Requirements and Operations Team Industry Day Briefing 17 January, 2002.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
2013 Key Issues Review: Enabling Sustained Deep Space Exploration with a Broad Vision Congressional Visits Day Preparatory Briefing Teleconferences February.
Advertisements

Simulating Ground Support Capability for NASAs Reusable Launch Vehicle Program Kathryn E. Caggiano Peter L. Jackson John A. Muckstadt Cornell University.
Technology Module: Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) Space Systems Engineering, version 1.0 SOURCE INFORMATION: The material contained in this lecture.
Advanced Hypersonic Weapon Flight Test Overview to the Space & Missile Defense Conference 14 August 2012 Ms. Debra G. Wymer Director, Technical Center.
TERRY PHILLIPS Schafer Corp HOT EAGLE High Operations Tempo Energetic Access to Globe and Launch Experiment Marine Operations Using Space Transportation.
The Vision for Space Exploration – Challenge & Opportunity ISS Panel Report Robert D. Cabana ISS Panel Chair March 30, 2005.
1 Review of US Human Space Flight Plans Committee Evaluation Measures and Criteria for Humans Spaceflight Options 12 August 2009.
Architecture Team Industry Day Briefing 17 January, 2002.
HLV Industry Day Hybrid Launch Vehicle Phase I: Concept Development & Demonstration Planning Mr. Bob Hickman Aerospace Corporation Space and Missile Systems.
GALILEO INTERIM SUPPORT STRUCTURE EUROPEAN COMMISSION International Civil Aviation Organization GALILEO CAR/SAM ATN/GNSS Seminar Varadero, Cuba, 6 to 9.
NASA-USAF Reusable Space Launch Development Industry Day Briefing 17 January, 2002.
1 CISR-consultancy Challenges “Customer ask us what to do next” Keywords: “Customer ask us what to do next” From Policy to Practise The world is going.
Federal Aviation Administration Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) Briefing to COMSTAC Kelvin Coleman May 16, 2008.
AT 209 Introduction to Civil Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS)
6th Framework Programme Thematic Priority Aeronautics and Space.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Commercial Crew Initiative Overview and Status to the COMSTAC Philip McAlister NASA Exploration Systems Mission.
Military Spaceplane (MSP) and Reusable Launch Vehicle Study Brig Gen Anarde HQ AFSPC/XP UNCLASSIFIED.
Propulsion Engineering Research Center NASA Technology Roadmap: Launch Propulsion Systems Robert J. Santoro The Propulsion Engineering Research Center.
Roadmap Name Strategic Roadmap #n Interim Report April 15, 2005.
Reducing the cost of sustained operations through technology infusion April 2004 Darin Skelly NASA Kennedy Space Center Transformational Spaceport & Range.
Presented to: Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems Committee By: Stan Pszczolkowski, Manager, System Analysis Division Date: March 1, 2006 Federal Aviation.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Commercial Crew Initiative Overview and Status with a Focus on Insight / Oversight Approach to the COMSTAC.
Space-Based Force Application: A Technical View Dr. Laura Grego Union of Concerned Scientists Outer Space & International Security: Options for the Future.
FAA NAS Enterprise Architecture – Informing Future Challenges in V&V for NextGen 2009 V&V Summit November, 2009.
United States Air Force: Air Doctrine – Provide Global Capability Objective: Know how the United States Air Force is structured in terms of missions and.
Force Packaging. Overview Principles of War Process of Force Packaging Developing Packages.
Boeing Space & Intelligence Systems Non-ITAR Data 1 GPS IIF Program Update National Space-Based PNT Advisory Board Presented by Mr. Ken Torok V.P. Navigation.
1 SpaceX proprietary data constituting “Confidential Information” under applicable agreements. Tim Hughes Vice President & Chief Counsel.
1 Commercial Crew Program The Next Step in U.S. Space Transportation Brent W. Jett October 11, 2012 Commercial Crew Program - Same Crew…New Ride.
HLV Industry Day Mr. Ken Hampsten Space and Missile Systems Center Lt. Col. Jim Ceney Air Force Research Laboratory Lt. Col. Gus Hernandez Air Force Space.
Space Engineering 2 © Dr. X Wu, Space Engineering 2 Lecture 1.
SBIR Topic N Ocean Data Telemetry MicroSat Link ODTML SERB.1 Ocean Data Telemetry MicroSat Link ODTML – Concept OBJECTIVES: –Develop next-generation.
Advanced Range Technology Working Group July 2002 Contact information: Kevin Brown Vice President, Business Development Command and Control Technologies.
Infrastructure for Reusable Vehicles The next generation of Space Travel Eric Jensen ASTE 527 Infrastructure for Reusable Vehicles The next generation.
Vehicle Infrastructure Integration Briefing to OFCM CEISC James Pol USDOT Intelligent Transportation Systems Joint Program Office May 17, 2005.
5/9/02 1 Spaceport Vision Team Members Organizations that contributed: Federal Government DoD DoC DoT NASA State Government NCSS Industry University Detailed.
Projectile Kinetic Energy Reduction System (PKERS)
Simulation Based Operational Analysis of Future Space Transportation Systems Alex J. Ruiz-Torres Information and Decision Sciences, COBA, UTEP Edgar Zapata.
03/11/021 Spaceport Vision Team Members. 03/11/022 Systems Definition Spaceport System Spaceport Stakeholder Needs High-Level Trade Study Performance.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Transitioning Toward the Future of Commercial Human Spaceflight COMMERCIAL CREW PROGRAM AIAA Spring Dinner.
NASA/Air Force Cost Model presented by Keith Smith Science Applications International Corporation 2002 SCEA National Conference June
March 2004 At A Glance autoProducts is an automated flight dynamics product generation system. It provides a mission flight operations team with the capability.
PREDECISIONAL FOR PLANNING AND DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 1 Humans to the Martian System Preliminary Summary of Strategic Knowledge Gaps P-SAG (jointly sponsored.
Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO) Col Mark Weadon Air Force Weather Deputy for Federal Programs May 17 th,
MODEL-BASED SOFTWARE ARCHITECTURES.  Models of software are used in an increasing number of projects to handle the complexity of application domains.
Human Exploration of Mars Design Reference Architecture 5
© 2014 Orbital Sciences Corporation. All Rights Reserved. SPRSA Excess Capacity Panel Carol P. Welsch Orbital Sciences Corporation June 10, Welsch.
EC Review – 01/03/2002 – WP9 – Earth Observation Applications – n° 1 WP9 Earth Observation Applications 1st Annual Review Report to the EU ESA, KNMI, IPSL,
ASTWG Vision Team Group Exercise: Initial Summary of Results.
Force Packaging >. Overview  Force Packaging  Process of Force Packaging  Detached Support  Developing Packages.
Approved For Public Release © The Aerospace Corporation 2009 June 17, 2009 Initial Summary of Human Rated Delta IV Heavy Study Briefing to the Review of.
CSRP NASA Workshop NASA’s Revised Budget. CSRP NASA Workshop NASA’s New Vision and Objectives (as of January 14, 2004)  VISION  The fundamental goal.
This Briefing is Unclassified Space Situation Awareness (SSA) for the Warfighter 25 August 2005 HQ AFSPC/DRC Lt Col Troy Pannebecker.
03/20/021 Spaceport Vision Team Members Organizations that contributed: Air Force NASA NCSS FAA Industry University Etc.
V - 1 V. System Technology for Large Space Telescopes Session Chair: Juan A. Roman.
Orbital Aggregation & Space Infrastructure Systems (OASIS) Background Develop robust and cost effective concepts in support of future space commercialization.
Millennium Engineering and Integration Company A NEW DOCUMENTATION PROCESS TO STREAMLINE RANGE SAFETY PROCEDURES 0 O. “Rusty” Powell, Allan Smith, Jeff.
UNIT 1 – MODULE 2: Satellites *. MANUFACTURING Several primary components must be manufactured in order to have a working satellite: – Satellite – Sensor(s)
Workshop on Science Associated with the Lunar Exploration Architecture - Earth Science Subcommittee Theme: A Lunar-Based Earth Observatory Science Observations.
National Goals and Objectives
Supportability Design Considerations
Space Tug Propellant Options AIAA 2016-vvvv
Name of the idea Description and Military Application Maturity
Name of the idea Description and Military Application Maturity
NASA Hypersonic Research
NDIA Targets, UAVs and Range Operations
Force Packaging.
Joint Planning and Development Office “Where new ideas are welcome”
Uncontrolled copy when printed
GOLD-2 – Anticipating Customer Needs
Presentation transcript:

Requirements and Operations Team Industry Day Briefing 17 January, 2002

ONE.011_Rqmts/Ops-2 Outline  Team Products  Requirements analysis and process  CONOPS development  Joint requirements matrix  Design reference missions  Comparison of AF and NASA requirements  Questions relevant to Requirements/Ops

ONE.011_Rqmts/Ops-3 Team Products  Mission Needs Document: A document describing the high-level technical and mission needs of the developed system  Level I Requirements Document: Quantify, compare, and combine, to the extent possible, traceable AF and NASA requirements  Concept of Operations Document: A description of how the prototype system is to be operated  Design Reference Missions: A technical description of the missions used as reference in the design of the system

ONE.011_Rqmts/Ops-4 Requirements Analysis  Analysis Addressed Five Key Questions:  Question 1.What is the impact of an RLV system towards meeting present or projected NASA/AF requirements?  Question 2.If impact warrants an RLV system, when is it needed?  Question 3.What characteristics would an RLV system need to meet NASA/AF mission requirements?  Question 4.How do the characteristics of an AF system compare to those of a NASA system?  Question 5.What is the integrated set of requirements?

ONE.011_Rqmts/Ops-5 Strategic Visions Mission Area Plans Sub-Mission areas Identify Mission Attributes (e.g. responsiveness, safety) Map attributes to requirements in each sub-mission area Downward Trace Requirements Current Missions (“to be”) Future Missions/ Concepts (“could be”) Quantify Impact on Requirements, Need Dates, Operations Determine Range in Characteristics Across Sub-mission Areas Reconcile NASA/AF Requirements to Develop an Integrated System Review and Validate Review Past Studies Questions 1 & 2 Question 3 Questions 4 & 5 Requirements Process

ONE.011_Rqmts/Ops-6 CONOPS Development  Consolidates RLV prototype missions, operations, security, safety, and logistics  AF missions stressors:  Force Applications: Global Strike  Force Enhancement: Responsive Tactical Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR)  Space Control: Space Superiority  Space Support: Satellite Constellation Reconstitution. Refueling and Surge  NASA Missions  Alternate Access to International Space Station  Demonstrate technologies or objectives for follow-on systems  2nd Draft complete - will evolve as required

ONE.011_Rqmts/Ops-7 Requirements Matrix General Mission

ONE.011_Rqmts/Ops-8 Requirements Matrix General Mission (cont’d)

ONE.011_Rqmts/Ops-9 Requirements Matrix Sites

ONE.011_Rqmts/Ops-10 Requirements Matrix Payloads

ONE.011_Rqmts/Ops-11 Requirements Matrix Flight Safety/Reliability

ONE.011_Rqmts/Ops-12 Requirements Matrix Operability

ONE.011_Rqmts/Ops Low Earth Orbit Payload Delivery Demonstrate the capability of the prototype RLV architecture to deliver a useful payload to a desired orbit. 2. Deliver Microsats and Perform Operational Maneuver Demonstrations Demonstrate the capability to dispense and deploy microsats in desired orbital locations using on-orbit DV capability. 3. Rendezvous, Proximity Operations,and Maneuver Demonstrations Demonstrate the capability of the prototype RLV architecture to perform rendezvous, station-keeping,and proximity operations. 4. Demonstrate Technologies or Objectives for Follow-on Systems Provide relevant environments for the testing and/or demonstration of developmental technologies relevant to the 2nd Generation RLV and other launch vehicle and space systems. 5. LEO Tactical Orbital Operations Platform Demonstrations Demonstrate the delivery and operation of a tactical orbital operations platform to low earth orbit. 6. Alternate Access to International Space Station Demonstrate the capabilities required to provide an alternative method of delivering supplies and equipment to the International Space Station (ISS). 7. Common Aero Vehicle (CAV) Strike Package Demonstrations Demonstrate the delivery and deployment of a Common Aero Vehicle strike package to low earth orbit. 8. Demonstrate Characteristics for Follow-on Reliability Requirements Demonstrate ground, flight and mission operations with the prototype RLV architecture. to provide traceability to Air Force and NASA reliability goals and objectives. 9. Demonstrate Reductions in Launch Cost per Pound for Routine Spacelift Demonstrate ground, flight and mission operations with the prototype RLV architecture. to provide traceability to Air Force and NASA cost goals and objectives. 10. Operability Demonstrations Demonstrate with the prototype RLV architecture the attributes to address the cost and affordability goals of the 2nd Generation RLV. 11. International Space Station Routine Resupply Demonstrate the capability with the prototype RLV architecture to meet the mission requirements of routine resupply missions to the ISS. Prototype RLV Design Reference Mission Summary

ONE.011_Rqmts/Ops-14 Comparison of AF and NASA Requirements  Concurrence in many areas: Reliability; De-orbit mass; Orbits; Abort Scenarios  NASA and AF requirements do not currently converge in certain areas:  Weight delivered to orbit:  Payload: K lbs  Crewed: 45+ K lbs  Responsiveness: AF < 12 hours to 2 days; NASA weeks  On-orbit capability: Duration and maneuverability substantially higher for NASA (ISS driven)  Sortie Rate: AF driven by future conflict scenario - could be high; NASA low  Human rating: AF no requirement; NASA needed in FY12 system  Weather: The AF has a requirement to operate in stronger winds, more precipitation and a wider range of temperatures.  Launch / Landing: AF has a requirement to operate from inland CONUS AFB.

ONE.011_Rqmts/Ops-15 Questions For Industry Requirements/Ops 1.What are the technology "long poles" to enable responsive space access (i.e., capable of achieving aircraft levels of cost, reliability and safety) over the next 25 years (Including vehicle, propulsion, ground infrastructure, operations, payloads, sensors, etc.)? Given your knowledge of currently funded NASA and Air Force programs, what would be your recommended technology roadmap? What changes and/or additional long-term technology investments should begin within the next seven years? 2.What RLV technologies does your company feel are state-of-the-art and ready for full-scale development today relative to your understanding of NASA and Air Force RLV requirements? 4.What is the earliest your company believes it is feasible to field a next generation RLV system(s) capable of meeting NASA and Air Force requirements? Please elaborate on your rationale and associated milestones. What would be the top 10 issues going into full-scale (or engineering and manufacturing) development of the next RLV (e.g., funding, technology maturity, immature requirements, joint program complexity, etc.)?

ONE.011_Rqmts/Ops-16 Questions For Industry Requirements/Ops (cont’d) 6.What are the drivers for meeting operability needs? What is the value of early flight demonstrations using state-of-the-art systems (existing engines, TUFI TPS, SOA avionics, electric valve actuators, etc.) for demonstrating operability? What relationship (if any) exists between the size of the launch vehicle and operability? Describe/define observed interactions between safety and operability needs 9.Given your knowledge of NASA and Air Force requirements, what degree of commonality does your company believe is possible between NASA and Air Force RLV architectures and associated elements (including ground and flight systems)? Does your company see commonality between the NASA/AF needs and mission requirements and a commercial opportunity? Do you believe a modular RLV concept is possible whereby we support a near term demonstrator in the 15-25K payload class, and that booster in turn is a modular component of a larger RLV?