Reconnaissance Satellite Programs—John Hilliard
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
L AUNCH SYSTEMS Databk7 Collected.Book Page 18 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM Databk7 Collected.Book Page 19 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM
databk7_collected.book Page 17 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM CHAPTER TWO L AUNCH SYSTEMS databk7_collected.book Page 18 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM databk7_collected.book Page 19 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM CHAPTER TWO L AUNCH SYSTEMS Introduction Launch systems provide access to space, necessary for the majority of NASA’s activities. During the decade from 1989–1998, NASA used two types of launch systems, one consisting of several families of expendable launch vehicles (ELV) and the second consisting of the world’s only partially reusable launch system—the Space Shuttle. A significant challenge NASA faced during the decade was the development of technologies needed to design and implement a new reusable launch system that would prove less expensive than the Shuttle. Although some attempts seemed promising, none succeeded. This chapter addresses most subjects relating to access to space and space transportation. It discusses and describes ELVs, the Space Shuttle in its launch vehicle function, and NASA’s attempts to develop new launch systems. Tables relating to each launch vehicle’s characteristics are included. The other functions of the Space Shuttle—as a scientific laboratory, staging area for repair missions, and a prime element of the Space Station program—are discussed in the next chapter, Human Spaceflight. This chapter also provides a brief review of launch systems in the past decade, an overview of policy relating to launch systems, a summary of the management of NASA’s launch systems programs, and tables of funding data. The Last Decade Reviewed (1979–1988) From 1979 through 1988, NASA used families of ELVs that had seen service during the previous decade. -
BELLCOMM, INC. Case 720 23 P Unclas
3 e--* I ', - -,p. .. - BELLCOMM, INC. 1100 Seventeenth Street, N.W. WkhingtoL D. C. 20036 SUBJECT: Selected Comments on Agena and DATE: March 26, 1968 Titan I11 Family Stages Case 720 FROM: C. Bendersky ABSTRACT This memo presents (unclassified) comments on the status of Lockheed Agena and Titan I11 family propulsion stages gathered to support current NASA Orbital Workshop Studies. (VASA-CR-955 11) SELECTED COMMENTS ON AGENA N79-72086 AND TITAN 3 FAHILY STAGES (Eellcomrn, Inc-) 23 P Unclas 00/75 11184 BELLCOMM,INC. 1100 Seventeenth Street, N.W. Washington, D. C. 20036 SUBJECT: Selected Comments on Agena and DATE: March 26, 1968 Titan I11 Family Stages Case 720 FROM: C. Bendersky MEMORANDUM FOR FILE This memo presents (unclassified) comments on the status of both the Lockheed Agena Space Propulsion Systems and the Martin Titan I11 booster family. The data presented were primarily obtained during a visit to Lockheed, Sunnyvale, Cali- fornia, January 23 and Martin, Denver, Colorado, January 24-25, 1968l. H. S. London was present 3t Martin. This memo will dis- cuss specific operational features of the subject stages of cur- rent interest to the hlorkshop B & C study. The detailed charac- teristics of the stases and flight performance data are available upon request from this writer. This memo reports information available as of February 1, 1968 and will be updated as warranted. 1.0 AGENA STAGES It must be emphasized that the available Aaena has achieved a high degree of reliability through flights on Thor, Atlas and Titan boosters. For example, more than 10 Titan IIIB/ Agenas have been successfully flown from the Western Test Range (NTR). -
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. -
Titan II Small Multisatellite Mission Approach
I I Titan II Small Multisatellite Mission Approach Aubrey J. Butts I David F. Giere Bruce M. French Martin Marietta Astronautics Group John J. Kusnierek I Space Systems Division, USAF At the present time, small satellite programs are faced with the dilemma that they are I sometimes so small that they cannot afford the expense of a dedicated Expendable Launch Vehicle (EL V) and. therefore, must attempt to find a way to get into orbit as a secondary payload. This paper discusses another alternative, the use of a Titan II as a dedicated launch vehicle for a group of small satellites. Launches could be scheduled on a periodic I basis as a function of predicted need. The Titan II has the capability of inserting total payload weight of 3,000 to 4,000 lbs. into high-inclination, low-earth orbits and smaller payloads to higher orbits. Orbit changes are possible depending on the altitudes and I payloads weights involved. Payload fairings are available for small and large payloads. Since the total payload could conceivably consist of satellites from several unrelated programs, some type of mission "broker" or central contracting agency would be needed to develop and implement a multisatellite mission. This paper offers an approach to I implementing a mission of this type that would allow small satellites to schedule a launch on the T -II multisatellite carrier at a predetermined launch date during each year. The costs would be shared between payloads on the basis of weight and volume. This gives those small satellite programs a launch option that would provide on-orbit operation at a I predetermined time. -
Up from Kitty Hawk Chronology
airforcemag.com Up From Kitty Hawk Chronology AIR FORCE Magazine's Aerospace Chronology Up From Kitty Hawk PART ONE PART TWO 1903-1979 1980-present 1 airforcemag.com Up From Kitty Hawk Chronology Up From Kitty Hawk 1980-1989 F-117 Nighthawk stealth fighters, first flight June 1981. Articles noted throughout the chronology are hyperlinked to the online archive for Air Force Magazine and the Daily Report. 1980 March 12-14, 1980. Two B-52 crews fly nonstop around the world in 43.5 hours, covering 21,256 statute miles, averaging 488 mph, and carrying out sea surveillance/reconnaissance missions. April 24, 1980. In the middle of an attempt to rescue US citizens held hostage in Iran, mechanical difficulties force several Navy RH-53 helicopter crews to turn back. Later, one of the RH-53s collides with an Air Force HC-130 in a sandstorm at the Desert One refueling site. Eight US servicemen are killed. Desert One May 18-June 5, 1980. Following the eruption of Mount Saint Helens in northwest Washington State, the Aerospace Rescue and Recovery Service, Military Airlift Command, and the 9th Strategic Reconnaissance Wing conduct humanitarian-relief efforts: Helicopter crews lift 61 people to safety, while SR–71 airplanes conduct aerial photographic reconnaissance. May 28, 1980. The Air Force Academy graduates its first female cadets. Ninety-seven women are commissioned as second lieutenants. Lt. Kathleen Conly graduates eighth in her class. Aug. 22, 1980. The Department of Defense reveals existence of stealth technology that “enables the United States to build manned and unmanned aircraft that cannot be successfully intercepted with existing air defense systems.” Sept. -
Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Ulysses Mission (Tier 2)
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration February 1990 Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Ulysses Mission (Tier 2) (_AgA-i'M-I02993) ORAF[ _-NVTRr_NM_TAL I-MPACT Nq0-]4777 STATEMEf'!T FDR THt ULYsSeS MTSSIqN (TIER 2) (NASA) 1_7 p C_EL. ]3? Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Ulysses Mission (Tier 2) Office of Space Science and Applications Solar System Exploration Division Washington, DC 20546 February 1990 Copies of this document can be obtained from: NeUonel Technical Information Service (NTIS) 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, VA 22161 Phone: (703) 487-4650 For Rush Orders: (703) 4874700 Request the document as: N90-14727 ABSTRACT LEAD AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration Washington, DC 20546 COOPERATING AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 FOR INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Dudley G. McConnell NASA Headquarters Code EL Washington, DC 20546 (202) 453-1587 DATE: February 1990 This Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) addresses the environmental impacts which may be caused by the implementation of a space flight mission to observe the polar regions of the Sun. The proposed action is completing the preparation and operation of the Ulysses spacecraft, including its planned launch on the Space Transportation System (STS) Shuttle in October 1990 or in the backup opportunity in November 1991, and the alternative of canceling further work on the mission. The Tier I EIS (NASA 1988a) included a delay alternative which considered the Titan IV launch vehicle as an alternative booster stage for launch in 1991 or later. However, in November 1988, the U.S. Air Force, which procures the Titan IV, notified the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) that it could not provide a Titan IV vehicle for the 1991 launch opportunity because of high priority Department of Defense requirements. -
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. -
In Better Times, Martin Marietta Titan 340 Ex- Pendable Launch Vehi- Cle (ELV) Lifts Off with Spacebound Military Payload
In better times, Martin Marietta Titan 340 Ex- pendable Launch Vehi- cle (ELV) lifts off with spacebound military payload. Successive Titan 340 failures bracketed the destruc- tion of Space Shuttle Challenger. putting USAF's space-launch program on hold last year. Things are looking up, now that Air Force Systems Command's Space Division has con- ducted its Titan 340 in- spection and recovery program and has put into effect its compre- hensive space-launch recovery plan. leading to a better mix of booster rockets to augment the Shuttles in assuring fu- ture US access to space. Mr HE US space program is begin- Vital military pay- ning to lose the snakebitten look loads are still on the it took on last year amid a shocking succession of accidents befalling ground, but USAF is Space Shuttle Challenger and three unmanned launch vehicles. rebuilding its launch The program still has a long, long capability to be way to go in fully recovering from the impact of those accidents. They stronger and more left the Air Force incapable of versatile than that of launching growing numbers of satel- lites vital to national security. the pre-Challenger This sobering—even scary— state of affairs will persist into next era. year and will not be much alleviated for another year or so after that. Shuttle Orbiters will not fly again until February 1988, at the earliest. The first of the big Titan IV Comple- mentary Expendable Launch Vehi- cles (CELVs) now being developed to carry outsized payloads high into Coming space will not be ready for launch until early 1989. -
Rocketry Index a “Catalog” of All the Hobby Rockets
and Present The Rocketry Index A “Catalog” of all the hobby rockets... ever! (or at least as many as I could manage!) Compiled and Edited by John A. Lee OSL Revision: 13.01 Contents Introductory Materials............................................................... 43 What Is “The Rocketry Index?”........................................................43 What Gets Included With the Rockets ..............................................45 What Gets Included With the Companies .........................................47 Company Information .................................................................................... 47 Company Statement ....................................................................................... 47 Rocketeers’ Views of the Companies.............................................................. 47 Master Lists ................................................................................................... 47 Family Groups...................................................................................49 Patriarchal Families ...................................................................................... 49 Always Ready Rocketry Families ..................................................................... 50 ARR Basic Blues Family .................................................................................................... 50 Art Applewhite Families ................................................................................... 50 Applewhite Cinco Family ................................................................................................. -
M2M Connectivity It's All About Location No Sky View? Forrester +
Worldwide Satellite Magazine May 2012 SatMagazineSatMagazine M2M Connectivity It’s All About Location No Sky View? Forrester + Heyman Bragging Rights The Failed Hire Improving STEM SatMagazine — May 2012 — Vol. 5, #2 Publishing Operations InfoBeam Silvano Payne ......................................Publisher + Writer A Successful Antenna Unfurling (Harris) .............. Page 08 Hartley G. Lesser ...................................Editorial Director Pattie Waldt ............................................ Executive Editor Jill Durfee .................... Sales Director, Editorial Assistant SES’ Hulk ................................................................ Page 08 Donald McGee ...................................Production Manager Simon Payne ................................. Development Manager Dual Solutions (Yahsat) ........................................ Page 08 Mike Antonovich ....Contributing Editor, SatBroadcasting Maxime Baudry ...................................Contributing Editor Chris Forrester ...........Senior Contributing Editor, Europe Antenna Approvals (Thrane & Thrane) ................. Page 10 Alan Gottlieb ...................... Contributing Editor, Maritime Bob Gough .......... Senior Contributing Editor Asia-Pacific Joining Forces (Astrium Services + Hisdesat) ..... Page 10 Richard Dutchik ..................................Contributing Editor Jos Heyman .........................................Contributing Editor CAPEX Impact On FSS Operators (NSR) ............... Page 11 Dan Makinster...................................... -
Volume I D2-116262-1 Submitted To
NASA CONTRACT NAS 2-6518 HEUS-RS APPLICATIONS STUDY FINAL REPORT - VOLUME I D2-116262-1 SUBMITTED TO: JET PROPULSION LABORATORY ATTENTION: MR. F. L. SOLA CONTRACTING AGENCY: NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION AMES RESEARCH CENTER MOFFETT FIELD, CALIFORNIA 94035 JUNE 1972 N74-115 9 8 (ISACR13 2 7 4 ) HEUS-RS PPLICATIONS Report (Boeinq STUD, VO1UM2 1 Final Wash.) -1- p HC $7.5C Co., Seattle, CSCL 21H Unclas /co G3/2 8 2212 AEROSPACE GROUP - SPACECRAFT DIVISION THE BOEING COMPANY SEATTLE, WASHINGTON D2-116262-1 ABSTRACT This document is a final report of a High Energy Upper Stage - Restartable Solid (HEUS-RS) Applications Study, NASA Contract NAS 2-6518. The material herein deals with sizing and integrating a high energy upper stage restartable solid motor into a flight stage with various payloads for use with Titan III and Thor launch vehicles. In addition, performance of the HEUS-RS with the space shuttle is briefly examined. KEY WORDS Titan IIIB Specific Impulse Thor Propel l ant Thorad Quench Centaur Performance HEUS-RS Mission Model Total Impulse Space Shuttle PRECEDING PAGE BLANK NOT FILMED ii 02-116262-1 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS BII Burner II AV Delta Velocity ETR Eastern Test Range FCE Flight Control Electronics GRU Gyro Reference Unit HEUS High Energy Upper Stage HEUS-RS High Energy Upper Stage-Restartable Solid RCS Reaction Control Subsystem ROM Rough Order of Magnitude TAT Thrust Augmented THOR WTR Western Test Range iii D2-116262-1 Volume I TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 1.1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.2 -
LCD-79-112 Procurement of DSCS II Satellites F-17 and F-18
B-168707 APRIL 16, 1979 The Honorable Jamie L. Whitten Chairman, Committee on Appropriations House of Representatives Dear Mr. Chairman: 109125 Your February 26, 1979, letter requested that we review the Department of Defense's plan to purchase two satellites for the Defense Satellite Communications System, Phase II (DSCS II). Our findings, conclusions, and recommendations are summarized below. A more detailed discussion of the results of our review is provided in the enclosure to this letter. We have concluded that Defense's requirement for the Phase II satellites has not been justified. This require- ment is based on a theoretical gap in communications (caused by not having enough satellites in the phase's final years) before the operational Phase III (DSCS III) satellites become available. The problem with this theory, however, is that the two Phase II satellites could not be launched in time to fill any gap between the two phases. The earliest pos- sible launch of the two Phase II satellites could not occur before the Phase III satellites are scheduled to be in orbit and operational. Any difficulties with the remaining Phase II program, such as launch failures or catastrophic failures of on-orbit satellites, could not be alleviated by this addi- tional procurement. The justification for this procurement was enhanced because Defense Communications Agency program officials used a different criterion than that used by Air Force officials responsible for the satellite procurements to determine the numbers of satellites needed to maintain system availability. This rule change resulted in an apparent need for the two satellites, but, in our opinion, the need is neither appro- priate nor practical in terms of actual satellite deliveries and launch schedules.