USOS Core Complete Development GuidelinesQuestions

1
CR 6291
USOS Core Complete Development Guidelines/Question
s
12/19/01
Nancy Wilks Assembly Configuration Team (281)
244-7127
2
Purpose of Presentation

• The purpose of this presentation is
• Request for Technical Definition
  Authorization/Evaluation
• Request for Partial/Early Implementation
• Request for Full/Final Implementation
• Information Only
• Response to an Action Item

3
Problem Definition

• What is the problem/issue?
• Need a technical feasibility assessment of the
  Proposed US Core Complete Planning Assembly
  Sequence by January 17, 2002.
• Who is impacted?
• Everyone

4
Why is this Assembly Sequence Feasibility
Assessment Important?

• This assembly sequence will be used for
• Development of the US Core Complete assembly
  sequence cost baseline
• Final Assembly Sequence due the end of January
• To define the manifest complement and post-AC
  steady state operations cost baseline through the
  program end date of FY 2015.
• To understand what the utilization crew time

5
Given US Core Complete Development Guidelines

• 4 Shuttle Flights per year to ISS starting in
  FY2003
• US Core Complete (3 person capability only)
• All trusses (and MT/CETA rails) and arrays
• Node 2
• NASDA, ESA modules and external elements
• Other elements - Cupola, SPDM
• CAM in April, 2007
• SPP, MTsM via Shuttle (with in current
  commitment)
• 1 dedicated Russian Shuttle Flight
• 2 partial Russian Shuttle flights
• Russian Segment
• Universal Docking Module (FGB-2) via Proton
• Research modules 1 and 2
• All external attached payloads
• All Internal ISPRs supported by budget

6
Other Guidelines/Considerations

• Crew rotation every 5 to 7 months on Shuttles as
  much as possible
• Maintain system functionality
• PCU, ATA, NTA resupply and maintenance ORUs
• External logistic carriers and stowage platforms
• SM MMOD Debris Panels and Wings
• Define other miscellaneous items for flight.
• Not part of core complete (additional cost if
  added)
• No Node 3, CRV, Hab, Regenerative ECLSS (OGS,
  WRS, additional ARS, or additional FCE (WHC, Crew
  quarters, Galley, second TVIS, R/F)
• Define requirements for
• ATV, HTV, Progress, Shuttle resupply
• Assembly sequence cost increases independent of
  US Core Complete definition
• New RS configuration (see backup charts)
• Different SPP, UDM, MTsM
• External Carriers

7
What Else is Different?

• Flight 1J/A is delayed and 4 JEM PM system racks
  are launched in the MPLM and temporarily stowed
  in the Node 2 stowage rack locations on Flt ULF2.
• Flight ULF2 includes the PVR FSE Carrier to stow
  the spare PVR radiator on-orbit.
• Russian flight order has been updated to match
  the December 7, 2001 fax F-1/106-6253

8
Additional Groundrules and Assumptions

• 12. The Russian Docking Compartment relocation
  using the SSRMS will occur prior to Flight ULF2.
  The SSRMS will operate from the FGB PDGF.
• 13. The MTsM launched on Flight 9A.1 replacing
  the DSM on the FGB. The MTsM will be installed
  using the SSRMS based on the Lab PDGF.
• 14. Hardware shall be delivered to the current
  schedule and should not be delayed because of
  launch date changes.
• 15. Identify all cost savings from the budget
  baseline. Flights 18A (CRV), 20A (Node 3), and
  16A (Hab) have been removed from this sequence.
• 16. Flight integration for ULF2 should be listed
  as a separate line item in the ROM.
• 17. For analysis purposes, assume the following
  flights have Crew Rotation 10A, ULF2, 9S, UF3,
  9A.1,UF5, 14A, UF7.
• 18. Nothing has changed from the baseline up to
  Flight 10A.
• 19. For steady state operations post-UF7, assume
  the following
• 4 total Shuttle flights per year equally spaced
  every 3 months
• 2 flights are unpressurized flights
• 2 flights are mixed (MPLM and unpressurized) with
  Crew Rotation
• The pressurized and mixed flights will alternate

• 1. During the technical feasibility assessment of
  this CR, the teams shall provide a consolidated
  list of technical program risks due to open
  issues.
• 2. Any ROM costs shall be given as major task
  line items so that major cost drivers can be
  identified.
• 3. The ULF2 PVR Carrier costs are not part of
  this CR assessment. Any ISS integration costs
  can be included in the ROM for this CR.
• 4. ESP3 is similar to ESP2 with an additional
  interface to attach to a CAS interface.
• 5. Costs for post-10A carriers are not part of
  this CR.
• 6. The new Russian Segment will meet the Russian
  Segment Specification.
• 7. The ISS configuration at US Core Complete will
  reflect a UF6 stage configuration in addition of
  the CAM.
• 8. HTV Demo flight has no EVA requirement.
• 9. The MELFI is planned to be returned for
  refurbishment on Flight ULF2 in an inactive MPLM.
  The refurbished MELFI will be launched on UF3 in
  an active MPLM (only OV-103 can support active
  MPLMs).
• 10. Flights UF3, UF5, and UF-6 will have active
  MPLMs.
• 11. All Shuttles will be modified to accommodate
  active MPLMs by Flight UF-7.

9
Forward Work

• Collect assessments from all teams
• Technical feasibility assessments only (identify
  show stoppers) from all teams
• Examples
• Manifest (Shuttle APM, timeline, of Shuttle
  EVAs)
• Schedule (H/W and S/W availability Training)
• Traffic Model (logistics, LM, utilization)
• Sequence (configuration, kinematic robotics,
  deferred EVAs)
• Any Design/ Technical assessments (e.g., JEM
  System racks stowage into Node 2 instead of the
  ELM PS)

All assessments needed by January 17th
10
Forward Work

• Collect assessments from all teams
• Identify changes that drive major cost increases.
• Provide ROMs per Assembly Sequence Cost
  Assessment Guidelines Attachment

All assessments needed by January 17th
11
Backup ChartsRussian Segment Configuration
Changes
12
Russian Configuration Changes

• Augmented Service Module solar arrays
• No DC2
• the DC1 is relocated from the SM nadir to the SM
  zenith using the SSRMS
• SPP is a simplified structure with only 4 solar
  arrays
• There is no pressurized compartment or
  centralized heat rejection system
• Delivered on 2 carriers and assembled on-orbit
• The first carrier is installed on the relocated
  DC1 using the SSRMS
• The ERA is used for the final deployment of SPP
• The Multi-Purpose Module (also called the MTsM)
  is launched on Flight 9A.1 together with the SPP
  carrier
• The UDM will be based on the FGB design
• Articulating solar arrays and a deployed radiator
• Provides distribution of SPP power to the Russian
  Segment
• Only 2 mechanisms provided for the Research
  Modules
• No change in Russian Segment Specification

13
Background

• Budget constraints have forced the Russians to
  develop a new Russian Segment configuration
• This configuration concept is very preliminary
• For example, there are 3 SPP concepts still under
  consideration
• This is a courtesy delivery of the Russian
  Segment configuration for the US to identify any
  high level issues or constraints

14
Isometric View from Starboard Side
15
Zenith View
16
VERY Preliminary Russian Segment EVA Plan

• Details of EVA, flight, and configuration
  interdependencies are preliminary
• These are estimates based on concepts and will
  change
• Deferred EVAs
• Solar Array augmentation 4 EVAs (may or may not
  happen)
• DC1 relocation 4 EVAs
• MPM 3 EVAs
• SPP-U installation 5 EVAs
• UDM 4 EVAs
• SPP-U 4 EVAs
• RM1 4 EVAs
• RM2 4 EVAs
• Additional EVAs may be required during Shuttle
  flights