Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “LAUNCH COMPLEX”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 199 records · Page 11
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2007

50 Years of Electronic Check Out and Launch Systems at Kennedy Space Center

When NASA was created in 1958 one of the elements incorporated into this new agency was the Army Ballistic Missile Agency (ABMA) in Huntsville, AL and its subordinate Missile Firing Laboratory (MFL) in Cape Canaveral. Under NASA, the MFL became the Launch Operations Directorate of the George C. Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, but expanding operations in the build up to Apollo dictated that it be given the status of a full fledged Center in July, 1 962[ 1]. The next year it was renamed the John F. Kennedy Space Center (KS C) after the president whose vision transformed its first decade of operation. The ABMA was under the technical leadership of Dr. Werner Von Braun. The MEL was run by his deputy Dr. Kurt Debus, an electrical engineer whose experience in the field began in the early days of V-2 testing in war time Germany. In 1952 a group led by Debus arrived in Cape Canaveral to begin test launches of the new Redstone missile [2]. During the 50's, The MFL built several launch complexes and tested the Redstone, Jupiter and Jupiter C missiles. This small experienced team of engineers and technicians formed the seed from which has grown the KSC team of today. This article briefly reviews the evolution of the KSC electronic technologies for integration, check-out and launch of space vehicles and payloads during NASA's first 50 years.

Starr, Stanley O.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Apollo 11 Launch

This NASA Kennedy Space Center video release presents the countdown and liftoff of Apollo 11, the first manned journey to the Moon which began at Pad A, Launch Complex 39, Kennedy Space Center, Florida at 9:32 a.m. EDT on July 16, 1969. The crew of Apollo 11 included Commander Neil A. Armstrong, Command Module pilot Michael Collins, and Lunar Module pilot Edwin E. Aldrin, Jr. Several different camera viewpoints of the spacecraft as well as over-head shots of the Kennedy launch control center are presented prior to liftoff. Other footage includes shots of President Lyndon B. Johnson and his wife among the Florida audience viewing liftoff. During the countdown several audio updates from Kennedy launch control are presented as to the status of pre-launch testing and system readiness. Captivating footage from liftoff to the spacecraft nearing the outer Earth atmosphere is shown as the video ends with Neil Armstrong's confirmation of engine skirt separation and launch escape tower separation from the spacecraft.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2019

Software Development and Testing Support for the Avionics Systems Telemetry Tool Suite

The Customer Avionics Interface Development and Analysis (CAIDA) team provides modeling and simulation software for the verification of the Launch Control System (LCS). In late 2015, CAIDA began development of the Data Exchange Message (DEM) Generator (DEMGen) and development of the DEM Modifier (DEMMod) in early 2017. DEMGen is able to mimic the telemetry streams normally sent by different simulators allowing increased user control and more telemetry instances. DEMMod takes in a telemetry stream and allows the modification of entire packets or simple measurement values. Together, these tools provide the capabilities to simulate and test complex launch scenarios to ensure LCS is fully prepared for any anomalous behavior during an actual launch. In early 2018, CAIDA began a new project called the CAIDA Advanced Telemetry Tool (CATT), which combined the code and documentation of DEMGen and DEMMod. CATT now allows the integration of new tools into a singular program providing compact and easy access. In the fall of 2018, the author worked with another intern, Antonio Negron, to develop several new CATT features along with proper documentation and unit testing. In the following spring, the author continued that work by integrating the features into CATT, solidifying the documentation, and expanding the testing to cover more cases. The outcome of both semesters includes an inspection engine for automated packet analysis, a packet-masking feature, and a multi-measurement sequencing feature.

Thomas, Taylor Walter↗
NASA NTRS2008

Designing the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle Upper Stage Element and Integrating the Stack at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center

Fielding an integrated launch vehicle system entails many challenges, not the least of which is the fact that it has been over 30 years since the United States has developed a human-rated vehicle - the venerable Space Shuttle. Over time, whole generations of rocket scientists have passed through the aerospace community without the opportunity to perform such exacting, demanding, and rewarding work. However, with almost 50 years of experience leading the design, development, and end-to-end systems engineering and integration of complex launch vehicles, NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center offers the in-house talent - both junior- and senior-level personnel - to shape a new national asset to meet the requirements for safe, reliable, and affordable space exploration solutions.' These personnel are housed primarily in Marshall's Engineering Directorate and are matrixed into the programs and projects that reside at the rocket center. Fortunately, many Apollo era and Shuttle engineers, as well as those who gained valuable hands-on experience in the 1990s by conducting technology demonstrator projects such as the Delta-Clipper Experimental Advanced, X-33, X-34, and X-37, as well as the short-lived Orbital Space Plane, work closely with industry partners to advance the nation's strategic capability for human access to space. Currently, only three spacefaring nations have this distinction, including the United States, Russia, and, more recently, China. The U.S. National Space Policy of2006 directs that NASA provide the means to travel to space, and the NASA Appropriations Act of2005 provided the initial funding to begin in earnest to replace the Shuttle after the International Space Station construction is complete in 20 IO? These and other strategic goals and objectives are documented in NASA's 2006 Strategic Plan.3 In 2005, a team of NASA aerospace experts conducted the Exploration Systems Architecture Study, which recommended a two-vehicle approach to America's next space transportation system for missions to the International Space Station in the next decade and to explore the Moon and establish an outpost around the 2020 timeframe.4 Based on this extensive study, NASA selected the Ares I crew launch vehicle configuration and the heavy-lift Ares V cargo launch vehicle (fig 1). This paper will give an overview of NASA's approach to integrating the Ares I vehicle stack using capabilities and assets that are resident in Marshall's Engineering Directorate, working in partnership with other NASA Centers and the U.S. aerospace industry. It also will provide top-level details on the progress of the in-house design of the Ares I vehicle's upper stage element.

Lyles, Garry↗
NASA NTRS2008

Designing the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle Upper Stage Element and Integrating the Stack at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center

Fielding an integrated launch vehicle system entails many challenges, not the least of which is the fact that it has been over 30 years since the United States has developed a human-rated vehicle - the venerable Space Shuttle. Over time, whole generations of rocket scientists have passed through the aerospace community without the opportunity to perform such exacting, demanding, and rewarding work. However, with almost 50 years of experience leading the design, development, and end-to-end systems engineering and integration of complex launch vehicles, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA's) Marshall Space Flight Center offers the in-house talent - both junior- and senior-level personnel - to shape a new national asset to meet the requirements for safe, reliable, and affordable space exploration solutions. The technical personnel are housed primarily in Marshall's Engineering Directorate and are matrixed into the programs and projects that reside at the rocket center. Fortunately, many Apollo-era and Shuttle engineers, as well as those who gained valuable hands-on experience in the 1990s by conducting technology demonstrator projects such as the Delta-Clipper Experimental Advanced, X-33, X-34, and X-37, as well as the short-lived Orbital Space Plane, work closely with industry partners to advance the nation's strategic capability for human access to space. The Ares Projects Office, resident at Marshall, is managing the design and development of America's new space fleet, including the Ares I, which will loft the Orion crew capsule for its first test flight in the 2013 timeframe, as well as the heavy-lift Ares V, which will round out the capability to leave low-Earth orbit once again, when it delivers the Altair lunar lander to orbit late next decade. This paper provides information about the approach to integrating the Ares I stack and designing the upper stage in house, using unique facilities and an expert workforce to revitalize the nation's space exploration resources.

Otte, Neil E.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Performance Evaluation of the NASA/KSC Transmission System

NASA-KSC currently uses three bridged 100-Mbps FDDI segments as its backbone for data traffic. The FDDI Transmission System (FTXS) connects the KSC industrial area, KSC launch complex 39 area, and the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. The report presents a performance modeling study of the FTXS and the proposed ATM Transmission System (ATXS). The focus of the study is on performance of MPEG video transmission on these networks. Commercial modeling tools - the CACI Predictor and Comnet tools - were used. In addition, custom software tools were developed to characterize conversation pairs in Sniffer trace (capture) files to use as input to these tools. A baseline study of both non-launch and launch day data traffic on the FTXS is presented. MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 video traffic was characterized and the shaping of it evaluated. It is shown that the characteristics of a video stream has a direct effect on its performance in a network. It is also shown that shaping of video streams is necessary to prevent overflow losses and resulting poor video quality. The developed models can be used to predict when the existing FTXS will 'run out of room' and for optimizing the parameters of ATM links used for transmission of MPEG video. Future work with these models can provide useful input and validation to set-top box projects within the Advanced Networks Development group in NASA-KSC Development Engineering.

Christensen, Kenneth J.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Orion Launch Abort System Performance on Exploration Flight Test 1

This paper will present an overview of the flight test objectives and performance of the Orion Launch Abort System during Exploration Flight Test-1. Exploration Flight Test-1, the first flight test of the Orion spacecraft, was managed and led by the Orion prime contractor, Lockheed Martin, and launched atop a United Launch Alliance Delta IV Heavy rocket. This flight test was a two-orbit, high-apogee, high-energy entry, low-inclination test mission used to validate and test systems critical to crew safety. This test included the first flight test of the Launch Abort System preforming Orion nominal flight mission critical objectives. NASA is currently designing and testing the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). Orion will serve as NASA's new exploration vehicle to carry astronauts to deep space destinations and safely return them to earth. The Orion spacecraft is composed of four main elements: the Launch Abort System, the Crew Module, the Service Module, and the Spacecraft Adapter (Fig. 1). The Launch Abort System (LAS) provides two functions; during nominal launches, the LAS provides protection for the Crew Module from atmospheric loads and heating during first stage flight and during emergencies provides a reliable abort capability for aborts that occur within the atmosphere. The Orion Launch Abort System (LAS) consists of an Abort Motor to provide the abort separation from the Launch Vehicle, an Attitude Control Motor to provide attitude and rate control, and a Jettison Motor for crew module to LAS separation (Fig. 2). The jettison motor is used during a nominal launch to separate the LAS from the Launch Vehicle (LV) early in the flight of the second stage when it is no longer needed for aborts and at the end of an LAS abort sequence to enable deployment of the crew module's Landing Recovery System. The LAS also provides a Boost Protective Cover fairing that shields the crew module from debris and the aero-thermal environment during ascent. Although the Orion Program has tested a number of the critical systems of the Orion spacecraft on the ground, the launch environment cannot be replicated completely on Earth. A number of flight tests have been conducted and are planned to demonstrate the performance and enable certification of the Orion Spacecraft. Exploration Flight Test 1, the first flight test of the Orion spacecraft, was successfully flown on December 5, 2014 from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station's Space Launch Complex 37. Orion's first flight was a two-orbit, high-apogee, high-energy entry, low-inclination test mission used to validate and test systems critical to crew safety, such as heat shield performance, separation events, avionics and software performance, attitude control and guidance, parachute deployment and recovery operations. One of the key separation events tested during this flight was the nominal jettison of the LAS. Data from this flight will be used to verify the function of the jettison motor to separate the Launch Abort System from the crew module so it can continue on with the mission. The LAS nominal jettison event on Exploration Flight Test 1 occurred at six minutes and twenty seconds after liftoff (See Fig. 3). The abort motor and attitude control motors were inert for Exploration Flight Test 1, since the mission did not require abort capabilities. A suite of developmental flight instrumentation was included on the flight test to provide data on spacecraft subsystems and separation events. This paper will focus on the flight test objectives and performance of the LAS during ascent and nominal jettison. Selected LAS subsystem flight test data will be presented and discussed in the paper. Exploration Flight Test -1 will provide critical data that will enable engineering to improve Orion's design and reduce risk for the astronauts it will protect as NASA continues to move forward on its human journey to Mars. The lessons learned from Exploration Flight Test 1 and the other Flight Test Vehicles will certainly contribute to the vehicle architecture of a human-rated space launch vehicle.

McCauley, R.↗
NASA NTRS1999

[X-33 Launch and Landing Facilities]

Sverdrup is responsible for the design, construction and activation of the X-33 Flight Operations Center at Edwards Air Force Base and for providing assistance in activating the X-33 Landing Sites. The past year has seen the completion of the construction of the X-33 Flight Operations Center. Construction was completed in December of 1998, with systems checkout and testing continuing into early 1999. Integration of the site with LMCMS and other partner-supplied systems began in December and will continue through rollout of the X-33 vehicle. The construction of the X-33 Launch Complex has been performed within the Edwards AFB and Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) systems with no substantial interference to either parties. A high level of cooperation exists between Sverdrup, Edwards AFB, and the Air Force Research Laboratory in the areas of access, training, security, and operations. There have been no conflicts between programs that have not been accommodated. Development of the landing sites is progressing with many of the modifications necessary underway. GSE commitments are in place. The personnel training program developed by Sverdrup for persons entering the launch site construction areas, was modified by Lockheed for use in training and access control to the Center during flight operations to maximize safety and minimize intrusion upon the environment. Close cooperation between Sverdrup, the construction workers, and the environmental biologist permitted construction to proceed in a timely fashion without harm to the wildlife, in particular, the Desert Tortoise. Although the entire X-33 site encompasses approximately 50 acres including a new access road, only the areas directly impacted by the construction were cleared to minimize the impact on the environment. A total of about 30 acres was actually disturbed.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1989

Earth orbital operations supporting manned interplanetary missions

The orbital operations required to accumulate, assemble, test, verify, maintain, and launch complex manned space systems on interplanetary missions from earth orbit are as vital as the flight hardware itself. Vast numbers of orbital crew are neither necessary nor desirable for accomplishing the required tasks. A suite of robotic techniques under human supervisory control, relying on sensors, software and manipulators either currently emergent or already applied in terrestrial settings, can make the job tractable. The mission vehicle becomes largely self-assembling, using its own rigid aerobrake as a work platform. The Space Station, having been used as a laboratory testbed and to house an assembly crew of four, is not dominated by the process. A feasible development schedule, if begun soon, could emplace orbital support technologies for exploration missions in time for a 2004 first interplanetary launch.

Sherwood, Brent↗
NASA NTRS2009

Lift-Off Acoustics Predictions for the Ares I Launch Pad

The vibroacoustic environment associated with large launch vehicles is of concern for the integrity of the launch complex and the vehicle itself. A large body of knowledge of this environment was developed during the early years of the missile and space flight, particularly during the Apollo program. Reference 1, prepared by Sutherland and others during that era, contains much of that knowledge. A specific process for predicting noise on and around the vehicle itself and the launcher is presented in Reference 2, prepared by Eldred, et al. Recent reviews of the process, e.g., Reference 3, have suggested some revised details but generally support the methodology in Reference 2.

Launch Pad↗
NASA NTRS2024

Helium Conservation by Diffusion Limited Purging of Liquid Hydrogen Tanks

Recently, the new 1.2-million-gallon liquid hydrogen (LH 2 ) storage tank at the Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39 was purged, replacing nitrogen with helium, using a piston purge process. This purging approach had been used on Space Shuttle External Tanks (ET) in the past, but not on one of the large LH 2 tanks. The result was a huge success, potentially saving more than 1 million cubic feet of helium and significant labor. To better understand this result, a diffusion-based purge model was developed. The model predictions accurately match the helium concentration data, providing understanding of the helium savings and suggesting how to better optimize the purging of this large tank for future operations. The model was then applied to the piston purging of the Space Shuttle ETs, showing that these purges were not optimal, but that the amount of wasted helium was not excessive and that additional helium might have been saved by small changes to the process. The Space Shuttle Program (SSP) has ended, but these results are applicable to the purging of future large cylindrical LH 2 tanks. Finally, data have been obtained on inerting the Space Launch System (SLS) Core Stage (CS) LH 2 tank, replacing hydrogen with helium after an aborted launch. This is a more complicated case, but the model predicts that substantial helium might be saved by modifying the current purging process.

Helium Conservation↗
NASA NTRS2018

NASA: 60 Years and Counting...

Sputnik launched on 4 Oct 1057. On July 29, 1958, Eisenhower signed the National Aeronautics and Space Act, the creation of NASA. The Soviets launched the first human into orbit, Yuri Gagarin, on April 12, 1961. On 5 May 1961, Alan Shepard's Freedom 7 Mercury capsule lifted off at 9:34 a.m. from Launch Complex 5 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, and flew a suborbital trajectory lasting 15 minutes and 22 seconds, America's first man in space. On 25 May 1961, Kennedy delivered a speech to a joint session of Congress. In that speech, he stated "I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth." The rest, as they say, is history. Project Mercury, the first U.S. program to put humans in space, made 25 flights, six of which carried astronauts between 1961 and 1963. The Gemini program primarily tested equipment and mission procedures and trained astronauts and ground crews for future Apollo missions to the Moon. Exactly eight years, one month and 26 days after President Kennedy challenged Americans to reach for the Moon, Project Apollo landed the first humans on the lunar surface and returned them safely to Earth. In 1973, Skylab expeditions paved the way for the International Space Station. Over 30 years, NASA's space shuttle fleet, ”Columbia, Challenger, Discovery, Atlantis and Endeavour,” flew 135 missions and carried 355 different people to space. The space shuttle carried people into orbit repeatedly; launched, recovered and repaired satellites; conducted cutting-edge research; and built the largest structure in space, the International Space Station. Tragically, NASA lost two crews of seven in the 1986 Challenger accident and the 2003 Columbia accident. The International Space Station is a model for global cooperation and scientific advancements that is enabling growth of private industry in low-Earth orbit and development of new technologies to advance human space exploration. Built between 1998 and 2011, the space station has housed humans continuously since Nov. 2, 2000. NASA has contracted with commercial companies SpaceX, Orbital ATK, and Sierra Nevada Corporation to deliver science investigations, cargo, and supplies to the crews living in space, and soon Boeing and SpaceX will transport astronauts to and from the station. Today, NASA is working on many fronts to advance man's presence in space. NASA's Exploration Campaign will establish U.S. preeminence in cislunar space through the operations and the deployment of a U.S.-led Lunar Orbital Platform-Gateway (LOPG). Together with the Orion and SLS Programs, the LOPG is central to advancing and sustaining human space exploration goals, and is the unifying single stepping off point for human cislunar operations, lunar surface access and missions to Mars. As one might expect, EMC for all this activity is challenging, to say the least. In the next half-hour or so, I will talk about some of those challenges and how the different programs are meeting them.

Scully, Bob↗
NASA NTRS2010

Operational Lessons Learned from the Ares I-X Flight Test

The Ares I-X flight test, launched in 2009, is the first test of the Ares I crew launch vehicle. This development flight test evaluated the flight dynamics, roll control, and separation events, but also provided early insights into logistical, stacking, launch, and recovery operations for Ares I. Operational lessons will be especially important for NASA as the agency makes the transition from the Space Shuttle to the Constellation Program, which is designed to be less labor-intensive. The mission team itself comprised only 700 individuals over the life of the project compared to the thousands involved in Shuttle and Apollo missions; while missions to and beyond low-Earth orbit obviously will require additional personnel, this lean approach will serve as a model for future Constellation missions. To prepare for Ares I-X, vehicle stacking and launch infrastructure had to be modified at Kennedy Space Center's Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) as well as Launch Complex (LC) 39B. In the VAB, several platforms and other structures designed for the Shuttle s configuration had to be removed to accommodate the in-line, much taller Ares I-X. Vehicle preparation activities resulted in delays, but also in lessons learned for ground operations personnel, including hardware deliveries, cable routing, transferred work and custodial paperwork. Ares I-X also proved to be a resource challenge, as individuals and ground service equipment (GSE) supporting the mission also were required for Shuttle or Atlas V operations at LC 40/41 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. At LC 39B, several Shuttle-specific access arms were removed and others were added to accommodate the in-line Ares vehicle. Ground command, control, and communication (GC3) hardware was incorporated into the Mobile Launcher Platform (MLP). The lightning protection system at LC 39B was replaced by a trio of 600-foot-tall towers connected by a catenary wire to account for the much greater height of the vehicle. Like Shuttle, Ares I-X will be stacked on a MLP and rolled out to the pad on a Saturn-era crawler-transporter. While Ares I-X was only held in place by the four hold-down posts on its aft skirt during rollout, a new vehicle stabilization system (VSS) attached to the vertical service structure kept the vehicle from undue swaying prior to launch at the pad, LC 39B. Following the launch, the flight test vehicle first stage was recovered with the aid of new parachutes resized to accommodate the five-segment-long first stage, which had a much greater length and mass than the Shuttle s reusable solid rocket boosters. After splashdown, recovery divers exercised extra care when handling the first stage to ensure that the flight data recorders in the fifth segment simulator were not damaged by exposure to sea water. The data recovered from the Ares I-X flight test will be very valuable in verifying the predicted environments and models used to design the vehicle. Lessons learned from Ares I-X will be shared with the Ares Projects through written and verbal reports and through integration of mission team members into the Project workforce.

Davis, Stephan R.↗
NASA NTRS1962

VISUAL CONTROL OF RENDEZVOUS

Space rendezvous involving human occupants will be required in many phases of space flight. In order that rendezvous capability be concurrent with other phases of manned space flight to insure that such tasks as the rotation and addition of crews for manned space station, supply of stations and launching complexes for deep-space probes, and the emergency rescue of personnel may be carried out, it is desirable to determine the ability of a human pilot to control the rendezvous maneuver. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration has conducted a study program to determine vehicle requirements and control techniques for a number of proposed methods for performing piloted space rendezvous. The final step in each phase of the rendezvous study program has been a simulation of the man-machine combination to test its feasibility. Initially, an analytical study was conducted to determine a range of conditions that would exist at the beginning of the terminal phase of rendezvous (ref. 1). Piloted systems were investigated for rendezvous control using these initial conditions. One such study of piloted rendezvous in which all the required control information was displayed to the simulator pilot on instruments is presented in reference 2. While the control of the rendezvous maneuver by use of the instrument display was shown to be feasible, the sufficiently accurate measurement of the necessary information to operate the instrument was realized to be a difficult problem. Consideration was therefore given to the possibility of maneuvering range and range rate required for the control of the rendezvous from visual sightings made during the initial control application. To provide this capability, an analytical study was made. This analytical study, presented in reference 3, derived three techniques for obtaining range and range rate visually and conducted a simplified preliminary situation to test the three analytical techniques. The study reported herein is a continuation of the simulation work begun in reference 3, and is aimed at determining the ability of a pilot to use visual information to reduce or eliminate the need for some or all of the data that would normally be displayed on instruments.

Rendezvous↗