Low Cost Launch

1
Low Cost Launch

• Leah Gaffney
• Paul Murphy
• Will Schaefer

2
Low Cost LaunchOverview of Basic Approaches

• Expendable launch vehicles (ELVs)
• Relatively mature . . . , but limited in their
  potential to provide dramatic cost reductions
• There have been a number of endeavors to provide
  low cost alternatives, but few successes with
  Western suppliers
• Some programs to watch are EELV and Scorpius
• Reusable launch vehicles (RLVs)
• Relatively immature but have the potential, as a
  revolutionary change, for dramatic cost
  reductions
• Several programs in development and the emphasis
  of this discussion Eldred, C. H., et al, 1996,
  Future Space Transportation Systems and Launch
  Vehicles, AIAA.

3
Low Cost ELV Programs

Cost per Launch a (M)
Status
Vehicle Name
Payload/Orbit (lbs)
Vehicle Mfr

Conestoga EER Systems Corp. 2200-2600/LEO 10-20 Pr
oduction launches scheduled for 98 in
2000 Cosmos Polyot (Russia) 3086/LEO
10-12 Production, over 771/GEO 700
produced Cyclone NPO Yushnoye (Russia) 6614-8818/L
EO 20-23 Production CZ-1D China Great Wall
Industry Corp. 1985/LEO 10 Available c CZ-4
China Great Wall Industry Corp. 5500/SSO d
15-20 Production EELV Boeing Lockheed
Martin 4060 - 41000 TBD Pre-EMD EMD initial
depending on class/orbit launch service
contracts to be awarded 9/98 LMLV-1 Lockheed
Martin 2300/LEO 14 Available e PacAstro
(PA-2) AeroAstro 496/Polar 6M Design
stage 750/LEO(Equat.) Pegasus XL Orbital
Sciences 1105/LEO 760 lbs/Polar 14 Production
f Rockot Eurockot GmbH 4078/LEO
7 Production Khrunichev Enterprises (Russia)

a Source Forecast International/DMS e First
launch in 8/95 failed. b First launched in 1995,
rocket failed shortly after launch. f First
launch in 6/94 ended in failure. A second
failure c Incorporates Italian IRIS upper
stage. occured in6/95. A
third failure in occurred in 11/96. d SSO - Sun
Synchronous Orbit
4
Low Cost ELV Programs (Concluded)
Status
Cost (M)
Payload/Orbit (lbs)
Vehicle Mfr
Vehicle Name

Scorpius Microcosm, Inc. 2,200 - 15,000/LEO 1.7 -
7.9 Developmenta Shavit Israel Aircraft
Industries 1000/LEO 5 Production Soyuz Central
Specialized Design 16000/LEO 12-25 Productionb Sta
rt-1 IVK Moscow 1654//LEO 7 Productionc
Taurus-1 Orbital Sciences 3100/LEO (Equat.)
15-55 Production 2340/LEO 990/GTO
Vega BPD Difesa e Spazio (Italy) 716/LEO
(Equat.) 13 Engineering Development VLS IAE
(Brazil) 440/LEO (Equat.) 6-10 Developmentd

a Family of vhicles with varying capabilities. b
Two launch failures in '96. c First launched in
'93. Based on SS-25 ICBM. Launch failure in 3/95
resulted in loss of Israeli Techsat-1. d First
launched in 11/97 ended in failure.
5
EELV
Mfrs Boeing Co. Lockheed Martin Family of
expendable launch vehicles LEO/GTO/GEO
orbits Boeina family of three vehicles with
payload capacity upwards of 33,000 lbs to GTO,
and 50,000 lbs to LEO Lockheed Martina family
of four vehicles with payload capability upwards
of 8,500 lbs to GTO, 13,500 lbs to GEO, and
41,000 lbs to LEO Goal to reduce Govt's total
cost of launch through 2020 by at least 25
Lockheed Martin
Boeing
Status Pre-EMD module of 3-phase development
program. Award of the development initial
launch services contracts in Sept '98.
6
Scorpius
Mfr Microcosm, Inc. Family of expendable
launch vehicles LEO/GEO orbit Focus on cost
reliability, and not design for max
performance. Use COTS wherever possible. Payload
capability 2200 to 25,000 lbs. Heavy lift
(50,000 lbs) could follow. Objective of reducing
total launch costs by a factor of 10.
Status Progress slowed due to funding delays.
Construction of 2 suborbital vehicles has begun.
7
Reusable Launch Vehicles

• Description
• Use of piloted space planes and/or rocket stages
  that are reused on multiple flights
• Reuse can be partial or full, depending on the
  particular approach
• Significance
• Potential for substantial cost savings compared
  to conventional ELVs
• 4.5 - 17 million per launch
• lt 1 - 3.5 K per pound to LEO
• Quick turnaround between flights, measured in
  days (aircraft-like operations)
• Flexibility in launch location and the ability to
  abort and return in the case of piloted vehicles

8
Reusable Launch Vehicles (Continued)

• Technology maturity
• Current programs in various stages of development
  and construction
• Initial test flights planned for late 1998
  commercial operations planned to start in 1999
  (Kistler K-1)
• Related developments for passenger flight (e.g.,
  Space Cruiser System by Zegrahm Space Voyages,
  Space Van by Space Tour)
• Risks
• Design challenges include engine performance,
  thermal protection, lightweight structures and
  tanks, but appear to be workable
• Funding and credibility issues in some cases
• Programs tend to emphasize LEO launches, but some
  make references to mods for GEO or inteplanetary
  applications

9
Reusable Launch Vehicles (Concluded)

• Industry players
• Major U.S. launch suppliers, including Boeing and
  Lockheed Martin
• A number of entrepreneurial start-up ventures

10
Reuseable Launch Vehicle Programs

Max Payload (lbs)
Status
Orbit
Vehicle Name
Vehicle Mfr

Clipper Grapham Boeing Co. Suborbital N/A Techno
logy demonstration program completed in
96. Eclipse Astroliner Kelly Space
Technology LEO 8800 Suborbital Sprint
flights in late 96 commercial ops in
99. K-Series Kistler Aerospace Corp. LEO 4800 Test
flights planned for late 98 commercial ops
in 99 onwards. Pathfinder Pioneer
Rocketplane Corp. LEO 5500 Selected by
NASA/Marshall for Bantam-X development
program. Roton Rotary Rocket
Co. LEO 7000 Flight test in early 99
Commercial ops in 2000. VentureStar Lockheed
Martin LEO/GTO 25000 Transition to FSD after
X-33 program in 99 Fisrt flight
test

11
Reuseable Launch Vehicle Programs (Concluded)
Status
Orbit
Max Payload
Vehicle Mfr
Vehicle Name

X-33 Lockheed Martin Suborbital N/A First flight
test from Edwards AFB in July
99. X-34 Orbital Sciences Corp. Suborbital N/A Fir
st flight test 3/99 first powered flight
summer 99.

12
BMDO/NASA Clipper Graham (DC-X Series)
Mfr Boeing Co. (formerly McD. Douglas) Single
stage, non-piloted Vertical takeoff/vertical
landing (VTVL), Subsonic flight Four Pratt
Whitney RL-10A5 LO2/LH2 engines (DC-XA) Twelve
completed flights (eight DC-X, four
DC-XA) Demonstrated four key RLV
capabilities aircraft-type operation rapid
tunaround, VTVL rapid prototyping of HW/SW
Status Program completed in 1996 after loss of
DC-XAa.
a The DC-XA vehicle was lost after landing on its
fourth successful flight when one of its landing
gears failed to deploy.
13
VentureStar RLV
Mfr Lockheed Martin Single-stage-to orbit
(SSTO) Vertical launch, horizontal landing LEO/G
TOa orbit Seven Rocketdyne RS2200 aerospike
engines Payload capability 25000 lbs to LEO,
13000 lbs to GTO Launch costs one-tenth todays
levels 1K per lb vs 10K per lb.
Status VentureStar to transition to full scale
development after X-33 program in 1999. First
flight expected in 2003.
a Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit
14
K-Series RLV
Mfr Kistler Aerospace Corporation Two stage,
fully reuseable Vertical launch, recovery
by parachute and air bags LEO orbit 1st stage -
three Aerojet/Russian NK-33 engines, 2nd stage -
one Aerojet/Russian NK-34 engine Payload
capability 4800 lbs to 200km, 1800 lbs to
1200km altitude 17 million list price
Status Up to 6 flight tests plan- ned for late
1998. Commercial operations planned for 1999
onwards.
15
Pathfinder RLV
Mfr Pioneer Rocketplane Corp. Aerial
propellant transfer space- plane, expendable
upperstage to launch payload piloted Conventiona
l takeoff and landing LEO orbit. Possibly small
pay- loads to GTO, GEO. Two Pratt Whitney F100
engines and one RD-12 rocket engine Payload
capability 2200 to 5500 lbs (depending upon
upperstage) Could launch a 2000 lb satellite for
4M or about 2K per lb.
Status Pioneer is one of four winners in
NASA/Marshall Bantam-X development program aimed
at significantly lowering cost of access to
space for small satellites. Can be built and
ready for launch within three years of full
financing.
16
Roton RLV
Mfr Rotary Rocket Company Fully reuseable,
Single-Stage-To-Orbit (SSTO) non-piloted Vertic
al takeoff. Deploys rotors during reentry and
lands vertically as an auto- rotating
helicopter. LEO orbit RocketJetTM rotary
aerospike engine Payload capability 7000
lbs Anticipate charging 1K per lb to LEO (7M
to deliver 7000 lbs to LEO)
Status Flight test in early 1999. Commercial
operations in 2000.
17
Eclipse Astroliner RLV
Mfr Kelly Space Technology Two-stage,
partially reuseable (pay- load delivery system is
expendable) piloted Towed launch, horizontal
landing LEO orbit future - GEO Three Russian
RD-120 engines Payload capability8800
lb-class satellite to 200km 3750 lbs to
1100km Expect cost to orbit to be lt2K/lb,
but cost would vary depending on number of
flights per year for a customer
Status Tow launch demonstrated at Edwards AFB,
12/97 1/98. Suborbital Eclipse Sprint flights
begin in late 1998. Comm- ercial operations in
1999.
Future versions may accommodate GEO or
passengers in suborbital flights.
18
Low Cost Launch Assessment Basis

• Boeing (EELV)phone interview with Barry Waldman
  and Paul Klevatt.
• EELV Program Office web site
• http//www.laafb.af.mil/SMC/MV/eelvhome.htm
• Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) Briefing
  to 1998 National Space Symposium, EELV Program
  Office, 1998.
• Space Systems Forecast, Forecast
  International/DMS, 1997-98.
• Future Aeronautical and Space Systems, Progress
  in Astronautics and Aeronautics Vol. 172, 1997.
• Industrial Assessment for Space Launch Vehicles,
  DoD January 1995.
• Kelly Space Technology (Eclipse)phone
  conversation with Charles Kondrack.
• Kistler Aerospace Corp (K-Series)phone interview
  with Dan Brandenstein.

19
Low Cost Launch Assessment Basis (Concluded)

• Lockheed Martin (VentureStar)
• Orbital Sciences (X-34)phone interview with Bob
  Lindberg, Program Manager.
• Pioneer Rocketplane (Pathfinder)phone interview
  with Mitchell Clapp.
• Rotary Rocketphone interview with Geoffrey
  Hughes.
• Scorpius (Microcosm) web site
• http//www.smad.com/scorpius/index.html
• Status of the Scorpius Low Cost Launch Services
  Program, Microcosm, Inc., 1996.
• Summary Report on the Delta ClipperExperimental
  Flight Demonstration Programs, joint Boeing/NASA
  paper, 48th International Astronautical Congress,
  Oct. 1997.