Summary of Phase I
- Developed an investment portfolio that strikes a balance of new developments, technology, and operational programs with an eye towards a new way of exploring.
- Created a point of departure DRM that is flexible and can evolve over time to support multiple destinations with the identified systems.
- Identified a minimum subset of elements needed to conduct earlier beyond LEO missions.
- Infused key technology developments
that should begin in earnest and identified gaps which should help inform additional technology prioritization over and above the NEO focused DRM.
- Costed the DRM using traditional costing methodologies.
- Determined alternative development options are required to address the cost and schedule shortfalls."
Synopses of Black Belt Projects and Kaizens. Manufacturing, Lean, Freight Reduction, Material Conveyance, Recycling and Process Improvement, Supermarket Takt Time, JIT Kitting,
Automation & Innovation in sesar by Peter HothamALIAS Network
If you are interested in the topic please register to the ALIAS network:
http://network.aliasnetwork.eu/
to download other materials and get information about the ALIAS project (www.aliasnetwork.eu).
Can be headhunted for senior level managerial assignments as NDT Operations / Project Manager NDT & Inspection with an organisation of repute
Preferred Industry: Oil & Gas / NDT, Inspection & Construction Company
An astute professional with over 20 years of experience in NDT Testing & Inspection as well as Project Execution across NDT companies.
Currently associated with Engineering And Research International LLC, Abu Dhabi, UAE as Operations Manager – NDT & Metlab.
Holds important Industry certifications for Inspections like ASNT NDT Level III, CSWIP 3.1.
Holds the merit of imparting Personnel Training in various NDT methods & General/ Radiation Safety.
An effective communicator with excellent relationship management skills and strong analytical, leadership, decision-making, problem solving & organisational abilities.
Dear Colleague,
In the asymmetrical realities of urban combat and mountainous terrain, as
well as in homeland defense areas of border patrol and maritime surveillance,
night vision systems have become crucial assets to maximize operational
advantage. As the US Military enters the seventh year of sustained combat in
OIF/OEF, the ability to conduct surveillance and operations under the cover of night
is of great concern to operators and commanders alike.
IDGA's 4th Annual Night Vision Systems will examine how the military, DHS, and
industry are evolving their technology requirements in this tough and dynamic
environment. It will bring attendees up to date on forward looking sensor technologies,
including a frank discussion on next generation low light level sensors and
imagers as potential successors to the image intensifier tube and the related
technological developments. Topics will include:
• New applications for Electro-Optic/Infrared Sensors
• Component Revolutions: Sensors, Displays, Processors, Optics
• System Capability Trade-Offs: Digital vs. Analog
• Networked Sensors Evolution and Current Status
• Maintaining and Utilizing Night Vision Systems in 24/7 High Intensity Operational
Environments
• Trade Controls: Policy & Procedure
IDGA’s 4th Annual Night Vision Systems will bring solution providers face to
face in one location with DoD & DHS program and procurement influencers to
discuss future night vision requirements and ways to get new systems and
technologies into the field quicker without compromising capability or
interoperability.
Join this discussion! Act now & reserve your place among the top night vision
experts at this critical event. Register today by calling 800-882-8684 or visiting
www.idga.org/us/nightvision.
I look forward to meeting you in July!
V/R,
Dr. Joseph Estrera
Senior VP and Chief Technology Officer
L-3 Electro-Optical Systems
2009 Night Vision Systems Conference Chair
8:00 am – 10:00 am 7:30 am Registration I2CMOS roadmap and options for customization!
Image Intensified (I2) CMOS cameras represent a low-risk technical
solution for digital night vision. I2 CMOS combines two proven and
reliable technologies into a single camera sensor using a common
aperture. This workshop provides system integrators with an
understanding of the technology, its usefulness in various night vision
applications and interface considerations.
What will be covered:
• I2CMOS Technology – principles of operation, how it is manufactured
and expected performance.
• I2CMOS Application – trades analysis and concept of operations.
• I2CMOS Integration – mechanical, electrical, communications, optical,
display, MMI and life-cycle management
• I2CMOS Maturation – plan for enhanced sensor performance and
added features.
How you will benefit:
• Interact directly with I2CMOS subject matter experts, gaining invaluable
insight into the technology, its operation, manufacture and performance
• Receive an analysis of other digital night vision camera technologies
and the strengths and weaknesses of each
• Gain a better understanding of the role I2CMOS can play in mounted,
dismounted, aerial and force protection/security operations
• Receive thorough training regarding the complete integration of
I2CMOS into a higher level assembly or system. Considerations for
integrators will include: mechanical, electrical, software,
communications, optical, display, man-machine interface and life cycle.
• Be presented with the I2CMOS roadmap and options for customization
– performance and form/fit/function
Session Leaders: Dr. Joseph Estrera, Senior VP and Chief Technology
Officer, and John Robinson Advanced Technologies Business
Development Manager, L-3 Electro-Optical Systems
A Primer on I2CMOS and its Applicability to System Integrators
10:15 am – 12:15 pm Understand NV component tech!
Modern combat operations necessitate the use of nig
Synopses of Black Belt Projects and Kaizens. Manufacturing, Lean, Freight Reduction, Material Conveyance, Recycling and Process Improvement, Supermarket Takt Time, JIT Kitting,
Automation & Innovation in sesar by Peter HothamALIAS Network
If you are interested in the topic please register to the ALIAS network:
http://network.aliasnetwork.eu/
to download other materials and get information about the ALIAS project (www.aliasnetwork.eu).
Can be headhunted for senior level managerial assignments as NDT Operations / Project Manager NDT & Inspection with an organisation of repute
Preferred Industry: Oil & Gas / NDT, Inspection & Construction Company
An astute professional with over 20 years of experience in NDT Testing & Inspection as well as Project Execution across NDT companies.
Currently associated with Engineering And Research International LLC, Abu Dhabi, UAE as Operations Manager – NDT & Metlab.
Holds important Industry certifications for Inspections like ASNT NDT Level III, CSWIP 3.1.
Holds the merit of imparting Personnel Training in various NDT methods & General/ Radiation Safety.
An effective communicator with excellent relationship management skills and strong analytical, leadership, decision-making, problem solving & organisational abilities.
Dear Colleague,
In the asymmetrical realities of urban combat and mountainous terrain, as
well as in homeland defense areas of border patrol and maritime surveillance,
night vision systems have become crucial assets to maximize operational
advantage. As the US Military enters the seventh year of sustained combat in
OIF/OEF, the ability to conduct surveillance and operations under the cover of night
is of great concern to operators and commanders alike.
IDGA's 4th Annual Night Vision Systems will examine how the military, DHS, and
industry are evolving their technology requirements in this tough and dynamic
environment. It will bring attendees up to date on forward looking sensor technologies,
including a frank discussion on next generation low light level sensors and
imagers as potential successors to the image intensifier tube and the related
technological developments. Topics will include:
• New applications for Electro-Optic/Infrared Sensors
• Component Revolutions: Sensors, Displays, Processors, Optics
• System Capability Trade-Offs: Digital vs. Analog
• Networked Sensors Evolution and Current Status
• Maintaining and Utilizing Night Vision Systems in 24/7 High Intensity Operational
Environments
• Trade Controls: Policy & Procedure
IDGA’s 4th Annual Night Vision Systems will bring solution providers face to
face in one location with DoD & DHS program and procurement influencers to
discuss future night vision requirements and ways to get new systems and
technologies into the field quicker without compromising capability or
interoperability.
Join this discussion! Act now & reserve your place among the top night vision
experts at this critical event. Register today by calling 800-882-8684 or visiting
www.idga.org/us/nightvision.
I look forward to meeting you in July!
V/R,
Dr. Joseph Estrera
Senior VP and Chief Technology Officer
L-3 Electro-Optical Systems
2009 Night Vision Systems Conference Chair
8:00 am – 10:00 am 7:30 am Registration I2CMOS roadmap and options for customization!
Image Intensified (I2) CMOS cameras represent a low-risk technical
solution for digital night vision. I2 CMOS combines two proven and
reliable technologies into a single camera sensor using a common
aperture. This workshop provides system integrators with an
understanding of the technology, its usefulness in various night vision
applications and interface considerations.
What will be covered:
• I2CMOS Technology – principles of operation, how it is manufactured
and expected performance.
• I2CMOS Application – trades analysis and concept of operations.
• I2CMOS Integration – mechanical, electrical, communications, optical,
display, MMI and life-cycle management
• I2CMOS Maturation – plan for enhanced sensor performance and
added features.
How you will benefit:
• Interact directly with I2CMOS subject matter experts, gaining invaluable
insight into the technology, its operation, manufacture and performance
• Receive an analysis of other digital night vision camera technologies
and the strengths and weaknesses of each
• Gain a better understanding of the role I2CMOS can play in mounted,
dismounted, aerial and force protection/security operations
• Receive thorough training regarding the complete integration of
I2CMOS into a higher level assembly or system. Considerations for
integrators will include: mechanical, electrical, software,
communications, optical, display, man-machine interface and life cycle.
• Be presented with the I2CMOS roadmap and options for customization
– performance and form/fit/function
Session Leaders: Dr. Joseph Estrera, Senior VP and Chief Technology
Officer, and John Robinson Advanced Technologies Business
Development Manager, L-3 Electro-Optical Systems
A Primer on I2CMOS and its Applicability to System Integrators
10:15 am – 12:15 pm Understand NV component tech!
Modern combat operations necessitate the use of nig
Create software builds with jazz team buildBill Duncan
A guide to using the Jazz Team Build feature in Rational Team Concert
Veena H. Balakrishnaiah (veena.balakrishna@in.ibm.com), Build and Release Engineer, IBM
Summary: Veena H. Balakrishnaiah gives an overview of how to configure source control and Jazz Team Build components of Rational Team Concert to define and manage your build. Jazz builds run against files that come from a designated build repository workspace and include traceability between change sets and work items. Jazz Team Builds provide support for the automation, monitoring, and awareness of a team's regular builds.
This article originally appeared at http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/create-software-builds-jazz-team-build/index.html?ca=drs-
How to implement access restrictions to your EA artifacts using Rational Syst...Bill Duncan
Abstract
This white paper provides you with information on how to implement access restrictions to your Enterprise Architecture (EA) Artifacts using IBM Rational System Architect Catalog Manager.
Content
This white paper discusses what Rational System Architect Catalog Manager is and how it can be used to addresses the concerns of "Visibility" and "Security". The paper also gives problem scenarios and then the solutions to those scenarios to help easier understanding of the capabilities.
Optimize load handling for high-volume tests with IBM Rational Performance Te...Bill Duncan
Summary: When using IBM® Rational® Performance Tester for testing diversified protocols and large volume load simulations, it is essential to optimize the performance of your testing machines and tools, as well as your network and infrastructure. In this article, you will discover best practices that you can adopt to enhance the load generation capability of Rational Performance Tester per machine by configuring both the testing tool and the operating system. You will also learn about techniques that you can use to alleviate trivial errors that occur during large volume load simulations.
Improve software development project success with better informationBill Duncan
Summary: Automated reporting can help you document compliance and eliminate the errors, inconsistency, and wasted time and effort inherent in manual reporting. Automated measurement can help improve processes and streamline project delivery. This article describes how automated reporting and measurement tools, such as IBM Rational Publishing Engine and Rational Insight, help software and systems development teams provide accurate, timely, and appropriate information to decision makers.
Automate document generation from SysML models with Rational Rhapsody Reporte...Bill Duncan
This article explains techniques to generate documents from IBM® Rational® Rhapsody SysML models, using the Rhapsody ReporterPLUS feature. Automated document generation from existing models enhances consistency between the different representations of the system used throughout system development. Using the right techniques, it is possible to produce publication-ready, human-readable documents that support engineering processes.
Inadequate Security Practices Expose Key NASA Network to Cyber AttackBill Duncan
Remote attackers using the Internet could seize control of servers on NASA's agency-wide mission networks that guide spacecraft, potentially causing havoc with America's space missions, the space agency's inspector general said in a new report.
The audit - Inadequate Security Practices Expose Key NASA Network to Cyberattack - didn't link any specific mission to specific vulnerabilities, but did mention that the NASA mission network is widely distributed and hosts more than 190 IT systems and projects run by the agency's mission directorates and Jet Propulsion Laboratory, including the Hubble space telescope, space shuttle and international space station and the Cassini and lunar reconnaissance orbiters.
By default, IBM® Rational® Performance Tester provides essential performance metrics, such as throughput, response times, concurrency, and success rate. However, it also includes several advanced features for detailed analysis, many of which are not commonly used. Proper use of these options provides deeper insight when analyzing test results. This article gives five tips for using some of these advanced features, all of which have helped tremendously in real-world performance testing projects with large companies.
Developing service component architecture applications using rational applica...Bill Duncan
Summary: This article describes how to develop and access SCA applications using Rational Application Developer Version 8 with a sample application. It begins with some basic definitions and frequently used terms used, next we describe the pre-requisites and references links before start developing SCA applications. Next explains with the wizards of the Rational Application Developer to create a sample SCA application, create different supported bindings for SCA Services and SCA References like default SCA binding, web services binding, and EJB bindings. The article concludes by describing how Servlet client application accesses the SCA sample application.
Managing requirements across Analysis and Design phases using System Architec...Bill Duncan
Abstract
This document describes why requirements need to be tracked and also explains how tracking can be setup and managed.
Content
The IBM Rational System Architect DOORS integration helps users create abstract views in System Architect based on the user requirements in IBM Rational DOORS. Having this integration will enable users to synchronize the model with the ever changing requirements. This document can be used as a reference for users who would like to map their requirements captured in DOORS to a modeling tool Rational System Architect. Also, there would be an information flow between DOORS to System Architect and vice-versa.
Using the document provided, users can map the requirements in DOORS to the System Architect project encyclopedia and vice versa. As a summary, this document can prove effective as a start point for new users who are in the process of exploring this integration and its benefits.
What's New in Rational Team Concert 3.0Bill Duncan
Rational Team Concert integrates work item tracking, source control management, continuous builds, iteration planning, and a highly configurable process support to adapt to the way you want to work, enabling developers, architects, project managers, and project owners to work together effectively.
Rational Team Concert 3.0 coming November 23rd!
Here are some highlights of what's coming in the next version:
* Simplified packaging
* Advanced planning for formal and agile teams
* Flexible customization and configuration
* Distributed source control
* Enterprise build support, with enhanced Build Forge integration
* Enterprise platform enhancements (z/OS and Power)
* Enhanced client for Microsoft Visual Studio IDE
* Open integrations to your existing tools, including a new DOORS 9.3 integration and OpenSocial support
Essentials of Automations: Optimizing FME Workflows with ParametersSafe Software
Are you looking to streamline your workflows and boost your projects’ efficiency? Do you find yourself searching for ways to add flexibility and control over your FME workflows? If so, you’re in the right place.
Join us for an insightful dive into the world of FME parameters, a critical element in optimizing workflow efficiency. This webinar marks the beginning of our three-part “Essentials of Automation” series. This first webinar is designed to equip you with the knowledge and skills to utilize parameters effectively: enhancing the flexibility, maintainability, and user control of your FME projects.
Here’s what you’ll gain:
- Essentials of FME Parameters: Understand the pivotal role of parameters, including Reader/Writer, Transformer, User, and FME Flow categories. Discover how they are the key to unlocking automation and optimization within your workflows.
- Practical Applications in FME Form: Delve into key user parameter types including choice, connections, and file URLs. Allow users to control how a workflow runs, making your workflows more reusable. Learn to import values and deliver the best user experience for your workflows while enhancing accuracy.
- Optimization Strategies in FME Flow: Explore the creation and strategic deployment of parameters in FME Flow, including the use of deployment and geometry parameters, to maximize workflow efficiency.
- Pro Tips for Success: Gain insights on parameterizing connections and leveraging new features like Conditional Visibility for clarity and simplicity.
We’ll wrap up with a glimpse into future webinars, followed by a Q&A session to address your specific questions surrounding this topic.
Don’t miss this opportunity to elevate your FME expertise and drive your projects to new heights of efficiency.
Accelerate your Kubernetes clusters with Varnish CachingThijs Feryn
A presentation about the usage and availability of Varnish on Kubernetes. This talk explores the capabilities of Varnish caching and shows how to use the Varnish Helm chart to deploy it to Kubernetes.
This presentation was delivered at K8SUG Singapore. See https://feryn.eu/presentations/accelerate-your-kubernetes-clusters-with-varnish-caching-k8sug-singapore-28-2024 for more details.
State of ICS and IoT Cyber Threat Landscape Report 2024 previewPrayukth K V
The IoT and OT threat landscape report has been prepared by the Threat Research Team at Sectrio using data from Sectrio, cyber threat intelligence farming facilities spread across over 85 cities around the world. In addition, Sectrio also runs AI-based advanced threat and payload engagement facilities that serve as sinks to attract and engage sophisticated threat actors, and newer malware including new variants and latent threats that are at an earlier stage of development.
The latest edition of the OT/ICS and IoT security Threat Landscape Report 2024 also covers:
State of global ICS asset and network exposure
Sectoral targets and attacks as well as the cost of ransom
Global APT activity, AI usage, actor and tactic profiles, and implications
Rise in volumes of AI-powered cyberattacks
Major cyber events in 2024
Malware and malicious payload trends
Cyberattack types and targets
Vulnerability exploit attempts on CVEs
Attacks on counties – USA
Expansion of bot farms – how, where, and why
In-depth analysis of the cyber threat landscape across North America, South America, Europe, APAC, and the Middle East
Why are attacks on smart factories rising?
Cyber risk predictions
Axis of attacks – Europe
Systemic attacks in the Middle East
Download the full report from here:
https://sectrio.com/resources/ot-threat-landscape-reports/sectrio-releases-ot-ics-and-iot-security-threat-landscape-report-2024/
"Impact of front-end architecture on development cost", Viktor TurskyiFwdays
I have heard many times that architecture is not important for the front-end. Also, many times I have seen how developers implement features on the front-end just following the standard rules for a framework and think that this is enough to successfully launch the project, and then the project fails. How to prevent this and what approach to choose? I have launched dozens of complex projects and during the talk we will analyze which approaches have worked for me and which have not.
Connector Corner: Automate dynamic content and events by pushing a buttonDianaGray10
Here is something new! In our next Connector Corner webinar, we will demonstrate how you can use a single workflow to:
Create a campaign using Mailchimp with merge tags/fields
Send an interactive Slack channel message (using buttons)
Have the message received by managers and peers along with a test email for review
But there’s more:
In a second workflow supporting the same use case, you’ll see:
Your campaign sent to target colleagues for approval
If the “Approve” button is clicked, a Jira/Zendesk ticket is created for the marketing design team
But—if the “Reject” button is pushed, colleagues will be alerted via Slack message
Join us to learn more about this new, human-in-the-loop capability, brought to you by Integration Service connectors.
And...
Speakers:
Akshay Agnihotri, Product Manager
Charlie Greenberg, Host
GraphRAG is All You need? LLM & Knowledge GraphGuy Korland
Guy Korland, CEO and Co-founder of FalkorDB, will review two articles on the integration of language models with knowledge graphs.
1. Unifying Large Language Models and Knowledge Graphs: A Roadmap.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.08302
2. Microsoft Research's GraphRAG paper and a review paper on various uses of knowledge graphs:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/graphrag-unlocking-llm-discovery-on-narrative-private-data/
Software Delivery At the Speed of AI: Inflectra Invests In AI-Powered QualityInflectra
In this insightful webinar, Inflectra explores how artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming software development and testing. Discover how AI-powered tools are revolutionizing every stage of the software development lifecycle (SDLC), from design and prototyping to testing, deployment, and monitoring.
Learn about:
• The Future of Testing: How AI is shifting testing towards verification, analysis, and higher-level skills, while reducing repetitive tasks.
• Test Automation: How AI-powered test case generation, optimization, and self-healing tests are making testing more efficient and effective.
• Visual Testing: Explore the emerging capabilities of AI in visual testing and how it's set to revolutionize UI verification.
• Inflectra's AI Solutions: See demonstrations of Inflectra's cutting-edge AI tools like the ChatGPT plugin and Azure Open AI platform, designed to streamline your testing process.
Whether you're a developer, tester, or QA professional, this webinar will give you valuable insights into how AI is shaping the future of software delivery.
2. Agenda
Summary / Key Findings Steve Altemus
DRM Review Kent
Joosten
Technology Feed Forward and Gaps
Chris Culbert
Launch Vehicle
Angelia Walker
Crewed SpacecraN Steve Labbe
Cost Study History Rita Willcoxon
Phase I Summary & Conclusions Steve Altemus
TransiQon to Phase II John Olson
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 2
3. Summary of Phase I
Developed an investment porTolio that strikes a balance of new
developments, technology, and operaQonal programs with an eye
towards a new way of exploring.
Created a point of departure DRM that is flexible and can evolve over
Qme to support mulQple desQnaQons with the idenQfied systems.
IdenQfied a minimum subset of elements needed to conduct earlier
beyond LEO missions.
Infused key technology developments that should begin in earnest and
idenQfied gaps which should help inform addiQonal technology
prioriQzaQon over and above the NEO focused DRM.
Costed the DRM using tradiQonal cosQng methodologies.
Determined alternaQve development opQons are required to address the
cost and schedule shorTalls.
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 3
4. RecommendaQons
In order to close on affordability and shorten Launch Vehicle
the development cycle, NASA must change its • Ini#ate development of a evolvable moderate SSP‐
tradiQonal approach to human space systems derived in‐line HLV 100 t class in FY2011
acquisiQon and development Crewed SpacecraN
Development Path • Develop an Orion‐derived direct return vehicle and
in‐house developed Mul#‐Mission Space Explora#on
• Balance large tradi#onal contrac#ng prac#ces with
Vehicle
fixed price or cost challenges coupled with in‐house
development • Do not develop a dedicated ISS ERV
• Use the exis#ng workforce, infrastructure, and • Further trade CTV func#onality and HLLV crew ra#ng
contracts where possible costs against Commercial Crew u#liza#on for
explora#on
• Leverage civil servant workforce to do leading edge
development work Ground ops processing and launch
AlternaQve Development Approaches infrastructure
• Take advantage of exis#ng resources to ini#ate the • Ini#ate ground ops system development consistent
development and help reduce upfront costs with spacecraW and launch vehicle development
- Launch Vehicle Core Stage Technology Development
- Mul#‐Mission Space Explora#on Vehicle • Focus technology development on near term
- In Space Propulsion explora#on goals (NEO by 2025)
– Solar Electric Propulsion Freighter • Revise investments in FTD, XPRM, HLPT, ETDD, and
– Cryo Propulsion Stage / Upper Stage HRP and others to align with the advanced systems
- Deep Space Habita#on capabili#es iden#fied in the framework
• Re‐phase technology investments to support the
defined human explora#on strategy, mission and
architecture
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 4
5. DRM IntroducQon
Previous HEFT DRM analyses helped draw conclusions regarding system
requirements for the NEO missions examined
• In‐space propulsion technology advances and high system reusability did not
obviate need for higher capacity launcher (excessive number of commercial
launches, DRM Set 1)
• Commercial on‐orbit refueling did not obviate need for higher capacity launcher
(excessive number of commercial launches, DRM Set 2). Commercial launch rate
available for explora#on missions significantly limited by costs of infrastructure
expansion.
“Hybrid” DRM analysis (“DRM 4”) presented to Steering Council 17
August. AddiQonal analysis performed to assess:
• “Balanced” HLLV/Commercial launchers
• Impacts of “moderate” HLLV capacity
• Impacts of dele#on of solar electric propulsion (SEP) technology/system
• Qualita#ve assessment of SEP
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 5
6. Concept of OperaQons (NEO Crewed Missions, 100 t HLLV)
NEO 30d at NEO
MMSEV
continues
operations
at NEO
159d Transit
193d Transit
SEP #1
EP Module Staging Location of
Dock All Elements
SEP #2 is Target
Dependent
CPS#1
E-M L1
DSH
339d Transit 339d Transit
4d Transit
SEP #2
CPS#2
LEO 407 km
x 407 km
CTV
CTV w/Crew CTV SM
SEP #1 DSH MMSEV MMSEV
OR
SEP #2
CPS #1 EP Module CPS #2 CPS #2 EDL
Kick stage
Commercial
Crew
HLLV ‐ 100t
HLLV ‐ 100t
HLLV ‐ 100t
HLLV ‐ 100t
EARTH CREW LAUNCH
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 6
7. In‐Space Mission Elements for DRM 4
Solar Electric
Cryogenic Propulsion
Propulsion Stage
Crew Transfer MulQ Mission (SEP)
Space Deep Space (CPS)
Vehicle Electric
ExploraQon Habitat
(CTV) Propulsion
Vehicle (DSH)
Kick Module
(MMSEV) (EPM)
Stage
Mass (kg) ** 13,500 6,700 23,600 6,300 12,600 10,600 2,900
4.57 (max
Diameter (m) 5.2 4.5 1.9 7.5 5.75 (stowed) 5.75 (stowed)
stowed)
Length (m) 4.2 6.8 7.7* 3 12.3 9 5.1
Pressurized Vol. (m3) 18.4 12 115 n/a n/a n/a n/a
NOTES:
• Elements Not To Scale
• * Habitat length with adapters: 9.8 m
• ** Inert mass shown for CPS, SEP and EPM
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 7
8. Systems Extensibility/EvoluQon for Other DesQnaQons
HEO/GEO NEO Lunar Orbit Lunar Surface* Phobos/Deimos Mars*
CTV CTV CTV+ CTV+ CTV+ CTV+
HLLV HLLV HLLV HLLV HLLV HLLV+
x1 x3 x1 x2 +xN xN
Rover Cab, Rover Cab,
MMSEV MMSEV MMSEV
Ascent Cab? Ascent Cab?
CPS CPS CPS CPSx2 CPSxN CPSxN
Surface
Transit Surface Transit Hab,
HAB Hab Hab+ Transit
Hab+
SEP SEP+, NEP
or
NEP
* AddiEonal systems required for these desEnaEons
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 8
9. Campaign Profile
DRM 4: 100 t HLLV w/ Commercial Crew
NEO
HEO
(No Crew) HEO E‐M L1 E‐M L1
RoboQc RoboQc
Precursor Precursor
Inflatable
DSH Demo
Test
CPS Flagship
Flight
L1 mission w/ ~55 t
Full Scale
SEP 30 kWe Flagship Deployment
of Opportunity
Payloads
MMSEV
CTV Test at ISS w/ High‐Speed
CTV Entry
Commercial Crew Ellip#cal
Reenty Test
Test to NEO
HLLV Flight to HEO to E‐M L1 (via E‐M L1)
NEO Mission
Commercial Crew / Cargo ConOps
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
Indicates flight to LEO
9 10
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 9
10. Integrated Cost EsQmates
DRM 4: 100 t HLLV w/ Commercial Crew & CTV‐E Prime to RepresentaQve NEO
$20,000
Program Integra#on
Robo#cs Precursor
$18,000 CTV
CPS
MMSEV
$16,000 DSH
SEP
Commercial Crew Development
$14,000 Commercial
HLLV
Mission Opera#ons
$12,000 Ground Opera#ons and Infrastructure Development
$ in Millions
$10,000
$8,000
$6,000
$4,000
$2,000
$0
Years
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 10
12. IntroducQon
Previous HEFT DRM analyses helped draw conclusions regarding system
requirements for the NEO missions examined
• In‐space propulsion technology advances and high system reusability did not
obviate need for higher capacity launcher (excessive number of commercial
launches, DRM Set 1)
• Commercial on‐orbit refueling did not obviate need for higher capacity launcher
(excessive number of commercial launches, DRM Set 2). Commercial launch rate
available for explora#on missions significantly limited by costs of infrastructure
expansion.
“Hybrid” DRM analysis (“DRM 4”) presented to Steering Council 17
August. AddiQonal analysis performed to assess:
• “Balanced” HLLV/Commercial launchers
• Impacts of “moderate” HLLV capacity
• Impacts of dele#on of solar electric propulsion (SEP) technology/system
• Qualita#ve assessment of SEP
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 12
13. Concept of OperaQons (NEO Crewed Missions, 100 t HLLV)
NEO 30d at NEO
MMSEV
continues
operations
at NEO
159d Transit
193d Transit
SEP #1
EP Module Staging Location of
Dock All Elements
SEP #2 is Target
Dependent
CPS#1
E-M L1
DSH
339d Transit 339d Transit
4d Transit
SEP #2
CPS#2
LEO 407 km
x 407 km
CTV
CTV w/Crew CTV SM
SEP #1 DSH MMSEV MMSEV
OR
SEP #2
CPS #1 EDL
EP Module Results in CPS #2 CPS #2
Kick stage CxP‐like “1.5
launch” Commercial
Crew
architecture
along with Low‐boiloff
associated
HLLV ‐ 100t
HLLV ‐ 100t
HLLV ‐ 100t
HLLV ‐ 100t
CPS may
issues not be
required
EARTH CREW LAUNCH
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 13
14. Campaign Profile
DRM 4: 100 t HLLV w/ Commercial Crew
NEO
HEO
(No Crew) HEO E‐M L1 E‐M L1
RoboQc RoboQc
Precursor Precursor
Inflatable
DSH Demo
Test
CPS Flagship
Flight
L1 mission w/ ~55 t
Full Scale
SEP 30 kWe Flagship Deployment
of Opportunity
Payloads
MMSEV
CTV Test at ISS w/ High‐Speed
CTV Entry
Commercial Crew Ellip#cal
Reenty Test
Test to NEO
HLLV Flight to HEO to E‐M L1 (via E‐M L1)
NEO Mission
Commercial Crew / Cargo ConOps
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
Indicates flight to LEO
9 10
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 14
15. DRM Hybrid: Chemical/SEP 100 t HLLV
Mass AllocaQon
100 t HLLV
Elements are not to scale
Elephant stands and element adapters will use unallocated mass
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 15
16. Concept of OperaQons (NEO Crewed Missions, 70 t HLLV)
NEO
L1 and beyond ops same
as 100t op#on
Dock All Elements
EPM CPS #2
SEP #1
E-M L1
339d Transit
SEP#2 transfers
DSH to L1
339d Transit
Kick Stage Kick Stage SEP#1 transfers Kick Stage 4d Transit
CPS #1 to L1
LEO 407 km
x 407 km Both stacks leave
CPS #1
LEO at the same
time
OR
CPS #2 CTV
CTV
DSH
SEP #2 MMSEV MMSEV
SEP #1
EPM
Kick Stage Could Potentially
Kick Stage Kick Stage Kick Stage
Replace One HLLV
Commercial
Lanch
Crew
HLV ‐ 70t
HLV ‐ 70t
HLV ‐ 70t
HLV ‐ 70t
HLV ‐ 70t
HLV ‐ 70t
EARTH
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 16
17. DRM Hybrid: Chemical/SEP 70 t HLLV
Mass AllocaQon
70 t HLLV
HLLV 2 has negaQve
unallocated mass (‐1.15t)
Elements are not to scale
Elephant stands and element adapters will use unallocated mass
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 17
19. Concept of OperaQons
100 t HLLV – All Chemical In‐Space Propulsion
30d at NEO
NEO
MMSEV
Cryo Stage #4
Cryo Stage #5
211d Transit 126d Transit
Kick Stage
Cryo Stage #3
Dock All Elements DSH
Cryo Stage #2
LEO Cryo Stage #1
CTV-AE CTV-AE
CTV SM
DSH DSH
5X Cryo Stages
OR
MMSEV MMSEV
EDL
Kick stage
5 X HLLV ‐ 100t
HLLV ‐ 100t
Elements are not to scale
EARTH
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 19
20. Risk Assessment Comparisons
Area SEP (100 t) SEP (70 t) Chem (100 t) Chem (70 t)
# of Unique Elements 7 7 5 5
Total # of Elements 9 11 9 12
# Launches (HLLV) 3 5 6 9
# AR&Ds 8 9 9 12
# of Undocks 10 14 10 13
# Propellant Transfers 0 0 0 0
Chemical Prop Burns 7 9 14 19
Mission Life#me 841 Days 930 Days 821 Days 1091 Days
Crew Time 394 Days 394 Days 371 Days 371 Days
IMLEO Mass (t) 254 262 537 591
NEO Arrival Stack Mass (t) 57 57 109 121
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 20
21. Solar Electric Propulsion
Benefits & Highlights
Baseline Slope = 7.29
13.5t CTV
Slope = 4.33
“Gear” RaQo for SEP missions significantly beper than chemical stages
Mission flexibility – departure/return windows
SEP affords more “graceful”, less catastrophic propulsion system
failure modes
SubstanQal power available at desQnaQon and during coast periods
Reusable architecture potenQal
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 21
22. DRM Assessment Summary
ObservaQons
• Balanced HLLV/Commercial launchers – Reasonable balance of commercial and
government launches achievable through robo#c precursors, flagships and full‐scale
demos
• Impacts of moderate HLLV capacity – 100 t class launcher allows single launch of systems
needed for crewed flight to HEO, reduces launches needed for NEO by ~50%
• Impacts of solar electric propulsion – SEP architecture reduces by half the mass to LEO
and decreases sensi#vity to mass growth by ~60%
• QualitaQve assessment of SEP – offers unique mission flexibility, reduc#on in risk and
extensibility to more ambi#ous explora#on missions
Top PrioriQes Looking Forward
• Perform func#onality trades amongst architecture elements, par#cularly CTV/MMSEV/Hab
• Understand CTV func#onality and rela#onship to Commercial Crew through opera#onal
concept analysis including con#ngencies
• Trade reusability of key transporta#on/habita#on elements
• Perform campaign analysis – other missions of interest and how well DRM elements and
technologies play (e.g., CPS evolu#on to HLLV upper stage, or vice versa)
• Perform boroms‐up element design, layout and packaging for SEP, MMSEV and Hab
including radia#on protec#on strategies
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 22
24. Summary
Human missions to NEOs require a focused technology investment
porTolio
• The agency is already inves#ng in every area needed to enable this class of
mission, but emphasis must be put in the right areas
• Latest DRM analysis adds Solar Electric Propulsion to other areas of early
investment emphasis
As definiQon of the mission profile matures and our understanding of the
deep space environment improves, addiQonal technology needs may be
idenQfied (e.g. radiaQon protecQon for hardware)
Core improvements in the way NASA has always done business are
needed in areas such as logisQcs management, hardware supportability,
soNware development, and mission operaQons with limited ground
support. While these improvements may not be directly technology
related, they are criQcal to implemenQng the defined DRM.
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 24
25. Technology Progress towards other DesQnaQons
HEFT DRM 4 DRM 4 Other Crew DesQnaQon
Lunar Surface (Long
Technology Area Near‐Earth Objects EM‐L1 / Lunar Orbit Mars Orbit
Dur.)
Mars Surface
Propulsion Technologies
Heavy LiN Propulsion Technology ˜! ˜! ! ˜! !
In‐Space Chemical Propulsion ˜! ˜! ˜! ˜! !
High Efficiency In‐Space Propulsion ˜! ˜! ! ˜! !
Cryogenic Fluid Management (e.g. zero boil off) ˜! ˜! ! ˜! !
Cryogenic Fluid Transfer ! ! ! ! !
Technologies for Human Health & HabitaQon
Life Support and HabitaQon ˜! ˜! ! ! !
ExploraQon Medical Capability ˜! ˜! ! ! !
Space RadiaQon ProtecQon ˜! ˜! ! ˜! !
Human Health and Countermeasures ˜! ˜! ! ! !
Behavioral Health and Performance ˜! ˜! ˜! ! !
Space Human Factors & Habitability ˜! ˜! ˜! ! !
Symbol
Technology development complete ˜! Technology Required for this des#na#on
Addi#onal tech. dev. required ! Technology is applicable to this des#na#on
Technology not developed ! Not Applicable
Need more data
NASAWATCH.COM 25
26. Technology Progress towards other DesQnaQons (cont’d)
HEFT DRM 4 DRM 4 Other Crew DesQnaQon
Lunar Surface (Long
Technology Area Near‐Earth Objects EM‐L1 / Lunar Orbit Mars Orbit
Dur.)
Mars Surface
Power Technologies
High Efficiency Space Power Storage ˜! ˜! ! ! !
High Power Space Electrical Pwr GeneraQon ˜! ˜! ! ! !
Entry Descent & Landing Technologies
High Speed Earth re‐entry (> 11 km/s) ˜! ˜! ! ˜! !
Aeroshell & Aerocapture ! ! ! ! !
Precision Landing ! ! ! ! !
EVA & RoboQcs Technologies
EVA Technology ˜! ˜! ˜! ! !
Human ExploraQon TeleroboQcs ˜! ˜! ˜! ˜! !
Human RoboQc Systems ˜! ˜! ˜! ! !
Surface Mobility ! ! ! ! !
Symbol
Technology development complete ˜! Technology Required for this des#na#on
Addi#onal tech. dev. required ! Technology is applicable to this des#na#on
Technology not developed ! Not Applicable
Need more data
NASAWATCH.COM 26
27. Technology Progress towards other DesQnaQons (cont’d)
HEFT DRM 4 DRM 4 Other Crew DesQnaQon
Lunar Surface (Long
Technology Area Near‐Earth Objects EM‐L1 / Lunar Orbit Mars Orbit
Dur.)
Mars Surface
SoNware & Electronic Technologies
Autonomous Systems ! ! ! ! !
Advanced Avionics/SoNware ! ! ! ! !
Advanced Nav/Comm ! ! ! ! !
Other Technologies
Advanced Thermal Control & ProtecQon Systems ˜! ˜! ˜! ! !
Automated Rendezvous and Docking ˜! ˜! ˜! ˜! ˜!
Supportability & LogisQcs ! ! ! ! !
Lightweight Materials & Structures ! ! ! ! !
Environment MiQgaQon (e.g.Dust) ! ! ! ! !
In‐Situ Resource UQlizaQon ! ! ! ! !
Symbol
Technology development complete ˜! Technology Required for this des#na#on
Addi#onal tech. dev. required ! Technology is applicable to this des#na#on
Technology not developed ! Not Applicable
Need more data
NASAWATCH.COM 27
28. Extensibility of Solar Electric Propulsion Stage
Na#onal Aeronau#cs and Space Administra#on
1,000 kWe + Nuclear Stage
• ETDD thruster cluster or
advanced high power thruster
Technology Demonstration Complexity and Available Power
• Robo#c to Mars
MegaWaO‐Class Fast‐Transit SpacecraR
• Human Cargo / Precursor
• Extensible for Surface Power
TRL9 SEP Stage 90 kW
FTD‐1 SEP Stage/ARDV
NEXT Ion + 30 kWe FAST Array
A Bridge Technology for ESMD Human OperaNons
• NASA SMD Science
• DoD Opera#onal Missions 300 kWe SEP Stage
ETDD Advanced EP Thruster + 90 kWe
TRL9 SEP Stage 30 kW • Cargo/Crew to NEO
• Reusable Orbital Transfer
• Lunar Cargo
Demonstrate SpacecraO buses with increasing power & decreasing specific mass to
enable advanced electric and plasma propulsion spacecraO that will decrease trip
Nmes to Mars and beyond. Each demonstraNon spacecraO bus has immediate
applicaNon & payoff to other mission objecNves. NEP power system technologies
are extensible to surface power.
State‐of‐Art
• < 3 kWe devices
• GEOCOM auxiliary propulsion
• Planetary science (DS1, Dawn) 2015 2020 2025
NASAWATCH.COM Beyond ‐>
29. Key ObservaQons
No wasted technology investments
• Every technology needed to enable a human NEO mission also is needed for
other human des#na#ons
There are technologies needed for other desQnaQons NOT needed for a
human NEO mission; technology gaps
Gap technologies that represent unique NASA needs will require the
agency to sustain key core competencies for future missions
• Precision landing
• Aeroshell/aerocapture
• Space Nuclear Power
• ISRU
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 29
31. Launch Vehicle
Issue RecommendaQon
• An HLV is central to any robust human explora#on • Accelerate the HLV decision – moderate HLV
program • Ini#ate a Shurle‐derived inline HLV Program
• Delaying a decision on HLV configura#on and beginning in FY2011
requirements to 2015 limits NASA’s op#ons and - Ini#al 90 – 100 t range
hampers planning - Defer upper stage to Block II
• There is no benefit to delaying work on the HLV, no
technology needed for capability development
Note: An RP‐based HLV (100‐120 t) and a replacement for the
- Industry RFI Response
(Russian) RD‐180 is higher cost to NASA and therefore
Risk if unresolved requires supplemental funding from DoD to offset increased
• NASA will lose an opportunity to build from the costs
exis#ng flight‐proven systems
• Losing the capability to build an SSP‐derived HLV will
require the development of new manufacturing,
processing, and launch infrastructure at addi#onal
cost and schedule risk.
33.
0'
0
3
3
ø
ø
0
3
3
ø
'
.
'
.
12.5'
ø
Key Trade 27.5’ Inline 33’ Inline 33’ RP
Geometry Shurle ET diameter Saturn V heritage 33’ diameter Saturn V heritage 33’ diameter
Booster 4 or 5 segment PBAN booster, evolvable to HTPB 5 segment PBAN booster, evolvable to HTPB 1.25 m lbf RP engines on boosters
SSME (RS‐25D) transi#oning to 1.25 m lbf thrust class LOX/RP‐1
Core Stage Engine RS‐68B evolvable to RS‐68B E/O
RS‐25E engine
Upper Stage Engine RL10A4‐3 J‐2X J‐2X‐285
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 31
32. Moderate HLV OpQons –70 t to 100 t Comparison
>130 t
>70 t ~100 t
US Engine Trade
Payload Trade Op#ons
Op#ons
• 10 m shroud (baseline) Upper Stage evolved
• RS‐25E
• 8.4 m shroud from CPS
• J‐2X
• Orion Crew Capable
• NGE (RL10
replacement)
Evolves
OR
to
5 seg PBAN SRB to Composite HTPB SRBs
Ini#al Capability > 70 t Ini#al Capability ~100 t Ul#mate Capability >130 t
4 Segment PBAN SRBs 5 Segment PBAN SRBs 5 Segment HTPB Composite SRBs
27.5’ dia Core Stage using 3 RS‐25D 27.5’ dia Core Stage using 5 RS‐25D 27.5’ dia Core Stage using RS‐25E
No Upper Stage No Upper Stage NASAWATCH.COM
Upper Stage evolved from CPS
33. EvoluQon OpQons
4/3 (70 t) Vehicle EvoluQon
• 76 t with 4/3 vehicle in cargo configura#on
• 85 t capability with 4/3 vehicle and a RS‐25 D Upper Stage
• ~105 t capability with 4/3 vehicle, US, and HPTB/Composite case SRB’s
• Performance analysts' recommenda#on
- 1st stage under‐thrusted for super heavy liW
- Add another pair of 4 segment boosters
5/5 (100 t) Vehicle EvoluQon
• 101 t with 5/5 vehicle in cargo configura#on
• 127 t with RS‐25 US
• >140 t with RS‐25 US and HPTB/composite case SRB’s
StarNng with 3 engine core and 4 segment motors requires both core and motor
evoluNon to achieve > 130 t
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 33
34. Cost Concept Comparison of Major Discriminators
Cost through FY17 ‐ $B
100 t 70 t
ATP to First Flight 7.5 years 7 years
Core Stage 4.5 4.8
(DDT&E + Produc#on)
RS‐25D Sustaining 0.6 0.8
RS‐25E 0.7 0
(DDT&E + Produc#on)
4 Segment SRB Sustaining 0 2.8
5 Segment SRB 3.0 0
(DDT&E + Produc#on)
First Flight w/RS‐25E’s FY23 FY25
Total Cost thru FY17* 11.6 11.0
*Costs do not include reserves & FTEs, and do not fully fund to the first test flight
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 34
35. Moderate HLV Vehicle Discriminators
70 t vs. 100 t
70 t 100 t
4 Segment PBAN SRBs 5 Segment PBAN SRBs
27.5’ dia Core Stage using 3 RS‐25D 27.5’ dia Core Stage using 5 RS‐25D
No Upper Stage No Upper Stage
RS‐25E development may be deferred RS‐25E development required up‐front
5 flights with 15 RS 25‐D units 3 flights with 15 RS 25‐D units
NEO mission flight rate and schedule NEO mission flight rate and schedule
determines produc#on limits determines produc#on limits
• 15 engines per NEO mission (DRM 4) • 15 engines per NEO mission (DRM 4)
• Produc#on rates of 20/yr achievable • Produc#on rates of 20/yr achievable
4 segment motors (RSRM) 5 segment motors (RSRMV)
• Obsolescence issues (asbestos) may need • Obsolescence not an issue; 5 motors
to be addressed – possible delta qual of planned for qual, may be less
1‐5 addi#onal motors • Heritage hardware assessed to new
• Would require new avionics (could use environments and loads
RSRMV avionics) • Parachutes challenges (in work)
ATP to first‐flight – 6 years • New avionics suites (in work)
ATP to first‐flight – 6.5 years
MPS more complex (DDT&E forward
work)
• May lead to more MPTA tes#ng
Base hea#ng more challenging
(DDT&E forward work)
NASAWATCH.COM 35
36. Required Ground OperaQons ModificaQons for Any
Shuple‐Derived HLV
One fill + 2 scrub One total launch
Current FSS height & MLP flame hole do load arempts arempt with
not support either HLV configura#on. (3 arempts total) current sphere
with current capacity
sphere capacity (without 48 hr.
(without 48 hr. replenishment)
replenishment)
Shurle 70 t HLV 100 t HLV
Mods required for either HLV OpQon
KSC Facility Large Cost Drivers:
• New Tower for high‐eleva#on access
• Manifest (flights per year, spacing, etc.) • New ML Base (similar cost to MLP mods) with Tower (driven by
determines KSC Infrastructure rollout stabiliza#on and LV/spacecraW rollout purge requirements)
• VAB plazorm mods to meet access requirements
• Flight Hardware ConfiguraQon
• Pad flame deflector mods (based on engine configura#on)
• Reusable hardware increases • Structural reinforcement driven by tower, vehicle & ML base weight
facility footprint • Pad, Pad Slope, Crawler, Crawlerway, VAB, etc.
• Ship to Integrate Flight Hardware • Facili#es & GSE must be brought into compliance with current
minimizes KSC facility footprint construc#on standards & codes (VAB life safety & fire suppression)
• GHE recovery system may be required (out‐years)
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 36
37. Heavy LiN Launch Vehicle (HLLV) RecommendaQon
IniQate a 100 t class Shuple‐derived moderate HLLV
• Accommodates difficult NEO crewed missions with less risk
• Defers Upper stage to Block II and evolve US from CPS
• U#lizes experienced workforce
• Hardware has demonstrated reliability and performance
• More payload capability for the investment
Further Launch Vehicle trades should be completed by HLPT Team at
MSFC
Perform a trade of the feasibility of Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (CPS)
evoluQon to Upper Stage (HEFT Phase II)
• Evolu#on of the CPS from the current Ares I Upper Stage design is feasible to evolve to an
earth departure stage (EDS) with modest CFM requirements
• CPS design could build on exis#ng elements of Ares I US for early demonstra#on
• Extensibility for longer loiter required for CPS is feasible
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 37
39. Crewed SpacecraN/ERV – As presented July 13th
Issue Risk if unresolved
• HEFT assessments iden#fied a func#onal • Pursuing an ISS ERV diverts near term
requirement for a crewed explora#on resources that could be berer aligned with
spacecraW advancing human (beyond LEO) explora#on
• Developing an Orion‐derived explora#on RecommendaQon
vehicle • Switch Focus to develop an Orion‐derived
- Provides a clear explora#on spacecraW focus exploraQon spacecraN using a block approach
- Leverages CxP investment, maintaining - Do not develop a dedicated ISS ERV
Agency momentum, and preserves prime
contractor rela#onship • Development Path
- Can yield an ISS ERV via Block development - Orion‐derived direct return vehicle and in‐
house developed exploraQon craN
• No dedicated ISS ERV in any explora#on
- Manage the Orion‐derived explora#on
DRMs spacecraW to fit the available budget using
- ERV development is a sub‐op#mum detour rigorous design‐to‐cost targets
in the path to an explora#on spacecraW - Implement lean in‐house development of the
- ERV development reduces available budget MMSEV
for key systems and tech development by
• Alterna#ve Development Path
more than $2.0B
- Orion block 2 vehicle
- with airlock and robo#c elements
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 39
41. Crew Transfer Vehicle (CTV) FuncQonality OpQons
There are natural capability break points that suggest several CTV opQons
• Future assessment to refine these is required to fully defined CTV func#onality
CTV‐E: minimal EOM (only) funcQon
• Does not provide support for (on‐orbit) con#ngency abort func#ons
CTV‐AE: provides ascent/entry
• Must include the Ascent Abort (LAS) capability/func#onality
• Provides CM/SM crewed support (LEO to HEO / DSV sep thru EDL / Cont. Abort Reqs.)
CTV‐E*: entry + (on orbit) conQngency abort funcQons
• CTV‐E* is a reduc#on of system capability from CTV‐AE
- Eliminates the Ascent Abort (LAS) capability/func#onality
• Maintain SM func#onality to cover crewed support & con#ngency abort requirements
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 41
42. Crew Transfer Vehicle (CTV) OpQons – CapabiliQes
CTV ConfiguraQon CTV‐E CTV‐E* CTV‐A/E
Crew in CTV during ascent? No No Yes
Ascent Abort (Pad to LEO) No No Yes
No. of Crew ‐ Delivery of Crew to LEO / Return from
3‐4 3‐4 3‐4
beyond LEO
Ascent/On‐orbit Crew Support (hrs) 0 / 0 0 / 216 12+ / 216
Crew Support For EDL & Recovery (hrs) 40 40 40
Quiescent Time (days) 400 400 400
Automated Rendezvous & Docking – AR&D TBD TBD Yes
Main Propulsion delta‐V (m/s) <200 1500+ 1500+
Entry Speed for Entry Descent & Landing – EDL (km/s) <11.8 <11.8 <11.8
EDL & Recovery System (water landing) Yes Yes Yes
RCS Control for EDL Yes Yes Yes
ConQngency (In Space) Abort No Yes Yes
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 42
43. Crew Transfer Vehicle‐Entry (CTV‐E) FuncQonality ImplicaQons
Minimum CTV‐E capability implies certain condiQons
• All beyond LEO missions require CTV‐E, MMSEV & CPS + Comm. Crew launch
• LEO to L1 crew support (~4 days) off‐loaded to the MMSEV
• No stand alone in‐space con#ngency abort support (insufficient crew support Eme)
- Requires combina#on with MMSEV and CPS
AddiQonal implicaQons
• Does not support early beyond LEO mission w/CTV only (insufficient crew support Eme,
insufficient Delta‐V)
• Places Commercial Crew in Cri#cal Path for explora#on missions
• CTV‐E is not on path to provide Commercial Crew alterna#ve
Pre‐Decisional: For NASA Internal Use Only NASAWATCH.COM 43