DOCSLIB.ORG

Athena I - Kodiak Star Mission

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Athena I - Kodiak Star Mission NASA Facts National Aeronautics and Space Administration John F. Kennedy Space Center Kennedy Space Center, Florida 32899 AC 321-867-2468 August 2001 KSC Release No. 99-01 Athena I - Kodiak Star Mission In 1998, Kennedy Space Center became the Starshine 3 lead center responsible for NASAs acquisition and Starshine 3 is a student-built satellite developed management of the Expendable Launch Vehicle by the Rocky Mountain NASA Space Grant Consor- (ELV) Launch Services Program) The Program, with tium and the Naval Research Laboratory) The its vision statement, Global Leadership in Launch satellite is a one-meter optically reflective sphere that Service Excellence, provides launch services for weighs 220 pounds (100 kilograms)) Starshine 3 is NASA and NASA-sponsored payloads from launch covered with approximately 1500 aluminum mirrors sites that include Cape Canaveral Air Force Station that are one inch each in diameter) These mirrors (CCAFS), Fla; Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB), were machined by technology students in Utah, with Calif; Kwajalein Atoll in the Pacific; Wallops Flight the grinding and polishing of the mirrors being Facility, Va; and a new launch complex on Kodiak accomplished by students in kindergarten through Island, Alaska) twelfth grade in schools all over the world) Once Starshine 3 is in orbit, students can visually track the Athena I Kodiak Star Launch satellite with the naked eye) Students will determine Of particular impor- the coordinates of Starshine 3 and record their tance to NASA is the locations on the Starshine Project Internet web site) up-coming Kodiak Star The resulting Starshine 3 data will provide scientists Mission, which utilizes with new knowledge about how the Earths upper a Lockheed Martin atmosphere reacts to fluctuations in the suns ultra- Athena I launch violet radiation during a sunspot cycle) This knowl- vehicle) This mission is edge will help NASA improve forecasts of satellite scheduled for launch in orbit decay that will help astronauts to more precisely the Fall of 2001 and perform debris avoidance maneuvers for the Interna- will be the first orbital tional Space Station and the Space Shuttle) launch utilizing the new Launching Starshine 3 from the Kodiak Launch Kodiak Launch Com- Complex at a 67-degree inclination will allow stu- plex in Alaska) The Kodiak Star Mission will carry dents worldwide, including northern latitudes such as four satellites into Earth orbit: the NASA-sponsored Alaska, northern Canada, Scandinavia and Russia, Starshine 3, and three satellites sponsored by the to participate in the project) Worldwide student Department of Defense Space Test Program (STP): participation has not been possible on previous PICOSat, PCSat, and Sapphire) Starshine missions launched at lower inclinations Each satellite has specific orbit requirements, from the Space Shuttle) which the Athena I vehicle will accomplish by maneuvering into two separate orbits with the STP Space Test Program-Sponsored Satellites satellites being released at an altitude of 497 miles PICOSat is built by Surrey Satellite Technology (800 kilo-meters) and Starshine 3 released at an Ltd) in Guildford, United Kingdom) PICOSats altitude of 310 miles (500 kilometers)) mission is to fly and operate four scientific payloads: Polymer Battery Experiment (PBEX), Ionospheric Base, Calif), on Aug) 22, 1997) The first successful Occultation Experiment (IOX), Coherent Electro- launch of an Athena II carried NASAs Lunar magnetic Radio Tomagraphy (CERTO) and Ultra- Prospector spacecraft, on a mission to study the Quiet Platform (OPPEX)) moon, from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla), PBEX is designed to test the flexible polymer on Jan) 6, 1998) The most re-cent Athena launch battery for applications to space flight) IOX uses was Sept) 24, 1999, from VAFB, carrying the Global Positioning Satellite signals to measure IKONOS-2 Satellite for space imaging) ionospheric properties that impact communications and navigation signals) CERTO measures electron Kodiak Launch Complex (KLC) content of the ionosphere with the beacon signal KLC is the newest commercial launch complex in and ground-based receivers) OPPEX demonstrates the United States, located on Narrow Cape, of passive and active vibration control for position- Kodiak Island, Alaska, approximately 41 miles south sensitive sensors) of the city of Kodiak and 250 miles south of The Prototype Communications Satellite (PCSat) Anchorage) The Alaska Aerospace Development is the first in an intended line of experimental satel- Corporation (AADC) built the launch complex and lites designed, constructed and tested by midship- also operates it) The advantage to this location is its men of the United States Naval Academy) PCSats wide-open launch corridor and an unobstructed function is to serve as a position/status reporting and down-range flight path) The location is ideal for message communications satellite for remote trav- launching expendable launch vehicles with payloads elers using only hand-held or mobile radios) PCSat requiring low-Earth polar or sun-synchronous orbits) will augment the existing worldwide terrestrial KLC facilities utilized by the Kodiak Star Mission Amateur Radio Automatic Position Reporting System include a Launch Control and Management Center (APRS) by providing links from 90 percent of the (LCMC), Payload Processing Facility (PPF), Inte- Earths surface not covered by the terrestrial gration Processing Facility (IPF), Launch Service network) Structure (LSS) and Launch Pad) The Sapphire satellite was built by Space Range, vehicle and spacecraft operations are Systems Development Laboratory of Stanford conducted from the Launch Control Center (LCC) on University and will also be operated by United States launch day) The LCC also serves as the admini- Naval Academy midshipmen) Sapphire will carry strative and engineering support facility for the several experiments into orbit including a Beacon Kodiak Launch Complex) Monitoring Experiment, a Tunneling Horizon Detector Spacecraft are received, staged, processed and and a voice synthesizer microchip that will convert validated in the PPF) The PPF high bay facilities text messages into a synthesized human voice to include an airlock and a processing high bay) The allow it to speak to listeners over amateur radio IPF is a multifunction building for receiving and frequencies) processing equipment, components and flight hardware) It serves as a receiving, checkout and Athena Launch History vehicle stage integration facility) The Athena launch vehicle program began in The LSS and Launch Pad are unique facilities January 1993) The that allow the launch vehicle and payload to be Athena is a core com- readied for launch in an enclosed environment) A ponent of the Lockheed 75-ton bridge crane lifts the fairing to the vertical Martin Astronautics family position onto the launch pedestal) After the entire of launch vehicles, which assembly is complete, and just prior to launch, the also includes the Titan IV, surrounding service structure is rotated away) Titan II, Multi-Service Launch System, Atlas II/ III, Atlas V and Proton Web Site Addresses: vehicles) http://www)ksc)nasa)gov/elv/netscape4)html The first successful Expendable Launch Vehicle Web Site launch of an Athena I www)ksc)nasa)gov delivered the NASA- Kennedy Space Center Home Page sponsored Lewis satellite www)akaerospace)com into orbit from Alaska Aerospace Development Corporation Vandenberg Air Force.
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]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Out There Somewhere Could Be a PLANET LIKE OURS the Breakthroughs We’Ll Need to find Earth 2.0 Page 30
    September 2014 Out there somewhere could be A PLANET LIKE OURS The breakthroughs we’ll need to find Earth 2.0 Page 30 Faster comms with lasers/16 Real fallout from Ukraine crisis/36 NASA Glenn chief talks tech/18 A PUBLICATION OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS Engineering the future Advanced Composites Research The Wizarding World of Harry Potter TM Bloodhound Supersonic Car Whether it’s the world’s fastest car With over 17,500 staff worldwide, and 2,800 in or the next generation of composite North America, we have the breadth and depth of capability to respond to the world’s most materials, Atkins is at the forefront of challenging engineering projects. engineering innovation. www.na.atkinsglobal.com September 2014 Page 30 DEPARTMENTS EDITOR’S NOTEBOOK 2 New strategy, new era LETTER TO THE EDITOR 3 Skeptical about the SABRE engine INTERNATIONAL BEAT 4 Now trending: passive radars IN BRIEF 8 A question mark in doomsday comms Page 12 THE VIEW FROM HERE 12 Surviving a bad day ENGINEERING NOTEBOOK 16 Demonstrating laser comms CONVERSATION 18 Optimist-in-chief TECH HISTORY 22 Reflecting on radars PROPULSION & ENERGY 2014 FORUM 26 Electric planes; additive manufacturing; best quotes Page 38 SPACE 2014 FORUM 28 Comet encounter; MILSATCOM; best quotes OUT OF THE PAST 44 CAREER OPPORTUNITIES 46 Page 16 FEATURES FINDING EARTH 2.0 30 Beaming home a photo of a planet like ours will require money, some luck and a giant telescope rich with technical advances. by Erik Schechter COLLATERAL DAMAGE 36 Page 22 The impact of the Russia-Ukrainian conflict extends beyond the here and now.
    [Show full text]
  • Sapphire-Like Payload for Space Situational Awareness Final
    Sapphire-like Payload for Space Situational Awareness John Hackett, Lisa Li COM DEV Ltd., Cambridge, Ontario, Canada ([email protected]) ABSTRACT The Sapphire satellite payload has been developed by COM DEV for a Surveillance of Space mission of the Canadian Department of National Defence, which is scheduled to be launched later in 2012. This paper presents a brief overview of the payload, along with the potential for using this optical instrument as a low cost, proven Space Situational Awareness hosted payload on geostationary satellites. The Sapphire payload orbits on a dedicated satellite and hence the payload was not required to actively point. The proposed hosted payload version of Sapphire would be enhanced by incorporating a two dimensional scan capability to increase the spatial coverage. Simulations of the hosted payload version of Sapphire performance are presented, including spatial coverage, approximate sensitivity and positional accuracy for detected resident space objects. The moderate size, power and cost of the Sapphire payload make it an excellent candidate for a hosted payload space situational awareness application. 1. INTRODUCTION The Sapphire payload is described elsewhere [1] and was developed by COM DEV on a moderate budget for MDA Systems Ltd. and the Canadian Department of National Defence and is scheduled to fly in 2012. The Sapphire payload combines the SBV heritage [2] through the telescope design/contractor, with high quantum efficiency CCDs and advanced high reliability electronics. The Sapphire mission [3] was developed by the Canadian Department of National Defence (DND) as part of its Surveillance of Space project. MDA Systems Ltd. was the mission prime contractor, and COM DEV was the payload prime contractor.
    [Show full text]
  • Learning from Other People's Mistakes
    Learning from Other People’s Mistakes Most satellite mishaps stem from engineering mistakes. To prevent the same errors from being repeated, Aerospace has compiled lessons that the space community should heed. Paul Cheng and Patrick Smith he computer onboard the Clementine spacecraft froze immediately after a thruster was commanded to fire. A “watchdog” algorithm designed to stop “It’s always the simple stuff the thrusters from excessive firing could not execute, and CTlementine’s fuel ran out. !e mission was lost. Based on that kills you…. With all the this incident, engineers working on the Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous (NEAR) program learned a key lesson: the testing systems, everything watchdog function should be hard-wired in case of a com- puter shutdown. As it happened, NEAR suffered a similar computer crash during which its thrusters fired thousands looked good.” of times, but each firing was instantly cut off by the still- —James Cantrell, main engineer operative watchdog timer. NEAR survived. As this example illustrates, insights from past anoma- for the joint U.S.-Russian Skipper lies are of considerable value to design engineers and other mission, which failed because program stakeholders. Information from failures (and near its solar panels were connected failures) can influence important design decisions and pre- vent the same mistakes from being made over and over. backward (Associated Press, 1996) Contrary to popular belief, satellites seldom fail because of poor workmanship or defective parts. Instead, most failures are caused by simple engineering errors, such as an over- looked requirement, a unit mix-up, or even a typo in a docu- ment.
    [Show full text]
  • Year in Review 2013
    SM_Dec_2013 cover Worldwide Satellite Magazine December 2013 SatMagazine 2013 YEAR IN REVIEW SatMagazine December 2013—Year In Review Publishing Operations Senior Contributors This Issue’s Authors Silvano Payne, Publisher + Writer Mike Antonovich, ATEME Mike Antonovich Robert Kubbernus Hartley G. Lesser, Editorial Director Tony Bardo, Hughes Eran Avni Dr. Ajey Lele Richard Dutchik Dave Bettinger Tom Leech Pattie Waldt, Executive Editor Chris Forrester, Broadgate Publications Don Buchman Hartley Lesser Jill Durfee, Sales Director, Editorial Assistant Karl Fuchs, iDirect Government Services Eyal Copitt Timothy Logue Simon Payne, Development Director Bob Gough, 21 Carrick Communications Rich Currier Jay Monroe Jos Heyman, TIROS Space Information Tommy Konkol Dybvad Tore Morten Olsen Donald McGee, Production Manager David Leichner, Gilat Satellite Networks Chris Forrester Kurt Peterhans Dan Makinster, Technical Advisor Giles Peeters, Track24 Defence Sima Fishman Jorge Potti Bert Sadtler, Boxwood Executive Search Simen K. Frostad Sally-Anne Ray David Gelerman Susan Sadaat Samer Halawi Bert Sadtler Jos Heyman Patrick Shay Jack Jacobs Mike Towner Casper Jensen Serge Van Herck Alexandre Joint Pattie Waldt Pradman Kaul Ali Zarkesh Published 11 times a year by SatNews Publishers 800 Siesta Way Sonoma, CA 95476 USA Phone: (707) 939-9306 Fax: (707) 838-9235 © 2013 SatNews Publishers We reserve the right to edit all submitted materials to meet our content guidelines, as well as for grammar or to move articles to an alternative issue to accommodate publication space requirements, or removed due to space restrictions. Submission of content does not constitute acceptance of said material by SatNews Publishers. Edited materials may, or may not, be returned to author and/or company for review prior to publication.
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Virgo: Status of the Detector, Latest Results and Future Prospects
    universe Review Advanced Virgo: Status of the Detector, Latest Results and Future Prospects Diego Bersanetti 1,* , Barbara Patricelli 2,3 , Ornella Juliana Piccinni 4 , Francesco Piergiovanni 5,6 , Francesco Salemi 7,8 and Valeria Sequino 9,10 1 INFN, Sezione di Genova, I-16146 Genova, Italy 2 European Gravitational Observatory (EGO), Cascina, I-56021 Pisa, Italy; [email protected] 3 INFN, Sezione di Pisa, I-56127 Pisa, Italy 4 INFN, Sezione di Roma, I-00185 Roma, Italy; [email protected] 5 Dipartimento di Scienze Pure e Applicate, Università di Urbino, I-61029 Urbino, Italy; [email protected] 6 INFN, Sezione di Firenze, I-50019 Sesto Fiorentino, Italy 7 Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Trento, Povo, I-38123 Trento, Italy; [email protected] 8 INFN, TIFPA, Povo, I-38123 Trento, Italy 9 Dipartimento di Fisica “E. Pancini”, Università di Napoli “Federico II”, Complesso Universitario di Monte S. Angelo, I-80126 Napoli, Italy; [email protected] 10 INFN, Sezione di Napoli, Complesso Universitario di Monte S. Angelo, I-80126 Napoli, Italy * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The Virgo detector, based at the EGO (European Gravitational Observatory) and located in Cascina (Pisa), played a significant role in the development of the gravitational-wave astronomy. From its first scientific run in 2007, the Virgo detector has constantly been upgraded over the years; since 2017, with the Advanced Virgo project, the detector reached a high sensitivity that allowed the detection of several classes of sources and to investigate new physics. This work reports the Citation: Bersanetti, D.; Patricelli, B.; main hardware upgrades of the detector and the main astrophysical results from the latest five years; Piccinni, O.J.; Piergiovanni, F.; future prospects for the Virgo detector are also presented.
    [Show full text]
  • The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2012
    Federal Aviation Administration The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation: 2012 February 2013 About FAA About the FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation The Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation (FAA AST) licenses and regulates U.S. commercial space launch and reentry activity, as well as the operation of non-federal launch and reentry sites, as authorized by Executive Order 12465 and Title 51 United States Code, Subtitle V, Chapter 509 (formerly the Commercial Space Launch Act). FAA AST’s mission is to ensure public health and safety and the safety of property while protecting the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States during commercial launch and reentry operations. In addition, FAA AST is directed to encourage, facilitate, and promote commercial space launches and reentries. Additional information concerning commercial space transportation can be found on FAA AST’s website: http://www.faa.gov/go/ast Cover art: Phil Smith, The Tauri Group (2013) NOTICE Use of trade names or names of manufacturers in this document does not constitute an official endorsement of such products or manufacturers, either expressed or implied, by the Federal Aviation Administration. • i • Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation Dear Colleague, 2012 was a very active year for the entire commercial space industry. In addition to all of the dramatic space transportation events, including the first-ever commercial mission flown to and from the International Space Station, the year was also a very busy one from the government’s perspective. It is clear that the level and pace of activity is beginning to increase significantly.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolving Launch Vehicle Market Supply and the Effect on Future NASA Missions
    Presented at the 2007 ISPA/SCEA Joint Annual International Conference and Workshop - www.iceaaonline.com The Evolving Launch Vehicle Market Supply and the Effect on Future NASA Missions Presented at the 2007 ISPA/SCEA Joint International Conference & Workshop June 12-15, New Orleans, LA Bob Bitten, Debra Emmons, Claude Freaner 1 Presented at the 2007 ISPA/SCEA Joint Annual International Conference and Workshop - www.iceaaonline.com Abstract • The upcoming retirement of the Delta II family of launch vehicles leaves a performance gap between small expendable launch vehicles, such as the Pegasus and Taurus, and large vehicles, such as the Delta IV and Atlas V families • This performance gap may lead to a variety of progressions including – large satellites that utilize the full capability of the larger launch vehicles, – medium size satellites that would require dual manifesting on the larger vehicles or – smaller satellites missions that would require a large number of smaller launch vehicles • This paper offers some comparative costs of co-manifesting single- instrument missions on a Delta IV/Atlas V, versus placing several instruments on a larger bus and using a Delta IV/Atlas V, as well as considering smaller, single instrument missions launched on a Minotaur or Taurus • This paper presents the results of a parametric study investigating the cost- effectiveness of different alternatives and their effect on future NASA missions that fall into the Small Explorer (SMEX), Medium Explorer (MIDEX), Earth System Science Pathfinder (ESSP), Discovery,
    [Show full text]
  • Orbiter Processing Facility
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration Space Shuttle: Orbiter Processing From Landing To Launch he work of preparing a space shuttle for the same facilities. Inside is a description of an flight takes place primarily at the Launch orbiter processing flow; in this case, Discovery. Complex 39 Area. TThe process actually begins at the end of each acts Shuttle Landing Facility flight, with a landing at the center or, after landing At the end of its mission, the Space Shuttle f at an alternate site, the return of the orbiter atop a Discovery lands at the Shuttle Landing Facility on shuttle carrier aircraft. Kennedy’s Shuttle Landing one of two runway headings – Runway 15 extends Facility is the primary landing site. from the northwest to the southeast, and Runway There are now three orbiters in the shuttle 33 extends from the southeast to the northwest fleet: Discovery, Atlantis and Endeavour. Chal- – based on wind currents. lenger was destroyed in an accident in January After touchdown and wheelstop, the orbiter 1986. Columbia was lost during approach to land- convoy is deployed to the runway. The convoy ing in February 2003. consists of about 25 specially designed vehicles or Each orbiter is processed independently using units and a team of about 150 trained personnel, NASA some of whom assist the crew in disembarking from the orbiter. the orbiter and a “white room” is mated to the orbiter hatch. The The others quickly begin the processes necessary to “safe” the hatch is opened and a physician performs a brief preliminary orbiter and prepare it for towing to the Orbiter Processing Fa- medical examination of the crew members before they leave the cility.
    [Show full text]
  • 1.1 a Survey of the Lightning Launch Commit Criteria
    1.1 A Survey Of The Lightning Launch Commit Criteria William P. Roeder and Todd M. McNamara 45th Weather Squadron, Patrick AFB, FL 1. 45 WS MISSION The 45th Weather Squadron (45 WS) provides comprehensive weather services to America’s space program at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) and NASA’s Kennedy Space Center (KSC) (Harms et al., 1999). These services include weather support for pre-launch, launch, post-launch, routine weather forecast, 24/7 watches/warnings, flight briefings, and special missions. A major part of the 45 WS support to launch is evaluating and forecasting the Lightning Launch Commit Criteria (LLCC) (Roeder et al., 1999) and User Launch Commit Criteria (Boyd et al., 1995). The LLCC protect against natural and rocket triggered lightning strikes to the in-flight rocket. The User Launch Commit Criteria include low level winds so the rocket doesn’t Figure 1. Average cloud-to-ground lighting flash density topple or get blown back into the launch pad 2 during launch, and ceiling and visibility so the (flashes/km •year) for the CONUS (1989–1993), corrected for detection efficiency. Data are from the ascending rocket can be tracked by camera to National Lightning Detection Network. Figure provided ensure it is on the correct trajectory. Launch by Dr. Richard Orville, Texas A&M University. customers include the DoD, NASA, and commercial customers for approximately 30 launches per year. The launch vehicles supported 2. INTRODUCTION TO THE LIGHTNING recently include Titan, Atlas, Delta, Athena, LAUNCH COMMIT CRITERIA Pegasus, and Space Shuttle space launch vehicles, and Trident ballistic missiles.
    [Show full text]
  • Launch Vehicle Control Center Architectures
    Launch Vehicle Control Center Architectures Michael D. Watson1, Amy Epps2, and Van Woodruff3 NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL 35812 Michael Jacob Vachon4 NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX 77058 Julio Monreal5 European Space Agency, Launchers Directorate, Paris, France Marl Levesque6 United Launch Alliance, Vandenberg AFB and Randall Williams7 and Tom McLaughlin8 Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA 90245 Launch vehicles within the international community vary greatly in their configuration and processing. Each launch site has a unique processing flow based on the specific launch vehicle configuration. Launch and flight operations are managed through a set of control centers associated with each launch site. Each launch site has a control center for launch operations; however flight operations support varies from being co-located with the launch site to being shared with the space vehicle control center. There is also a nuance of some having an engineering support center which may be co-located with either the launch or flight control center, or in a separate geographical location altogether. A survey of control center architectures is presented for various launch vehicles including the NASA Space Launch System (SLS), United Launch Alliance (ULA) Atlas V and Delta IV, and the European Space Agency (ESA) Ariane 5. Each of these control center architectures shares some similarities in basic structure while differences in functional distribution also exist. The driving functions which lead to these factors are considered and a model of control center architectures is proposed which supports these commonalities and variations. I. INTRODUCTION Launch vehicles in both Europe and the United States have been operating successfully for several decades.
    [Show full text]