Architecture Team

1
Architecture Team

• Industry Day Briefing
• 17 January, 2002

2
Example Development Strategy
NASA Variant
2002 06
2009 - ?
2012-2014
DoD Variant

• Option for Early Capability
• To improve operations knowledge base for the next
  vehicle
• To serve as technology test platform
• To provide limited operational capability

• Leads to full system capabilities in 2012-14
• Converged Cargo/MSP Requirements
• Modular variant for Human Space Flight

• Ground and Flight Demonstrations
• Risk Reduction
• Operability
• Long Term ST

3
Integrated Architecture Elements
4
System Classes Investigated
Representative Concepts that Bound the Trade Space
Far
Near
TSTO
Air Launch
ELV-RLV Hybrid
SSTO/ Combined Cycle
5
Operability, Reliability, Affordability

• All architectures will be evaluated for
• Operability / Responsiveness
• Safety / Reliability
• Affordability
• Performance / Design Reference Missions
• Sensitivity studies are being performed to help
  USAF and NASA
• Understand the impact of payload lift
  requirements
• Identify the benefit that can be achieved from
  common NASA/USAF architectures

6
Preliminary Sizing Assumptions

• Common Groundrules
• Max Axial Acceleration
• 3gs for Manned and Side Mount Vehicles While
  Mated
• 5gs for Unmanned Vehicle
• 650 psf Max Q for Winged Vehicles
• Mass Margin Allowing 35 Weight Growth
• Throttle for full engine out capability
• New LOX/LH2 and/or LOX/RP engines
• 2012 Cargo Variant
• 15-25 klbs to 100 nmi Circular 28.5
• Payload Envelope
• 12 ft X 30 ft Cylindrical, External, Reusable,
  9.65 klbs
• 2012 Crewed Variant
• 45 klbs to 100 nmi Circular 28.5
• Payload Envelope
• 15 ft X 55 ft Cylindrical, External, Reusable, 20
  klbs

7
2012 Vehicle Options Optimized TSTO

• Description
• Two Stages- Smaller stage delivers payload to
  orbit
• Booster stages fly back to launch site on jet
  engines
• Design intent Minimize weight and size of the
  vehicle
• Propellants
• Hydrogen and/or Hydrocarbon fuels are viable
  design paths
• Sample Development Path

Serial Burn Design
Sample
15-25 klb to LEO
2012-14
2009
45 klb to LEO
15-25 klb to LEO

• Requires development of - 4 operational stages
• - 2- 4 operational engines

Parallel Burn Design
8
2012 Vehicle Options Modular TSTO

• Description
• Two nearly-identical stages
• Booster stages glide back to launch site.
• Design intent Maximize commonality Reduce
  number of stages to be developed
• Propellants
• Hydrogen or Hydrocarbon fuels are viable design
  paths
• Sample Development Path

Sample
15-25 klb to LEO
New Booster
2012-14
2009
45 klb to LEO OR
15-25 klb to LEO
Additional Booster

• Requires development of - 1 or 2 operational
  stages
• - 1 or 2 operational engines

9
Representative TSTO Architectures
Optimized LH-LH
Optimized RP-LH
Optimized RP-RP
Non-Optimized RP-RP
Bimese LH-LH
Bimese RP-RP
Trimese LH-LH
Demonstrators
2012 Cargo
2012 Crewed
Denotes common hardware for each 2012 concept
10
Air Launch Vehicles

• Description Combination of aircraft and
  expendable / reusable launch systems
• Design Intent
• Aircraft altitude and velocity reduces energy
  requirements on launch system
• Mobile infrastructure enables greater variety of
  launch sites and less asset vulnerability
• Vehicle combinations consist of aircraft combined
  with
• Solid motor launch vehicles
• Expendable launch vehicles
• Reusable launch vehicles
• Key Considerations
• Carrier aircraft limits total mass of launch
  system
• Separation of the launch vehicle from aircraft
  poses challenges

11
Hybrid Vehicles

• Description Combination of expendable and
  reusable stages
• Design Intent
• Increase the range of missions and lift
  capacities provided by reusable vehicles alone
• Reduce the number of new reusable stages that
  must be developed
• Improve the cost effectiveness of the overall
  vehicle architecture
• Vehicle combinations consist of RLV stages
  combined with
• Expendable upper stages (liquids solids)
• Expendable booster vehicles
• Solid strap-ons
• Expendable drop tanks
• Key Considerations
• Staging velocities and recovery of RLV stages
• Basing modes
• Impact on operability, affordability, and
  responsiveness

12
Example Sensitivity Study