IPA Prep Meeting

1
Transforming the National Spacelift Architecture
Development Transformation Directorate, Space
Missile Systems Center,
Air Force Space Command
JEREMY NOEL, Capt, USAF Chief Analyst RAYMOND
ESCORPIZO, Capt, USAF Lead, Space Operations
Demonstrations EDWARD NED JONES, 2Lt,
USAF Space Systems Engineer, Concept Development
2
Overview

• Why do we need responsive spacelift?
• Challenges potential additional benefits of
  responsive space efforts
• Update on major activities to understand
  develop responsive spacelift
• Summary of Operationally Responsive Spacelift
  (ORS) Analysis of Alternatives (AoA)
• Force Application and Launch from CONUS (FALCON)
  program highlights
• Proposed long-term ORS Roadmap

See associated paper for references
3
Overview

• Why do we need responsive spacelift?
• Challenges potential additional benefits of
  responsive space efforts
• Update on major activities to understand
  develop responsive spacelift
• Summary of Operationally Responsive Spacelift
  (ORS) Analysis of Alternatives (AoA)
• Force Application and Launch from CONUS (FALCON)
  program highlights
• Proposed long-term ORS Roadmap

See associated paper for references
4
Why Responsive Spacelift?-- To Enable Responsive
Space --

• Space enhances national security military,
  commercial, diplomacy/political, economic, etc.
• Need ability to conduct continuous global
  operations
• Space uniquely suited to task if able to rapidly
  adapt to changing warfighter needs
• Asymmetric opposition forces present new
  challenges
• Need to shorten the delay between sensor and
  shooter
• Need to maintain American interests in
  space--military commercial
• Need to protect, augment, replenish space
  assets on demand
• Recognize increased dependence on space services
  systems

Responsive space offers promise of affordable
operational capability --Information force
application at the right place right time --
5
Responsive Spacelift Objectives
6
Overview

• Why do we need responsive spacelift?
• Challenges potential additional benefits of
  responsive space efforts
• Update on major activities to understand
  develop responsive spacelift
• Summary of Operationally Responsive Spacelift
  (ORS) Analysis of Alternatives (AoA)
• Force Application and Launch from CONUS (FALCON)
  program highlights
• Proposed long-term ORS Roadmap

See associated paper for references
7
Responsive Spacelift Challenges To Overcome

• Current lift architecture not designed to be
  responsive
• Long development cycles a strategic focus on
  space capability
• Need to balance new systems with new operational
  concepts
• Continuously changing requirements or economic
  outlook
• Nearly every launch is somewhat uniqueneed for
  more standardization
• Changing launch rates forced additional
  programmatic review
• Result Increased programmatic technical risk
• Higher than anticipated recurring launch costs
• Driven primarily by lower than anticipated launch
  rates
• Existing launch costs too high to effectively
  supply tactical effects to the warfighter
• Unknowns Reusable element production costs and
  operability
• Few data points for reusable systems available to
  accurately determine future reusable element
  production costs or operability

8
Responsive Spacelift Potential Additional
Benefits

• Responsive affordable spacelift may
• Open new commercial ventures
• Further push technology production
  capabilities, affecting all aspects of the
  economy
• Help American aerospace industry respond to
  increased foreign spacelift competition
• Invigorate a new generation of American space
  enthusiasts

9
Overview

• Why do we need responsive spacelift?
• Challenges potential additional benefits of
  responsive space efforts
• Update on major activities to understand
  develop responsive spacelift
• Summary of Operationally Responsive Spacelift
  (ORS) Analysis of Alternatives (AoA)
• Force Application and Launch from CONUS (FALCON)
  program highlights
• Proposed long-term ORS Roadmap

See associated paper for references
10
ORS AoA Purpose and Scope

• Purpose of the AoA
• Determine the best method (means) to responsively
  launch, maneuver, service and retrieve space
  payloads so as to enhance military effectiveness
• Develop acquisition and development roadmaps for
  recommended alternative(s)
• Develop streamlined process for future
  AoAs--Pathfinder opportunity!
• Scope of the AoA
• Spans all AFSPC Mission Areas
• Force Application - Leverage Prompt Global Strike
  (PGS) efforts and Institute for Defense Analysis
  and ACCs Future Strike Studies
• Force Enhancement Include theater ISR and
  other mission area augmentation/ replenishment
• Space Support Addresses numerous alternative
  launch options, and includes on-orbit transfer
  servicing
• Space Control Addresses offensive, defensive,
  and space situational awareness activities

11
Alternative Space Architectures Considered in AoA

• Conventional architectures
• Represent a future where rapid response
  capability is not available
• Mostly for comparison purposes
• Launch-on-need architectures
• Represent a future where space assets are
  launched on an as-needed basis
• Some background (peacetime) capability is also
  assumed
• Alternate architectures
• Servicing
• Reusable
• Retrievable

MUA identified 3 levels of performance for space
capabilities 1) Navigation 2) Surveillance 3)
Reconnaissance 4) Force application
12
ORS Launch System Analysis

• Investigated a broad range of spacelift solutions
  capable of satisfying launch profiles
• Designed broad range of launch vehicle
  configurations
• Developed 71 lift architectures
• Determined operability ranges (2) for all launch
  vehicle designs
• Determined cost range (2) for all launch vehicles
  with reusable elements
• Calculated Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of each
  spacelift solution
• Characterized the risk of each spacelift solution

• Improved Accessibility, Autonomous
• Systems
• Payload Canisterization, Standardized
• Flight Ops

• Reduced System Complexity
• Increased Component Life
• Process / Practices Improvements
• Clean Pad Steamlined Infrastructure

13
ORS Launch System AnalysisSpacelift Vehicle
Concepts

• RLV - TSTO
• Optimized LH-LH
• Optimized RP-RP
• Optimized RP-LH
• Bimese LH-LH
• Bimese RP-RP
• Hypersonic-Rocket

• Existing LV systems
• ELV
• Liquid two stage
• Solid three stage
• Hybrid - Pop-Up
• LH RLV first stage
• RP RLV first stage
• Liquid, or Solid Upper Stage

Five Payload Classes 1 klb 5 klb 15 klb 25
klb 45 klb
Extensive analysis performed on broad range of
launch concepts over 87 concepts considered
14
ORS Cost Comparison Baseline Architecture

• Key areas of uncertainty RLV processing timeline
  and production cost
• Hybrids are competitive for lowest LCC, in both
  best-case and worst-case processing times and
  production costs

DoD-only Missions Medium Military Utility
Performance Level
Best Case RLV Production Cost and Turn-Time
Worst Case RLV Production Cost and Turn-Time
Relative LCC
Relative LCC
ELV
RLV
Hybrid
Hypersonic
ELV
RLV
Hybrid
Hypersonic
Hybrids offer the potential for lower overall
launch costs without the risks of an RLV
15
Launch Cost Comparisons
Short Processing Timelines
Long Processing Timelines
15k Solid ELV
15k Solid ELV
13k Hybrid
13k Hybrid
15k RP-RP Optimized RLV
15k RP-RP Optimized RLV
Hybrids have significant per launch cost
advantages over ELVs
16
ORS Launch System AnalysisResults Advantages of
Hybrid (RLV/ELV) Solutions
RLV
ELV
RLV-ELV Hybrid
36 of ELV
Expended Hardware (Klb)
33
12
0
196
0
89
Reused Hardware (Klb)
45 of RLV

• Fully-Expendable ELVs
• Expend large amounts of hardware
• Drives higher recurring costs

• Fully-Reusable RLVs
• Are big because the orbiter must go to and return
  from orbit
• Drives higher development and production costs

• Hybrid ELV-RLVs
• Balance ELV-RLV Production and Development costs,
  resulting in lower LCC for most cases

Based on 15 Klb to LEO capability, LH2
Propellant
Hybrids offer cost effective combination of RLV
and ELV
17
Notional Modular Family
18
Spacecraft Architecture Analysis Conclusions

• Payloads can be made responsive
• Responsiveness fairly insensitive to spacecraft
  weight
• Majority of existing DoD spacecraft are gt1Klb
  10Klb LEO equivalent covers all by GPSIII
  MILSATCOM
• Tactical satellites
• Small satellites (lt1Klb) fill unique niches OCS
  DCS
• Cost effectiveness of small tactical satellites
  depends on the capability you need
• For capabilities imposed by ORS AoA, spacecraft
  significantly larger than 1Klb were required for
  reconnaissance, surveillance, navigation
• Strategic vs. tactical constellation decisions
  depend on usage rate over time and corresponding
  costs
• Usage rates over 6-7 times in 20 years supports
  strategic approach
• Analysis must be made for each constellation

19
Launch Vehicle Architecture Analysis Conclusions

• With new design emphasis, launch vehicle
  responsiveness is relatively insensitive to
  vehicle dry-weight
• Across full range of assumptions hybrid launch
  vehicle offers the best mix of operability, cost,
  and risk
• Analysis supports 2/3 reduction in recurring
  launch cost, 2-day turn-time, and low technical
  risk
• Further understanding of operability cost
  issues developed through course of acquisition
  strategy
• Starts with concept definition development
• Leads to hybrid operability demonstrator
  operational hybrid
• IOC date of 2018 based on available funding, not
  technical risks
• Roadmaps
• Use evolutionary development approach to provide
  a modular growth path maximizing commonality
• Technology roadmap supports subsystem-level
  demonstrations

20
Overview

• Why do we need responsive spacelift?
• Challenges potential additional benefits of
  responsive space efforts
• Update on major activities to understand
  develop responsive spacelift
• Summary of Operationally Responsive Spacelift
  (ORS) Analysis of Alternatives (AoA)
• Force Application and Launch from CONUS (FALCON)
  program highlights
• Proposed long-term ORS Roadmap

See associated paper for references
21
Program Goal
Develop and Validate, through Demonstrations,
Technologies that will Enable Both Near-term and
Far-term Capabilities Enabling Transformational
Prompt Global Strike and Demonstrating Affordable
and Responsive Space Lift
22
Objectives Small Satellite Launch
Affordable and Responsive Spacelift Capability

• Small payloads to LEO
• Up to 1000 lbs payload to 28.5o, circular, 100
  nm altitude
• Affordable
• Low recurring launch cost lt 5M per launch
• Responsive
• 24 hrs to alert status
• Launch within 24 hrs from alert status

23
ObjectivesForce Application

• Near-Term Capability
• Common Aero Vehicle (CAV) / Small Launch Vehicle
  (SLV) System
• High Endurance CAV
• 1000 lb payload (CAV)
• Unitary Penetrator
• Multiple Munitions
• Sensors, UAVs, etc.
• Global reach
• Operationally, Responsive booster
• Surge Rate of 16 launches in 24 hours
• 24 hours to alert status
• Launch lt2 hrs after execution order

• Far-Term Capability
• Hypersonic Cruise Vehicle (HCV)
• High L/D Configuration
• 12000 lb payload
• CAVs,
• cruise missiles
• SDBs
• Global down cross range
• Aircraft-like operation
• Reusable
• Recallable
• Launch on demand

24
Overview

• Why do we need responsive spacelift?
• Challenges potential additional benefits of
  responsive space efforts
• Update on major activities to understand
  develop responsive spacelift
• Summary of Operationally Responsive Spacelift
  (ORS) Analysis of Alternatives (AoA)
• Force Application and Launch from CONUS (FALCON)
  program highlights
• Proposed long-term ORS Roadmap

See associated paper for references
25
Long- Term Proposed Roadmap
26
Responsive SpaceliftConclusions

• Responsive space offers lots of opportunities
• All stakeholders that develop use space assets
  should benefit
• Improved space capability potential for
  significantly lower recurring launch costs
• Enabling responsive space means changing how we
  do business
• Moving toward responsive spacelift isnt without
  risks
• Risks can be mitigatedrequires solid acquisition
  programs focused technology development efforts
• ORS AoA suggests evolutionary acquisition
  approach
• Block I Small Launch Vehicle (FALCON program)
• Evolve SLV into Hybrid (RLV-ELV) Operability
  Demonstratorlearn about both reusable
  expendable vehicle operability, production costs,
  etc.
• Block II Operational Hybrid, IOC 2018
• Block III EELV Replacement, IOC beyond 2020

27

• Backups

28
AoA Process 4 Major Steps

• Examine Military Utility (AFSPC/XPY)

2. From Military Utility, derive responsive space
system architectures and launch loads
3. Explore responsive launch options to meet
loads
4. Determine most cost effective launch solution
29
Flight Hardware Production Costs (Comparisons)
20,000
Shuttle Orbiter
Production Level 2
15,000
AoA RLV Production Cost Region
SRM Missiles
Vehicle Cost/Inert Wt (FY'03/Lb)
10,000
Production Level 1
Military Aircraft
5,000
ELVs
Commercial Aircraft
Vehicle Inert Wt (Klb)
30
Achieving RLV Affordability Responsiveness
Processing Labor-Hours
Infrastructure
Integration
Payloads
Spaceport
Post Ops
Industrial Base
Launcher
Net Results Short Timelines Low Cost Low Risk
1st Stage Hybrid RLV Subsystems

• Modern Engines
• Fewer Engines
• High Margins

• Benign Environment
• Modern Self-Contained Actuation

• Batteries only
• No Fuel Cells
• No APUs

• No TPS Required

• No OMS
• Non-toxic RCS

• Canisterized Payloads

• No Crew or long duration missions

439
0
0
42
34
7
2
Crew Support
Propulsion
Mechanical
Electrical
Thermal
OMS/RCS
P/L Integration
STS
5,771
7,764
8,205
10,434
12,482
Result Supported By ORS AoA AFRL/Industry
(RAST SOV Studies)
15,893
18,914
Hybrid turnaround time 26 Serial Hrs
31
Operability Affordability
Order-of-magnitude operability/cost improvements
achievable through a combination of good system
design, improved operating practices, and
application of technology Requires combination
of...
Reduced System Complexity
Elimination of crew compartment, life support
systems, systems for long on-orbit flight
Increased System/Component Life
Increased design margins, modern technologies,
increased component testing
Process / Practices Improvements
Standardized LRUs and repair procedures,
management by metrics
Improved Accessibility, Autonomous Systems
Systems designed for ease of access, RR, and
processing without ground systems
Clean Pad Steamlined Infrastructure
Reduced number of interfaces, automation,
non-toxic or hazardous operations
Payload Canisterization, Standardized Flight Ops
Payload canisters with standard interfaces and
automation of flight planning
Demonstrator program essential to maturate
engineering data metrics, and to validate
design and processing concepts
32
Operationally Responsive Spacelift Demonstrators
with Residual Capabilities
Architecture
Capability Needed
On-demand payload deployment to augment and
quickly replenish constellations to support
crises and combat operations launch to sustain
required constellations for peacetime operations
recoverable, rapid-response transport to,
through, and from space and integrated space
operations mission planning to provide near
real-time automated planning to enable on-demand
execution of space operations POC Capt Alec
Leung, SMC/TD (DSN833-3593)
Technology Status
Engineering Solution
Small Launch Demo (lt1Klb FALCON)

• Demonstrate ORS
• Block I Initial focus on 1 Klb to LEO capability
  (FALCON) freeze 2004
• Medium Launch Ops Demo Follow-On effort includes
  5-10 Klb to LEO hybrid RLV/ELV vehicle freeze
  2007
• Reusable booster Exp. upper stages
• Modular Insertion Stage (MIS)
• Flight Cost 20 M
• Turnaround 24-96 hrs

Enabling Technology
Target Performance Goal
Asses. '04
None required
Not applicable
G
Medium Launch Ops Demo (5 10Klb Hybrid)
18 Mar 2004 (2000)version
33
ORS Developmental RoadmapDemonstrators with
Residual Capabilities
Small Launch Demo Devel. (FALCON)
1Klb Vehicle Ops.
ACQUISITION
IOC
Responsive Space Studies
ORS AoA
Concept Development
Demo Definition
Acquisition Operations Support
Risk Red Design Development
IOC
Demo TFD 11
Fast-Turn Propulsion System
5
5
Integrated RLV Structures
6
6
TECHNOLOGIES
RLV Mission Operations
5
5
Technologies For ORS Block II Demo
Global Flight Control/Termination
5
Ground Ops (Fast integration, fueling, etc)
5
5
POC Capt Alec Leung, SMC/TDEC, DSN833-3593
18 Mar 2004 (2000)version
34
Operationally Responsive Spacelift ORS Block II
5-10Klb Operational Vehicles
Capability Needed
Architecture
On-demand payload deployment to augment and
quickly replenish constellations to support
crises and combat operations launch to sustain
required constellations for peacetime operations
recoverable, rapid-response transport to,
through, and from space and integrated space
operations mission planning to provide near
real-time automated planning to enable on-demand
execution of space operations POC Capt Alec
Leung, SMC/TD (DSN833-3593)
Technology Status
Engineering Solution

• ORS Block II Objective System
• Upgrade Medium Launch Ops Demo
• (10 Klb to LEO hybrid RLV/ELV vehicle) to
  operational status
• Reusable booster Exp. upper stages
• Modular Insertion Stage (MIS)
• Flight Cost 20 M
• Turnaround 24-96 hrs

TFD 2015
18 Mar 2004 (2000)version
35
ORS Developmental Roadmap ORS Block II 5-10Klb
Operational Vehicles 2018 IOC
Resp. Payload Dev
Concept Development
Demo Definition
Acquisition Operations Support
Risk Red Design Development
ACQUISITION
IOC
Ground Ops (Fast integration, fueling, etc)
5
5
Integrated RLV Structures
5
6
LOX/Hydrocarbon Propulsion
5
4
Decision Pt. For Propulsion
LOX/LH2 Propulsion
4
5
Green Upper Stage Propulsion
4
TECHNOLOGIES
Advance RCS/OMS Propulsion
4
Integrated Electric Systems
5
5
Integrated A-GNC/HM/VMS
4
5
Intelligent Maintenance Operations
POC Capt Alec Leung, SMC/TDEC, DSN833-3593
4
4
18 Mar 2004 (2000)version
36
Operationally Responsive Spacelift EELV
Replacement (ORS Block III, gt10Klb)
Capability Needed
Architecture
On-demand payload deployment to augment and
quickly replenish constellations to support
crises and combat operations launch to sustain
required constellations for peacetime operations
recoverable, rapid-response transport to,
through, and from space and integrated space
operations mission planning to provide near
real-time automated planning to enable on-demand
execution of space operations POC Capt Alec
Leung, SMC/TD (DSN833-3593)
Technology Status
Engineering Solution

• ORS Block III (EELV Replacement) Objective System
• Heavy Launch Ops Demo (gt10 Klb to LEO likely
  fully reusable vehicle)
• Tech Freeze Date TBD

POC Capt Alec Leung, SMC/TDEC, DSN833-3593
18 Mar 2004 (2000)version
37
Operationally Responsive Spacecraft
Architecture
Capability Needed
Develop responsive spacecraft with the following
characteristics short acquisition cycles,
low-cost to design and build, rapid turn-on and
initialization. Satellites will augment existing
space capabilities, deliver new space
capabilities, and replenish or replace existing
or planned space capabilities traditionally in
the domain of large spacecraft. POC Capt
Alec Leung, SMC/TD (DSN833-3593)
Technology Status
Engineering Solution
Numerous studies are underway to determine the
best way to develop responsive spacecraft.
Multiple approaches are under consideration,
including TacSat demonstrators and design
studies.
Some capabilities can be generated with existing
technologies, and technologies to fully take
advantage of responsive spacecraft are still
being studied.
Y
18 Mar 2004 (2000)version
38
Questions To Answer ThroughData Mining

• When do we build tactical vs. strategic
  constellations?
• What can we conclude about spacecraft size,
  capability, LCC?
• Do recurring launch costs impact preferred space
  vehicle solution?
• Is on-orbit servicing cost efficient? Is it
  necessary to achieve desired capability?
• Are reusable spacecraft cost efficient?
• What is the value of maneuverability?

Preliminary results not reviewed yet by AoA Core
Team