Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: nuke moon shuttle - or not ?
10kBq jaro

Date:
nuke moon shuttle - or not ?



http://www.aviationnow.com/publication/awst/loggedin/AvnowStoryDisplay.do?pubKey=awst&issueDate=2005-01-31&story=xml/awst_xml/2005/01/31/AW_01_31_2005_p20-23-01.xml&headline=NASA+Sets+Crew+Exploration+Vehicle+Procurement+Guidelines


World News & Analysis


NASA Sets Crew Exploration Vehicle Procurement Guidelines


Aviation Week & Space Technology


01/31/2005, page 20


Craig Covault


Kennedy Space Center


EADS rockets into U.S. manned flight procurement along with strong NASA guidelines for bidders to manage cost and risk



TEAMING FOR EXPLORATION


A multibillion-dollar NASA contracting effort, the largest since the Apollo, shuttle and space station developments, is formally underway with the release of the draft request for proposals for the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) to replace the shuttle and eventually return astronauts to the Moon as a stepping-stone to Mars.


With guidance from the draft request for proposals (RFP) now in hand, contractors are beginning a flurry of activity to posture for formal bids and to align their earlier in-house concepts with major new exploration program specifics, including strong guidelines on managing cost and risk.


And Lockheed Martin will announce this week that it is teaming with EADS Space Transportation for the CEV contract.


Should this team win, Europe's largest aerospace contractor would be in line for a key role in developing a replacement for the shuttle and renewed human operations on the lunar surface.


Northrop Grumman and Boeing last week formalized their draft CEV teaming agreement and will announce additional partners in the coming weeks to compete head-to-head against the Lockheed Martin group including EADS.


The Northrop Grumman/Boeing team will also include international participants, says Doug Young, director of Space Systems for Northrop Grumman Integrated Systems. But the team is not yet ready to announce which companies--domestic or foreign--will also be involved.


Under Lockheed Martin's team, EADS would specifically play an important role in development of a CEV autonomous docking system "and the long-duration module, an astronaut habitat on the Moon," said Cleon Lacefield, Lockheed Martin vice president and CEV program manager.


Lockheed Martin will also announce this week that its other CEV team members are Orbital Sciences, United Space Alliance, Hamilton Sundstrand and Honeywell.


As the space program's major new contracting effort gets underway, the U.S. Government Accountability Office warned that NASA's contractor management skills remain "high-risk." This is a stark warning by the GAO to NASA as it enters a major new human flight program, while also returning the existing one to operation after the tragic Columbia accident.


http://www.aviationnow.com/media/images/awst_images/large/AW_01_31_2005_554_L.jpg


Drawing shows conceptual CEV with nose-mounted lunar habitat and aft silver Earth Departure Stage outbound on a trip to the Moon. The landing struts on the lunar habitat are retracted.Credit: NASA/PAT RAWLINGS AND BILL GLEASON/SAIC


[ comment : looks an awful lot like Stan Borowski's LANTR shuttle -- no mention of nuke power in the article though... see right-most configuration in image at http://exploration.jsc.nasa.gov/HumanExplore/Exploration/EXLibrary/docs/BeyondLEO/leo295/LTS.GIF  ]


"Until NASA has the data, tools and analytical skills needed to alert program managers of potential cost overruns and schedule delays and take corrective action before they occur, it will continue to face challenges to effectively overseeing its contractors," the GAO says.


NASA is trying to reduce risk and increase cost efficiency and contractor accountability through the way it will procure the new manned space flight systems. Key elements of the procurement will include new "concepts of operation" and advanced systems engineering strategies toward integrating the expertise of NASA and industry, says Navy Rear Adm. (ret.) Craig E. Steidle, NASA associate administrator for Exploration Systems.


The draft RFP cites about 35 broad management-related topics in addition to about 40 diverse engineering areas, each involving dozens of advanced technologies just for the CEV.


NASA's fundamental objective will be to complete "Spiral 1 requirements" by 2006 for CEV Earth orbit operations and undertake a CEV preliminary design review and unmanned flight demonstration in 2008 concurrent with NASA's selection of a winning contract team.


NASA and the winning team would then move into final design and fabrication to support the first CEV manned flight to Earth orbit by 2014--a mission that, by contract, would also demonstrate "Spiral 2" CEV capabilities necessary for a resumption of U.S. manned lunar flights starting in 2015-20.


The launch vehicle to be used for CEV operations will be selected later based on each team's CEV design not to exceed 20 metric tons.


Lockheed Martin will describe its new full team in more detail before the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics' (AIAA) First Exploration Conference Jan. 30-Feb. 2 at Disney World near Orlando, Fla. Lockheed Martin is the conference's major sponsor.


While not announcing new team members this week, Northrop Grumman and Boeing are planning to explain at the AIAA conference how their systems engineering approach can be best applied in the NASA Constellation exploration technology program.


"We will discuss how we have a good, closed-loop systems engineering process across the enterprise, industry and NASA to make sure that when we get to Systems Requirements Reviews there are a solid set of requirements we can execute without major changes," Young said.


AIAA officials said they originally planned the event for about 600 participants, but 1,500 have tried to register, filling display space and conference facilities to the maximum. Exploration managers view the forum as a kickoff to the exploration program and the first chance for key decision-makers from the diverse technologies involved to meet at the same venue. Aviation Week & Space Technology is a cosponsor of the event.


Industry managers have been impressed by the draft RFP's clarity on CEV integration with several other key Exploration elements that would cycle in with Spiral 2. Those elements include an Earth Departure Stage (EDS) to transport astronauts from Earth orbit to lunar orbit and a Lunar Surface Access Module (LASM) capable of initially supporting astronauts on the Moon for "at least four days."


Young also said the 70-page draft RFP also clears up "issues that had been a bit unclear and created disparity in the way people bid [other NASA] programs."


Lacefield said industry executives also admire the draft RFP's detailing of risk reduction emphasis to reach a successful final design and its focus on management processes to assess progress and cost.


The scope of the overall exploration program, for both human and robotic elements, is expanding rapidly, with about 70 contracts let already, says Steidle. And this does not even include major existing Mars efforts (see p. 48).


"The support has been tremendous," including from a significant new crop of companies previously involved in nontraditional aerospace technologies now needed for the various exploration elements, he said.


As examples, Steidle noted that various food processing companies are seeking to participate, as are non-aerospace robotics and equipment technology leaders, such as Caterpillar, the earth-moving machinery company. Such firms are interested not only to establish direct contracts, but also to fundamentally broaden their technology personnel and base.


Among the measures called for in the draft RFP is a new "Flight Applications of Spacecraft Technology" (Fast) program to be contractor-led. It is to use a mix of ground and flight, subscale and full-scale, tests to mitigate and retire risk more aggressively than in previous NASA manned space projects.


"Fast is the term they are using instead of 'flyoff,'" said Chuck Allen, Boeing vice president for Space Exploration Systems. "There have been a lot of questions about how you could do something akin to a flyoff with a spacecraft development."


To the competing contractors, the Fast program will mean an approach to test the hardware elements that can be flight-tested to figure out the areas of highest risk. "You then can project that into the future, for the full-scale system, including the risk management and mitigation systems developed along the way to give the government a degree of confidence 'that these guys really do get it,'" Allen said.


As contractors ready for the procurement with the draft RFP, they also await the release next week of NASA's Fiscal 2006 budget request. It will seek additional increases for NASA exploration funding, says outgoing Administrator Sean O'Keefe. The administrator, Steidle and NASA center directors and managers met here at Kennedy to discuss key exploration related issues including:


*Fiscal 2006: The new budget will show that the Bush administration continues to be serious about propelling exploration, O'Keefe said. The increases sought for exploration "will be a singularly unique exception" to the rest of the overall administration budget, he said.


Pending the President's selection of a replacement, O'Keefe said he will stay on at NASA to shepherd the new budget through its initial set of congressional hearings.


But O'Keefe will be in for a rough ride in his final appearances before Congress if the Fiscal 2006 budget, as widely reported, cuts funding for a full robotic Hubble Space Telescope servicing mission, and replaces it with a less expensive robotic mission that does no more than assure Hubble's safe ocean impact at the end of its life.


*New exploration "concepts of operations": "We have new exploration 'concepts of operations' that we are just sharing with industry," Steidle said. They are specifically being briefed by NASA to the 11 engineering organizations selected in September for diverse technology studies under the Constellation program (AWST Sept. 6, 2004, p. 19). The output of the new operations concepts, combined with the technology work under the original contracts, will be released to industry as a whole so it can be used in connection with industry responses to the formal CEV RFP due out Mar. 1, Steidle said. The 11 organizations are: Andrews Aerospace, Boeing, Draper Labs, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Orbital Sciences, Raytheon, SAIC, Schafer, Spacehab and t/Space.


*Systems engineering and integration: "We have started a big effort in systems engineering and integration," Steidle said. "Pulling all these systems together will require a tremendous effort and evolution."


Steidle said NASA will issue a Request for Information (RFI) to industry this spring for input on how to approach selection of a major contractor and NASA center to integrate the CEV development as a whole.


The information request should be followed about mid-year with a formal RFP for bids on an exploration program systems integrator that would be selected by year's end or early 2006.


With EADS and likely other international partners involved across the human and robotic exploration spectrum, one management issue NASA must devote more attention to is the "establishment of more clear engagement" rules for U.S. and international contractors involved in exploration, said Bob Ford, Lockheed Martin's overall CEV program director and deputy program manager.


While greater definition is needed for international "rules of the road," the draft RFP is filled with other key directives on which contractors need to base their proposals.


For example, the document stresses flexibility "in order to incorporate new technologies and respond with agility to scientific discoveries." That passage--out of thousands of other words--is boldly underlined.



__________________
GoogleNaut

Date:

I took a look at these, and I would say that the configuration of the right most four units look an awful lot like an NTR using a trimodal engine (such as P&W's Triton.) The reason for this is that the configuration of the engines--spaced far apart and placed aft of a bulkhead which is suspiciously shaped like a radiation shield and the presence of a dimunitive LOX tank (which is small compared to an all LOX/LH2 stage, such as far left.) Together this makes me think this is indeed an NTR with some oxygen afterburning. Without doing the numbers, that's my best 'guess.' The diagram just looks 'about right' to be an NTR.


__________________
10kBq jaro

Date:

Ooops -- the AW&ST picture link wasn't "live" -- try it now : http://www.aviationnow.com/media/images/awst_images/large/AW_01_31_2005_554_L.jpg


 



__________________
GoogleNaut

Date:

Here's another interesting concept put forward by Kistler Aerospace: a modular, expandible, reusable space craft that can be flown to the moon and back.

The concept uses a slightly modified RL-10 LOX/LH2 engine for propulsion, but I bet it could be modified to use an RL-10 sized NTR for higher performance. An NTR based system should easily achieve 700 sec of specific impulse without stressing the hardware too hard. This should achieve about a 50% increase in payload capacity I would imagine.

__________________
GoogleNaut

Date:

Oops. I kind of forgot to post the website!

The vehicle concept can be found at:

http://www.lunartransportationsystems.com/spacecraft.aspx

__________________
GoogleNaut

Date:

Jaro:

I found the NASA source paper for the vehicles you mentioned above--quite by accident. I recognized the drawings from your post.
The title of the paper is:

“2001: A Space Odyssey” Revisited -- The Feasibility of 24 Hour Commuter
Flights to the Moon Using Lox-Augmented NTR Propulsion"

It can be found at:

http://astp.msfc.nasa.gov/ast/presentations/7a_barro.pdf


It would seem that those vehicles in the drawing were indeed lox augmented nuclear thermal rocket systems.

__________________
10kBq jaro

Date:

Yes, the links were posted recently by John Fraz on the old NS message board, at http://p068.ezboard.com/fnuclearspacefrm20.showMessage?topicID=247.topic


What I found odd is that the AW&ST article has the same LANTR moon shuttle illustration, but no mention of nuke propulsion.... what gives ??


 



__________________
GoogleNaut

Date:

Seems like a rather glaring omission on their part ...possibly just a mistake? Hmmm. Not enough info.

__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard