ARCHITECTING THE NEXT CREWED    MISSIONS TO THE MOON                      Brian Muirhead                    Constellation ...
Introduction/Takeaway♦ Experience has shown us that integrated architecture  assessments are crucial for establishing stab...
Integrated Architecture Analysis                           Cost, Risk                                                     ...
Integrated Margins Analysis    ♦ Integrated margins assessments allow flexibility in allocation    ♦ Avoids overdesign due...
5
Constellation’s Seven Projects                    Orion-CrewAres- Launch        Exploration       Extravehicular    Missio...
NASA’s Exploration Roadmap05   06   07     08   09     10   11    12    13     14     15     16   17   18    19   20    21...
Ares Project                                         Ares I – Crew Launch Vehicle Orion CEV                  Encapsulated ...
Orion Project          Launch Abort System                                        Orion – Crew Exploration                ...
Ground Operations Project                               Ares I                         Crawler-Transporter             Are...
Architecture Definition Introduction♦ Constellation conducted a Lunar Capability Concept Review  (LCCR) in June 2008 to de...
Lunar Crewed Mission Profile                                                                                              ...
Ares V 51 Series Trade Space Performance at       Translunar Injection (Feb 08)                                           ...
Ares V Point of Departure Baseline                                         ♦ Vehicle 51.0.48                      21.7 m  ...
Altair Lunar Lander POD Baseline♦ 4 crew to and from the surface   • Seven days on the surface   • Lunar outpost crew rota...
Lunar Surface System Concept Elements                  Conceptual Outpost Elements                            10 kW Array ...
Mission Design Drivers and Flexibility (example) ♦ Drivers:    •   Surface Stay Time    •   Anytime Return Capability    •...
Delta-V:3-Burn Lunar Orbit Insertion Sequence for Global Access        LOI-2                                  •Trajectorie...
Low Lunar Orbit Loiter:Benefit to Global Access No Extended loiter                      •Map is a Mercator projection     ...
Integrated Performance Assessment                                                           Ares-V Options*, Altair Mass* ...
System and Mission Recommendation                   50000                               C   6    C                        ...
Resulting Change in Ares V Point ofDeparture            Core      Standard Core          Opt. Core Length /     Booster   ...
Lunar Transportation Figures of Merit♦ Performance                                                                        ...
Stochastic Margins Analysis @TLI                       kgCalculated Gross Capability                                      ...
PDFs for Ares-V Delivery Capability                                               PDF for Ares-V Delivery Capability (Vari...
CDFs for Ares-V Delivery Capability                                   CDF for Ares-V Delivery Capability (Various Designs)...
Ares 51.0.48 and Various Altair ΔV Capabilities                                                  27
Ares 51.0.47 and Various Altair ΔV Capabilities                                                  28
Probabilities of Having Adequate Margin: By Launch                        Vehicle and Cargo for Sortie and Outpost Mission...
Lunar Transportation Architecture Summary♦ Ares-V   • Ares-V 51.0.48, maximizes commonality between     Lunar and Initial ...
Lunar Architecture Technical Summary♦ The Constellation Program has completed extensive design, cost and  risk analysis st...
Introduction/Takeaway♦ Experience has shown us that integrated architecture  assessments are crucial for establishing stab...
Back UpsJune 18 - 20, 2008              Section 13: Architecture Summary and Next Steps   Page 33
System and Mission Recommendation                   50000                                          6                      ...
Mars Mission Profile                                                               10       ~500 days on Mars            I...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Muirhead.brian

19,688 views
19,660 views

Published on

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
19,688
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Muirhead.brian

  1. 1. ARCHITECTING THE NEXT CREWED MISSIONS TO THE MOON Brian Muirhead Constellation Chief Architect PM Challenge, 2009
  2. 2. Introduction/Takeaway♦ Experience has shown us that integrated architecture assessments are crucial for establishing stable configurations that meet performance, cost and risk goals♦ Isolated, “stovepiped” elements designs (i.e., Orion, Altair, Ares, etc.) anchored only by “control masses” derived from a reference mission are insufficient.♦ Integrated architecture assessments allow for: • Mission-level trades and optimization ensuring efficient vehicle designs • Appropriate allocation of design margins • Architecture-level functional allocations eliminating “I forgots” 2
  3. 3. Integrated Architecture Analysis Cost, Risk System and Mission Recommendations AssessmentsAres V Concepts Integrated Performance Altair Concept and parametrics Ground Ops Transporter Reserves & Refine- “Basis” Mission Margins ment (may not meet reqts)“Basis Mission” Buyback Methodology Orion, Ares I and EVA Baseline Surface System Design/Analysis Cost, Risk, Scenario Analyses •Mobility Lander Config, •Outpost Buildup Rate Unloading Strategy, •Resource Utilization P/L Mass, Volume •Commercial Involvement •International Partnerships Continued Surface Scenario Assessments “Trade Set” G&As from Option & Lat 1 & 2 Comparisons Element Concepts 3
  4. 4. Integrated Margins Analysis ♦ Integrated margins assessments allow flexibility in allocation ♦ Avoids overdesign due to “margin on margins” – unique to exploration missions ♦ Stochastic approach allows architecture-level margin confidence levels kg Note: PM Reserve may be encumbered by threats and opportunities. Unencumbered PM Reserve = PM Reserve – E{T&O}Calculated Gross Capability 75,085 f ( P t Ares −V I sp , mi , j ,t , Δvt , L) PM Reserve (Ares-V) Most Likely Gross Req’d Del Capability† 70,085 Capability (Ares-V) PgM Reserve TLI Stack Control Mass 66,085 t g(MTLI mi, j,t ,L) PM Reserve (Altair + Orion + SA) Predicted Mass* Expected Total Mass Total Margin (Altair + Orion + SA) (Altair + Orion + SA) MGA (Altair + Orion + SA) Base Mass** TLI Stack Control Mass Orion 20,185 kg Altair 45,000 kg SA 900 kg 4 4
  5. 5. 5
  6. 6. Constellation’s Seven Projects Orion-CrewAres- Launch Exploration Extravehicular Mission Vehicle Vehicle Activities Operations Ground Operations Altair Lunar Surface Systems 6
  7. 7. NASA’s Exploration Roadmap05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Science Robotic Missions Mars Expedition Design 7th Human Lunar Robotic Missions Lunar Lunar Outpost Buildup Landing 1st Human Orion Flt. Surface Systems Development Early Design Activity Lunar Lander Development Ares V Development Earth Departure Stage Development Orion Production and Operations Orion Development Initial Orion Capability Ares I Development Commercial Crew/Cargo for ISS ISS Sustaining Operations Space Shuttle Ops SSP Transition… 7 7
  8. 8. Ares Project Ares I – Crew Launch Vehicle Orion CEV Encapsulated Service Serves as the long term crew Module (ESM) Panels launch capability for the U.S.Instrument Unit Upper Stage 5 segment Shuttle-derived solid Element rocket booster Upper Stage Engine Interstage New liquid oxygen/liquid hydrogen upper stage using J-2X engine First Stage 8
  9. 9. Orion Project Launch Abort System Orion – Crew Exploration Vehicle Orion will support both International Space Station (ISS) and lunar missions Designed to operate for 180 days Crew Module and up to 210 days docked to ISS or supporting outpost Service Module missions on the moon. Designed for lunar mission with 4 crew membersSpacecraft Adapter Can accommodate up to 6 crew members to the ISS Potential to deliver pressurized and unpressurized cargo to the ISS 9
  10. 10. Ground Operations Project Ares I Crawler-Transporter Ares I New ML Ares I Ares IVAB HB3 LC 39B Ares V Ares V Pad 39A Flame Deflector Modified ML Ares VVAB HB1 Ares V Pad 39A Page 10
  11. 11. Architecture Definition Introduction♦ Constellation conducted a Lunar Capability Concept Review (LCCR) in June 2008 to define an integrated Point of Departure (POD)* for the transportation architecture including capabilities to: • Deliver and return crew to the surface of the moon for short durations, i.e. Human Lunar Return (HLR) • Support a range of lunar exploration scenarios and possible surface system architectures, including establishment of a lunar outpost♦ Included in the LCCR were the Mission Concept Reviews for Ares V and Altair (crewed and cargo) including • Conceptual designs and key driving requirements • Technology drivers and alternative designs • Design concepts that meet mission and programmatic requirements♦ Current capabilities of Ares I and Orion for the lunar missions were assumed♦ Lunar Surface System concepts were explored but no POD selected *This is a POD transportation architecture and NOT the final baseline Page 11
  12. 12. Lunar Crewed Mission Profile MOON“Basis” Mission used to establish minimumcontent: Crew of 4 + 500 kg cargo 100 kg return payload Sortie to Pole 7 day stay 4 crew members 500 kg p/l down 100 kg p/l up Single Burn Lunar Orbit Insertion Burn LLO 100 km at 891 m/s Altair performsAdditional mission content evaluated during LOI Orion performs 3integrated architecture analysis Burn TEI up to 1,492 m/s Orion 20.185 t at TLI EDS Performs TLI on FD5 Direct or Skip Entry ERO Ares-1 Ascent Target 90 min. launch Nominal Water separation Landing EARTH Up to 4 days LEO Loiter 12
  13. 13. Ares V 51 Series Trade Space Performance at Translunar Injection (Feb 08) Common Design Features Core Standard Core Opt. Core Length / Booster W/ 5 RS-68 # Core Engines Composite Dry Structures for Core Stage, EDS & 51.0.39 5 Segment +5.0t 51.0.46 Shroud PBAN 63.6t 68.6t Height = 116 m Steel Case -2.5t +2.5t Reusable Engines: 6 Metallic Cryo Tanks for Spacers: 1 +6.1t +6.1t Core Stage & EDS 5 Segment 51.0.40 +5.0t 51.0.47 RS-68B Performance: HTPB 69.7t 74.7t +8.6t Isp = 414.2 secComposite Case +3.6t Expendable Engines: 6 Thrust = 3547 k N @ vac Spacers: 1 -3.6t -2.3t J-2X Performance: 51.0.41 +3.7t 51.0.48 5.5 Segment Isp = 448.0 sec PBAN 67.4t 71.1t +1.3t +5.0t Thrust = 1308 k N @ vac Steel Case Reusable Engines: 6 Shroud Dimensions: Spacers: 0 Barrel Dia. = 10 m LCCR Study Reference LCCR Study Upgrade Usable Dia. = 8.8 m Barrel Length = 9.7 m 7405.13 7330.13
  14. 14. Ares V Point of Departure Baseline ♦ Vehicle 51.0.48 21.7 m 10 m • 6 Engine Core, 5.5 Segment PBAN Steel Case Booster • Provides Architecture Closure with Margin 23.2 m ♦ Maintaining Vehicle 51.0.47 with Composite HTPB Booster as future block change option • Final Decision on Ares V Booster at Constellation Lunar 10 m 116.2 m SRR (2010) • Additional Performance Capability if needed for Margin or requirements • Allows for competitive acquisition environment for 71.3 m booster58.7 m ♦ Near Term Plan to Maintain Booster Options • Fund key technology areas: composite cases, HTPB propellant characterization • Competitive Phase 1 Industry Studies NOTE: These are MEAN numbers Page 14
  15. 15. Altair Lunar Lander POD Baseline♦ 4 crew to and from the surface • Seven days on the surface • Lunar outpost crew rotation♦ Global access capability♦ Anytime return to Earth♦ Capability to land 14 to 17 metric tons of dedicated cargo♦ Airlock for surface activities♦ Descent stage: • Liquid oxygen / liquid hydrogen propulsion♦ Ascent stage: • Hypergolic Propellants or Liquid oxygen/methane Page 15
  16. 16. Lunar Surface System Concept Elements Conceptual Outpost Elements 10 kW Array (net) 10 kW Array (net) 2 kW Array (net) 2 kW Array (net) Logistics Logistics Pantry Pantry Habitation Habitation Power Support Unit (PSU) Power Support Unit (PSU) Element Habitation Element Habitation(( Supports // scavenges from Element Element Small Pressurized Supports scavenges from Small Pressurized crewed landers )) crewed landers Rover (SPR) Rover (SPR) PSU PSU (Facilitates SPR (Facilitates SPR docking & charging) docking & charging) Common Airlock Common Airlock With Lander With Lander ATHLETE ATHLETE ISRU Oxygen ISRU Oxygen Long-distance Long-distance Production Plant Production PlantMobility System (2)Mobility System (2) Unpressurized Rover Unpressurized Rover 16
  17. 17. Mission Design Drivers and Flexibility (example) ♦ Drivers: • Surface Stay Time • Anytime Return Capability • Global Access • Surface Mission Duration • Spacecraft maximum mass • Lunar payload delivery and return ♦ Mission design parameters traded to achieve global access: • Delta-V: − Orion fixed at 1492 m/s (including dispersions, 1417 m/s available for translational maneuvers) − Altair examined from 891m/s - 1350 m/s − Earth Departure Stage fixed at 3175 m/s • Low Lunar Orbit Loiter: − Post-LOI 1 day nominal to +6 days extended − Pre-TEI 1 day nominal to +5 days extended • Temporal Availability (Availability over 18.6 year lunar nodal cycle) − Assume 100% initial availability, trade availability for additional surface locations • Reserves/Margin Posture 17
  18. 18. Delta-V:3-Burn Lunar Orbit Insertion Sequence for Global Access LOI-2 •Trajectories are optimized based on Plane change lunar surface location and epoch to maneuver minimize total propellant cost and system wet mass. •Forcing energy into the system by increasing Delta-V rapidly increases wet mass. Other mission design techniques are used to gain global access. LOI-1 LOI-3 Capture maneuver LLO circularization 18
  19. 19. Low Lunar Orbit Loiter:Benefit to Global Access No Extended loiter •Map is a Mercator projection of entire lunar surface. •White regions represent difficult to reach locations due to earth-moon geometry. •When Delta-V is constrained due to mass limits, loiter in Extended loiter lunar orbit prior to descent is a powerful knob for additional access. •Additional loiter means increased total in-space mission duration, while maintaining fixed surface stay. 19
  20. 20. Integrated Performance Assessment Ares-V Options*, Altair Mass* vs. Surface Access - ->50% Temporal, 2nd TLI Opp, 1 Day Pre-TEI Loiter, +6 Days Post LOI Loiter 100% Temporal, 5th TLI Opp 90% Temporal, 2nd TLI Opp 50% Temporal, 2nd TLI Opp 49500 51.0.47=74.7 t - 20.2 t (Orion) - 5 t (L3 PMR) = 49.5 t 48500 +6 Days LOI 1000 m/s 47500Altair Mass (kg) +6 Days LOI 46500 +6 Days LOI +4 Days LOI +2 Days LOI 51.0.48=71.1 t - 20.2 t (Orion) - 5 t (L3 PMR) = 45.9 t Cargo Optimized, Crew Optimized, 45500 891 m/s 950 m/s 44500 Crew Optimized, 43500 891 m/s 42500 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 * L3 Reserves applied to Ares-V and Altair, % Lunar Surface Access Altair Masses include 860 kg spacecraft adapter Takeaway: Surface access is attainable through various trades of Delta-V, loiter, and temporal availability. of Delta- 20
  21. 21. System and Mission Recommendation 50000 C 6 C l ora Ares 51.0.47 51.0.47 - Option Ares-V 51.0.47 - Option mp Global access achieved Ares-V % Te Global access achieved with reduce temporal • • 6-RS68B 6-RS68B 50 with reduce temporal • • 55Segment Composite SRBs coverage (not anytime) coverage (not anytime) Segment Composite SRBs and extended loiter A and extended loiter (notional) (notional)Altair Mass (kg) S 6 S B 45000 Extended Loiter D Ares 51.0.48 D Ares-V Reference: 51.0.48 Ares-V Reference: 51.0.48 C •• 6-RS68B 6-RS68B •• 5.5 Segment Steel Reusable SRBs 5.5 Segment Steel Reusable SRBs Altair Reference: p804-D Altair Reference: p804-D • • Sized for 1000 m/s, propellants Sized for 1000 m/s, propellants loaded for 950 m/s loaded for 950 m/s • • Sized for 55days total LLO Loiter Sized for days total LLO Loiter 40000 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 † % Lunar Surface Access ♦ Point D is the nominal baseline design point which includes 950 m/s load and 5 day low lunar orbit loiter ♦ Points B & C are with Altair 950 m/s load without loiter ♦ Point A would be enabled by Ares 51.0.47 and allow Altair to load to 1000 m/s ♦ Full global access can be achieved with combination of mission timing, duration and/or additional loiter Page 21
  22. 22. Resulting Change in Ares V Point ofDeparture Core Standard Core Opt. Core Length / Booster W/ 5 RS-68 # Core Engines 51.0.39 5 Segment +5.0t 51.0.46 63.6t Ref DDTE 68.6t +$127M PBAN -2.5t Ref Produc +2.5t +$22M/yr Steel Case 1 in 66 1 in 62 Engines: 6 Reusable Spacers: 1 +6.1t +6.1t 5 Segment 51.0.40 +5.0t 51.0.47 HTPB 74.7t +$1.03B 69.7t +$898M +8.6t +$295M/yr Composite Case +3.6t +273M/yr 1 in 63 Engines: 6 1 in 59 Expendable Spacers: 1 -3.6t -2.3t 51.0.41 +3.7t 51.0.48 5.5 Segment PBAN 67.4t +$600M 71.1t +$727M +1.3t +$30M/yr +5.0t +$52M/yr Steel Case 1 in 64 Engines: 6 1 in 62 Reusable Spacers: 0 22
  23. 23. Lunar Transportation Figures of Merit♦ Performance ♦ Affordability • Ability to support the lunar outpost • DDT&E • Mass to surface: crew & cargo • Recurring • Robustness of margins by system • Budget wedge left for surface systems • Surface coverage: global access • Cost confidence Effects of Reducing Altair MR LCCR-M (Trade Set 2) Cx Level Sandchart Ares-V Options*, Altair Mass* vs. Surface Access - ->50% Temporal, 2nd TLI Opp, 1day Pre-TEI Loiter, +4 Days Post LOI Loiter Lunar Surface Systems 100% Temporal, 5th TLI Opp 90% Temporal, 2nd TLI Opp 50% Temporal, 2nd TLI Opp $14,000 Program Reserves 49500 Altair 51.0.47=74.7 m T - 20.2 mT (Orion) - 5 mT (L3 PMR) = 49.5 mT EVA Ground Operations Program Integration 48500 $12,000 Mission Ops Ares V Ares I 47500 47139 kg, 1000 m/s Orion $10,000 Total NOA Altair Mass (kg) 46500 off load prop & subtract 1mT MR RY $M $8,000 51.0.48=71.1 m T - 20.2 mT (Orion) - 5 mT (L3 PMR) = 45.9 mT 45500 subtract 1 mT MR Cargo Optimized, Crew Optimized minus 1mT MR, sized for 1000 m/s, offload prop to subtract 1 mT MR 46264 kg, 891 m/s 950 m/s, + 4 days LOI loiter, 44757 kg, resultant Cargo = 14.7 mT Crew Optimized, $6,000 45765 kg, 950 m/s 44500 51.0.40=69.7mT - 20.2 m T (Orion) - 5 m T (L3 PMR) = 44.5 m T Crew Optimized minus 1mT MR, sized f or 950 m/s, + 4 Crew Optimized, days LOI loiter, 43485 kg, resultant Cargo = 13.0 mT 43500 44185 kg, 891 m/s $4,000 add loiter add loiter 51.0.46=68.6m T - 20.2 mT (Orion) - 5 m T (L3 PMR) = 43.4 mT 43002 kg, Cargo Capability 12.9 mT 42500 $2,000 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 * L3 Reserves applied to Ares-V and Altair, % Lunar Surface Access Altair Masses include 860 kg spacecraft adapter $0 FY08 FY10 FY12 FY14 FY16 FY18 FY20 FY22 FY24 FY26 FY28 FY30 Fiscal Year CxAT_Lunar TIP 06 May 2008 3 May 21st, 2008 SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED (SBU) Page 56♦ Risk ♦ Operations / Extensibility • LOC / LOM • Facilities impacts • Technical performance risk • Operational flows • Schedule risk • Mars feed-forward • Commonality Ground Systems Discriminators Trade Studies Attacked Risk Drivers of Minimal Functional Vehicle (aborts were “off the table”) ROM Development Costs thru 2020 3,500,000 Preliminary Results subject to revision during close‐out 1 in 7 Results do not include placeholders 3,000,000 CONSTELLATION GROUND OPERATIONS VIE Task Option Risk Build‐Up  by Subsystem 3.00E‐01 2,500,000 SRPE A  2.50E‐01 2,000,000 SPE 1,500,000 2.00E‐01 LPE MMOD Life Support 1,000,000 1.50E‐01 Thermal MLE LOC Propulsion Power Avionics 500,000 1.00E‐01 Operations LDAC 2 0 Baseline 45.0.2 51.00.40 51.00.46 51.00.47 51.00.48 5.00E‐02 Increasing Mass for LOC/LOM mitigation 0.00E+00 Baseline 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1274 : 1273  : LDAC‐2 Design Mass Increase [kg] 18 For NASA Internal Use Only 11 Page 23
  24. 24. Stochastic Margins Analysis @TLI kgCalculated Gross Capability f ( PAres −V I sp , mi , j ,t , Δvt , L) t PM Reserve (Ares-V) Most Likely Gross Req’d Del Capability† Capability (Ares-V) PgM Reserve TLI Stack Control Mass t PM Reserve (Altair + Orion + SA) g (M TLI mi , j ,t ,L) Predicted Mass* Expected Total Mass Total Margin (Altair + Orion + SA) (Altair + Orion + SA) MGA (Altair + Orion + SA) Base Mass** TLI Stack Control Mass Orion 20,185 kg Altair 45,000 kg* *including 900 kg adapter ♦ Stochastic analysis focused around trans-lunar injection (TLI) Page 24
  25. 25. PDFs for Ares-V Delivery Capability PDF for Ares-V Delivery Capability (Various Designs) 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 Probability/mt 0.05 Ares 51.0.39 Ares 51.0.48 0.04 Ares 51.0.47 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 mtPDF with the 95th percentile at 65.2 mt and the 5th PDF with the 95th percentile at 74.7 mt, the 5th percentile atpercentile at 62 mt, developed from a Monte Carlo 69.7 mt, and some negative skewness. This was developedanalysis by SpaceWorks Engineering. using engineering judgment. Page 25
  26. 26. CDFs for Ares-V Delivery Capability CDF for Ares-V Delivery Capability (Various Designs) 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6Probability Ares 51.0.39 0.5 Ares 51.0.48 Ares 51.0.47 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 mt Page 26
  27. 27. Ares 51.0.48 and Various Altair ΔV Capabilities 27
  28. 28. Ares 51.0.47 and Various Altair ΔV Capabilities 28
  29. 29. Probabilities of Having Adequate Margin: By Launch Vehicle and Cargo for Sortie and Outpost Missions Critical Probability for Various LVs and Altair Loadings 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 Stochastic margins Stochastic margins assessment indicates assessment indicates 0.6 high probability of having high probability of havingProbability adequate Program/Project adequate Program/Project 0.5 margins and reserve margins and reserve 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 DM Cargo/PMR (In Excess of 500 kg) Ares 51.0.39 + Altair 804-D @ 891 m/s Ares 51.0.48 + Altair 804-D @ 891 m/s Ares 51.0.47 + Altair 804-D @ 891 m/s Ares 51.0.48 + Altair 804-D @ 950 m/s Ares 51.0.48 + Altair 804-D @ 1000 m/s Page 29
  30. 30. Lunar Transportation Architecture Summary♦ Ares-V • Ares-V 51.0.48, maximizes commonality between Lunar and Initial Capabilities: − 6 engine core, 5.5 segment PBAN steel case booster − Provides architecture closure with additional margin − High commonality with Ares I • Continue to study the benefits/risk of improved performance of Ares-V 51.0.47♦ Altair • Robust capability to support Lunar Outpost Missions: − Optimize for crew missions (500 kg + airlock with crew) − Lander cargo delivery: ~ 14,500 kg in cargo only mode • Size the system for global access while allowing future mission and system flexibility − Size Altair tanks for 1,000 m/s LOI delta-v − Size for an additional 4 days of Low-Lunar Orbit loiter♦ Orion • Continue to mature Orion vehicle concept • Maintain strong emphasis on mass control − Continue to hold Orion control mass to 20,185 kg at TLI • Maintain emphasis on evolution of Orion Block 2 to support lunar Outpost missions
  31. 31. Lunar Architecture Technical Summary♦ The Constellation Program has completed extensive design, cost and risk analysis studies of lunar transportation options and developed an adequately closed Point of Departure (POD) transportation architecture for the CxP Lunar Capability including capabilities to: • Deliver and return crew to the surface of the moon for short durations, Human Lunar Return (HLR) capability • Enable establishment of a lunar outpost architecture • Support a range of mission campaigns and possible lunar surface architecture options♦ Ares, Altair, Orion, EVA and GOP have completed extensive design, performance, cost and risk analysis to establish this baseline♦ Lunar Surface Systems (LSS) has provided a feasible set of surface system configurations, vehicles and operational concepts to support the validation of the transportation system This is a POD transportation architecture baseline not the final design Page 31
  32. 32. Introduction/Takeaway♦ Experience has shown us that integrated architecture assessments are crucial for establishing stable configurations that meet performance, cost and risk goals♦ Isolated, “stovepiped” elements designs (i.e., Orion, Altair, Ares, etc.) anchored only by “control masses” derived from a reference mission are insufficient.♦ Integrated architecture assessments allow for: • Mission-level trades and optimization ensuring efficient vehicle designs • Appropriate allocation of vehicle design margins • Architecture-level functional allocations eliminating “I forgots”♦ Details on the performance of the architecture elements and how they operate together is critical to maintaining a viable architecture 32
  33. 33. Back UpsJune 18 - 20, 2008 Section 13: Architecture Summary and Next Steps Page 33
  34. 34. System and Mission Recommendation 50000 6 l C C po ra Ares 51.0.47 51.0.47--Option Ares-V 51.0.47 Option Ares-V m • • 6-RS68B Te 6-RS68B % • • 55Segment Composite SRBs 50 Global access achieved Segment Composite SRBs Global access achieved with reduce temporal with reduce temporal A coverage (not anytime) coverage (not anytime) and extended loiter and extended loiter (notional)Altair Mass (kg) (notional) S 6 S B Extended Loiter D 45000 Ares-V Recommendation: Ares 51.0.48 D Ares-V Recommendation: 51.0.48 C 51.0.48 • • 6-RS68B 6-RS68B • • 5.5 Segment Steel Reusable 5.5 Segment Steel Reusable Altair Recommendation: Altair Recommendation: SRBs SRBs • • Sized for 1000 m/s, propellants Sized for 1000 m/s, propellants Loaded for 950 m/s Loaded for 950 m/s • • Sized for 55days total LLO Sized for days total LLO Loiter Loiter 40000 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 † % Lunar Surface Access Additional Altair delta-v Transportation Cargo Degree Down Available Reserve @ TLI (t) (m/s) (Ares & G.O.) Cost % Surface Ares- of Ares (FY07 $M)* in V Access @ Ares-V ISS/ Cargo 50% Plom Lunar Only Altair Sized DDT&E Rec. Ares-V Temporal Common Load Mode Prog For ($M) ($M/yr) (t) Perform Total Reserve Margin A 51.0.47 1/59 Medium 1000 1000 +$1,556 +$303 14.6 2.3 5.0 6.5 50% 65% B 51.0.48 1/62 High 950 950 +$1,044 +$55 13.8 0.1 5.0 6.3 50% 50% C 51.0.48 1/62 High 1000 950 +$1,044 +$55 14.6** 1.6 5.0 4.2 40% 50% D 51.0.48 1/62 High 1000 950 +$1,044 +$55 14.7** 1.2 5.0 4.3 40% 70% * Additional cost as compared to the 51.0.39 PPBE budget submittal † Coverage based on coarse trajectory scans across the Metonic cycle. ** P/L available with lander “kitted” for cargo mode and full prop loading Additional surface coverage expected with further mission design refinement. 34
  35. 35. Mars Mission Profile 10 ~500 days on Mars In-Situ propellant production for Ascent 5 11 Crew: Ascent to high Mars Vehicle Aerocapture / Entry, Descent & Land Ascent orbit 4 Vehicle 12 Crew: Prepare for Trans- Earth Injection Aerocapture Habitat Lander into Mars Orbit 3 9 Crew: Use Orion to transfer to Habitat Lander; Cargo: then EDL on Mars2 ~350 days to Mars 8 Crew: Jettison drop tank after trans-Mars injection ~180 days out to Mars 13 Crew: ~180 days Cargo back to Earth Crew Vehicles Transfer Vehicle 7 Ares-I Crew Launch 4 Ares-V Cargo 6 3 Ares-V Cargo Launches 1 Launches ~26 ~30 months months 14 Orion direct Earth return 35

×