Engineering topics
Publications and source records attributed to Chase, R. L..
Potential mission opportunities outlined and illustrated are missile defense; space defense; command, control, and communications; defense suppression; force support; space transportation; and orbital support.
A workshop panel defined missions that would require the potential use of very large, advanced space systems, and ranked them on the basis of need from both a civilian and military perspective. The panel also pointed out those that would need advanced propulsion technology. Surveillance, communications, and defense were given the highest priority, followed by command and control, orbital support, terrestrial support, and space science.
A representative set of space systems, functions, and missions for NASA and DoD from which launch vehicle requirements and characteristics was established as well as a set of air-breathing launch vehicles based on graduated technology capabilities corresponding to increasingly higher staging Mach numbers. The utility of the air-breathing launch vehicle candidates based on lift-off weight, performance, technology needs, and risk was assessed and costs were compared to alternative concepts. The results indicate that a fully reusable launch vehicle, whether two stage or one stage, could potentially reduce the cost per flight 60-80% compared to that for a partially reusable vehicle but would require advances in thermal protection system technology. A two-stage-to-orbit, parallel-lift vehicle with an air-breathing booster would cost approximately the same as a single-stage-to-orbit vehicle, but the former would have greater flexibility and a significantly reduced developmental risk. A twin-booster, subsonic-staged, parallel-lift vehicle represents the lowest system cost and developmental risk. However, if a large supersonic turbojet engine in the 350,000-N thrust class were available, supersonic staging would be preferred, and the investment in development would be returned in reduced program cost.
A method of conducting a technology readiness assessment was developed. It uses existing OAST technology readiness and risk criteria to define a technology readiness factor that considers both the required gain in technology readiness level to achieved technology readiness plus the degree of effort associated with achieving the gain. The results indicate that Solar Electric Propulsion is preferred based on technology readiness criteria. Both Solar Sail and Solar Electric Propulsion have a high level of transfer potential for future NASA missions, and each has considerable technology spillover for non-NASA applications.
This paper presents the results of a study to compare space-storable with earth-storable spacecraft propulsion systems, space-storable with solid kick stages, and several space-storable development options on the basis of benefits received for cost expenditures required. The results show that, for a launch vehicle with performance less than that of Shuttle/Centaur, space-storable spacecraft propulsion offers an incremental benefit/cost ratio between 1.0 and 5.5 when compared to earth-storable systems for three of the four missions considered. In the case of VOIR 83, positive benefits were apparent only for a specific launch vehicle-spacecraft propulsion combination. A space-storable propulsion system operating at thrust of 600 lbf, 355 units of specific impulse, and with blowdown pressurization, represents the best choice for the JO 81 mission on a Titan/Centaur if only spacecraft propulsion modifications are considered. For still higher performance, a new solid-propellant kick stage with space-storable spacecraft propulsion is preferred over a system which uses space-storable propellants for both the kick stage and the spacecraft system.