we are closer to mars today than we have ever been…
TRANSCRIPT
We Are Closer to Mars Today Than We Have Ever Been…
Aerojet Rocketdyne Capabilities Can Provide the Needed Propulsion and Power Technology
2
1940’s 1950’s 1960’s 1970’s 1980’s 1990’s 2000’s 2010’s
AerobeeFirst
Production Launcher
Apollo SPSFirst Human Rated Lunar
Vehicle VoyagerFurthest,
Longest Life Spacecraft
VikingFirst Mars Lander
NERVA NRX/ESTFirst Nuclear Flight Type Rocket Engine
SNAP 10AFirst Production Space Nuclear Fission Power
NEARFirst Asteroid
Lander
CassiniFirst
Spacecraft to Orbit Saturn
MessengerFirst Spacecraft to Orbit Mercury
New Horizons
First Pluto Flyby
AEHFFirst USA Hall Thruster Flight
MMRTGFirst Multi-mission
Radioisotope
Mars Science Lab
Deepest Throttling Monoprop
Engine
Saturn VLargest Production
Human Rated Rocket Engines
JATOFirst Jet Assisted Take-off from an Aircraft Carrier
PolarisFirst Submarine Launched ICBM
First Solid BallisticMissile
Atlas V SRBLargest US Monolithic
Solid Rocket Motor
TelstarFirst Flight of a Hydrazine
Arcjet
NTP LEU
Concept
SEP Demo
Surface Power
Concept
Some Capabilities Areas AR is Working
FUTURE CAPABILITIES ARE NEEDED TO OPEN THE SOLAR SYSTEM TO HUMAN EXPLORATION AND SETTLEMENT AT MARS
3
Today’s Capabilities No Heavy Lift
− Many flights− In-space assembly
Chemical Propulsion Only− Long trip times to Mars− Very large mass to Earth orbit− Limited split mission benefit
Solar and Radioisotope Power− Limited maximum power
capability and budgets
Future Capabilities In-work Heavy lift (SLS)
• Boost & Upper-stage
Solar Electric Propulsion
Nuclear power & propulsion
Deep Space Habitats Life Support (H2O, Food) Radiation Protection Crew & Cargo Landers ISRU-Resource Utilization Deep-space High Thrust
Foundational Capabilities Needed for Mars
4
Going to Mars with humans requires a diverse set of “tools”
Mars Descent Lander
Mars Ascent Vehicle
Ref: B. Drake/NASA image with modification per CR Joyner
Ascent Vehicle• ISRU*
influenced
Large EDL & Surface Habitat• ISRU* influenced
Transit Habitat
In-Space Propulsion
Earth to Mars to Earth
Solar Electric100 to 200 kWe
Cargo
4 crew for 1000 days
Orion
Space Launch System
Earth and Near Earth
• 4 Crew• 21 Days• < 12 km/s
• 70 & 130 t• EUS• Large shroud
Mars Orbit to Surface
High ThrustCrew
ISRU=In-Situ Resource Utilization – discussed later*
Some Mars Architectures Options Being Considered
5
LRO
LEO
Phobos Orbit
Elliptical Mars OrbitLGA
LEO=Low Earth OrbitLRO=Lunar Retrograde OrbitLGA=Lunar Gravity AssistYr=YearSEP=Solar Electric Propulsion
Mars Stay 300-500 daysIn Orbit or Surface
Earth to Mars Crew300+ days
Mars to Earth180+ days
High & Low Thrust Hybrid
Combined
High Thrust
Earth to Mars Cargo1200 days
Earth to Mars Crew180+ days
Mars to Earth300+ days
SEP Pre-positions
Cargo
6 -12 SLS
~2 SLS Launches per Yr1 Mars Mission per 2 Yrs
Architecture Studies
• AR examined utility of SEP for logistics of deep space exploration dating back into the early 2000’s
– HRT program supporting lunar logistics – 2005
– Augustine committee – 2008– Cis-lunar tugs – 2010– HLPT study - 2011– Waypoint cis-lunar logistics - 2012
• Current work examining SEP cargo vehicle power level trades
– Updates to HLPT using SLS– Trades on departure orbit and power level
• Future Work– LDRO starting orbits to Mars– No Mars entry spiral– Multiple tier approach
Example Copernicus run showing SEP trajectory
Approved for Public Release
Affordable Crew Transportation Options
• If 6 month transfer times are required– LOX/methane with ISRU– LOX/H2 with long-term cryo storage– Nuclear thermal propulsion with long-term cryo storage
• Least number of launches per Mars expedition
• If longer crew transfer times are acceptable then storable chemical + SEP becomes an option
– Potential benefit of commonality between cargo and crew propulsion systems
7
• CHEMICAL PROPULSION OPTIONS ARE HIGH TRL BUT REQUIRE MORE LAUNCHES WITH IN-SPACE ASSEMBLY – CONCERNS ARE ISRU OR LT CRYO-STORAGE
• NUCLEAR THERMAL PROPULSION IS LOWER TRL AND REQUIRES LT CRYO STORAGE
Nuclear Thermal Propulsion
• Twice the Isp of LOX/H2; about 60% the best chem launch mass
• Safety and regulatory issues drive cost
• Key affordability drivers:– Overall DDT&E program approach– Fuel selection drives security, system
complexity and testing costs– Thrust class impacts testing cost and
number of NTRs/mission
8
• A COMBINED SPLIT MARS ARCHITECTURE (SEP ~100 KWE CARGO) HELPS NTP AFFORDABILITY AND HELPS THRUST DOWNSIZING
• NO BIG ENGINES WITH BIG TEST FOOTPRINTS• USE AS MUCH OFF-SHELF TECHNOLOGY AS POSSIBLE
FROM “DETERMINING AN AFFORDABLE MARS MISSION CAPABLE NTP THRUST SIZE”, BY R. JOYNER ET AL.; NETS, FEBRUARY 2015
How Do We Get Sustained Survivability at MarsUse Evolutionary Approach …
9
Cis-Lunar Habitats for Proving Ground Missions in 2020’s
Approved for Public Release
Source: Thales Alenia Space
Source: NASA
• Habs prove out systems requiredfor Mars transfers
• Missions for Orion/SLS in 2020’s ofprogressively longer duration
A Progression of Cis-Lunar Missions
• Using the SLS Block 1B configuration and Orion
• Many options for pressurized volume
• Key to habs is what goes inside • ECLSS,
• Biological experiments,
• Radiation protection, etc.
• Duration can be increased by adding elements
• Logistics support via commercial model - SEP plays well
Key Factors in Cis-Lunar Mission Plans
• Progress toward Mars readiness
• Maintain cadence that keeps public / political interest
• Stay within budget guidelines
• No detours / dead-ends / blind alleys
• Reuse is a “plus” –learn from what we have done on ISS and
shuttle
SLS Launch Configurations
13
Notional Cis-Lunar Mission Progression
Earth
2025 20262024
LEO(407km circ)
2023202220212020 2027 2028 2029
LDRO(70,000km)
Lunar Surface
20 – 30 days
30 – 60 days60 – 90 days
Telerobotics
90 – 120 days
Lunar Sorties (BYOLL)
SLS Cadence of 1
per year
Europa SEP ResupplyMars
First Mars Cargo
Launches
Logistics for Cis-Lunar Habs
• Study results for cis-lunar habitat logistics show significant savings for cargo delivery using SEP
• Additional modules can also be delivered to build hab capability
• Cargo can be delivered using commercial or international LVs
Initial Wet Mass at ISS (kg)
Payload (kg)
Xenon (kg)
Trip Time (years)
5000 2500 1500 0.7
10000 5800 3000 1.4
15000 9000 4500 2.15
20000 12300 6000 2.9
Approved for Public Release
Conclusions
• Split Cargo / Crew Architecture provides large cost savings for early Mars campaign
– Can transfer approximately 80% of required assets by mass– Saves 60% of total campaign cost when compared to earlier DRMs
• Power level of SEP for cargo can be reduced to 150 – 200 kWe– 20 mT – 40 mT payloads can be delivered in less than 3 years
• Modular SEP approach allows for scaling, extensibility, and economies of scale
• Early demonstration of SEP and Deep Space Habitat capabilities can be accomplished via (a) cis-lunar mission(s)
Approved for Public Release