N93-2208

3.0 MANNED SYSTEMS EARTH.TO-ORBIT

stage-to-orbit general not technology. (SSTO) designs that are in feasible using current

3.1 Advanced Manned System - Theodore Langley Research

Launch A. Talay, Center

Several alternatives exist for the development of the next manned launch system. The Advanced Manned Launch System (AMLS), which represents a cleansheetreplacement forthe Space Shuttle, faces competition from concepts such as (1) the Personnel Launch System, which would serve as a personnel transport to complement the Space Shuttle, and (2) an advanced version of the existing Space Shuttle. An AMLS system could begin operations sometime between 2005 and 2020, depending upon the level of national interest and support. It would probably demonstrate a payload capacity less than that of the Space Shuttle, although performance specifications are far from certain. Even the form of the AMLS is still under discussion. Design studies have considered a wide variety of options including all levels of hardware reusability; single-, dualand multiplestaging; and airbreathing vs. rocket propulsion. An evaluation of the relative cost-effectiveness of these options is impossible without guidance regarding basic mission requirements such as total number of launches over the system's life cycle and the date required. The availability of more advanced technologies will enable single-

Alternative AMLS design concepts vary in terms of performance, risk and operational factors. Airbreathing systems minimize the substantial launch pad investments associated with rocket systems, but they also introduce more stringent requirements in thermal protection, landing gear and air data. LaRC AMLS studies indicate that: operational circa on a two-stage

A near-term AMLS, 2005, should rely propulsion system.

A longer-term system, operational 2015, could improve its performance using a SSTO design concept.

circa by

Additional studies of ground operations are needed to define life cycle costs and to better discriminate between airbreathing and rocket propulsion systems. Rocket systems maximize the performance of vehicles using payload-toorbit as the primary figure of merit. Air-breathing options capabilities in terms recall, offset launch launch. provide unique of cruise, loiter, and all-azimuth

27 PREIiEDING P/Y.__._ULANK NOT FtLM_

ADVANCED

MANNED

LAUNCH

SYSTEM

Theodore A. Talay Space Systems Division NASA Langley Research Center

PR'_t'EI_!N_

P,_I__ BLAt"_K NOT

FtI..MEO 29

THE NEXT MANNED

SPACE TRANSPORTATION
requirements

SYSTEM

Satisfy people/payload Improve Increase Increase

cost effectiveness reliability margins

:H

ILLOW?

STS EVOLUTION Evolve existing system PERSONNEL LAUNCH SYSTEM Separate people from cargo Complement STS

ADVANCED MANNED LAUNCH SYSTEM ,CleansheetSTS replacement

SPACE TRANSPORTATION
1990 1995 2000

ARCHITECTURE OPTION
2010 2015 2020

2005

)ace Shuttle

ATP

PLS (Assured

Access)

I
ATP f NLS

I
(Multi-role

I
Heavy-lift)

ATP

3O

POST-SHUTTLE
2000

AMLS OPTIONS
2010

STUDIES
2020

Rockets

Fully Reusable

Partially Reusable EX_andable

Drop-tank SSTO

SSTO

i Two-Stage

Airbreather/ Rockets

Mach 3 Two-Stage

Mach 6-10 Two-Stage

Single-Stage Airbreather

EFFECTS OF VEHICLE REUSABILITY LIFE-CYCLE COST TRENDS

ON

Expendable

..."" Partially reusable..........-.-"

.." ,...""

Life-cycle costs

Fully reusable

Total launches

over life-cycle

31

TECHNOLOGIES
Ke Technologies Structures

FOR AMLS VEHICLE

Near Term Technology Composite structures Reusable AI-Li tanks Durable metallic or ceramic TPS

OPTIONS
Advanced Technology "I3-AIcomposite structures and TPS Reusable thermoplastic hydrogen tanks Reusable AI-Li oxygen tanks Extra lightweight SSME derivative Variable mixture ratio rocket Turborocket, ramjet, scramjet propulsion

Space Shuttle (reference) AI structures AI tanks Limited composites Ceramic TPS

Propulsion

SSME

Lightweight SSME derivative Turbojet/ramjet ATR

Subsystems

Hydraulic power Monoprop APU Hypergolic OMS/RCS Fuel cells

Electromechanical actuators All-electric Lightweight fuel cells, batteries Cryogenic/gaseous OMS/RCS Fault-tolerant/self check

Lightweight subsystems using advanced materials Actively cooled or carbon-carbon inlets and nozzles

TECHNOLOGY

EFFECT ON ROCKET VEHICLE WEIGHT

Near-Term Technology

LAUNCH

1970's STS Technology 10

Advanced Technology
./////s

liftoff Gross weight, MIb

ii///// //////_

2 I--

Jwo-sTage
r////_

/
I 0

I 10

t 20

"z

I 30

,,I 40

z//Y/l/

50

6O

70

Dry weight reductions

from STS, percent

32

NASP MATERIAL AND STRUCTURE BENEFITS FOR ROCKET

TECHNOLOGY SSTO

Advanced carbon-carbon nose cap and leading edges -_

500 r 400

Titanium aluminide structure

hydrogen

tank

1
Aluminum-lithium oxygen tank !/,I

Dry weight, KIb

300 200

Slush propellanls

100 0

Near-term

Advanced

Technology

Variable mixture ratio engines (rocket technology)

FACTORS

INFLUENCING

ROCKET

VEHICLE

SIZING

SSTO Vehicle weight

Advancing technology --_ Design for performance __-Design for operations, Increasing payload, --_ safety, reliability margins

33

DESIGN
5000 4000 Gross 3000 W_l_'t' -

FOR PERFORMANCE

ROCKET

SSTO

VEHICLE

4,206K---_]

2000 _
I

1000 -

500 400 Dry 300 427K

we_Igbht' 200100 0 Minimum Subsystems Slush Propellants VMR Engine

Near-term Technology

Advanced Materials

Advanced SSME

DESIGN

FOR OPERATIONS

ROCKET

SSTO VEHICLE

4000 Gross 5000 f 3000 weight'2000

'[
0 5OO 4OO Dry 3OO weight, Ib 200 100 i

o F, , l-_q '-q
Design for Performance Robust Subsystem 15 percent Margin No Slush Propellants Engine-Out Capability Crew Escape Module

34

AMLS

DESIGN COMPARISONS
and technology levels

Design to same mission requirements Compare Compare rocket vs. airbreather single-stage

systems systems

vs. two-stage

Near-term

Technology

Advanced

Technology

Rocket two-stage Air-breather/rocket Rocket single-stage two-stage

Rocket two-stage Airbreather/rocket two-stage

Rocket single stage (SSME-derived) Rocket single stage (VMR) Airbreather/rocket single stage (ATR)

Airbreather/rocket single stage (SCRAM)

NEAR-TERM

TECHNOLOGY
MISSION

AMLS

10K POLAR

Dry weight, klb Two-stage rocket 167

Two-stage airbreather/rocket

-------r-------

440

SSTO rocket

427

/
0 1O0 Length, ft 200 300 35

"ADVANCED

TECHNOLOGY

AMLS
Dry weight, KIb

10K POLAR MISSION

Two-stage rocket Two-stage airbreather/rocket SSTO SSME rocket SSTO VMR rocket ATR/rocket SSTO Conical AB SSTO 0 100 Length, ft 200 300

99

221

125

112

214

157

TOTAL

IDEAL VELOCITY

REQUIRED

TO REACH

ORBIT

60000 50000 40000 Delta V, ft/sec 30000 20000 10000 0

Losses
- _ Flequired

36

RELATIVE
Hydrogen

PROPELLANT

COSTS

costs = 20 x Oxygen costs Oxygen (liquid or triple point), KIb Hydrogen (liquid or slush), KIb 155 548 100 179 171 126 192 452 Ratio of propellant costs to baseline rockets 1.00 2.73 1.00 1.47 1.00 0.81 1.01 2.03

Technology level

Vehicle

Near term

Two-stage

rocket

932 53 598 237 1024 1059 638 0

Two-stage AB Advanced Two-stage Two-stage rocket AB

SSME-SSTO VMR-SSTO ATR-SSTO Conical AB SSTC

OPERATIONS

TRADE

I_aiF dataI
I OMS eng. I

I
Launch pad

14 I

landing gear A thermal P ,he, umat,ics Hydraulics

IAPUI IIAP I
Adv' support sys.
Advl airbreather Adv. rocket

Rocket System Option Figures of merit: Time Manl_ower

Airbreather System Option

37

KEY FINDINGS
IOC/technology

OF LaRC STUDIES

levels crucial to vehicle options technology) technology)- two-stage SSTO systems

IOC 2005 (near-term IOC 2015 (advanced

Ground operations (a key to life-cycle cost) require detailed system and facility trades to discriminate between rocket and air-breathing options Missions and flight operations may be discriminator

Rocket options best for payload-to-orbit accelerator missions (lowest dry weight two-stage and SSTO systems indicative of lowest DDT&E costs) Air-breathing options provide unique capabilities Offset launch } Selectable orbital elements - All-azimuth launch - Cruise capability - Loiter - Recall
n

38