Launch Alliance; Denver, Colorado, USA Keywords: Ordnance, hazard, Safety, Atlas Introduction United Launch Alliance launches Atlas V from Cape Canaveral and Vandenberg Air Force launch facilities. Space launch vehicles such as Atlas V consist of various subsystems like pneumatics, propulsion, ordnance, avionics etc. The ordnance systems play a key role with instant activations to initiate various discrete events such as lift off, stage separations, spacecraft separation and flight termination if needed for public safety. Ordnance function is therefore essential for both mission success and uniquely for public safety. Ordnance hazards are present during prelaunch operations and during flight. Prevention of inadvertent activation and assured functioning are both important for safety. A major requirement is to provide a number of inhibits to prevent inadvertent activation. The number of required minimum inhibits depends on a critical or catastrophic consequence. Adequate qualification testing, lot acceptance testing and service life testing are essential for assured functioning. Operations at the launch ranges are controlled by Range Safety regulations like EWR 127-1 and AFSPCMAN 91-710. A number of military standards such as MIL-STD-1576, MIL-DTL-23659 and MIL-HDBK-1512 provide guidance for design and testing. The Department of Transportation provides requirements for safe ground transportation of ordnance. This paper reviews many of these requirements and their compliance approach. Atlas V Space Launch Vehicle Atlas launch vehicle has evolved over many years. Starting with an Atlas A in 1955, the version today is Atlas V. Figure 1 (Reference 1) shows the evolution over the years.
    [Show full text]
  • US Missiles - Tri-Service Designation System
    US Missiles - Tri-Service designation system In 1962, a Tri-service designation system was adopted for missiles and rockets. Missiles still in service changed their previous USAF / Navy / Army designation getting the new one. Tri-Service Designation System Status Prefix Launching Environment Mission Type C Captive A Air C Transport B Booster J Special Test, temporary B Multiple D Decoy L Launch M Maintenance C Coffin / Container E Electronic / Communication Vehicle N Special Test, permanent F Individual G Surface Attack M Guided Missile X Experimental G Runway I Aerial / Space Intercept N Probe Y Prototype (preserial) H Silo-Stored L Launch Detection / Surveillance R Rocket Z Planned / Proposed / L Silo-Launched M Scientific / Calibration S Satellite Projected M Mobile N Navigation P Soft-Pad Q Drone R Surface Ship S Space Support S Space T Training U Underwater U Underwater Attack W Weater M - Guided Missiles 1 Matador Martin Marietta MGM-1 (ex B-61A, TM-61A), W5 warhead MGM-1A W5 warhead MGM-1B W5 warhead MGM-1C (TM-61B), W5 warhead 2 Terrier Convair / General Dynamics ex SAM-N-7 RIM-2A BW-0 RIM-2B BW-1 RIM-2C BT-3 (Terrier 3) Beam-riding RIM-2D BT-3A(N) (Terrier 3A), Nuclear warhead W45 mod.1 (weight < 365 lbs) RIM-2F HT-3 3 Nike Ajax Western Electric ex SAM-A-7, ex M-1 MIM-3A 4 Falcon Hughes AIM-4 ex GAR-1 XIM-4 ex XF-98 AIM-4A ex GAR-1D AIM-4B ex GAR-2 AIM-4C ex GAR-2A AIM-4D ex GAR-2B AIM-4E ex GAR-3/GAR-3A, Super Falcon AIM-4F ex GAR-4/GAR-4A, Super Falcon AIM-4G ex GAR-4A, Super Falcon AIM-4H XAIM-4H 5 Corporal Firestone ex SSM-A-17
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft Designations and Popular Names
    Chapter 1 Aircraft Designations and Popular Names Background on the Evolution of Aircraft Designations Aircraft model designation history is very complex. To fully understand the designations, it is important to know the factors that played a role in developing the different missions that aircraft have been called upon to perform. Technological changes affecting aircraft capabilities have resulted in corresponding changes in the operational capabilities and techniques employed by the aircraft. Prior to WWI, the Navy tried various schemes for designating aircraft. In the early period of naval aviation a system was developed to designate an aircraft’s mission. Different aircraft class designations evolved for the various types of missions performed by naval aircraft. This became known as the Aircraft Class Designation System. Numerous changes have been made to this system since the inception of naval aviation in 1911. While reading this section, various references will be made to the Aircraft Class Designation System, Designation of Aircraft, Model Designation of Naval Aircraft, Aircraft Designation System, and Model Designation of Military Aircraft. All of these references refer to the same system involved in designating aircraft classes. This system is then used to develop the specific designations assigned to each type of aircraft operated by the Navy. The F3F-4, TBF-1, AD-3, PBY-5A, A-4, A-6E, and F/A-18C are all examples of specific types of naval aircraft designations, which were developed from the Aircraft Class Designation System. Aircraft Class Designation System Early Period of Naval Aviation up to 1920 The uncertainties during the early period of naval aviation were reflected by the problems encountered in settling on a functional system for designating naval aircraft.
    [Show full text]
  • January Contest Results
    FEBRUARY 2015 4625 Brandingshire Pl., Fort Worth, TX 76133 January Contest Results Best of Show: Richard Wolf, Mitsubishi J2M Raiden “Jack” 1 Place, 1/48-Scale Aircraft: Sean Richards, Israeli S-199 2 Place, 1/48-Scale Aircraft: Sean Richards, Nakajima J1N “Irving” 3 Place, 1/48-Scale Aircraft: Sean Richards, Bell X-5 1 Place, 1/72-Scale Aircraft: Joseph Fischer, F-35 2 Place, 1/72-Scale Aircraft: Dave Hibscher, Dornier Do-280 3 Place, 1/72-Scale Aircraft: Dave Hibscher, Beech 18 1 Place, 1/32-Scale Aircraft: Richard Wolf, Mitsubishi J2M Raiden “Jack” 1 Place, Other Aircraft: Richard Wolf, “Messerschnitzel” 2 Place, Other Aircraft: Richard Wolf, “Rif Raf’s Spitsfire” 1 Place, 1/35-Scale Armor: Sean Richards, Hippie M60 2 Place, 1/35-Scale Armor: Sean Richards, Hippie M113 3 Place, 1/35-Scale Armor: Sean Richards, “Sarge’s Roach Coach” 1 Place, Ships, Dave Hibscher, U-Boat 1 Place, Figures: Frank Landrus, Jet Pilot 1 Place, Automotive, Richard Marmo, Fruehauf Tanker Trailer 1 Place, Fantasy: Tyler Fassett, Astray Red Frame 2 Place, Fantasy, Tyler Fassett, Gundam Blitz New club officers named for 2015 during January meeting The IPMS Fort Worth Scale Modelers has a new officer corps on board for 2015. Due to commitments to work and family, several of our 2014 officers had to bow out for the new year, so we welcome a new group. Dave Hibscher will serve as club president for 2015, replacing Glenn Whitmire who has served our club faithfully for the past six years. Dave New President Dave Hibscher (right) is has been a member of the club for more congratulated by outgoing club President Glenn than 20 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    THE CAPE Military Space Operations 1971-1992 by Mark C. Cleary 45th Space Wing History Office Table of Contents Preface Chapter I -USAF Space Organizations and Programs Table of Contents Section 1 - Air Force Systems Command and Subordinate Space Agencies at Cape Canaveral Section 2 - The Creation of Air Force Space Command and Transfer of Air Force Space Resources Section 3 - Defense Department Involvement in the Space Shuttle Section 4 - Air Force Space Launch Vehicles: SCOUT, THOR, ATLAS and TITAN Section 5 - Early Space Shuttle Flights Section 6 - Origins of the TITAN IV Program Section 7 - Development of the ATLAS II and DELTA II Launch Vehicles and the TITAN IV/CENTAUR Upper Stage Section 8 - Space Shuttle Support of Military Payloads Section 9 - U.S. and Soviet Military Space Competition in the 1970s and 1980s Chapter II - TITAN and Shuttle Military Space Operations Section 1 - 6555th Aerospace Test Group Responsibilities Section 2 - Launch Squadron Supervision of Military Space Operations in the 1990s Section 3 - TITAN IV Launch Contractors and Eastern Range Support Contractors Section 4 - Quality Assurance and Payload Processing Agencies Section 5 - TITAN IIIC Military Space Missions after 1970 Section 6 - TITAN 34D Military Space Operations and Facilities at the Cape Section 7 - TITAN IV Program Activation and Completion of the TITAN 34D Program Section 8 - TITAN IV Operations after First Launch Section 9 - Space Shuttle Military Missions Chapter III - Medium and Light Military Space Operations Section 1 - Medium Launch Vehicle and Payload Operations Section 2 - Evolution of the NAVSTAR Global Positioning System and Development of the DELTA II Section 3 - DELTA II Processing and Flight Features Section 4 - NAVSTAR II Global Positioning System Missions Section 5 - Strategic Defense Initiative Missions and the NATO IVA Mission Section 6 - ATLAS/CENTAUR Missions at the Cape Section 7 - Modification of Cape Facilities for ATLAS II/CENTAUR Operations Section 8 - ATLAS II/CENTAUR Missions Section 9 - STARBIRD and RED TIGRESS Operations Section 10 - U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter Nine Army Nuclear Weapons
    9 Army Nuclear Weapons Chapter Nine Army Nuclear Weapons The Army1 uses a wide variety of nuclear weapon sys- ish, Dutch, Italian, and West German armies. LANCE tems-medium range PERSHING la and short-range replaced HONEST JOHN in all of these countries, more LANCE surface-to-surface missiles, NIKE-HERCULES than doubling the range and accuracy over the older surface-to-air missiles, 155mm and 8-inch (203mm) artil- missile, and providing greater mobility and reliability. lery, and atomic demolition munitions (nuclear land A new warhead for the LANCE, an enhanced radiation mines). The HONEST JOHN surface-to-surface rocket, version of the W70 (Mod 3) produced in 1981-1983, is although withdrawn from active U.S. use, is nuclear being stored in the U.S. and awaits shipment to armed with some NATO allies. Army nuclear weapons Europe. The HONEST JOHN short-range free-flight are deployed with U.S. combat units throughout the rocket, first deployed in 1954, remains deployed with United States, Europe, in South Korea, and among allied W31 nuclear warheads in the Greek and Turkish military forces. They vary in range from manually armies. No plans are currently known for the replace- emplaced land mines to 460 miles, and in yield from sub ment of HONEST JOHN in the above forces with the (0.01) to 400 kilotons. LANCE, but they will be obsolete in the late 1980s and The PERSHING la is the longest range and highest impossible to support. A nuclear armed LANCE yield Army nuclear weapon currently deployed. One replacement is under development, called the Corps hundred and eighty launchers, with more than 300 mis- Support Weapon System, as part of the Army-Air Force siles, all armed with W50 nuclear warheads, are Joint Tactical Missile System program to investigate deployed in West Germany with the U.S.
    [Show full text]