Historic Launch Vehicle Development

Copyright © 2011 United Launch Alliance, LLC. All Rights Reserved.File no.

ULA Briefing toNational Research Council

Launch Propulsion Systems Roadmap

March 23, 2011

Bernard Kutter

ManagerAdvanced Programs

ULA Briefing toNational Research Council

Launch Propulsion Systems Roadmap

March 23, 2011

Bernard Kutter

ManagerAdvanced Programs

File no. | 2

Historic Launch Vehicle Development

O22P1-478

X43

NASP

0203066

9500883

9906391

2001-00432

9610538

RLVVenture Star

TSTOSLI

ED04-0320-16

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 Predicting Future Launch Vehicles and Their Required Technologies is a Challenge Their Required Technologies is a Challenge

File no. | 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

Enhanced Propulsion is On-going Common RequirementEnhanced Propulsion is On-going Common Requirement

Courtesy PWR and AerojetRS-68RS-68 RD-180RD-180 SSMESSME X-33X-33 ORSCORSC

File no. | 4

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

Continuous US Propulsion InvestmentContinuous US Propulsion Investment

Courtesy Xcor

Courtesy PWR

0

50

100

150

200

1 of 1 2 of 2 3 of 4RL10 Engine Operation

Sta

ge

Fa

ilure

Ra

te

Engine-Out

File no. | 5 United Launch Alliance (ULA) Proprietary Information

Integrated Vehicle Fluids (IVF)

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 GH2Internal

Combustion Engine

Electrical Generator

LO2 Tank

LH2 Tank

Battery

Drive Motor

O2 Pump

Settling Thruster O2 & H2

Vaporizer/Heater

Drive Motor

H2 Pump

H2 Engine Bleed

Attitude Thrusters

Tank Pressurization Controls

H2/O2ThrusterCourtesy IES

File no. | 6

Key to Launch Vehicle Advancement is Demand

Without Demand Pull Advanced Technology

Will Remain on the Shelf

File no. | 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

Courtesy Lockheed Martin

2004: 54 Launches24 Vehicles Active

2.2 Launches per Family

1984: 129 Launches14 Vehicles Active

9 Launches per Family

Lack of Demand Limits Opportunity for Lack of Demand Limits Opportunity for Advanced Technology InsertionAdvanced Technology Insertion

File no. | 8

Medium Class Intermediate Class

Delta II Delta IV Delta IV HeavyAtlas V

Heavy Class

United Launch Alliance (ULA)

Two World-Class Launch Systems– 50/50 Joint Boeing/Lockheed Martin Ownership

ULA Formed due to Low Launch DemandULA Formed due to Low Launch Demand

File no. | 9

100% Mission Success48 for 48

ULA Launch History

National Security - 26 NASA/Civil - 12 Commercial - 10

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


NROL-24 - 12/10/07 - Atlas V


NROL-28 - 3/13/08 - Atlas V


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


NROL-26 - 1/17/09 - Delta IV

NOAA-N' - 2/6/09 - Delta II

Kepler - 3/6/09 - Delta II

Most Recent LaunchesGPS 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


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


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

Delta IICOSMO-411/5/10

Atlas VOTV-23/5/11

Delta IVNROL-273/11/11

File no. | 10

NASA Exploration HLV Demand

Low Demand Plagues Future Technology Insertion EffortsLow Demand Plagues Future Technology Insertion Efforts

File no. | 11

Launch Rate Influence

Launch business is very capital intensive

$0/mT

$5/mT

$10/mT

$15/mT

$20/mT

$25/mT

$30/mT

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Launch Rate (#/year)

$ in

Mil

lio

ns

/ m

T

Infrastructure Dominated

Recurring Dominated

LE

O L

aun

ch C

ost

($M

/mT

)

Launch Rate (#/year)

HLV

Fixed cost amortization

Multi year block buy

Technology Advancement

HLV $54M/mT @ HEFT 1 launch per 2 years rate

HLV

Del

ta IV

Atla

s V

Launch Rate Currently Bigger Cost Driver than TechnologyLaunch Rate Currently Bigger Cost Driver than Technology

File no. | 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 BaseIncreased Rate Supports Healthy Supplier BasePrerequisite for Technology Innovation/AdoptionPrerequisite for Technology Innovation/Adoption

File no. | 13

Reusability: Real or Myth

File no. | 14

Reuse of Expensive Hardware

Is Reusability Cost Effective?Is Reusability Cost Effective?

Booster engine reuse has best potential to demonstrate cost reduction at low launch rate

ATS SeparationHypercone Deployment Parafoil

Deployment

Mid Air Capture

Barge Recovery

InspectionATS Integration on new Booster

Vehicle Launch

Campaign

2nd Stage SepEngine Fluid Isolation

File no. | 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

Historic Launch Vehicle Development

Documents

Transcript of Historic Launch Vehicle Development