Transcript Slide 1

U.S. Commercial Space
Presented to
Association of Space Explorers
by
Jim Voss
Why Commercial Space?

It is US National Space Exploration Policy
– Vision for Space Exploration, Jan 2004:

The United States will Promote…
commercial participation in exploration…
to further U.S. scientific, security, and economic interests.
– NASA Authorization Act of 2005:


The Administrator... shall develop a commercialization plan to
support the human missions to the Moon and Mars, to support lowEarth orbit activities…
There are commercial markets, so money to be made
Multiple Existing Markets
• NASA cargo and crew to the
International Space Station
• U.S. national security needs
• Personal spaceflight
• Industrial-Corporate applications
ISS Cargo Supply Strategy
• NASA is developing an ISS Cargo Supply Strategy that uses a mixed
fleet (ATV, HTV, Progresses and US domestic cargo service providers).
• Strategy requires purchase of domestic delivery services as soon as
available.
• Purchase of Russian cargo delivery services will bridge the gap
between Shuttle and the new US domestic cargo service providers.
• NASA has initiated planning for commercial cargo services
procurement
NASA stated up-mass requirement for ISS lifetime re-supply by US
domestic commercial services is approximately 80 metric tons
ISS Cargo Requirements
 ISS continually assesses cargo upmass
requirements
 Current assessment of upmass shortfall beyond
baseline Shuttle, ATV, HTV, Progress capabilities
to be met by US commercial services:
5
Commercial Orbital Transportation Services
(COTS)
The Commercial Crew & Cargo Program Office established to:
– Implement U.S. Space Exploration policy with investments
to stimulate the commercial space industry
– Facilitate U.S. private industry demonstration of cargo and
crew space transportation capabilities
– Create a market environment in which commercial space
transportation services are available to Government and
private sector customers
COTS Implementation

$500M budgeted for the demonstration of
commercial orbital transportation capabilities

Technical Development/Demonstration
competition in 2006
– includes an option for crew transportation
demonstrations

Planning initiated within NASA for
procurement of ISS commercial cargo services
by 2010
COTS Participants


Received 21 proposals from 20 companies across
the full spectrum of industry
Down selected to 6 finalists – 2 selected for
funding
–
–
–
–
–
–
Andrews Space
SpaceDev
SPACEHAB
Transformational Space Corp. (t/Space)
Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) - Funded
Rocketplane Kistler (RpK) - Funded
Other Partnerships

Non-funded Space Act Agreements provide NASA
technical assistance to five companies :
–
–
–
–
–
Constellation Services International (CSI)
PlanetSpace
SpaceDev
SPACEHAB
Transformational Space Corp (t/Space)
COTS Flight Demonstrations
2008
2009
2010
2011
Cargo Demo Flight 1 (Sep)
2012
Crew Demo Flight 1 (Jun)
Cargo Demo Flight 2 (Jun)
Crew Demo Flight 2 (Dec)
Cargo Demo Flight 3 to ISS (Sep)
Pre Demo Flight 1 Risk Reduction Flight (Nov)
Crew Demo
Flight 3 (Apr)
Crew Demo
Flight (Aug)
Cargo Demo Flight 1 to ISS (Jan)
Cargo Demo Flight 2 to ISS (Mar)
Funded Milestone
Optional Milestone
10
SpaceX Concept
Description:
 Falcon 9 Launch Vehicle
 Dragon Crew/Cargo Spacecraft
Proposed Features:
 Flexible crew and cargo configurations
 Recoverable launch vehicle and spacecraft
 ISS cargo delivery & return demonstration
planned for completion by September 2009
 NASA Investment: $278 M
11
SpaceX Milestone Highlights
 FY06
 Program Management Plan/Kickoff Completed
 FY07
 System Requirements ReviewsCompleted
 Preliminary Design Review Completed
 Financing Round Completed
 Critical Design Review
 FY08
 Financing Round
 System/Design/Test/Readiness Reviews
 Orbital Test Flight 1
 FY09
 Delta System/Design/Test/Readiness Reviews
 Orbital Test Flight 2
 Orbital Demonstration Mission to ISS
12
Rocketplane Kistler Concept
Description:
 K-1 Launch Vehicle
 Orbital Vehicle
 Pressurized/Unpressurized Cargo/Crew
Modules
Proposed Features:
 Reusable launch and orbital vehicles that
return to launch site
 Modular crew and cargo configurations
 Demonstration planned for completion by
March 2009
 NASA Investment $207 M
13
RpK Milestone Highlights
 FY06
 Program Management Plan/Kickoff Completed
 Financing Round Completed
 FY07
 System Requirements Review Completed
 Financing Round -
Failed
 Critical Design Reviews
 FY08
 Engine Test Firing
 System/Design/Test/Readiness Reviews
 Launch Vehicle Complete/Ship
 Certification of Flight Readiness
 FY09
 Risk Reduction Orbital Test Flight
 Orbital Demonstration Mission to ISS (internal/pressurized)
 Orbital Demonstration Mission to ISS (external/unpressurized)
14
CSI Concept
 CSI cargo canister launched to orbit
by variety of launch vehicles
 Russian Progress vehicle acts as
tug to retrieve cargo canister and
dock with ISS
15
PlanetSpace Concept
ELV rocket based on legacy
V-2 engines
USAF FDL-7 based lifting
body spacecraft
16
SpaceDev Concept
Reusable - Piloted Lifting Body
Derived from NASA HL-20
Low Re-Entry Deceleration Loads (< 1.5 g)
Large Cross Range (1600 km)
Conventional runway landing
Exceptional Crew Safety: (Non-explosive
space vehicle propulsion)
Onboard hybrid propulsion & high lift
provide flexible abort options
HL
Titan III
Orbital Hybrid
Booster
Atlas V
Booster
Ares
Booster +
Hybrid
17
SPACEHAB Concept
 ARCTUS Evolved Transfer Vehicle
assembled from existing flight
certified components
(Centaur Upper Stage)
 Compatible with existing launch
vehicles
18
t/Space Concept
Air launched booster uses vapor
pressurization
Piloted capsule
Exceptional crew safety via air
launch and Discoverer/Corona
capsule
Separately launched cargo
module
Very low cost solution
19
Future




US Commercial spaceflight continues to develop
NASA will solicit replacement for Rpk
Suborbital tourism providers are viable
There is a market for high cost cargo
– NASA will solicit for commercial services to ISS
– Existing and developing launch systems support this

There is a market for low cost cargo
– Existing launch systems do not support this
– Technology improvements required