Economics of Launch Vehicles & Two Configurations for Cost Reductions

1. Economics of Launch Vehicles & Two Configurations for Tremendous Cost Reductions AIAA 2009-5399 45th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference Denver, Colorado Douglas G. Thorpe, Thortek Labs, Inc., Irvine, Kentucky Morehead State University, Space Science Center August 2-5, 2009 Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides

2. Market Forecast • For the next 10 years, there will be an average annual demand of 26.7 commercial space launches worldwide for GSO and non-GSO. • According to Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation (FAA/AST) & Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee (COMSTAC) for the period 2009 to 2018. • Revenues from the 28 commercial launch events in 2008 amounted to an estimated US$1.97 billion or $70.4M each. • Many US factories have annual gross sales of >$1B and more than 1,000 employees • This may explain why it is so difficult to find investors and government funding in the aerospace community • As a result: Future rocket designs must go to extreme measures to reduce development & re-occurring costs. Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides

3. Mid 1980’s Quote for LRB Project Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides

4. Liquid Rocket Booster Quote Analysis • Mid 1980’s quote • 12 Shuttle flights per year for 10 years • 24 LRB expended per year • 96 engines expended per year • Total LRB DDT&E = $3,224M • Engine development estimated at $1,483M • Engine development cost amortized over 10 years with 7.5% cost of money = $2.2M per engine. • Total engine unit cost estimated at $5.4M for each of the LOX/LH2 gas-generator cycle engines • Hydraulic TVC unit cost estimated at $700k for each of the 8 TVC’s per booster • CONCLUSION: Since little has changed in 20 years, using conventional business practices, engine and steering system costs will always amount to many $Millions regardless of the production rate. Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides

5. Cost of Access to Space Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides

6. Space Tourism Reality • Much publicity and excitement about space tourism increasing launch demand. • Using SpaceX dragon and Falcon 9 as an example: • 17,600 lb dragon can carry seven passengers to LEO aboard the Falcon 9. • Falcon 9 launch service alone is $36.75M or $5.25M per passenger or $2,088 per pound. • Even if launch service cost is reduced to 10%, it would be unclear if more than 10 times as many passengers would be able to afford $525,000 just for the launch service • plus the cost of riding in the dragon • plus the cost of the orbital hotel Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides

7. OEPSS – Operationally Efficient Propulsion System Study What is OEPSS? • OEPSS was a late 80’s study based on lessons learned on operational processing of launch vehicles and their ground support equipment. • The goal of the study was to identify vehicle design features that caused the most impact to vehicle processing. • OEPSS was conducted by senior technical personnel from NASA, Boeing, and Lockheed • And one new hire/recent college graduate Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides

8. OEPSS – Operationally Efficient Propulsion System Study The 15 top design concerns delineated in OEPSS • Enclosed Compartments • LOX tank forward • Side Mounted Boosters • Hypergolic Systems • Hydraulic Systems • Pneumatic Systems • Pressurization Systems • Multiple Propellants 9. Pre-Conditioning 10. Excessive Subcomponent Interfaces 11. High Maintenance Turbopumps 12. Ordnance Systems 13. Retractable Umbilical Carrier Plates 14. Engine Gimbal Systems 15. Ocean Recovery & Refurbishment • OEPSS determined that size doesn’t matter in launch vehicle processing costs • 3rd stage Saturn V requires ~ same level of effort as much larger 1st stage • 2-stage launch vehicle requires ~ twice ground processing as single stage Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides

9. Table #2: Examples of 5 Launch Vehicles Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides

10. Economic Truths about the Launch Service Industry • Minimize development costs by utilizing existing engines and infrastructure. • Minimize launch vehicle preparation • Minimize re-occurring costs by utilizing existing infrastructure. • Utilize LOX/LH2 propellants in order to obtain a larger useful payload to orbit; thereby, spreading the re-occurring costs around a larger customer base. Careful observation of Table #2 and strict adherence to OEPSS will reveal the following economic truths about how to obtain maximum profit in the launch service industry Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides

11. Proposed Launch Vehicles • As of result of the economic truths about the launch service industry, two launch vehicle configurations are proposed. • For payloads <30,000 lbs to LEO • Proposed: An air-launched, Single-Rocket-Stage LOX/LH2 vehicle. • Heavier payloads require more expensive (per pound) configuration, • Proposed: A vertical launch, single-stage-to-orbit LOX/LH2 vehicle that stages one or more engines. Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides

12. Response to the 1st Economic TruthMinimize development costs by utilizing existing engines and infrastructure • NOTE: Every $100M in development costs (engines, stages, or launch towers) will require payback >$700K per mission if amortized over 10 years @ relatively high rate of 20 missions per year. • Use existing engines, hardware, & pads • J-2(x), RL-10, RS-68, Centaur… • Launch from factory, if possible • Air Launch • Recommendation: US govt. should develop LOX/LH2 engine that costs <$1M each Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides

13. Response to the 2nd Economic TruthMinimize Launch Vehicle Preparation • According to the processing timeline on one American launch vehicle • 25 shifts (19.5% of effort) are required for spacecraft encapsulation; • 20 shifts (15.6% of effort) are required to horizontally prep and mate the first two stages; & • 83 shifts (65% of effort, 7.5 weeks) are required at the pad on an 18 week processing timeline while utilizing more than 100 touch-laborers • In comparison, Ariane V requires 50 total employees (including management) to encapsulate & mate the payload to the vehicle, transport the stack to the pad, and to launch the vehicle all within two weeks! • NOTE: A single rocket stage eliminates T-O’s, swing arms, pad access platforms, and pad processing for the second or more stages Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides

14. Response to the 3rd Economic TruthMinimize re-occurring costs by utilizing existing infrastructure • For an air launch system – the commercial air freighter can placed back in service during times when it is not needed for launch operations. • Compare to Sea Launch System - two dedicated ships can not be utilized for any other money generating ventures between missions. • Recommendation: US govt. should • develop heavy-lift aircraft modified for air launch operations and • develop other facilities to be used by commercial ventures that would pay tolls for their use. Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides

15. Air Transporters Comparison List of world’s largest air transporters is shown in Table #4 below. Although the 747-400F doesn’t have the largest payload capacity, more have been built (and nearing retirement). Therefore, used 747-400F may be cheaper than AN-124. Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides

16. Table #3: Comparisons between Launch Configurations Response to the 4th Economic TruthUtilize LOX/LH2 propellants in order to obtain a larger useful payload to orbit Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides

17. The Space Tug • Payload capacity to GTO is only ~52% of LEO. • Going from GTO to GSO further reduces launch vehicle capacity by 76%. • Also, three GN&C (Guidance, Navigation, & Control) systems are utilized to place a payload into its precise orbit. • Price of GN&C systems vary with precision from $250K to $2.5M each • What is needed: A space tug that could autonomously rendezvous with payloads in LEO and transport same to higher orbits • Benefit #1: Launch vehicle would increase payload capacity to GSO by 2.5 times • Benefit #2: Price of GN&C for launch vehicle would reduce by ~$6.75M • Recommendation: US govt. should develop a non-chemical, in-orbit transportation system • Candidates include: : electro-static, electro-magnetic, and electro-dynamic tethers with plasma contactors Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides

18. Conclusion • We compared economic vitality of 5 launch systems • We presented 5 methods of reducing launch service costs • Most important for launch provider is minimize development costs • We proposed two launch systems that should address the 4 economic truths • A LOX/LH2 Single-Rocket-Stage air-launch system • A LOX/LH2 single-stage-to-orbit system • US Government should support the entire US aerospace industry, not mission specific tech (I.e., SSME, J-2X). This can be accomplished by the following 4 recommendations: • Develop LOX/LH2 engine that costs <$1M each. • Develop heavy-lift aircraft modified for air launch operations • Develop common launch facilities to be used by commercial ventures that would pay tolls for their use • Develop a non-chemical, in-orbit transportation system Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides