Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “LAUNCHING PAD”

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 289 records · Page 16
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1990

Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Ulysses Mission (Tier 2)

This Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) addresses the environmental impacts which may be caused by the preparation and operation of the Ulysses spacecraft, including its planned launch on the Space Transportation System (STS) Shuttle and the alternative of canceling further work on the mission. The launch configuration will use the STS/Inertial Upper Stage (IUS)/Payload Assist Module-Special(PAM-S) combination. The Tier 1 EIS included a delay alternative which considered the Titan 4 launch vehicle as an alternative booster stage for launch in 1991 or later. However, the U.S. Air Force, which procures the Titan 4 for NASA, could not provide a Titan 4 vehicle for the 1991 launch opportunity because of high priority Department of Defense requirements. The only expected environmental effects of the proposed action are associated with normal Shuttle launch operations. These impacts are limited largely to the near-field at the launch pad, except for temporary stratospheric ozone effects during launch and occasional sonic boom effects near the landing site. These effects have been judged insufficient to preclude Shuttle launches. In the event of (1) an accident during launch, or (2) reentry of the spacecraft from earth orbit, there are potential adverse health and environmental effects associated with the possible release of plutonium dioxide from the spacecraft's radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTG). The potential effects considered in this EIS include risks of air and water quality impacts, local land area contamination, adverse health and safety impacts, the disturbance of biotic resources, impacts on wetland areas or areas containing historical sites, and socioeconomic impacts. Intensive analysis of the possible accidents associated with the proposed action are underway and preliminary results indicate small health or environmental risks. The results of a Final Safety Analysis Report will be available for inclusion into the final EIS.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1988

Draft environmental impact statement for the Galileo Mission (Tier 2)

This Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) addresses the environmental impacts which may be caused by the preparation and operation of the Galileo spacecraft, including its planned launch on the Space Transportation System (STS) Shuttle and the alternative of canceling further work on the mission. The launch configuration will use the STS/Inertial Upper Stage (IUS)/Payload Assist Module-Special (PAM-S) combination. The Tier 1 EIS included a delay alternative which considered the Titan 4 launch vehicle as an alternative booster stage for launch in 1991 or later. However, the U.S. Air Force, which procures the Titan 4 for NASA, could not provide a Titan 4 vehicle for the 1991 launch opportunity because of high priority Department of Defense requirements. The only expected environmental effects of the proposed action are associated with normal Shuttle launch operations. These impacts are limited largely to the near-field at the launch pad, except for temporary stratospheric ozone effects during launch and occasional sonic boom effects near the landing site. These effects have been judged insufficient to preclude Shuttle launches. In the event of: (1) an accident during launch, or (2) reentry of the spacecraft from earth orbit, there are potential adverse health and environmental effects associated with the possible release of plutonium dioxide from the spacecraft's radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTG).

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1990

Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Ulysses Mission (Tier 2)

This Final (Tier 2) Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) addresses the environmental impacts which may be caused by implementation of the Ulysses mission, a space flight mission to observe the polar regions of the Sun. The proposed action is completion of preparation and operation of the Ulysses spacecraft, including its planned launch at the earliest available launch opportunity on the Space Transportation System (STS) Shuttle in October 1990 or in the backup opportunity in November 1991. The alternative is canceling further work on the mission. The Tier 1 EIS included a delay alternative which considered the Titan 4 launch vehicle as an alternative booster stage for launch in 1991 or later. This alternative was further evaluated and eliminated from consideration when, in November 1988, the U.S. Air Force, which procures the Titan 4, notified that it could not provide a Titan 4 vehicle for the 1991 launch opportunity because of high priority Department of Defense requirements. The Titan 4 launch vehicle is no longer a feasible alternative to the STS/Inertial Upper Stage (IUS)/Payload Assist Module-Special (PAM-S) for the November 1991 launch opportunity. The only expected environment effects of the proposed action are associated with normal launch vehicle operation and are treated elsewhere. The environmental impacts of normal Shuttle launches were addressed in existing NEPA documentation and are briefly summarized. These impacts are limited largely to the near-field at the launch pad, except for temporary stratospheric ozone effects during launch and occasional sonic boom effects near the landing site. These effects were judged insufficient to preclude Shuttle launches. There could also be environmental impacts associated with the accidental release of radiological material during launch, deployment, or interplanetary trajectory injection of the Ulysses spacecraft. Intensive analysis indicates that the probability of release is small. There are no environmental impacts in the no-action alternative; however, the U.S. Government and the European Space Agency would suffer adverse fiscal and programmatic impacts if this alternative were adopted. The scientific benefits of the mission would be delayed and possibly lost. There could be significant impacts on the ability of the U.S. to negotiate international agreements for cooperative space activities.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1988

National Space Transportation System Reference. Volume 2: Operations

An overview of the Space Transportation System is presented in which aspects of the program operations are discussed. The various mission preparation and prelaunch operations are described including astronaut selection and training, Space Shuttle processing, Space Shuttle integration and rollout, Complex 39 launch pad facilities, and Space Shuttle cargo processing. Also, launch and flight operations and space tracking and data acquisition are described along with the mission control and payload operations control center. In addition, landing, postlanding, and solid rocket booster retrieval operations are summarized. Space Shuttle program management is described and Space Shuttle mission summaries and chronologies are presented. A glossary of acronyms and abbreviations are provided.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1993

Algorithm Aligns Gyrocompass In Twisting And Swaying Vehicle

Algorithm proposed for use with strapdown inertial sensors synthesizes gyrocompass and repeatedly refines alignment of synthetic gyrocompass to maintain accuracy until time of departure. In original application, inertial sensors located in spacecraft twisting and swaying in wind on launching pad, and time of departure is time of launch. Also possible to devise terrestrial version of algorithm for use in aircraft, ground vehicle, or vessel. Algorithm includes local-level-navigator, coarse-alignment, and fine-alignment subalgorithms.

Reddy, Narotham S.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Delta II/Geotail Launch with Pre-Launch Activities

The footage contains scenes from both the launch pad and the Mission Directors Center. Pre-launch activities include fueling of both the 1st and 2nd stages of the engines and 2nd stage helium/nitrogen pressurization. The launch has a short window of 5 minutes.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2010

Human Factors Vehicle Displacement Analysis: Engineering In Motion

While positioned on the launch pad at the Kennedy Space Center, tall stacked launch vehicles are exposed to the natural environment. Varying directional winds and vortex shedding causes the vehicle to sway in an oscillating motion. The Human Factors team recognizes that vehicle sway may hinder ground crew operation, impact the ground system designs, and ultimately affect launch availability . The objective of this study is to physically simulate predicted oscillation envelopes identified by analysis. and conduct a Human Factors Analysis to assess the ability to carry out essential Upper Stage (US) ground operator tasks based on predicted vehicle motion.

Atencio, Laura Ashley↗
NASA NTRS2011

Brief, Why the Launch Equipment Test Facility Needs a Laser Tracker

The NASA Kennedy Space Center Launch Equipment Test Facility (LETF) supports a wide spectrum of testing and development activities. This capability was originally established in the 1970's to allow full-scale qualification of Space Shuttle umbilicals and T-O release mechanisms. The LETF has leveraged these unique test capabilities to evolve into a versatile test and development area that supports the entire spectrum of operational programs at KSC. These capabilities are historically Aerospace related, but can certainly can be adapted for other industries. One of the more unique test fixtures is the Vehicle Motion Simulator or the VMS. The VMS simulates all of the motions that a launch vehicle will experience from the time of its roll-out to the launch pad, through roughly the first X second of launch. The VMS enables the development and qualification testing of umbilical systems in both pre-launch and launch environments. The VMS can be used to verify operations procedures, clearances, disconnect systems performance &margins, and vehicle loads through processing flow motion excursions.

Yue, Shiu H.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Development of Space Shuttle Rescue and Recovery Operations

As the first Space Shuttle launch was still in our future, many from NASA, the Department of Defense (DoD) and NASA contractors were busy planning for not only a nominal launch and return, but contingency operations at the launch pad and landing sites. Prior to the first launch, detailed coordination, planning and simulations were conducted at all three locations and internal rescue procedures were taught at Kennedy Space Center (KSC). Later in the Program, the Transoceanic Abort Landing (TAL) sites were added in Europe and Africa. For the 51L mission a new TAL site was brought on line in Morocco. However, upon launch, the Shuttle Program experienced it's first lost. During the following months a complete review of all contingency operations (launch and landing) was completed. Many enhancements were made based on the reviews following. A Mode VIII water rescue was developed for NASA by the DoD before the STS-26 launch. Different concepts were explored and being debated by NASA. Training of the contingency forces was required before final decisions were made forcing the teaching of two different sets of procedures. To assist with training, a video was developed for the fire/crash/rescue personnel. This accompanied the detailed extraction procedures that were developed by a combination of KSC and DoD firemen. Training for the fire/crash/rescue personnel at Vandenberg AFB was also being planned before the accident happen. The fire/crash/rescue mockup that was being built at Chanute AFB was diverted to Edwards AFB. Educational Objectives: With the emphasis on Commercial Crew Programs for Space flight it is important that all involved understand what is required to prepare for contingencies. Cost effective means of being prepared for contingencies are needed. Questions: 1. When should planning for nominal and contingency operations begin? 2. What type of training aids are needed for contingency operations? 3. Who were the major contributors to Shuttle contingency operations?

Chandler, Michael↗
NASA NTRS2015

Superhydrophobic Post Treatment and Coating Extenders for Improved Asset Sustainability

Launch structures, hardware, and ground support equipment, at NASA's John F. Kennedy Space Center in Florida, are exposed to a highly corrosive natural coastal marine environment. In addition, during launches, rocket exhaust deposition is also highly corrosive. Superhydrophobic coatings are being considered for additional corrosion protection on existing structures to enhance corrosion resistance and add an additional layer of protection against harsh environmental elements. These coatings have come into their own recently, and are now being investigated as corrosion protective coatings due to their water repelling capability. These coatings can be used on existing coatings, newly coated materials, or used on bare substrates. The coatings are not suitable for permanent corrosion protection, but can be used where additional corrosion control is desired or only when temporary corrosion control is needed, such as in hardware sitting on a launch pad for 30-45 days prior to a launch. In this study, superhydrophobic coatings were applied on various coated and uncoated substrates and exposed to the spaceport environment for various times up to 60 days. This paper highlights the current results of the superhydrophobic coatings performance evaluated by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, and contact angle measurements.

Coating↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

In-situ Lunar Launch and Landing Pad Construction with Regolith-Thermoset Polymer Composite Materials

Lunar launch and landing pads are necessary to mitigate risks to lander/ascent vehicles and surrounding surface assets from rocket plume ejected regolith. The current state of the art of landing and launching from the lunar surface is to land/launch on unprepared regolith surfaces. Significant risks exist for the larger landers proposed for the Artemis Program due to higher thrust levels leading to increased ejecta and cratering, presence of co-located assets in the ejecta path, and potential strict surface levelness requirements for tall vehicles.

Launch Pad↗
NASA NTRS2003

Scale Model Experiments on Sound Propagation From a Mach 2.5 Cold Nitrogen Jet Flowing Through a Rigid-Walled Duct With a J-Deflector

The Launch Systems Testbed (LST) represents the evolution of vibroacoustics research and development work performed at NASA John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC) over the last 15 years. The LST is located at the Launch Equipment Test Facility (LETF) in the KSC industrial complex. The LETF is operated by Sierra Lobo, Inc., as a member of University-Affiliated Technology Development Contract (USTDC) to KSC Spaceport and Engineering and Technology Directorate (YA), with ASRC Aerospace Corporation as a the prime contractor. Trajectory Simulation Mechanism (TSM) is a major component of the LST, developed specifically to simulate nonstationary acoustic loads on launch pad structures, vehicles, and payloads. TSM enhances the capabilities within LST for simulating launch environments of future vehicles. The scaled launch environments will be used to predict the full-scale launch environment via an appropriate scaling procedure. Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) has tasked NASA KSC to perform a basic technology test program in support of developing a low-cost clean pad (incorporating passive mitigation techniques) for future launch vehicles. The overall goal of the program is to develop innovative launch exhaust management systems, which effectively reduce launch acoustic environment with innovative duct designs, while eliminating traditional sound suppression water systems. Passive techniques, such as nontraditional duct geometries, resonators, and diffusers, etc., will be investigated. The overall goals are to advance innovative concepts for a clean pad while developing ideas to reduce transmitted sound via investigation and modeling of jet exhaust acoustic and flow field characteristics. The series of tests outlined in this report represent baseline tests and are geared towards defining the acoustic load environment on the TSM pad for open and closed duct configurations. This report summarizes the cold jet acoustic testing for Mach 2.5 supersonic nitrogen jet issuing from a nozzle with 1-inch exit diameter. Acoustic data, including spectral sound power and Overall Sound Pressure Level (OASPL), are obtained both for a free jet and with the jet flowing through a rigid-walled duct with a J-deflector. The relative performance of closed duct and open duct is evaluated. The results show that the closed duct is superior to the partially open duct, and results in about 3-decibel (dB) noise reduction (near the duct axis) relative to the free jet. The location of the nozzle exit plane (NEP) relative to the duct inlet plane (DIP) has a significant effect on the acoustic field. The results suggest that the location of NEP at 10 inches above the DIP results in reduced acoustic loads relative to 5 inches above the duct inlet and 1 inch into the duct inlet.

Kandula, Max↗
NASA NTRS1985

STS-51G Mission Highlights Resource Tape

The STS-51G flight crew, Commander Daniel C. Brandenstein, Pilot John O. Creighton, Mission Specialists Shannon W. Lucid, John M. Fabian, and Steven R Nagel, and Payload Specialists Patrick, Baudry, and Sultan Salman Al-Saud are seen performing pre-launch activities such as eating of the traditional breakfast, ride out to the launch pad, and crew suit-up for an early morning launch. Also, included are various panoramic views of Discovery on the pad. The main objective of this mission is to deploy three communication satellites. The satellites being deployed are MORE LOS-A, for Mexico; ARABSAT-A, for the Arab Satellite Communications Organization; and TELSTAR-3D, for AT&T. The crew also retrieve the SPARTAN-1 satellite. Scenes include the crew in the mess deck via video link with Mission Control Center in celebration of the 100th American in space. Al-Saud also spoke with his father in Saudi Arabia via video link. Views of certain experiments are also seen. Al-Saud is seen conducting the postural experiment, and Baudry is seen conducting the equilibrium experiments. Panoramic views of the Hawaiian Island Archipelago, and Wadi Habawnah, Saudi Arabia are also visible from the shuttle. Live footage ends with the re-entry of the vehicle into the Earth's Atmosphere, an early morning touchdown at Edwards Air Force Base and crew departure from the craft.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1999

STS-103 Discovery on Pad 39B

Live footage of the fully assembled Discovery Orbiter on the Launch Pad 39B before the 6:50 p.m. lift off is shown.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1993

An in-depth analysis and modelling of the Shuttle to MILA S-band telemetry link

The S-Band radio frequency (RF) link between the Merritt Island (MILA) Tracking Station and the Space Shuttle launch pads is a critical communication path for prelaunch and launch operations. The proposed siting of the Center for Space Education (CSE) at the Visitor Center required a study to avoid RF line-of-sight blockage and reflection paths. The study revealed the trees near MILA's 9-meter (9-M) antennas are obstructing the optical line-of-sight. The studies found diffraction is the main propagation mechanism. This paper describes a link model based on the Geometric Theory of Diffraction.

Caroglanian, Armen↗
NASA NTRS2002

STS-112 Flight Day 1 Highlights

On the first day of STS-112 the crew (Commander Jeff Ashby, Pilot Pam Melroy and Mission Specialists Sandy Magnus, Piers Sellers, David Wolf and Fyodor Yurchikhin) are shown preparing for launch at Kennedy Space Center, being transported to the Space Shuttle Atlantis at its launch pad, and being seated in the Orbiter. During the launch, the External Tank (ET) camera, mounted to the top of Atlantis's ET and aimed downward) will provide never before seen footage of the shuttle during lift-off. Following the final countdown and liftoff, the ET camera provides footage as Atlantis quickly leaves the Earth behind, at speeds over 2,800 miles per hour. Following orbital insertion, the shuttle's payload bay doors are shown opening in footage provided by a payload bay camera. Sellers and Magnus narrate their thoughts during a replay of the initial launch sequence, shortly after entering orbit. Following the tape, they are shown in the crewcabin with the rest of the crew, and they each share brief thoughts.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1993

STS-55 pad abort: Engine 2011 oxidizer preburner augmented spark igniter check valve leak

The STS-55 initial launch attempt of Columbia (OV102) was terminated on KSC launch pad A March 22, 1993 at 9:51 AM E.S.T. due to violation of an ME-3 (Engine 2011) Launch Commit Criteria (LCC) limit exceedance. The event description and timeline are summarized. Propellant loading was initiated on 22 March, 1993 at 1:15 AM EST. All SSME chill parameters and launch commit criteria (LCC) were nominal. At engine start plus 1.44 seconds, a Failure Identification (FID) was posted against Engine 2011 for exceeding the 50 psia Oxidizer Preburner (OPB) purge pressure redline. The engine was shut down at 1.50 seconds followed by Engines 2034 and 2030. All shut down sequences were nominal and the mission was safely aborted. The OPB purge pressure redline violation and the abort profile/overlay for all three engines are depicted. SSME Avionics hardware and software performed nominally during the incident. A review of vehicle data table (VDT) data and controller software logic revealed no failure indications other than the single FID 013-414, OPB purge pressure redline exceeded. Software logic was executed according to requirements and there was no anomalous controller software operation. Immediately following the abort, a Rocketdyne/NASA failure investigation team was assembled. The team successfully isolated the failure cause to the oxidizer preburner augmented spark igniter purge check valve not being fully closed due to contamination. The source of the contaminant was traced to a cut segment from a rubber O-ring which was used in a fine clean tool during valve production prior to 1992. The valve was apparently contaminated during its fabrication in 1985. The valve had performed acceptably on four previous flights of the engine, and SSME flight history shows 780 combined check valve flights without failure. The failure of an Engine 3 (SSME No. 2011) check valve to close was sensed by onboard engine instruments even though all other engine operations were normal. This resulted in an engine shutdown and safe sequential shutdown of all three engines prior to ignition of the solid boosters.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1999

STS-88 Mission Highlights Resources Tape

The STS-88 flight crew, Commander Robert D. Cabana, Pilot Frederick W. Sturckow, and Mission Specialists Nancy J. Currie, James H. Newman, Jerry L. Ross, and Sergei Krikalev present a video overview of their space flight. This is the first of three videos which show the highlights of the Endeavour mission. Important visual images include pre-launch activities such as the eating the traditional breakfast, crew suit-up, and the ride out to the launch pad. Also included are various panoramic views of the shuttle on the pad. After the closing of the hatch and arm retraction, launch activities are shown including countdown, engine ignition, launch, and the separation of the Solid Rocket Boosters. Once on-orbit crew members are seen delivering and connecting the UNITY Connecting Module to the ZARYA Control Module.

Source record↗