1 / 31

Integrated Options for Human Exploration Discussion August 12, 2009

Integrated Options for Human Exploration Discussion August 12, 2009. Topics for Discussion. Review and summarize potential decisions on human exploration Review options that have been analyzed Groundwork for Cost/Schedule Evaluation Analysis to follow.

elmo-wyatt
Download Presentation

Integrated Options for Human Exploration Discussion August 12, 2009

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Integrated Options for Human Exploration DiscussionAugust 12, 2009

  2. Topics for Discussion • Review and summarize potential decisions on human exploration • Review options that have been analyzed • Groundwork for Cost/Schedule • Evaluation Analysis to follow Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee

  3. Decisions (1 of 3) • What is the phase out plan of the Shuttle? • Fly out remainder of flights safely (Currently part of policy, but FY 11 funding not part of President’s budget) • Extend Shuttle at 1-2 flights per year through 2015 (Only in conjunction with extended ISS, SDV derived heavy lifter and commercial crew) • What is the future of the ISS? • End US participation in ISS at the end of 2015 • Continue US participation, through at least 2020 (Possible to use at minimal capability, or at enhanced level of US utilization) Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee

  4. Shuttle to Manifest Flyout (est. 2011) • Rationale: • Little margin remains in the shuttle schedule; experience indicates that it will take longer than currently projected to safely fly out the manifest. This scenario is more realistic, and would avoid undue pressure to complete flights within a particular budget year. • Advantages: • Prudent fly-out schedule • Allows realistic budget planning • Disadvantages: • Additional cost to current plan (but is likely closer to reality) • Notes: • No operational impact to Constellation program • Little change in workforce reduction Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee

  5. Shuttle to 2015 • Extend shuttle at 1-2 flights/year through 2015 (partially close gap) • Analyzed in conjunction with Shuttle-derived HLV • Rationale: The most realistic way to significantly reduce the gap (and to robustly use ISS’ full capability) • Advantages: • Reduces the gap in US human launch capability • Supports robust US and International utilization of the ISS • Smooth workforce transition • Takes maximum advantage of existing infrastructure and production capabilities (cost savings, which should be investigated) • Disadvantages: • Cost not currently carried in the budget • Mitigated when coupled with Shuttle-Derived HLV • Extends life of shuttle; independent risk assessment recommended Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee

  6. ISS to 2015 • Resupply and logistics with IP and COTS • Would require International Partner decision to transfer to other form of organization with lower US burden after 2015, or retire • Continue with Program of Record plan (FY10 budget) to de-orbit ISS in 2016. Continue present utilization focus within existing utilization budget. Resupply and logistics by IP and COTS vehicles Crew transport via Soyuz • Continue with historical plan of ending primary US support for ISS in 2015 • Focus work there on science and preparation for exploration to the extent possible Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee

  7. ISS to 2020 • Enhance US participation through 2020 • Demonstrate commitment to full utilization of ISS • Opportunity to expand international partnership • Development of technology and understanding of human research issues in preparation for exploration • Opportunity for full realization of national lab concept • Inclusion of new partners to be aligned with US national interests Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee

  8. Decisions (2 of 3) 3. Should the government developed launch system be based on NASA/Shuttle heritage or an EELV based systems? • Ares I plus Ares V (no refueling) • Ares V lite dual launch, enhanced with (potentially commercial) refueling) • Directly Shuttle derived vehicle, enhanced with (potentially commercial) refueling) • EELV H plus SH, enhanced with (potentially commercial) refueling 4. How should crew be carried to LEO (ISS in particular)? • US government provided systems • Commercial/international (implies eventual operational backup by US government system) Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee

  9. Ares I plus Ares V Ares I Characteristics: 5 Segment RSRB first stage J-2X LOX/LH2 upper stage Performance: LEO: 26 mTCrew Ares V Characteristics: (2) 5.5 Segment RSRB’s (6) RS-68B LOX/LH2 first stage J-2X LOX/LH2 upper stage Performance: LEO: 159 mTCargo + • NASA heritage components • Ares 1 for US crew transport to ISS and Earth Orbit Rendezvous with Ares 5 for crewed flights • Ares V alone for cargo Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee

  10. Ares V Lite • Ares V Lite is a human rated simplified version of baseline Ares V • Uses as cargo vehicle, crew delivery beyond LEO, the human rated as US backup for commercial launch • When use in lunar missions, two Ares V are used in “dual mode” • Rendezvous can occur either in Earth Orbit or Lunar Orbit Ares V lite x 2 Characteristics: (2) 5 Segment RSRB’s (6) RS-68A LOX/LH2 first stage J-2X LOX/LH2 upper stage Performance: LEO: 143 mT Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee

  11. Shuttle Derived Vehicle Sidemount Characteristics: (2) 4 Segment RSRB’s (3) RS-25E LOX/LH2 first stage J-2X LOX/LH2 upper stage Performance: LEO: 92 - 105 mT Commercial Crew Transport Characteristics: LOX/RP-1 first stage LOX/RP-1 upper stage Performance: LEO: 8 - 10 mT + or • Commercial transport to ISS and to LEO for EOR with SDV • Multiple Shuttle derived vehicles possible • For Moon, crewed mission is crew taxi + 3 launches, cargo is one launch Jupiter 241 Characteristics: (2) 4 Segment RSRB’s (4) RS-25E LOX/LH2 first stage J-2X LOX/LH2 upper stage Performance: LEO: 106 mT Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee

  12. ELV Super Heavy Launch Commercial Crew Transport Characteristics: LOX/RP-1 first stage LOX/RP-1 upper stage Performance: LEO: 8 - 10 mT ELV Super Heavy Characteristics: LOX/RP-1 first stage LOX/LH2 upper stage Performance: LEO: 75 mT + • Commercial crew transport to ISS and earth orbit rendezvous with EELV Super Heavy • Several options for SH with LOX/RP-1 based first stage • For Moon, crewed mission is crew taxi + 3 launches, cargo is one (or potentially two) launches Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee

  13. Propellant Storage & Transfer • Description: • Single tanker launched to orbit, or • Depot deployed in orbit and refueled • Autonomous on-orbit rendezvous and fuel transfer • May be used to top off or completely fill upper stages before leaving Earth Orbit • Advantages: • Increased deliver mass to target for give size booster and upper stage • May result in smaller booster requirements due dry payloads • Enable commercial market • Disadvantages: • Additional launches required compared to single large booster • Advanced cryogenic fluid management technology needed • Fluid coupling and transfer technology needed Tanker Depot Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee

  14. Decisions (3 of 3) 5. What is the first destination for exploration beyond LEO? • Moon with surface exploration focused on base • Moon with surface exploration focused on global exploration • Deep space with no surface exploration immediately • Mars first , with surface exploration 128 total possible options for consideration • Plus: Is the budget constrained to the budget guidance? Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee

  15. Destination Description: Lunar Base (~Program of Record) • Key Capabilities • Sortie, Extended Stay, and Outpost capability • Pervasive Mobility; ability to explore an extended range (25–100 km) around landing sites • Solar power with sufficient energy storage to keep assets alive between human visits • Habitation • Emphasis on understanding the lunar environment and its applicability to human exploration objectives • Developing & testing science protocols • Testing planetary protection approaches • Improving reliability and functionality of EVA & life support systems • Testing systematic approaches for resolving complex problems such as dust mitigation and radiation protection Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee

  16. Lunar Base Representative Architecture Separate crew and cargo missions are used to build the Lunar Base over time Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee

  17. Lunar Base Milestones, Destinations & Capabilities 1 2 3 4 5 9 6 10 11 7 8 180 Days 180 Days Lunar Crew Stay Cap. 180 Days 180 Days 180 Days 180 Days 45 Days 7 Days 28 Days 14 Days 28 Days Advanced ECLSS, Full Habitation, Continuous Presence, 1 ton O2 per year produced 14-day roves Human Lunar Return Initial Power, Habitation, Mobility Mars Mission Analogs, Expanded Resource Extraction Non-Polar Sortie (PoR) Full Communications Max Power Generation, Nighttime Ops Year

  18. Destination Description: Lunar Global • Uses self-contained or potentially mobile outposts to provide surface habitation (14 to180 day stay capability) • Lays the technology groundwork for Mars by developing subsystems and technologies that are forward extensible to Mars, but does not explicitly continue to Mars exploration • Independent outpost configurations are flexible and adaptable to landing site • Surface elements can be relocated from one site to another between crewed missions Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee

  19. Lunar Global Representative Architecture Sites 1-4 Site 6 Site 5 Site 7 Extended Duration - Site B Extended Duration - Site C Extended Duration - Site A Sortie Phase • 84 Days Max Duration • 280 Cumulative Surface Days • 2 Cargo Flights • 6 Crewed Flights • Pres Mobility • 182 Days Max Duration • 308 Cumulative Surface Days • 4 Cargo Flights • 6 Crewed Flights • Pres Mobility + Relocatable Hab • 56 Days Max Duration • 210 Cumulative Surface Days • 1 Cargo Flights • 5 Crewed Flights • Unpres Mobility • 4 Sortie Missions • 4 Locations • 7 Surface Days Each

  20. Lunar Global Milestones, Destinations & Capabilities 1 2 3 4 5 9 6 10 11 7 8 84 Day Stays / Extended Mobility 56 Day Stays 182 Day Stays HLR Site 1 Site 2 Site 4 Site 6 Site 3 Site 7 Site 5 Extended Duration Location A Extended Duration Location C Extended Duration Location B Sortie Flights Test Flights Year Habitat #1 Habitat Small Pressurized Rover (SPR) Small Pressurized Rover (SPR) Habitat Small Pressurized Rover (SPR) Small Pressurized Rover (SPR) 1st Cargo Flight Habitat #2

  21. Destination Description: Mars First • Primary objective is Mars exploration • All systems are designed for Mars • Development and test plan is created to reduce risk and gain confidence and experience with the Mars exploration system • The Moon is not a conceptual test bed for Mars, but an actual test bed for Mars • Systems would be used for surface exploration on the Moon as well • Commercial participation would be enhancing, probably be limited to activities such as launch to LEO • The human exploration of the Moon and Mars would be complementary to the ongoing robotic exploration, and synergies would be exploited, but not fundamentally drive the program • Assume technology investments can be made to increase TRL 2 and above technologies to appropriate TRL Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee

  22. Mars First Representative Architecture Source: MSFC 10 ~540 days on Mars ISRU / propellant production for MAV MAV ascent to orbit 5 11 AC / EDL of MDAV / Cargo Lander 4 Crew: Jettison DM & contingencyconsumables prior to TEI 12 Habitat Lander ACinto Mars Orbit 3 Crew: Use Orion/SM to transfer to Hab Lander; then EDL on Mars 9 Cargo: ~350 days to Mars 2 Crew: Jettison droptank after TMI; ~180 days out to Mars 8 13 Crew: ~180 days back to Earth Crewed MTV Cargo MTVs 7 Ares-I Crew Launch 6 Ares-V Cargo Launches 6 3 Ares-V Cargo Launches 1 ~30 months ~26 months Orion direct Earth return 14 22

  23. Mars First Representative Architecture Lunar Dress Rehearsal 3 Cargo to Surface & Orbit Surface Ops Ascent to Orbit 8 7 Cargo: 3 Days To Surface Crew: Less than 2 years at Moon 2 9 Crew: 3 Days to Earth • Assy of DAV and Hab/Lander to two 2 stg TMI Stages • 2 TMI’s; coast to Moon • DAV lands, TLI/descent-stage puts Hab/lander into orbit • Assy of transit Hab and 3 TMI modules • Crew in CM docks with stack • 2 modules perform first TMI burn, 1 performs second; coast to moon • TransitHab docks with Hab/Lander; crew transfers and descends • Surface ops; crew ascends then docks with transitHab • TEI; coast to earth • CM separation; entry; landing Crew: 3 Days to TLI 6 4 Cargo Launches Crew Launch 5 Cargo Launches 10 1 Earth Return ~10 months approximately 2 years 6 Launches 30 days apart 4 Launches 30 days apart

  24. Mars First Milestones, Destinations & Capabilities Crew and Cargo to the Moon Robotic Landings First Humans On Mars Second Mission To Mars Third Mission To Mars First Cargo To Mars 180Days 180Days NEO Mars ISS Mars Mars Mars Mars Mars Mars Year Repeat Mars Transit Habitat Demonstration Ascent Stage Demonstration Subscale EDL ISRU MSR In Space Transportation Cargo Landers Crew and Cargo Delivered to Lunar Surface – 2 year Operations Crew Vehicle

  25. Destination Description: Flexible Path • A Flexible Path of Human and Robotic Exploration: • Crewed exploration missions to many places in the inner solar system • Orbit planets with deep gravity wells, but do not land on the surface • Rendezvous with small planetary bodies such as NEOs and Mars moon Phobos • Tele-robotically explore and sample planetary surfaces Sun - Earth L2 Sun - Earth L1 L4 Value of flexible destinations: • Scientific knowledge and science operations support • Demonstrate capability of exploring in free space under conditions that we will meet on the way to Mars L1 L2 NEOs L3 Moon L5 Mars Earth Phobos & Deimos Venus Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee

  26. Flexible Path Representative Architecture Inner Solar System >365 day duration • Flexible Path is a sequence of missions with increasing capability into the inner solar system Limited Inner Solar System ~200 day duration Mars Phobos Sun-Earth Vicinity 30-90 day duration NEOs NEOs Near Earth 21+ day duration MarsFlyby Sun – Earth L2 Earth’s Lagrange Points Minimum Capability 7-14 day duration L2 Sun – Earth L1 Lunar Flyby L1 Zero boil off & Refueling

  27. Flexible Path Off Ramp to Lunar: Milestones, Destinations & Capabilities 1 2 3 4 5 9 6 10 11 7 8 Human Lunar Return Human to Mars Vicinity Humans in Cislunar Space Humans in Interplanetary Space First Humans to NEOs 7 Days 10 Days 21 Days 32 Days 90 Days 190 Days 440 Days 1st Habitat Flight Unpiloted Lunar Test EarthMoon L1 Sun Earth L2 Sun Earth L1 NEO (2007 UN12) Site 1 Site 2 Site 4 Site 3 Site 5 Mars Flyby Lunar Flyby Year Near Earth Sun Earth Vicinity Lunar Extended Duration Location A Lunar Sortie Flights Lunar Surface Test Flights Lander with Habitat Precursor Landers / Rovers Extended Robotic Presence

  28. Integrated Options (1 of 3)

  29. Integrated Options (2 of 3)

  30. Integrated Options (3 of 3)

  31. Next discussion topic: Cost and schedule analysis – Dr. Ride

More Related