Technical Sessions

Session IX: From Earth to Orbit

Chair: Mike Bender, Space Exploration Technologies

Wednesday, August 12, 2009

1:45 p.m. Falcon 1 Flight Results and Multiple Payload Integration

Aaron Dinardi, Brian Bjelde – Space Exploration Technologies

ABSTRACT: On 28 September 2008, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) made history when its Falcon 1 became the first privately‐developed, liquid‐fueled rocket to achieve Earth orbit. This was the fourth flight of the Falcon 1 launch vehicle from the SpaceX launch site on Omelek Island at the U.S. Army Kwajalein Atoll (USAKA) in the central Pacific Ocean. It achieved an elliptical orbit of 621 x 643 km, 9.34 degrees inclination, with full intended performance. With this flight, SpaceX has successfully flight proven 100% of its subsystems including 1st stage ascent, stage separation, 2nd stage ignition, fairing separation, guidance and control accuracies, stage 2 engine shutdown and orbital insertion, payload separation signaling, and stage 2 engine restart capability. A review of the successes and achievements is presented.

The successful flight of SpaceX’s Falcon 1 is both historically noteworthy and represents a major opportunity for the satellite industry to finally have access to a low‐cost demonstrated launch capability. Developed by SpaceX to provide reliable, low‐cost access to space, the capabilities of the Falcon 1 launch vehicle provide unique opportunities for small satellite programs. Two Falcon 1 vehicles have included accommodations for the carriage of multiple secondary satellites in the mission design. A top‐level overview of past multiple payload integration activities is discussed, along with the future plans for the Falcon 1 launch vehicle – which are focused on better servicing the needs of the small satellite community. An overview of these plans and how they will positively impact the small satellite community is discussed.

2:00 p.m. Rapid Coupled Loads Analysis and Spacecraft Load Reduction Using SoftRide

Raman Johal, Paul Wilke, Conor Johnson – CSA Engineering

ABSTRACT: The dynamic environment that a spacecraft will experience during a launch is unknown until a full coupled loads analysis (CLA) has been performed by the launch vehicle contractor. By the time this has been done, the small satellite provider might not have time to mitigate problem areas by redesigning component mounts or alternatively installing isolating mounts. Unmitigated loads issues could increase the risk of failure of not only a component, but of the entire mission. This current process of mission planning is costly and inefficient. A better approach is to have coupled loads analysis data available for real spacecraft of various sizes on multiple launch vehicles in order to know what the expected environment will be for a particular spacecraft and launch vehicle combination. To further ensure that any unknown vehicle loads will not be detrimental to the spacecraft, the installation of a SoftRide wholespacecraft isolation system can reduce the transmitted loads. This is the approach currently under study for the Office of Responsive Space (ORS) by CSA Engineering whereby many small spacecraft (less than 1500 lbs) are being analyzed on five separate launch vehicles and key spacecraft responses are being tracked. These responses will drive the creation of a small set of SoftRide “sizes” which can be premanufactured and stored on‐the‐shelf in anticipation of any upcoming launch. A software tool will be able to identify the expected loads on the spacecraft and the correct size SoftRide for the mission when a user enters information about the payload into a database which contains results from the entire set of generic payload analyses. This analysis and implementation methodology is being developed for ORS to help their need for a quick satellite launch aboard any available launch vehicle (LV) with only a few weeks notification. ORS’s needs can be a benefit to all small payloads because of the large loads database which can provide insight into a launch vehicle’s environment (using SoftRide) for spacecraft design purposes.

2:15 p.m. A Concept of International Nano‐Launcher

Kazuhiro Yagi, Seiji Matsuda, Jun Yokote – IHI Aerospace Co., Ltd. (IA); Takayoshi Fuji, Kenji Sasaki – Institute for Unmanned Space Experiment Free Flyer (USEF); Mitsuteru Kaneoka – CSP Japan Inc.; Shinichiro Tokudome, Yohsuke Nambu – Institute of Space and Astronautical Science (ISAS); Masaaki Sugimoto – The University of Tokyo

ABSTRACT: NEDO (New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization) initiated three‐year small satellite technology development program from April 2008 under the sponsorship of METI (Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry). In the meantime, the team of a private company and an university has conducted a feasibility study of atmospheric observation using mini satellites. Nano space is drawing strong interests from civil and defense agencies, academia and industry in major space fairing nations. It soon will be able to provide many innovative technologies that dramatically change design, manufacturing, operation and, most importantly, economy of the future space systems and applications. Launch opportunity for the nano space system is still limited to mixed loading on current launch vehicles. Dedicated new launcher optimized for this new category of the space system will strongly be requested as missions using nano satellites become more practical. Nano‐launcher has to be affordable and available to anyone at any time and launched from the wide variety of locations in land, sea or air. This paper summarizes results of the concept study of Nano Launch Vehicle Systems (NLVS) capable of lifting 1kg‐30kg payloads. The combination of US existing rocket system and sounding rockets of Japan is proposed as an example of promising solutions for the cost reduction using international cooperation scheme. Key elements, including maximum use of existing technologies, minimization of ground support facilities, multi‐platform launch system, are also discussed.

2:30 p.m. ASAP and VESPA: The Access to Space for Small Satellites

Jérôme Thiery – Arianespace

ABSTRACT: For any satellite customer, the key to “mission success” starts with the launch phase, one of the most important and sensitive periods in the whole development chain. This is especially the case for small missions built on small size platforms, for which clear rules and dedicated interface specifications must be established and followed to reach success. Although launch cost is a major driver for such missions, well established standards and corresponding experience must remain a key parameter when selecting the launch service provider.

Last year, Arianespace presented its experience in launching small satellites as well as the activities that were initiated for the development of ASAP‐S to improve the services for small satellites.

Since this conference, major progresses have been made in this development that increases our solutions to launch small satellites with the Arianespace fleet: Ariane 5, Soyuz and Vega. The first application of this new ASAP concept is foreseen on Soyuz in its configuration ASAP‐S beginning 2010. In parallel, a new carrying structure, socalled VESPA dedicated to Vega is also in development, with a first application foreseen in 2011. Arianespace proposes to present the progress of the ASAP‐S development, the update of the ASAP‐S User’s Manual (Satellite allowable volume and mass properties, applicable environment, dedicated interface, accommodations), as well as the new carrying structure dedicated to Vega.

2:45 p.m. The Stellar‐J: A Partially Reusable Horizontal Take‐Off Launch System Designed for Small Satellite and Low Startup Cost

Wes Kelly, Paul Royall – Triton Systems, LLC; Charles George – MSI Limited

ABSTRACT: Stellar‐J trade studies were undertaken to determine minimum performance requirements to launch small satellite constellation units (e.g., CICERO) or alleviate ascent load concerns of airframe manufacturers. Studies assumed vehicle total take‐off weight of 35 tons, similar to a Gulfstream‐3, with capability to carry an NK‐31/39 class reusable rocket engine. Burn durations were reduced from a 135‐sec vehicle baseline to 70‐sec in 5‐sec increments. Trajectories characterized 6, 3 and 2‐ton total separation weight expendable stage designs marking orbital injection weights. Payload weights were based on 4 assumed mass fractions (λ =0.85, 0.875, 0.9, 0.92). Overall trajectory results and propellant assumptions derived stage dimensions, and tank volumes. Effects of 4 hydrocarbon fuels (RP1, C₃H₈, CH₄ and ethanol) on propulsion and performance for the last of the two expendable stages (IIB) were examined, holding the first expendable stage (IIA) fixed. Inherent higher I_SP of low carbon fuels benefited the smallest mass payloads due to the high final stage ΔVs, but pressurization system design effects on λ were more telling. High dry weights and precision steering for orbital insertion seemed issues for use of simple sounding rockets. Examining thrust vector control (gimbals) and attitude thrusters, we reviewed classical control approaches to time varying gains and slosh problems. Results indicate that a 2‐ton expendable upper stage on lowered performance Stellar‐J trajectories (70‐75 second ascent burns) provides a means to launch single or double CICERO satellite units. Advantages include low cost, responsiveness and dedication to the needs of this or other potential small satellite users.

3:00 p.m. Is it Really That Hard to Get Your Hardware Into Space?

Gerry Webb – Commercial Space Technology Ltd (CST); Alex da Silva Curiel – Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd./Surrey Space Centre

ABSTRACT: Small satellite developers should be encouraged by the fact that reasonably priced access to space is not really the hurdle that it is often perceived to be. An analysis of the small satellites launched in recent years by their sub‐classes and annual rates of launches demonstrates that small satellites launch opportunities are widely available, and that a range of methods are utilised including dedicated, shared or piggy‐back launch.

Based on experience with a wide range of small satellite launches, it is illustrated how many of the perceived barriers to launching small satellites can be overcome. In particular with regard to affordable launch cost, which is commonly considered one of the major hurdles in the small satellite community.

The methods for small satellite launch are considered, and a statistical analysis is performed to show that, at a macroscopic scale, there are plenty of launch opportunities, and a significant number of small satellites would be launched with minimum expenditures if an approach to a choice of launch method, launch vehicle type and launch operator will be done in a correct manner. Certain recommendations for a realisation of this approach, including proposed empirical criteria are given.