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 361 records · Page 20
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of Aerodynamic Loads Databases for the Space Launch System Booster Separation Event

Booster separation is a mission-critical event within the orbital ascent of the Space Launch System (SLS). The complexity of the engine plume-affected, multibody, supersonic aerodynamics is compounded by the large span of the likely trajectory space. Characterization of the multiple input, multiple output system requires a combination of wind tunnel testing and computational simulation, but additional data processing is also required before the sparse, high-fidelity data can be fused into a continuous database with acceptable uncertainty quantification. This paper outlines the state of this approach as it has been applied to the most recent SLS booster separation aerodynamic loads database: that of the Artemis II launch vehicle.

Michael W Lee↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of Aerodynamic Loads Databases for the Space Launch System Booster Separation Event

Booster separation is a mission-critical event within the orbital ascent of the Space Launch System (SLS). The complexity of the engine plume-affected, multibody, supersonic aerodynamics is compounded by the large span of the likely trajectory space. Characterization of the multiple input, multiple output system requires a combination of wind tunnel testing and computational simulation, but additional data processing is also required before the sparse, high-fidelity data can be fused into a continuous database with acceptable uncertainty quantification. This paper outlines the state of this approach as it has been applied to the most recent SLS booster separation aerodynamic loads database: that of the Artemis II launch vehicle.

Michael Lee↗
NASA NTRS2016

Potential Large Decadal Missions Enabled by Nasas Space Launch System

Large space telescope missions have always been limited by their launch vehicle's mass and volume capacities. The Hubble Space Telescope (HST) was specifically designed to fit inside the Space Shuttle and the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is specifically designed to fit inside an Ariane 5. Astrophysicists desire even larger space telescopes. NASA's "Enduring Quests Daring Visions" report calls for an 8- to 16-m Large UV-Optical-IR (LUVOIR) Surveyor mission to enable ultra-high-contrast spectroscopy and coronagraphy. AURA's "From Cosmic Birth to Living Earth" report calls for a 12-m class High-Definition Space Telescope to pursue transformational scientific discoveries. NASA's "Planning for the 2020 Decadal Survey" calls for a Habitable Exoplanet Imaging (HabEx) and a LUVOIR as well as Far-IR and an X-Ray Surveyor missions. Packaging larger space telescopes into existing launch vehicles is a significant engineering complexity challenge that drives cost and risk. NASA's planned Space Launch System (SLS), with its 8 or 10-m diameter fairings and ability to deliver 35 to 45-mt of payload to Sun-Earth-Lagrange-2, mitigates this challenge by fundamentally changing the design paradigm for large space telescopes. This paper reviews the mass and volume capacities of the planned SLS, discusses potential implications of these capacities for designing large space telescope missions, and gives three specific mission concept implementation examples: a 4-m monolithic off-axis telescope, an 8-m monolithic on-axis telescope and a 12-m segmented on-axis telescope.

Technology↗
NASA NTRS2009

Ares V: Game Changer for National Security Launch

NASA is designing the Ares V cargo launch vehicle to vastly expand exploration of the Moon begun in the Apollo program and enable the exploration of Mars and beyond. As the largest launcher in history, Ares V also represents a national asset offering unprecedented opportunities for new science, national security, and commercial missions of unmatched size and scope. The Ares V is the heavy-lift component of NASA's dual-launch architecture that will replace the current space shuttle fleet, complete the International Space Station, and establish a permanent human presence on the Moon as a stepping-stone to destinations beyond. During extensive independent and internal architecture and vehicle trade studies as part of the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS), NASA selected the Ares I crew launch vehicle and the Ares V to support future exploration. The smaller Ares I will launch the Orion crew exploration vehicle with four to six astronauts into orbit. The Ares V is designed to carry the Altair lunar lander into orbit, rendezvous with Orion, and send the mated spacecraft toward lunar orbit. The Ares V will be the largest and most powerful launch vehicle in history, providing unprecedented payload mass and volume to establish a permanent lunar outpost and explore significantly more of the lunar surface than was done during the Apollo missions. The Ares V consists of a Core Stage, two Reusable Solid Rocket Boosters (RSRBs), Earth Departure Stage (EDS), and a payload shroud. For lunar missions, the shroud would cover the Lunar Surface Access Module (LSAM). The Ares V Core Stage is 33 feet in diameter and 212 feet in length, making it the largest rocket stage ever built. It is the same diameter as the Saturn V first stage, the S-IC. However, its length is about the same as the combined length of the Saturn V first and second stages. The Core Stage uses a cluster of five Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne RS-68B rocket engines, each supplying about 700,000 pounds of thrust. Its propellants are liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen. The two solid rocket boosters provide about 3.5 million pounds of thrust at liftoff. These 5.5-segment boosters are derived from the 4-segment boosters now used on the Space Shuttle, and are similar to those used in the Ares I first stage. The EDS is powered by one J-2X engine. The J-2X, which has roughly 294,000 pounds of thrust, also powers the Ares I Upper Stage. It is derived from the J-2 that powered the Saturn V second and third stages. The EDS performs two functions. Its initial suborbital burns will place the lunar lander into a stable Earth orbit. After the Orion crew vehicle, launched separately on an Ares I, docks with the lander/EDS stack, EDS will ignite a second time to put the combined 65-metric ton vehicle into a lunar transfer orbit. When it stands on the launch pad at Kennedy Space Center late in the next decade, the Ares V stack will be approximately 381 feet tall and have a gross liftoff mass of 8.1 million pounds. The current point-of-departure design exceeds Saturn V s mass capability by approximately 40 percent. Using the current payload shroud design, Ares V can carry 315,000 pounds to 29-degree low Earth orbit (LEO) or 77,000 pounds to a geosynchronous orbit. Another unique aspect of the Ares V is the 33-foot-diameter payload shroud, which encloses approximately 30,400 cubic feet of usable volume. A larger hypothetical shroud for encapsulating larger payloads has been studied. While Ares V makes possible larger payload masses and volumes, it may alternately make possible more cost-effective mission design if the relevant payload communities are willing to consider an alternative to the existing approach that has driven them to employ complexity to solve current launch vehicle mass and volume constraints. By using Ares V s mass and volume capabilities as margin, payload designers stand to reduce development risk and cost. Significant progress has been made on the Ares V to support a plaed fiscal 2011 authority-to-proceed (ATP) milestone. The Ares V team is actively reaching out to external organizations during this early concept phase to ensure that the Ares V vehicle can be leveraged for national security, science, and commercial development needs. This presentation will discuss Ares V vehicle configuration, the path to the current concept, accomplishments to date, and potential payload utilization opportunities.

Sumrall, Phil↗
NASA NTRS1988

Lunar landing and launch facilities and operations

A preliminary definition of a lunar landing and launch facility (LLLF or Complex 391) has been formulated. A Phase 3 lunar base is considered. Without specifying specific lunar base scenarios, three traffic levels are envisioned: 6, 12, and 24 landings/launches per year. A single, multipurpose vehicle for the lunar module is assumed. The design and specification of the vehicle and of the lunar base are outside the scope of this study. However, these two items will impact those items considered within the scope of this study because of interactions at the system boundaries. The scope of this study is graphically portrayed with the systems diagram. Based upon this diagram, nine major design items or areas are considered. These items are: (1) landing/launch site considerations; (2) structure, shelter, safety, and environmental needs; (3) landing/launch guidance, communications, and computing needs; (4) lunar module surface transport system; (5) heavy cargo unloading/loading systems; (6) personnel unloading/loading systems; (7) propellant unloading/loading systems; (8) vehicle storage; and (9) maintenance, repair, test and check-out requirements. Initially, a general, conceptual description of each of these items is given. Then, preliminary sizes, capacities, and other relevant design data for some of these items are identified. The Earth-Moon transportation infrastructure and the baseline lunar module design are summarized.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2000

In-Space Transportation Propulsion Architecture Assessment

Almost all space propulsion development and application has been chemical. Aerobraking has been used at Venus and Mars, and for entry at Jupiter. One electric propulsion mission has been flown (DS-1) and electric propulsion is in general use by commercial communications satellites for stationkeeping. Gravity assist has been widely used for high-energy missions (Voyager, Galileo, Cassini, etc.). It has served as a substitute for high-energy propulsion but is limited in energy gain, and adds mission complexity as well as launch opportunity restrictions. It has very limited value for round trip missions such as humans to Mars and return. High-energy space propulsion has been researched for many years, and some major developments, such as nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP), undertaken. With the exception of solar electric propulsion at a scale of a few kilowatts, high-energy space propulsion has never been used on a mission. Most mission studies have adopted TRL 6 technology because most have looked for a near-term start. The current activity is technology planning aimed at broadening the options available to mission planners. Many of the illustrations used in this report came from various NASA sources; their use is gratefully acknowledged.

Woodcock, Gordon↗
NASA NTRS2010

Planning and Estimation of Operations Support Requirements

Life Cycle Cost (LCC) estimates during the proposal and early design phases, as well as project replans during the development phase, are heavily focused on hardware development schedules and costs. Operations (phase E) costs are typically small compared to the spacecraft development and test costs. This, combined with the long lead time for realizing operations costs, can lead to de-emphasizing estimation of operations support requirements during proposal, early design, and replan cost exercises. The Discovery and New Frontiers (D&NF) programs comprise small, cost-capped missions supporting scientific exploration of the solar system. Any LCC growth can directly impact the programs' ability to fund new missions, and even moderate yearly underestimates of the operations costs can present significant LCC impacts for deep space missions with long operational durations. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) D&NF Program Office at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) recently studied cost overruns and schedule delays for 5 missions. The goal was to identify the underlying causes for the overruns and delays, and to develop practical mitigations to assist the D&NF projects in identifying potential risks and controlling the associated impacts to proposed mission costs and schedules. The study found that 4 out of the 5 missions studied had significant overruns at or after launch due to underestimation of the complexity and supporting requirements for operations activities; the fifth mission had not launched at the time of the mission. The drivers behind these overruns include overly optimistic assumptions regarding the savings resulting from the use of heritage technology, late development of operations requirements, inadequate planning for sustaining engineering and the special requirements of long duration missions (e.g., knowledge retention and hardware/software refresh), and delayed completion of ground system development work. This paper updates the D&NF LCC study, looking at the operations (phase E) cost drivers in more detail and extending the study to include 2 additional missions and identifies areas for increased emphasis by project management in order to improve the fidelity of operations estimates.

Newhouse, Marilyn E.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Software for Collaborative Engineering of Launch Rockets

The Rocket Evaluation and Cost Integration for Propulsion and Engineering software enables collaborative computing with automated exchange of information in the design and analysis of launch rockets and other complex systems. RECIPE can interact with and incorporate a variety of programs, including legacy codes, that model aspects of a system from the perspectives of different technological disciplines (e.g., aerodynamics, structures, propulsion, trajectory, aeroheating, controls, and operations) and that are used by different engineers on different computers running different operating systems. RECIPE consists mainly of (1) ISCRM a file-transfer subprogram that makes it possible for legacy codes executed in their original operating systems on their original computers to exchange data and (2) CONES an easy-to-use filewrapper subprogram that enables the integration of legacy codes. RECIPE provides a tightly integrated conceptual framework that emphasizes connectivity among the programs used by the collaborators, linking these programs in a manner that provides some configuration control while facilitating collaborative engineering tradeoff studies, including design to cost studies. In comparison with prior collaborative-engineering schemes, one based on the use of RECIPE enables fewer engineers to do more in less time.

Stanley, Thomas Troy↗
NASA NTRS2012

Integrated Ground Operations Demonstration Units Testing Plans and Status

Cryogenic propellant loading operations with their associated flight and ground systems are some of the most complex, critical activities in launch operations. Consequently, these systems and operations account for a sizeable portion of the life cycle costs of any launch program. NASA operations for handling cryogens in ground support equipment have not changed substantially in 50 years, despite advances in cryogenics, system health management and command and control technologies. This project was developed to mature, integrate and demonstrate advancement in the current state of the art in these areas using two distinct integrated ground operations demonstration units (GODU): GODU Integrated Refrigeration and Storage (IRAS) and GODU Autonomous Control

Johnson, Robert G.↗
NASA NTRS1972

Apollo 16 Press Kit

The Apollo 16 spacecraft is scheduled for launch on Apr. 16, 1972 from Complex 39A at the Kennedy Space Center, Florida by the Saturn V launch vehicle. Crewmen are mission commander John W. Young, command module pilot Thomas K. Mattingly II and lunar module pilot Charles M. Duke Jr. Objectives of the mission, to last up to 12 days, as outlined by NASA: to perform selenological inspection, survey and sampling of materials in a preselected region of Descartes using a lunar roving' vehicle; deploy and activate Apollo surface experiments; develop man's capability to work in the lunar environment; obtain photographs of candidate exploration sites; and toconduct inflight experiments and photographic tasks in lunar orbit. Following launch, the spacecraft will reach Earth Parking Orbit and remain in orbit for about two and one-half revolutions prior to Translunar Injection. Next, the Command and Service Module docks with the Lunar Module and the spacecraft "coasts" to the moon. In orbit around the moon, the Command and Service Module/Lunar Module combination will descend to within 50,000 feet of the lunar surface before undocking. The Lunar Module will continue to descend while the Command and Service Module returns to an orbit approximately 60 miles high. Stay time on the lunar surface is scheduled for approximately 73 hours. The ascent stage of the Lunar Module then lifts the astronauts back into lunar orbit where they will dock with the Command/Service Module. The Lunar Module is jettisoned and Transearth Injection follows. Just prior to reentry into the earth's atmosphere, the Service Module is jettisoned, and the astronauts in the Command Module splashdown in the Pacific Ocean. The target point for end-of-mission splashdown is at 05 degrees 0 minutes north latitude and 158 degrees 40 minutes west longitude or approximately 985 nautical miles south of Honolulu, Hawaii. Splashdown is scheduled for Apr. 28, 1972 at 10:30 a.m. Hawaiian Standard Time (2:30 p.m. CST). Recovery forces for Apollo 16, stationed in both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, will consist of three ships, nine aircraft and nearly 1,700 personnel. CTF-130 (Manned Spacecraft Recovery Force, Pacific) forces will be stationed south of Hawaii. Three ships, eight helicopters and three Air Force HC-130H aircraft, and nearly 1,100 personnel, will take part. Task Force 140 (Manned Spacecraft Recovery Force, Atlantic), comprising one ship, six HC-130H aircraft, three helicopters and approximately 300 personnel, will be positioned for possible launch abort operations. Two ships in the Atlantic will also be used for acoustical testing. Other forces, primarily aircraft and personnel of the Air Force Aerospace Rescue and Recovery Service will be on alert around the world for contingency recovery support.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2018

FPGA Reliability and Failure Rate Analysis for Launch and Space Vehicles Environments

Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) integrated circuits (IC) are one of the key electronic components in today's sophisticated launch and space vehicle complex avionic systems, largely due to their superb reprogrammable and reconfigurable capabilities combined with relatively low non-recurring engineering costs (NRE) and short design cycle. Consequently, FPGAs are prevalent ICs in communication protocols and control signal commands. This paper will demonstrate guidelines to estimate FPGA failure rates for ascent and in space operations. The guidelines will account for hardware and radiation-induced failures, as well as Bayesian updates to failure rates. The hardware contribution of the approach accounts for physical failures of the FPGA IC. The radiation portion will expand on FPGA susceptibility to different space radiation environments.

Al Hassan, Mohammad↗
NASA NTRS2018

Automated Spacecraft Communications Service Demonstration Using NASA's SCaN Testbed

The traditional paradigm for space mission operations relies on inefficient, highly scripted pre-planned activities between space communications & navigation service providers and user ground mission operations centers. Typically there is limited or non-existent automation capabilities on the user spacecraft for requesting space communications services, and on the provider network for request dispositioning and service provisioning. In the past, using these processes for space networks was sufficient with the relatively small number of user spacecraft requesting services. However, with an ever increasing number of satellites being launched to orbit, more complex event-driven science objectives, exploration missions involving collaborative platforms, and more distant missions, approaches that improve automation, flexibility and efficiency are needed. This paper describes NASA's recently completed on-orbit demonstration results of a new space communications service concept called User Initiated Service, and a discussion for infusing this innovation into operations.

waveforms↗
NASA NTRS2018

Automated Spacecraft Communications Service Demonstration Using NASA's SCaN Testbed

The traditional paradigm for space mission operations relies on inefficient, highly scripted pre-planned activities between space communications and navigation service providers and user ground mission operations centers. Typically there is limited or non-existent automation capabilities on the user spacecraft for requesting space communications services, and on the provider network for request dispositioning and service provisioning. In the past, using these processes for space networks was sufficient with the relatively small number of user spacecraft requesting services. However, with an ever increasing number of satellites being launched to orbit, more complex event-driven science objectives, exploration missions involving collaborative platforms, and more distant missions, approaches that improve automation, flexibility and efficiency are needed. This paper describes NASA's recently completed on-orbit demonstration results of a new space communications service concept called User Initiated Service, and a discussion for infusing this innovation into operations.

transmitters receivers↗
NASA NTRS1974

Skylab facilities modifications at KSC

The facilities required at KSC to support Skylab were largely those facilities used by Apollo, modified for Skylab's particular needs. The one exception is the series of modifications to permit launching a Saturn IB from Complex 39. This new capability not only supported Skylab, but also supports the upcoming Apollo Soyuz, and any further S-IB launches that might be undertaken.

Phillips, J. D.↗
NASA NTRS1973

The evolution of location and data collection systems in the United States.

Satellite location and data collection systems development began in the early 1960's in NASA and the French CNES. These systems were initially developed for application to meteorology and oceanography as a means of tracking moving platforms on a global scale. Additional applications such as geology, hydrology, and ecology have since evolved. To date, five successful missions have been completed. With each successive launch, systems improved in accordance with user requirements - particularly reduction in cost and complexity of platform equipment. With planned launches, facilities will be available to the user community through 1980; NASA is currently forecasting needs beyond 1980.

Morakis, J. C.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Orbit Determination Support for the Microwave Anisotropy Probe (MAP)

THe microwave Anisotropy Probe (MAP) ia the second Medium Class Explorer (MIDEX) mission of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The main goal of the MAP observatory is to measure the temperature fluctuations, known as anisotropy, of the cosmic microwave background (CBG) radiation over the entire sky and to produce a map of the CMB anisotropies with an angular resolution of approximately 3 degrees. MAP was launched from the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Complex 17 aboard a Delta II 7425-10 expendable launch vehicle at exactly 19:46:46.183 UTC on June 30, 20001. The spacecraft receiver a nominal direct insertion by the Delta expendable launch vehicle into a 185-km circular orbit with a 28.7 deg. inclination. MAP was than maneuvered into a sequence of phasing loops designed to set up a lunar gravity-assisted acceleration of the spacecraft onto a transfer trajectory to a lissajous orbit about the Earth-Sun L2 Lagrange point, about 1.5 million km from Earth. The science mission minimum lifetime is two years of observations at L2 with a desired lifetime of 4 years. The MAP transfer orbit consisted of 3.5 phasing loops.The MAP trajectory schematic all the way through L2 is shown. The first loop had a period of 7 days, the second and third loops were 10 days long, and the last half loop was 5 days. The periselene (i.e., lunar encounter or swingby) took place approximately 30 days after launch. After the periselene, the spacecraft cruised for approximately 60 days before it arrived in the vicinity of the L2 libration point. Two mid-course correction (MCC) maneuvers were performed to refine MAP's post-launch trajectory-one after periselene and one prior to arrival at vicinity of L2. Now that MAP is at its operational L2 lissajous orbit, the MAP satellite is commanded to perform occasional station-keeping (SK) maneuvers in order to maintain its orbit around L2. Because of its complex orbital characteristics, the mission provided a unique challenge to orbit determination (OD) support in many orbital regimes.

Truong, Son H.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Orbit Determination Support for the Microwave Anisotropy Probe (MAP)

NASA's Microwave Anisotropy Probe (MAP) was launched from the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Complex 17 aboard a Delta II 7425-10 expendable launch vehicle on June 30, 2001. The spacecraft received a nominal direct insertion by the Delta expendable launch vehicle into a 185-km circular orbit with a 28.7deg inclination. MAP was then maneuvered into a sequence of phasing loops designed to set up a lunar swingby (gravity-assisted acceleration) of the spacecraft onto a transfer trajectory to a lissajous orbit about the Earth-Sun L2 Lagrange point, about 1.5 million km from Earth. Because of its complex orbital characteristics, the mission provided a unique challenge for orbit determination (OD) support in many orbital regimes. This paper summarizes the premission trajectory covariance error analysis, as well as actual OD results. The use and impact of the various tracking stations, systems, and measurements will be also discussed. Important lessons learned from the MAP OD support team will be presented. There will be a discussion of the challenges presented to OD support including the effects of delta-Vs at apogee as well as perigee, and the impact of the spacecraft attitude mode on the OD accuracy and covariance analysis.

Bauer, Frank↗
NASA NTRS2002

Orbit Determination Support for the Microwave Anisotropy Probe (MAP)

The Microwave Anisotropy Probe (MAP) is a Medium Class Explorers (MIDEX) mission produced in partnership between Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) and Princeton University. The main science objective of the MAP mission is to produce an accurate full-sky map of the cosmic microwave background temperature fluctuations anisotropy. MAP was launched from the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Complex 17 aboard a Delta II 7425-10 expendable launch vehicle at exactly 19:46:46.183 UTC on June 30, 2001. The spacecraft received a nominal direct insertion by the Delta into a 185 km circular orbit. MAP was then maneuvered into a sequence of phasing loops designed to set up a lunar swingby (gravity-assisted acceleration) of the spacecraft onto a transfer trajectory to a Lissajous orbit about the Earth-Sun L2 point. The mission duration is approximately 27 months with 3 to 4 months of transfer time to the final mission orbit about L2. The MAP transfer orbit consisted of 3.5 phasing loops: the first loop has a 7-day period, the second and third loops have a 9-day period, and the last half loop has a 4-day period as illustrated in Figure 1, which also indicates the placement of maneuvers. A Pfinal correction maneuver was performed 18 hours after the last perigee to more closely achieve the targeted lissajous orbit. The lunar encounter or swingby took place approximately 30 days after launch. After the lunar encounter, the spacecraft will cruise for approximately 120 days before it arrives at L2. A Mid-Course Correction (MCC) maneuver was executed seven days after the swingby to further refine the trajectory. Once the MAP satellite is injected into the L2 Lissajous orbit, it will perform occasional stationkeeping maneuvers to maintain the Lissajous orbit for a minimum of two years (and a goal of four years). Because of its complex orbital characteristics, the mission provided a unique challenge to orbit determination (OD) support in many orbital regimes. Extensive trajectory error covariance analysis was performed to predict ephemeris accuracy for the OD process using a Bayesian least-squares technique. The orbit determination error analysis is essential for maneuver planning and maneuver recovery study. Several tracking scenarios were investigated for each phase of the mission. This paper provides a summary of the premission trajectory covariance error analysis, as well as actual real-time OD results. The use and impact of the various tracking stations, systems, and measurements will be discussed. Details of the operational OD support and the inferred OD accuracy will be presented, and the results will be compared to the premission covariance analysis, In addition, there will be a discussion of the challenges presented to OD support including delta-Vs at apogee as well as perigee, and effects due to spacecraft attitude mode, in light of their implications to the OD accuracy and covariance analysis.

Truong, Son H.↗