The document discusses several topics related to space launch vehicles and access to space, including: 1) The need for lower-cost and more responsive small launch vehicles to deploy microsatellites, as well as reusable launch vehicles for heavier payloads. 2) Ongoing efforts by the US Air Force and DARPA to develop small launch vehicles like the Sprite and RASCAL to deploy microsatellites at a lower cost than current expendable launch vehicles. 3) The potential for reusable launch vehicles, including concepts like the Falcon and hypersonic vehicles, to further lower the costs of access to space for different payload classes.

1. BRIG GEN S. PETE WORDENDirector for Development and TransformationAir Force Space Command, Space and Missile Systems CenterNovember 2003PERSPECTIVES ON SPACE FUTURE

2. LAUNCH VEHICLES, MICROSATELLITES AND CISLUNAR SPACE
•WHAT’S NEW IN DoD?
•ACCESS TO SPACE
–U.S. Dilemma –cost too much and takes too long
–Shuttle Problems, EELV Limitations
–Short Term –Small Launch Vehicles
–Long Term, Reusable
•Hypersonics/AirbreathersvsRockets
•Horizontal vsVertical
•MICROSATELLITES
–U.S. has largely ignored
–“Responsive” potential
•CISLUNAR/TRANSLUNAR OPPORTUNITIES
–NEOS
–Large Telescopes, Lunar Resources

3. Organization and Money
•2002 –Implementation of “Rumsfeld” Commission
•2002 –Reorganization of Air Force and NRO
–Under Secretary of the AF –Joint with DNRO
•DARPA –“Virtual Space Office”
–$100s M per year
–Transformational Charter

4. UNITED STATES STRATEGIC COMMAND --1 OCT 2002Our MissionEstablish and provide full-spectrum global strike, coordinated space and information operations capabilities to meet both deterrent and decisive national security objectives. Provide operational space support, integrated missile defense, global C4ISR and specialized planning expertise to the joint warfighter.

5. ACCESS TO SPACE ?
1998
Titan IV1986 Challenger
2003 Columbia

6. SpaceliftNeedsPayloads to LEO/Polar•MicroSatsBeyond GEO/Large Sats•SBL•Multi-Mission space platforms•Full LRSPayloads to LEO/Polar/GTOPayload Servicing•Responsive Sats& •Small Commercial SatsCargo/Crew to StationPayloads to GEO•Civil ISS•NationalAnnual Peacetime Launch NeedsAnnual War-time Launch Needs5-10 launches / year15-30 launches / year5 launches / year10-15 launches / year10 launches35 launches2 launchesNo addit’llaunches+ (Additional launches required for prewar augmentation and reconstitution given a near-peer competitor) +++ 1Klb Class15 KlbClass45Klb Class100+Klb Class

7. SpaceliftOptions
•Reference–Existing LV systems•ELV–Liquid two stage–Solid three stage•RLV -TSTO–Optimized LH-LH–Optimized RP-RP–Optimized RP-LH–BimeseLH-LH–BimeseRP-RP–Hypersonic-RocketPayload Classes–Microsat–5 klb–15 klb–25 klb–45 klb–100 klb

8. Imagine the Possibilities CAPABILITY CurrentSpace TransportationAdvancedSpace TransportationWHEN? ♦Current Space Transportation is paced on a shallow slope ♦Dramatic Change requires investment in new technologies ♦Imagine the Possibilities …
TIME
A National Initiative

9. Why RLVs?
A Glance at Production CostsB-2($8150/lb) 0500100015002000250030003500400045000100200300400500Vehicle Inert Wt (Klb) Vehicle Cost/Inert Wt (FY'02$/Lb) 717-200737Series757Series767-400ER777-200LR777-300ER 747SeriesF16JSFB-1F-22 PegasusTaurusAtlas IIAtlas II ASDelta IITitan IVTitan IV NUS Launch VehiclesCommercialAircraftMilitaryAircraftNoteProduction is the largest component of ELV flight costs. (70% for Delta II) Production Cost Floor for flight vehicles Tomahawk

10. ISABE SAPIndia 01|McClinton.ppt #10

11. Configuration Summary HTHLB1C1C2B2Technology LevelModerate Aggressive1st: Turbojet2nd: RBCCMach 41st: TBCC2nd: RocketMach 8+ 1st: Turbojet2nd: RocketMach 6.5EB1C1C2B2TechnologyModerate Aggressive1st: Turbojet2nd: RBCCMach 41st: TBCC2nd: RocketMach 8+ 1st: Turbojet2nd: RocketMach 6.5E

12. PAYLOAD NEEDS
100+ Payload to 100NM East LEO (Klbs) 7080010203040506090204060800Mission Needs, Per Year15 KlbsGEO40 KlbsPolar50 KlbsISSPeace-time rate (Civ, Gov, Mil) War-time rateData from 9 May 2003 Partnership Council BriefingDesired “End Point” Payload

13. TSTO HTHL PAYLOAD CAPABILITY
AirbreathingDesign SpacePayload to 100NM East LEO (Klbs) 7080 TOGW (Mlbs) 0.51.01.52.02.50Assumed Runway BoundTOGW Margin102030405060900100+ 1.2HTHL TSTO LimitPeace-time rate (Civ, Gov, Mil) War-time rateData from 9 May 2003 Partnership Council BriefingDesired “End Point” PayloadModerate Technology BoundAggressive Technology Bound

14. Sprite Small Launch Vehicle
Example•3-Stage Vehicle–LOX/Kerosene Ablative Engines–Hi Performance Pressure Fed Pressurization System–Composite Tanks–Modular Vehicle, Common Stage•6 for stage 1•1 for stage 2 (vac nozzle) –2.5klb thrust 3rdstage•600 lb payload to easterly LEO •~$5M estimated launch costGLOW: 78,500 lbsHeight: 50 ftDiameter: 11.2 ft

15. Minuteman III Launch VehiclePayload Fairing 270lbJettison fairing with stage #:TBD2070lbCAVs 1800lbGuidance System 0lb 4th StageNAMEPSRE Dry346lbPropellant260lbTotal606lbThrust (vac)332lbfIsp (vac)295.5secAe0.3sq ft3rd stage Adapter0lbneglected3rd StageNAMESR73Dry905lbSref14.75 sq ftPropellant7292lb Total8197lbThrust (vac)34500lbfIsp (vac)286.4secAe5.62sq ft2nd stage/ 3rd stage inner stage adapter (fixed)0lbneglected2nd StageNAMESR19Dry2359lbSref14.75 sq ftPropellant13680lbTotal16039lbThrust (vac)60700lbfIsp (vac)287.4secAe12.6sq ft1st stage/ 2nd stage0lbinner stage adapterneglected1st StageNAMEM55Dry5560lbPropellant45670lbTotal51230lbThrust (vac)200400lbfIsp (vac)250.35secAe11.4sq ftSref23.54 sq ft TOTAL VEHICLE WEIGHT 78142.0 lbsMinute-Man III Baseline Model1st Stage M552nd Stage SR 193rd Stage SR 73 Not Drawn to Scale

16. Falcon Summary (SpaceX)
•Payload capability: Approx 1100 lbs to LEO (28.5 deg)
•Launch from both Eastern and Western Ranges
•Multiple manifest, secondary, and piggyback capabilities
•Benign payload environment
•$6M per vehicle through 2004
•First launch possible by late 2003
•Diameter 5.5’ tapering to 5’ •Length 68’ •1stStage Parachute/Water Recovery•1stStage Lox/RP1•2ndStage Lox/RP1

17. DARPA RASCAL LV
The Responsive Access, Small Cargo, Affordable Launch (RASCAL) program will design and develop a low cost orbital insertion capability for dedicated micro-size satellite payloads. The concept is to develop a responsive, routine, small payload delivery system capable of providing flexible access to space using a combination of reusable and low cost expendable vehicle elements. Specifically, the RASCAL system will be comprised of a reusable airplane-like first stage vehicle called the reusable launch vehicle and a second stage expendable rocket vehicle. The RASCAL demonstration objectives are to place satellites and commodity payloads, between 50 and 130 kilograms in weight, into low earth orbit at any time, any inclination with launch efficiency of $20,000 per kilogram or less.

18. X-42Baseline ~50% Scale DemonstratorTSTO SystemPop-Up Demonstrator Larger Size ÎScalability + Capability Bi-mese or Weight OptimizedX-42 PROPOSED PROGRAM

19. NOTIONAL U.S. APPROACHNASA •Next Gen H2 Rocket•Metallic cryo-tank •Power•Actuation•Space-based Range•IVHM/AvionicsAir Force•Launch System Design and Integration•Launch Facility•Landing System •FlybackEngines•Wiring•TPS•GN&C•Expendable upperstagesMedium HTHL RLV (15-25klb) Medium VTHL RLV (15-25klb) Heavy (40-60klb) Very Heavy Lift HTHL (200 klb) Medium HTHL Hypersonic (15-25klb) Light RLVOps Demo (10 Klb) Very Heavy(80 klb) •Operational Baseline•Validated Systems Analysis•Validated, Credible, Cost Estimates•Validated Technologies Common to Larger Systems •Validated vehicle upgradeable as medium 2ndstage•Low cost light payload capabilityand/orCommon Boosterw/ ELV CoreSuper Heavy Lift (200 klb)

20. Light RLV HypersonicHypersonicTechnology Technology TestbedTestbed Flight Cost* ~ $7 M Turnaround ~ 24-72 hrsReliable ~ 0.995+ SmallSatSmallSatReusableReusableLauncherLauncherExperimental CAVExperimental CAVThrowerThrower Jet Engines allow incremental expansion of flight envelop with large number of flights
Cost includes: fixed variable costs at a flight rate of 30/year, with no upperstage

21. Notional Spiral Development Plan[25klb Spiral 2, without Crossfeed] FALCONSpiral 1Spiral 2Spiral 3Spiral 4Stage 1 EngineNew RP2 SSMENew LH Engine (4)Same as Spiral 2Same as Spiral 2Stage 2 EngineNew RPFALCON Stage 2Spiral 1 Stage 1Same as Stage 1EELV CoreStage 3 EngineNew RPFALCON Stage 3----EELV USPayload to LEO1,500 lb12,800 lb25,000 lb87,700 lb~ 160,000 lbStaging Delta-V12,700 fps12,800 fps10,600 fps14,400 fpsRLV Height101 ft112 ft166 ft166 ft166 ftRLV Dry Weight90.0 klb367.9 klb763.8 klb493.3 klbGLOW132.9 klb580.7 klb1,943.0 klb4,389.5 klb3,623.3 klbHeritageSameHeritageSameSameSame

22. RESPONSIVE SPACE
•Microsatellites
•Responsive Space

23. Satellite Size vs. CapabilitySatellite Class Mission Capabilities0.110100 10,000 1Operational National AssetsCommercial Communication SatellitesUniversity Experiment Class Satellite Weight (kg) NanoSatsLarge, “Operational” SatelliteSmallSatMicroSatsMicroSatsin the 100 kg Class can Now Perform Valuable Niche MissionsTactical Satellites(Historically University Experiment Class) 1,000 Demo/Experiment Missions(“Low” Cost Class of DoD NASA) Also Commercial LEO Comms. WindSat-Wind SpeedClementine-Moon MapPC SatSTARSHINECUBESATsORBCOMMTiPSCHIPSatMOSTIridiumGlobalStarMilStar, IntelSat6 6.4x3.6x11.8m 4600kg, Hubble,etc.

24. GLOBAL MICROSATS
2002 HISTORY
Microsat NameOwner/NationDate LaunchedMass/PurposeDashISAS/Japan4 Feb 200270kg/TechnologyKolibri-2000Academy ofSci/Russia/AustraliaUnk20kg/EducationUnkTsinghua/ChinaSep 2002 (failed)Unk/TechnologyAlsat 1Algeria/Surrey(UK)28 Nov 200292kg/Disaster MonitorMozhaetsRussia28 Nov 200264kg/Science/EducationFedSatAustralia14 Dec 200250kg/ScienceWEOSChiba Inst/Japan14 Dec 200268kg/Scienceμ-lab SatNASDA/Japan14 Dec 200268kg/TechnologyLatin-Sat A,BArgentina20 Dec 200211.35kg @/TechnologyUniSAT-2Univ of Rome/Italy20 Dec 200211.8kg/ScienceSaudiSat-1cSaudi Arabia20 Dec 2002Unk/Unk

25. U.S. AFRL XSS-10 MICROSAT PROGRAM, FEB 2003
COST: APPROX $60M
TIME: 6 YEARS

26. OTHER EFFORTS: JUNE 2000Figure 6 Figure 7
Tsinghua-1
Microsatellite
Figure 8 Russian
SNAP-1
Nanosatellite
COST: APPROX $1M
TIME: 1 YEAR COSPAS-SARSAT
Satellite Image Taken
by SNAP-1

28. CONOPS: Launch Decision and Processing
RESPONSIVE SPACE -TACSAT 1 2004Automatic OrbitManeuvers forConstellation BuildingJointTask ForceCommanderUnited CINC: OPLAN UseAuthorizedJTF Commander Decides: 1. Payload Capability Needed2. Area of Interest3. Area for Direct Downlink4. When to Call-up AssetSchedule of Downlink Times Locations3-5 DaysLaunch Team•Precise Orbit Calcs. •Range Safety Clearance•SC/Payload Integration–Battery Charge–Fueling•Final LV IntegrationLaunchDirectDownlinkRequest MissionCall-up

29. TacSat-1: Spacecraft Mission Highlights•Size: –41 inches Diameter, 18 inches High•Mass: –Bus: ~60 kg–Copperfield-2S: 20 kg–Imager: 10 kg–Total: ~90 kg•Power: –Available: 186W–Bus: 55W OAP, 75W Peak–Payload: ~70W Peak •Orbit: –Altitude: 400-450km–Inclination: ~63 Degrees•Mission Life: –Approximately 1 Year

30. Cis-Lunar SpaceCis-Lunar Space (Near Earth Deep Space) 24,000 km1023 m/secR = 384,000 km60oL1L2L3L4L5GEO42,100 kmGPS26,500 kmMoon
•Earth-Moon System
•Lagrangian (Libration) Points
–L1, L2, L3 –Unstable
–L4, L5 –Stable
•Minimal Propellant Requirements for “Station-Keeping”
•“Clean environment” for science experiments
•Region of Interest for MiDSTEP in Blue

31. TRANSLUNAR SPACE

32. Cis-Lunar Mission Concepts
Orbit Insertion/ Station KeepingGTOGEOLunarLibrationPointEarthTTI (700) AMF (1,900) LOI-Direct (800) LOI-WSB (700) PMF (1,100)
TTI = Transfer Trajectory Insertion
AMF = Apogee Motor Fire
PMF = Perigee Motor Fire
LOI = Lunar Orbit Insertion
WSB = Weak Stability Boundary= High Thrust (ΔV m/sec) = Low Thrust= Trajectory Correction (HT/LT) Altitude ControlWSB Optimization using LT ArcRepositioning/ Station KeepingAltitude Control

33. Navigation1. Navigation in Cis-Lunar Space•Tasks–Station-Keeping and Repositioning–Maneuvering–On-Orbit Storage•“Wandering” in Cis-Lunar Space (e.g., Near L1/L2) •Transferring Into Moon- Circling Orbit–Autonomy •Propulsion–Solar Sailing–Electric Propulsion•Navigation Aid–”Leaking” GPS SignalsL1L2L3L4L5

34. Classes of Near-Earth Asteroid Orbits
EarthEarthAtensIEOsApollosAmors

35. HAZARD SUMMARY (2003 NASA REPORT)

36. MOST: “Microvariability and
Oscillations of STars”
•Status: –In Phase D; pre-ship review by end of 2001–Launch scheduled for early 2003 (on Delta-2, with Radarsat2). •Innovative Elements: –Highly-accurate (~ 10 arc- seconds) attitude control. –Science-grade imaging telescope. •First CSA microsatellite. •Space astronomy mission. •Dynacon is Prime Contractor

37. MITIGATION

38. MITIGATION
•Near-Term --“Kiss it goodbye”
•Best-Identify objects decades or centuries out
–Explore Object
–Divert using “conventional” means
•Chemical or Electric Propulsion
•“Impact” movement
•“Yarkovsky” Effect --use solar radiation pressure
•Surprise Object --especially a “Comet”
–Diversion “Hard”
–Disruption “Dangerous” -“Rubble Pile” Problem
–“Kiss it Goodbye”
•“GIGGLE FACTOR”!!!

39. MITIGATION -COMMAND AND CONTROL
•The Real Issue on Planetary Defense is not “Weapons” --its “COMMAND
AND CONTROL” --C-2
•Who identifies the Threat?
•Who believes that its real and why?
•Who tells whom about the Threat?
•Who decides what to do?
•Who builds and executes the operation?
•Who pays?
•Who coordinates with all the effected parties?
•Who tests the mitigation method?
•Who gets blamed when it goes wrong?

40. C2 Environment for Today’s Missile WarningDECISION MAKERSNCA/CINCCommand and ControlWARFIGHTERSFIXED AND ENDURINGCOMMAND CENTERSMCCCAOCAMWCCoalitionForcesTheaterCINCS SPACEAF AOCJTFSEWS PartnersMissileSpaceNMD C3IOCCAirAEFCINC C2NODE PETEGlobal Grid TRIADGlobal VigilanceSENSORS PROCESSINGPARCSPAVE PAWSBMEWSMissile WarningCollateral/ ContributingEGLINGEODSS / Have StareSpace Surveillance WarnOC3FNORAD/USSPACECOM Warfighting Support SystemAir Control WarnRAOC/SBCCJTF/ CNDAlign With Global Warfighter/C2 GoalsAlign Goals

41. ASTEROID 2002 AA29

42. NEO Way Ahead
•USE MICROSATS TO IDENTIFY SUITABLE NEOS -- ESPECIALLY “HORSESHOE” ORBIT OBJECTS
•MOUNT SURVEY AND SAMPLE RETURN MISSIONS WITH MICROSATS
•CONDUCT “MANEUVER” EXPERIMENTS
•IF SUITABLE OBJECT CAN BE FOUND “MOVE” INTO EARTH ORBIT

43. LUNAR SOUTH POLE
“PEAKS OF ETERNAL LIGHT”

44. JAMES WEBB SPACE TELESCOPE

45. 25 YEAR SPACE PROGRAM
•DEVELOP AFFORDABLE “RESPONSIVE” LAUNCHERS 2010- 2015
•USE MICROSATELLITES TO SURVEY CISLUNAR SPACE, SUITABLE NEOS AND LUNAR POLES 2008-2018
•EVOLVE FULLY REUSABLE HEAVY LIFT AND PARTIALLY REUSABLE VERY HEAVY LIFT VEHICLES 2015-2020
•CONSTRUCT VERY LARGE SPACE TELESCOPE (PLANET FINDER) 30 METERS IN DIAMETER AT L-2 -2020-2025
•DEVELOP LUNAR/NEO RESOURCE USAGE 2020-2025
•MOVE NEO INTO EARTH ORBIT 2025-2030