1 / 15

Historic Launch Vehicle Development

ULA Briefing to National Research Council Launch Propulsion Systems Roadmap March 23, 2011 Bernard Kutter Manager Advanced Programs. O22P1-478. ED04-0320-16. 2001-00432. NASP. 9500883. 9610538. X43. RLV. Venture Star. 9906391. 0203066. SLI. TSTO. Historic Launch Vehicle Development.

winter-ball
Download Presentation

Historic Launch Vehicle Development

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. ULA Briefing toNational Research CouncilLaunch Propulsion Systems RoadmapMarch 23, 2011Bernard KutterManagerAdvanced Programs

  2. O22P1-478 ED04-0320-16 2001-00432 NASP 9500883 9610538 X43 RLV Venture Star 9906391 0203066 SLI TSTO Historic Launch Vehicle Development • Numerous breakthrough efforts by NASA, DoD and private sector have met with minimal success • Revolutionary technology • Revolutionary systems • Typically not achieving first flight Pictures Credit: NASA Predicting Future Launch Vehicles and Their Required Technologies is a Challenge

  3. Booster Engine • Brand new technology for large main engines not required • Chemical engines are essentially at their theoretical maximum Isp • Human Rating has minimal impact on engine design or technology • Reusability for multiple reuses drives need for added margin • Isn’t a big technology driver • However, importing, and domesticating Ox-Rich Staged Combustion (ORSC) Kerosene/LOX technology for US designed engines is a long standing need • ORSC offers substantial benefits • ORSC 30 sec Isp improvement over gas generator engines • ORSC engine no more costly than GG (PWR and Aerojet) • PWR and Aerojet pursuing ORSC engine technology • Cost and industrial base are current propulsion drivers • Technology priority: lower cost and increase operability Courtesy PWR and Aerojet RS-68 RD-180 SSME X-33 ORSC Enhanced Propulsion is On-going Common Requirement

  4. Engine-Out Stage Failure Rate RL10 Engine Operation 2nd Stage Engine Development • Thrust dependant on application • ~25 klb : EELV class • ~100 klb: Cross cutting use • J2X or SSME: HLV class • High ISP (>450 sec) • Reliable • Producible • Affordable • Shared infrastructure cost can be beneficial (e.g. Xcor piston pump) • Engine out • Single largest reliability improvement Courtesy Xcor Courtesy PWR Continuous US Propulsion Investment

  5. Integrated Vehicle Fluids (IVF) Tank Pressurization Controls LH2 Tank Attitude Thrusters Electrical Generator Battery Internal Combustion Engine LO2 Tank H2 Engine Bleed Drive Motor Drive Motor Settling Thruster O2 & H2 Vaporizer/Heater O2 Pump H2 Pump • Utilize hydrogen and oxygen to replace: • Hydrazine for attitude control • Helium for pressurization • Large Vehicle Batteries Power • Provides mission flexibility • Upper stage disposal • Reduced cost • Increased performance • Enhanced pressurization HP GO2 HP GH2 H2/O2 Thruster Courtesy IES United Launch Alliance (ULA) Proprietary Information

  6. Key to Launch Vehicle Advancement is DemandWithout Demand Pull Advanced Technology Will Remain on the Shelf

  7. Launch Market • Fragmented launch market • Atlas V • Delta IV • Delta II • Shuttle • Falcon 9 • Taurus II • HLV? • Ariane • H2A • Long March • Proton • Sea Launch • Soyuz • Commercial launch is not a successful business venture 1984: 129 Launches 14 Vehicles Active 9 Launches per Family 2004: 54 Launches 24 Vehicles Active 2.2 Launches per Family Courtesy Lockheed Martin Lack of Demand Limits Opportunity for Advanced Technology Insertion

  8. United Launch Alliance (ULA) • Two World-Class Launch Systems • 50/50 Joint Boeing/Lockheed Martin Ownership Medium Class Intermediate Class Heavy Class Delta II Delta IV Atlas V Delta IV Heavy ULA Formed due to Low Launch Demand

  9. 100% Mission Success48 for 48 ULA Launch History Most Recent Launches NROL-21 - 12/14/06 - Delta II THEMIS - 2/17/07 - Delta II STP-1 - 3/8/07 - Atlas V COSMO-1 - 6/7/07 - Delta II NROL-30 - 6/15/07 - Atlas V Phoenix - 8/4/07 - Delta II Worldview-1 - 9/18/07 - Delta II Dawn - 9/27/07 - Delta II WGS-1 - 10/10/07 - Atlas V GPS IIR-17 - 10/17/07 - Delta II DSP-23 - 11/10/07 - Delta IV COSMO-2 - 12/8/07 - Delta II NROL-24 - 12/10/07 - Atlas V GPS IIR-18 - 12/20/07 - Delta II NROL-28 - 3/13/08 - Atlas V GPS IIR-19 - 3/15/08 - Delta II ICO G1 - 4/14/08 - Atlas V GLAST - 6/11/08 - Delta II OSTM - 6/20/08 - Delta II GeoEye - 9/6/08 - Delta II COSMO-3 - 10/24/08 - Delta II NROL-26 - 1/17/09 - Delta IV NOAA-N' - 2/6/09 - Delta II Kepler - 3/6/09 - Delta II GPS IIR-20 - 3/24/09 - Delta II WGS-2 - 4/3/09 - Atlas V STSS-ATRR - 5/5/09 - Delta II LRO/LCROSS - 6/18/09 - Atlas V GOES-O - 6/27/09 - Delta IV GPS IIR-21 - 8/17/09 - Delta II PAN - 9/8/09 - Atlas V STSS Demo - 9/25/09 - Delta II Worldview-2 - 10/8/09 - Delta II DMSP-18 - 10/18/09 - Atlas V Intelsat-14 - 11/23/09 - Atlas V WGS-3 - 12/5/09 - Delta IV WISE - 12/14/2009 - Delta II SDO - 02/11/10 - NASA GOES-P - 03/04/10 - Delta IV OTV-1 - 04/22/10 - Atlas V GPS IIF-1 - 05/27/10 - Delta IV AEHF-1 - 8/14/10 - Atlas V NROL-41 - 9/20/10 - Atlas V COSMO-4 - 11/5/10 - Delta II NROL-32 - 11/21/10 - Delta IV NROL-49 - 1/20/11 - Delta IV OTV-2 – 3/5/11 – Atlas V NROL-27 – 3/11/11 – Delta IV Atlas V OTV-2 3/5/11 Delta II COSMO-4 11/5/10 Delta IV NROL-27 3/11/11 National Security - 26 NASA/Civil - 12 Commercial - 10

  10. NASA Exploration HLV Demand Low Demand Plagues Future Technology Insertion Efforts

  11. Launch Rate Influence • Launch business is very capital intensive HLV $54M/mT @ HEFT 1 launch per 2 years rate Infrastructure Dominated Recurring Dominated HLV LEO Launch Cost ($M/mT) Fixed cost amortization Multi year block buy Delta IV Atlas V Technology Advancement HLV Launch Rate (#/year) Launch Rate Currently Bigger Cost Driver than Technology

  12. Supply Base Health Supply base health of great concern Two opportunities for improvement NASA launch vehicle decision NASA – DoD (EELV) supply base sharing Increased EELV order quantity & annual build rate Stable, healthy supply base encourages new innovative solutions Increased Rate Supports Healthy Supplier Base Prerequisite for Technology Innovation/Adoption

  13. Reusability: Real or Myth

  14. Reuse of Expensive Hardware • Booster engine reuse has best potential to demonstrate cost reduction at low launch rate ATS Separation Hypercone Deployment 2nd Stage Sep Engine Fluid Isolation Parafoil Deployment Mid Air Capture Is Reusability Cost Effective? Vehicle Launch Campaign Barge Recovery ATS Integration on new Booster Inspection

  15. Summary • Focus propulsion investment on cost and operability • Robust engine out offers single largest opportunity for reliability enhancement • Need demand pull to encourage new technology adoption • It is not clear whether high rate production is more beneficial economically than re-use • Forecast is for low demand • Uncertainty in optimum future launch vehicle • Invest in cross cutting, broad use technologies

More Related