SlideShare a Scribd company logo

Dumbacher2012 pmchallenge

Download as PPTX, PDF
N
NASAPMC

This document provides an overview of NASA's Exploration Systems Development program, which is developing the Space Launch System (SLS), Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), and associated ground systems. It discusses the analysis of alternatives that was conducted to select these systems and an incremental approach to deliver beyond low Earth orbit exploration capabilities. Key decisions included validating Orion as the crew vehicle and selecting a heavy-lift launch vehicle concept using hydrogen and rocket propellant technologies.

TechnologyBusiness
1 of 51
Downloaded 43 times
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Exploration Systems Development Program Management Overview Dan Dumbacher February 2012
The NASA Vision To reach for new heights and reveal the unknown, so that what we do and learn will benefit all humankind. NASA Strategic Goals 1. Extend and sustain human activities across the solar system. 2. Expand scientific understanding of the Earth and the universe in which we live. 3. Create the innovative new space technologies for our exploration, science, and economic future. 4. Advance aeronautics research for societal benefit. 5. Enable program and institutional capabilities to conduct NASA‟s aeronautics and space activities. 6. Share NASA with the public, educators, and students to provide opportunities to participate in our mission, foster innovation, and contribute to a strong national economy 2
Stepping Stone Exploration 3
Human Exploration & Operations: Organization 4 Current as of February 2012
Exploration Systems Development These programs will develop the launch and spaceflight vehicles that will provide the initial capability for crewed exploration missions beyond LEO. – The Space Launch System (SLS) program is developing the heavy lift vehicle that will launch the crew vehicle, other modules, and cargo for these missions – The Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) program is developing the vehicle that will carry the crew to orbit, provide emergency abort capability, sustain the crew while in space, and provide safe re- entry from deep space return velocities – The Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) program is developing the necessary launch site infrastructure to prepare, assemble, test, launch and recover the SLS and Orion MPCV flight systems 5
Organization and Interfaces ESD Division and Programs HEO/ESD Level Exploration Systems Line of Authority Development HEO RMAO Line of Communication (ESD) Cross-Program Programmatic and ESD Systems Integration Strategic Integration RMO (CSI) (PSI) ESD HQ Program Agents PP&C Integration Team to (Reach back (PIT) Support) Program Technical Budget Schedule Working Integration WG Integration WG Groups Config Mgt & Risk Document Mgt Integration WG WG Integrated Transition Programmatic Integration WG Communication Program Level Ground Systems Development & Space Launch Multi-Purpose Crew Operations System Vehicle (GSDO) (SLS) (MPCV) 6
Analysis of Alternatives Overview 7
Objectives of Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) • Focus on delivering beyond Low Earth Orbit (BEO) capability for human exploration as expeditiously and safely as possible • Assume a flat-line budget • Develop an integrated capability by aligning MPCV, SLS, and GSDO concepts through a set of common ground rules and assumptions • Develop a budget profile to enable a wedge to be created for future in-space systems development 8
Integrated Plan Leading to Orion, SLS, and GSDO Information & Decisions FY 2011 FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT FORMULATION PLAN SLS, Orion, 21CGS ALT Integrate SLS, Orion, GSDO ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS INTEGRATED SLS, Orion, GSDO FINAL ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS DRAFT PRG GUIDANCE INTEGRATED SLS, Orion, GSDO ALTERNATIVE ARCHITECURE ARCHITECURE SELECTION ANNOUNCEMENT INDEPENDENT COST ASSESSMENT (ICA) FINAL REPORT TO NASA SLS ACQUISITION SECTION 309 REPORT December 23 9
Orion MPCV Analysis Approach • The MPCV Analysis sought to validate or challenge whether the beyond-LEO version of the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (the Reference Vehicle Design) is the most effective approach through: – Understanding progress to date on the Orion development effort – Validating whether the Orion requirements closely match MPCV requirements consistent with the Authorization Act – Examining and implementing ways to be able to deliver an affordable and achievable crew vehicle as soon as possible. For example: • Streamlining government oversight and insight activities to ensure we are focusing on the key-risk items • Implementing an incremental approach to developing and building vehicle capabilities • Planning a more innovative and cost-effective vehicle qualification plan, utilizing distributed test labs, for example • NASA is also exploring other affordability measures including consolidating facilities and re-using test assets 10
Decision for Orion as MPCV • Examined technical, risk and cost implications of replacing functionality of MPCV with in- space vehicle and planned Commercial Crew capabilities • CC-Based Approach produces large increases in required mission mass and associated number of launches (factor of 2 - 3) over Capability-Driven Reference with significant impacts on safety risk and P&O cost – Increases complexity of in-space vehicle assembly and number of elements required implying lower reliability system – Increases ground launch infrastructure and/or technology development – Introduces unique mission-critical events and additional Loss-of-Crew scenarios – “Launch-on-Demand” CC capability required to assure crew survivability in many abort scenarios – Parametric costs estimates indicate recurring cost delta per mission provides insufficient P&O funding for SLS and eliminates funding wedge for future capabilities given the flat-line budget Assessment confirms the requirements for an MPCV 11
SLS Analysis Approach Approach: • Leverage three government Requirement Analysis Cycle (RAC) Teams to create and study different design concepts that leverage capability across American industry • In parallel, solicit industry input and concepts via study contract input Implementation: • Team studies (Fall 2010) concluded without architecture decisions • Government Requirements Analysis Cycle (RAC) – Three competing configurations with fourth team looking at cross-cutting affordability – Approaches to affordability addressed by all 3 teams – Common requirements, goals/threshold approach - tradable – Incorporate incremental inputs from NASA Heavy Lift study contracts – Out brief to SLS Feb 16-18 • Contractor Heavy Lift Study Contracts–awarded November 2010 – 13 Contractors, $650K each, 6 month studies – broad SOW ideas – Initial Out briefs Feb 22-24 – Final Out briefs Apr 25-28 12
Analyzed SLS Concepts LOX/H2 – Reference Vehicle Design LOX/RP Modular Large RP configuration (large Modular RP configuration Hydrogen core configuration with diameter tanks) with multiple (smaller diameter tanks) with Description solid strap-on boosters; engine options, incl. NASA/USAF multiple engine options, incl. multiple evolution paths common engine NASA/USAF common engine Lift Capability 70 mT – 150 mT 100 mT – 172 mT 70 mT – 130 mT Note: Images based on government design solutions from RAC teams 13
SLS Decision Philosophy/Rationale • Maintains US leadership in LOX/LH2 technology – LOX/LH2 core uses RS-25E engines; LOX/LH2 Upper Stage uses J-2X – Establishes fixed central design path with logical use of existing strength in design and manufacture – Maintains existing knowledge base, skills, infrastructure, workforce, and industrial base for existing state of the art systems • Minimizes Unique Configurations – Evolutionary Path to 130mT allows incremental development; thus progress to be made even with constrained budgets – Allows early flight tests for MPCV – Provides flexible/modular design and system for varying launch needs – Gains synergy, thus reducing DDTE by building core and upper stage in parallel, allowing common tooling and engine feed components • Provides a Balanced Approach for Acquisition – Opportunity for use of existing contracts for development phase enabling a fast start – ASM will provide official agency decision on acquisition strategy – Allows for competition for best value to the government 14
Orion MPCV Overview 15
Orion MPCV Vehicle The Orion MPCV Crew Module (CM) design divides • Provide safe habitat critical functions from launch through landing and recovery among multiple • Conduct reentry and modules to landing as a stand alone module maximize the Launch Abort System performance of • Provide protection for the CM from atmospheric loads and the integrated heating during first stage flight • Safely jettison after successful spacecraft design pad operations and first stage flight Service Module (SM) • Provide support to the CM from launch through CM separation to missions with minimal impact to the CM Spacecraft Adapter • Provide structural connection to the launch vehicle from ground operations through CM Separation • Provide protection for SM components from atmospheric loads and heating during first stage flight 16
Orion MPCV Technology Advancements Propulsion Avionics Abort Motor, Attitude Control Motor, Algorithmic Autocode Generation, ARINC-653/DO- High Burn Rate Propellant for Solid 178 Standard Operating System, Baseband Rocket Motors Processor, High Speed/High Density Memory Benefits: High reliability launch abort, Devices, Honeywell HX5000 Northstar ASIC steerable solid rocket motors Benefits: Low cost, high performance, open architecture Navigation Communications Atmospheric Skip Entry, Flash Interoperable Communications, Lidar, Vision Navigation Communication Network Router Card, Digital Sensors, Autonomous Rendezvous and Video Recorder, Phased Array Antennas Docking, Fast Acquisition GPS Benefits: Low cost, high reliability, open Receiver, High Density Camera Sensors architecture Benefits: Low cost, high reliability, autonomous docking Life Support & Safety Solid Amine Swing-Bed, Backup and Structures Survival Systems, Closed Loop Life Composite Spacecraft Support, Contingency Land Landing, Structures, Human Rated Spacecraft Enhanced Waste Management, Primary Structures Environmental Control, Hazard Detection, Development, Advanced Manufacturing Isolation and Recovery Benefits: Low cost, low mass Benefits: Low consumables, long mission duration, high reliability, low operations cost Thermal Protection Power High Energy Density Lithium Ion System Batteries, Column Grid Array Ablative Heatshield with Composite Packaging (CGA), Direct Energy Carrier Structure Power Transfer System Benefits: Low cost, high reliability, high Benefits: Low cost, high energy (Beyond LEO) entry reliability, low mass, long mission duration 17
SLS Overview 18
SLS Planned Evolution Block 1A – 105 t incorporates Advanced Boosters Block 1 – 70 t Block 2 – 130 t 19
SLS Key Characteristics • Human-Rated • Affordable – Constrained budget environment – Maximum use of common elements and existing assets, infrastructure and workforce – Competitive opportunities for affordability on-ramps • Initial Capability: 70-100 metric tons (t), 2017-2021 – Serves as primary transportation for Orion and exploration missions – Provides back-up capability for crew/cargo to ISS • Evolved capability: 105 t, post-2021 – Includes Advanced Booster – Allows incorporation of any products from the Advanced Development NRA focusing on risk reduction • Evolved capability: 130 t, post-2021 – Offers large volume for science missions and payloads – Modular and flexible, right-sized for mission requirements SLS First Flight (Non-crewed) in 2017 20
Summary by Element: Risk Reduction Incorporated in Design • Boosters (3-phased approach) – Phase I: 5-segment Solid Rocket Booster in-scope modification to existing Ares contract with ATK for initial flights through 2021 – Phases II and III: Advanced Boosters • II: Engineering demonstration and risk reduction via NASA Research Announcement (NRA): Full and Open Competition in FY12; award by FY13 • III: Design, Development, Test & Evaluation (DDT&E): Full and Open Competition (RFP target FY15) • Stages – Core/Upper Stage: Justification for Other Than Full and Open Competition (JOFOC) to Boeing, modifying current Ares Upper Stage contract – Instrument Unit Avionics: In-scope modification to existing Ares contract with Boeing; consolidated with Stages contract to Boeing • Engines – Core Stage Engine: RS-25d JOFOC to existing Space Shuttle contract with Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne (PWR) – Upper Stage Engine: J-2X in-scope modification to existing Ares contract with PWR – Future Core Stage Engine: Separate contract activity to be held in the future • Spacecraft and Payload adapter and Fairing – Initial design: Adapter and Fairing design and development in-house through early design phase – Fairing Full and Open Competition planned for FY13 21
SLS Trades and Vehicle Reliability SLS Trades consider impacts on performance, safety and budget. • SLS has multiple trade studies (20+) on-going – Number of engines, stage testing at SSC vs. FRF, etc. • Results of all trades must be reconciled prior to establishing a complete baseline configuration addressing all 3 factors • Planning to baseline configuration at end of SRR/SDR – May 2012 • SLS Program is still in formulation phase Reliability predictions for all vehicles • Models use STS data for heritage and heritage derived hardware, e.g. SSME • Model includes flight path and time • Model used to predict LOM and LOC for 4 cases for each vehicle configuration: No Engine-Out (EO), Core EO, Upper Stage EO, and Both Stages EO • Estimates used to trade against performance and costs • Estimates will be used to develop reliability allocations for Elements post SDR 22
SLS Procurement Milestones • SLS Acquisition Overview Synopsis, posted September 22, 2011 • Industry Day at Marshall Space Flight Center on September 29 • SLS Advanced Development RFI, posted October 7, 2011 • SLS Advanced Booster Engineering Demonstration and Risk Reduction RFI, posted October 7, 2011 • Industry Day at Michoud Assembly Facility on November 14 • SLS Advanced Booster Engineering Demonstration and Risk Reduction Draft NRA, posted December 12, 2011 • SLS Advanced Development Draft NRA, posted February 1, 2012 • SLS Advanced Booster Engineering Demonstration and Risk Reduction NRA, posted February 9, 2012 • Industry Day at Marshall Space Flight Center on February 14 23
SLS Philosophy for Evolutionary Upgrades Stakeholders & Customer Needs Improvements in Affordability, Reliability, and Performance Missions Block 0 Design/Development Block 0 Mission Requirements Block 1 Advanced Development Block 1 Design/Development Block 1 Mission Requirements Block 2 Technology Advanced Development Block 2 Design/Development Block 2 Requirements Maturation* Mission Block 3 Advanced Development Block 3 Requirements Technology Maturation* Design/Development Block 4 Advanced Development Requirements Technology Maturation* * NASA, Office of Chief Technologist 24
SLS Development Key Tenets • Utilize an evolutionary development strategy that allows for incremental progress within constrained budgets • Incorporate mature technical solutions into SLS program-phased block upgrades • Optimize use of common elements and existing assets for a flexible/modular design Improve Affordability, Reliability, or Performance 25
Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) Overview 26
Flexible Approach Horizontal Launch & Landing Small Vehicle Launch Clean Floor Processing Flexible Launch Capability Heavy Class Launch Capability Multi-Use Integration (VAB) 27
GSDO Program Highlights • The demolition of the Fixed Service Structure/Rotating Service Structure (FSS/RSS) at Launch Complex 39-B was completed. Before After • Multi-Purpose Processing Facility (MPPF) Phase 1 modifications (HVAC) are progressing. • Space Shuttle Program facility turnover is underway. • Provided significant contribution to the Interagency Working Group Launch Infrastructure Modernization Report 28
Orion MPCV Ground Test Article 29
SLS Configurations 385 ft 315 ft 209 ft 0 70t - Block l crew 105 - Block lA cargo 105t - Block IA crew 130t_Block ll cargo 130t Block ll crew 30
Notional GSDO Range
Overall Flight Test Strategy 32
Mission/Flight Test Objectives • Flights are needed to test critical mission events and demonstrate performance in relevant environments – Abort, jettison, separation, chute deploy, Re-entry and TPS performance in BEO conditions, Integrated vehicle systems performance, and environments validation – Data collected from flights will be used to eliminate additional SLS test flights as the SLS configuration evolves – Dedicated flight tests will not be required for incorporation of competitive boosters, RS-25E, or the upper stage (with J-2X) • Four missions/test flights planned to meet minimum mission/flight test – Exploration Flight Test-1 (EFT-1), an orbital, uncrewed test flight in 2014 provides MPVC system level tests and risk reduction opportunity – Ascent Abort-2 (AA-2), an abort test in high dynamic pressure environment – Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1), an Un-crewed BEO (lunar flyby) and EM-2, a crewed BEO flight (includes 3-4 day lunar orbit) will provide more system level testing and shakedown 33
MPCV Test Campaign Reduces Risk While Maturing the Design GTA Acoustic, Modal, Vibe Testing Environment compatibility Water Drop Tests Correlate structural math models in water landing conditions Parachute Tests Nominal and contingency parachute performance tests Wind Tunnel Testing Aero/aerothermal database validation for Orion configuration TPS Arc Jet Testing Heatshield model correlation for entry performance EFT-1 Test Article Manufacturing and Assembly First production primary structure built for orbital flight Pad Abort Test - May 6, 2010 Demo abort capability with prototype LAS 34
Exploration Flight Test 1 35
Exploration Mission – 1 (EM-1) BEO Un-crewed Flight • Mission description – Un-crewed circumlunar flight – free return trajectory – Mission duration ~7 days • Mission objectives – Demonstrate integrated spacecraft systems performance prior to crewed flight – Demonstrate high speed entry (~11 km/s) and TPS prior to crewed flight • Spacecraft configuration – Orion “Block 0 Lunar” • Launch vehicle configuration – SLS Block 0, 5 segment SRBs, 3 SSMEs, 70-80 t – Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS) • Launch site – KSC LC-39B 35
Exploration Mission – 2 (EM-2) BEO Crewed Flight • Mission description – Crewed lunar orbit mission – Mission duration 10-14 days • Mission objectives – Demonstrate crewed flight beyond LEO • Spacecraft configuration – Orion “Block 0 Lunar” • Launch vehicle configuration – SLS Block 0, 5 segment SRBs, 3 SSMEs, 70-80 t – Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS) • Launch site – KSC LC-39B 36
Affordability
Improving Affordability of Human Spaceflight Programs Accelerate Decision- Manage Program RQ & Maintain Competition & Making Velocity Contractor Interfaces Improve Acquisitions Flatten Organization - Make Affordability a Focus on Key Driving Clear Authority & Requirement Requirements Accountability Eliminate Non-Value Maximize Use of Push Reserves to Added NASA & FAR RQ Industry Standards Programs Define Strategy & Clear Implement “Should Cost” Reduce Frequency of Roles for Oversight/Insight Based Management Agency-level Reviews Develop Mitigation Plans for Incentivize Contractors Identify Best Practices & High Risks / Cost Drivers for Effective Cost Mgmt Implement Lessons Learned Adopt Appropriate Maximize Competition Streamline Certificate of Safety & Risk Posture thru the Life of Program Flight Readiness Process Leverage Use of Capitalize on Progress In-House Capability Payment Structures
Accelerate Decision-Making • Overhauled the Governance Structure – Flattened organization – removed a layer – Clear authority and accountability – Fewer decision-boards – Pushed reserves to the programs – Fewer meetings and streamlined reporting • Implementing a New, Efficient, Distributed Integration Approach – ESD leads with reach back to the Programs & Centers through - • ESD Office of Cross Program Systems Integration (CSI) • ESD Office of Programmatic & Strategic Integration (PSI) • Leveraging Lessons Learned – Constellation Program – Ares 1X Flight Demonstration Project – Standing Review Board – Booz Allen Hamilton – Industry Input on Affordability – 1-on-1 meetings and SLS BAA input – DoD Better Buying Power Initiatives – NASA/DAU Program Executability Workshop
Manage Program RQ & Contractor Interfaces • Including Affordability as a Requirement – Encouraging commonality and utilization of industry standards vs NASA unique requirements. – Streamlined and Minimized Key Driving Requirements • ESD issued only 21 level one requirements; CxP had several hundred. • Strategically focused staffing of insight / oversight of contractor performance – Minimize number of Gov‟t staff performing insight/oversight – Follow a Risk-based or a Hybrid approach – Focus and clarify Government roles pertaining to interactions with and direction to contractor. • Risk Management – ESD cannot afford to mitigate all risks; risk acceptance needs to be approved and documented. – Connecting risk approach to use of reserves will allow ESD to strategically choose the most important risks to mitigate.
Maintain Competition & Improve Acquisitions - • Conducting ‘Will Cost’ and ‘Should Cost’ Reviews – Conducted a „Should Cost‟ training session – Booz Allen support of Independent Cost Assessment – DoD Price Fighters assisting SLS IATs – DCMA to assist with „Should Cost‟ review of Contractor overhead • Implementing Contract Incentives for Cost Reductions • Issuing Multiple Lower-Level Contracts vs Large System Level – Reduces pass through of subcontracting overhead & fees – Enables greater insight and ability to define requirements – Enable direct employment of contractor performance incentives – Improves competition • SLS: Element-level contracts • Ground Dev & Ops: FP IDIQ contracts • Leveraging Existing Assets
ESD - A fresh start to improve affordability… • Major cost drivers in human space flight are organizational structures, requirements and acquisition strategy / contract management. • ESD and its programs are new, very different development programs in comparison to prior NASA experiences • This new beginning has enabled NASA to pursue a more efficient and affordable future to human space flight by implementing approaches to secure better buying power, such as: – Accelerating Decision-Making Velocity – Better Managing Program Requirements & Contractor Interfaces, and – Improving Acquisition Strategy and Implementation 43
Space Launch System Affordability Begins with Accountability • Evolvable Development Approach – Manage requirements within constrained, flat budgets – Leverage existing National capabilities • Liquid oxygen/hydrogen propulsion infrastructure • Manufacturing and launch-site facilities – Infuse new design solutions for affordability • Robust Designs and Margins – Performance traded for cost and schedule – Heritage hardware and manufacturing solutions – Adequate management reserves controlled at lower levels • Risk-Informed Government Insight/Oversight Model – Insight based on: • Historic failures • Industry partner past performance and gaps • Complexity and design challenges – Judicious oversight: • Discrete oversight vs. near continuous • Timely and effective decisions • Right-Sized Documentation and Standards – 80% Reduction in the number of Type 1 Data Requirement Documents from the Ares Projects – Increased use of industry practices and tailored NASA standards • Lean, Integrated Teams with Accelerated Decision Making – Simple, clear technical interfaces with contractors – Integrated Systems Engineering & Integration organization – Empowered decision makers at all levels – Fewer control Boards and streamlined change process National Aeronautics and Space Administration 8094_Affordability.44
Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle Affordability Actions • Orion/MPCV affordability initiatives over the past 12 months have reduced DDT&E cost and enabled schedule acceleration. • Initiatives include: – Streamlined government oversight and insight that focuses on key-risk items and collocation with Prime contractor in selected areas – Incremental approach to building and testing vehicle capabilities – Reduction in formal deliverables and simplified processes while retaining adequate rigor – Partnering with suppliers to analyze cost drivers and possible efficiencies – Consolidation of test labs and re-use of test articles 45
Ground Systems Development and Operations Approach to Affordability • Architecture leverages existing Shuttle/ISS and Constellation assets and avoids unnecessary costs to be affordable. – Relies heavily on “grandfathering” of these heritage systems with respect to code compliance. • LC39 Pad B (clean pad) • Uses modified Ares 1-ML • Integration: VAB – High Bay-3 • Utilizes CxP Crew/Crew Module Recovery Approach • Civil Servants perform the traditional “Prime” role for management & integration – Allows Ground Operations to quickly respond to changing program direction with minimal cost/schedule impact – Avoids overhead costs on subcontracts, and is different from the Shuttle-USA experience • Acquisition approach enables flexibility and maximizes competition. – Reduce schedule and procurement costs through „best value‟ fixed-price IDIQ contracts. Pre-qualify and pre-stage supplier pools (designers, fabricators, constructors): • Design IDIQ contracts (in place) • Construction IDIQ contracts (in place) • GSE Fabrication IDIQ contracts (in place) • Craft Labor contract for installation support (in planning)
We Can Reach Multiple Destinations Mars and Its Moons, Phobos and Deimos: – A premier destination for discovery: Is there life beyond Earth? How did Mars evolve? – True possibility for extended, even permanent, stays – Significant opportunities for international collaboration High-Earth Orbit (HEO)/Geosynchronous- – Technological driver for Earth Orbit (GEO)/Lagrange Points: space systems – Microgravity destinations beyond LEO – Opportunities for construction, fueling, and repair of complex in-space systems – Excellent locations for advanced space telescopes and Earth observatories Near-Earth Asteroids: Earth’s Moon: – Compelling science questions: – Witness to the birth of the Earth and How did the Solar System form? Where inner planets did Earth‟s water and organics come from? – Has critical resources to sustain humans – Planetary defense: Understanding and – Significant opportunities for commercial mitigating the threat of impact and international collaboration – Potential for valuable space resources – Excellent stepping stone for Mars Increasing Our Reach and Expanding Our Boundaries 8032 SLS 101 Briefing.47
MPCV Test Campaign - Status Reduces Risk While Maturing the Design GTA Acoustic, Modal, Vibe Testing Environment compatibility Water Drop Tests Correlate structural math models in water landing conditions Parachute Tests Nominal and contingency parachute performance tests Wind Tunnel Testing Aero/aerothermal database validation for Orion configuration TPS Arc Jet Testing Heatshield model correlation for entry performance EFT-1 Test Article Manufacturing and Assembly First production primary structure built for orbital flight Pad Abort Test - May 6, 2010 Demo abort capability with prototype LAS 48
SLS Status • SLS Program Office – Presented “Pass the Torch” lecture at U.S. Space and Rocket Center‟s Davidson Center for Space Exploration on Feb 2 – Kickoff meeting on Feb 15 for System Requirements Review (SRR) / System Definition Review (SDR) in Mar 2012 • Program Planning & Control – Baselined SLS Program Plan at the Program Control Board on Jan 26 – Hosted technical interchange meeting (TIM) for the Exploration Systems Division‟s integrated programmatic communications working group from Jan 30 – 31 • Procurement – Held SLS Industry Days for the SLS Program, Stages, and NASA Research Announcement (NRA) Advanced Booster Engineering Demonstration and Risk Reduction (EDRR), attended by over 670 companies and potential partners – Conducted SLS Advanced Development and Academia Industry Day on Feb 14 • Boosters – Held kick-off for Integrated Acquisition Team on Jan 13 – Discussed systems engineering and integration at ATK-Lakeside from Jan 23 – 26 • Engines – Completed 10 tests for J-2X Upper Stage Engine E10001 (~1,040 sec cumulative hot-fire time) – Successfully demonstrated full flight mission duration (500 sec) and 100 percent power level (235 sec) in 2011 – Conducting engine to facility control system checkouts in preparation for PPA-2 Test #1 • Stages – Baselined Integrated Acquisition Team Board on Jan 17 • Spacecraft & Payload Integration – Successfully tested 3‟ by 5‟ Manufacturing Test Panel 6003 at LaRC on Jan 19 – Baselined Exploration Flight Test 1 (EFT-1) MPCV-To-Stage Adapter (MSA) detailed schedule on Jan 20
GSDO Status • Mobile Launcher move to Pad B • Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) designs for cable removal and VAB door modifications complete • Crawler Transporter-2 moved into VAB HB-2 to continue modification • VAB Door Project contract awarded to USA • Pad B LH2/LO2 Cross Country Pedestal Refurbishment complete • Tank Refurbishment sandblasting and painting started • ML Structural Design Contract awarded to RS&H • Received tilt-up umbilical arm test article at the the Launch Equipment Test Facility (LETF) • LETF Testing is scheduled to start beginning of May, 2012 • Initiated construction on CRF facility to support Orion Launch Abort System (LAS) assembly for EFT1 • Orion Ground Test Article (GTA) at KSC for GSE development 50
Questions? www.nasa.gov 51

More Related Content

PPTX
Carsile.azarbain
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Tim.honeycutt
NASAPMC
 
PPTX
Bilardo.vince
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Newman lengyel dartpm-chal_case
NASAPMC
 
PPT
Armstrong
NASAPMC
 
PPT
Woods.edwards.pm challenge bpr presentation 2012 v1
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Ed.mango
NASAPMC
 
PPTX
D brown gbezos_shirshorn
NASAPMC
 
Carsile.azarbain
NASAPMC
 
Tim.honeycutt
NASAPMC
 
Bilardo.vince
NASAPMC
 
Newman lengyel dartpm-chal_case
NASAPMC
 
Armstrong
NASAPMC
 
Woods.edwards.pm challenge bpr presentation 2012 v1
NASAPMC
 
Ed.mango
NASAPMC
 
D brown gbezos_shirshorn
NASAPMC
 

What's hot (19)

PPTX
Shinn
NASAPMC
 
PPT
Ray.ronald
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Keer.beth
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Les.sorge
NASAPMC
 
PPTX
Dennehy richard mrozinski
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Dittemore.gary
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Charles.armstrong
NASAPMC
 
PPTX
K ingoldsby
NASAPMC
 
PPT
Oberhettinger
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Hurley.robert
NASAPMC
 
PPTX
Hill.terry
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Daisy.mueller
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Nona.cheeks
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Svarcas.rita
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Krishen
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Mullane stanley-hamilton-wise
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Bladwin.kristen
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Graham dave
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Smith.marshall.bryant
NASAPMC
 
Shinn
NASAPMC
 
Ray.ronald
NASAPMC
 
Keer.beth
NASAPMC
 
Les.sorge
NASAPMC
 
Dennehy richard mrozinski
NASAPMC
 
Dittemore.gary
NASAPMC
 
Charles.armstrong
NASAPMC
 
K ingoldsby
NASAPMC
 
Oberhettinger
NASAPMC
 
Hurley.robert
NASAPMC
 
Hill.terry
NASAPMC
 
Daisy.mueller
NASAPMC
 
Nona.cheeks
NASAPMC
 
Svarcas.rita
NASAPMC
 
Krishen
NASAPMC
 
Mullane stanley-hamilton-wise
NASAPMC
 
Bladwin.kristen
NASAPMC
 
Graham dave
NASAPMC
 
Smith.marshall.bryant
NASAPMC
 
Ad

Similar to Dumbacher2012 pmchallenge (20)

PDF
Stock gahm
NASAPMC
 
PPTX
Bauer.frank
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Thomas.diegelman
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Human Exploration Framework Team Presentation
Bill Duncan
 
PPTX
Dumbacher
NASAPMC
 
PPTX
Majerowicz
NASAPMC
 
PDF
ARCtek_Charts_Post_ETu
Matthew F. Reyes
 
PDF
Mitskevich amanda
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Ingoldsby.k.lee.y
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Smith.marshall.bryant
NASAPMC
 
PPTX
Ruszkowski.james
NASAPMC
 
PPTX
Ed mangopanelpm challengefinal
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Brady tim
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Kelly.j.crumbley.t
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Chris.hardcastle
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Hunter.h.shinn.s
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Shinn.s.hunter.h
NASAPMC
 
PPT
WE2.L10 - NASA's Evolving Approaches to Maximizing Applications Return from o...
grssieee
 
PDF
Mukai
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Unmanned Systems Summit Brochure
monicamckenzie
 
Stock gahm
NASAPMC
 
Bauer.frank
NASAPMC
 
Thomas.diegelman
NASAPMC
 
Human Exploration Framework Team Presentation
Bill Duncan
 
Dumbacher
NASAPMC
 
Majerowicz
NASAPMC
 
ARCtek_Charts_Post_ETu
Matthew F. Reyes
 
Mitskevich amanda
NASAPMC
 
Ingoldsby.k.lee.y
NASAPMC
 
Smith.marshall.bryant
NASAPMC
 
Ruszkowski.james
NASAPMC
 
Ed mangopanelpm challengefinal
NASAPMC
 
Brady tim
NASAPMC
 
Kelly.j.crumbley.t
NASAPMC
 
Chris.hardcastle
NASAPMC
 
Hunter.h.shinn.s
NASAPMC
 
Shinn.s.hunter.h
NASAPMC
 
WE2.L10 - NASA's Evolving Approaches to Maximizing Applications Return from o...
grssieee
 
Mukai
NASAPMC
 
Unmanned Systems Summit Brochure
monicamckenzie
 
Ad

More from NASAPMC (20)

PDF
Bejmuk bo
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Baniszewski john
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Yew manson
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Wood frank
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Wood frank
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Wessen randi (cd)
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Vellinga joe
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Trahan stuart
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Snow lee
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Smalley sandra
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Seftas krage
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Sampietro marco
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Rudolphi mike
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Roberts karlene
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Rackley mike
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Paradis william
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Osterkamp jeff
NASAPMC
 
PDF
O'keefe william
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Muller ralf
NASAPMC
 
PDF
Mulenburg jerry
NASAPMC
 
Bejmuk bo
NASAPMC
 
Baniszewski john
NASAPMC
 
Yew manson
NASAPMC
 
Wood frank
NASAPMC
 
Wood frank
NASAPMC
 
Wessen randi (cd)
NASAPMC
 
Vellinga joe
NASAPMC
 
Trahan stuart
NASAPMC
 
Snow lee
NASAPMC
 
Smalley sandra
NASAPMC
 
Seftas krage
NASAPMC
 
Sampietro marco
NASAPMC
 
Rudolphi mike
NASAPMC
 
Roberts karlene
NASAPMC
 
Rackley mike
NASAPMC
 
Paradis william
NASAPMC
 
Osterkamp jeff
NASAPMC
 
O'keefe william
NASAPMC
 
Muller ralf
NASAPMC
 
Mulenburg jerry
NASAPMC
 

Recently uploaded (20)

PDF
gpt5_lecture_notes_comprehensive_20250812015547.pdf
Chinchu40
 
PPTX
Chapter 5: Probability Theory and Statistics
RandyFin
 
PDF
Transform Your ITIL® 4 & ITSM Strategy with AI in 2025.pdf
PDCA Consulting
 
PDF
7 ChatGPT Prompts to Help You Define Your Ideal Customer Profile.pdf
SOFTTECHHUB
 
PPTX
SOPHOS-XG Firewall Administrator PPT.pptx
AgnesMunisi
 
PDF
A comparative analysis of optical character recognition models for extracting...
IAESIJAI
 
PDF
Microsoft Solutions Partner Drive Digital Transformation with D365.pdf
Microsoft Dynamics
 
PDF
Web App vs Mobile App What Should You Build First.pdf
KodekX
 
PDF
Approach and Philosophy of On baking technology
30anthuong17
 
PDF
Unlocking AI with Model Context Protocol (MCP)
Brian McKeiver
 
PDF
Hindi spoken digit analysis for native and non-native speakers
IAESIJAI
 
PDF
Hybrid model detection and classification of lung cancer
IAESIJAI
 
PDF
August Patch Tuesday
Ivanti
 
PDF
Building Integrated photovoltaic BIPV_UPV.pdf
SandeepSingh286037
 
PDF
DP Operators-handbook-extract for the Mautical Institute
LeonelMejiaLarios
 
PDF
A comparative study of natural language inference in Swahili using monolingua...
IAESIJAI
 
PDF
project resource management chapter-09.pdf
ssuser00e6e21
 
PDF
Encapsulation theory and applications.pdf
gurumoop
 
PDF
Zenith AI: Advanced Artificial Intelligence
Biz Preneurs
 
PDF
Assigned Numbers - 2025 - Bluetooth® Document
Bloombase
 
gpt5_lecture_notes_comprehensive_20250812015547.pdf
Chinchu40
 
Chapter 5: Probability Theory and Statistics
RandyFin
 
Transform Your ITIL® 4 & ITSM Strategy with AI in 2025.pdf
PDCA Consulting
 
7 ChatGPT Prompts to Help You Define Your Ideal Customer Profile.pdf
SOFTTECHHUB
 
SOPHOS-XG Firewall Administrator PPT.pptx
AgnesMunisi
 
A comparative analysis of optical character recognition models for extracting...
IAESIJAI
 
Microsoft Solutions Partner Drive Digital Transformation with D365.pdf
Microsoft Dynamics
 
Web App vs Mobile App What Should You Build First.pdf
KodekX
 
Approach and Philosophy of On baking technology
30anthuong17
 
Unlocking AI with Model Context Protocol (MCP)
Brian McKeiver
 
Hindi spoken digit analysis for native and non-native speakers
IAESIJAI
 
Hybrid model detection and classification of lung cancer
IAESIJAI
 
August Patch Tuesday
Ivanti
 
Building Integrated photovoltaic BIPV_UPV.pdf
SandeepSingh286037
 
DP Operators-handbook-extract for the Mautical Institute
LeonelMejiaLarios
 
A comparative study of natural language inference in Swahili using monolingua...
IAESIJAI
 
project resource management chapter-09.pdf
ssuser00e6e21
 
Encapsulation theory and applications.pdf
gurumoop
 
Zenith AI: Advanced Artificial Intelligence
Biz Preneurs
 
Assigned Numbers - 2025 - Bluetooth® Document
Bloombase
 

Dumbacher2012 pmchallenge

  • 1. National Aeronautics and Space Administration Exploration Systems Development Program Management Overview Dan Dumbacher February 2012
  • 2. The NASA Vision To reach for new heights and reveal the unknown, so that what we do and learn will benefit all humankind. NASA Strategic Goals 1. Extend and sustain human activities across the solar system. 2. Expand scientific understanding of the Earth and the universe in which we live. 3. Create the innovative new space technologies for our exploration, science, and economic future. 4. Advance aeronautics research for societal benefit. 5. Enable program and institutional capabilities to conduct NASA‟s aeronautics and space activities. 6. Share NASA with the public, educators, and students to provide opportunities to participate in our mission, foster innovation, and contribute to a strong national economy 2
  • 4. Human Exploration & Operations: Organization 4 Current as of February 2012
  • 5. Exploration Systems Development These programs will develop the launch and spaceflight vehicles that will provide the initial capability for crewed exploration missions beyond LEO. – The Space Launch System (SLS) program is developing the heavy lift vehicle that will launch the crew vehicle, other modules, and cargo for these missions – The Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) program is developing the vehicle that will carry the crew to orbit, provide emergency abort capability, sustain the crew while in space, and provide safe re- entry from deep space return velocities – The Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) program is developing the necessary launch site infrastructure to prepare, assemble, test, launch and recover the SLS and Orion MPCV flight systems 5
  • 6. Organization and Interfaces ESD Division and Programs HEO/ESD Level Exploration Systems Line of Authority Development HEO RMAO Line of Communication (ESD) Cross-Program Programmatic and ESD Systems Integration Strategic Integration RMO (CSI) (PSI) ESD HQ Program Agents PP&C Integration Team to (Reach back (PIT) Support) Program Technical Budget Schedule Working Integration WG Integration WG Groups Config Mgt & Risk Document Mgt Integration WG WG Integrated Transition Programmatic Integration WG Communication Program Level Ground Systems Development & Space Launch Multi-Purpose Crew Operations System Vehicle (GSDO) (SLS) (MPCV) 6
  • 8. Objectives of Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) • Focus on delivering beyond Low Earth Orbit (BEO) capability for human exploration as expeditiously and safely as possible • Assume a flat-line budget • Develop an integrated capability by aligning MPCV, SLS, and GSDO concepts through a set of common ground rules and assumptions • Develop a budget profile to enable a wedge to be created for future in-space systems development 8
  • 9. Integrated Plan Leading to Orion, SLS, and GSDO Information & Decisions FY 2011 FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT FORMULATION PLAN SLS, Orion, 21CGS ALT Integrate SLS, Orion, GSDO ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS INTEGRATED SLS, Orion, GSDO FINAL ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS DRAFT PRG GUIDANCE INTEGRATED SLS, Orion, GSDO ALTERNATIVE ARCHITECURE ARCHITECURE SELECTION ANNOUNCEMENT INDEPENDENT COST ASSESSMENT (ICA) FINAL REPORT TO NASA SLS ACQUISITION SECTION 309 REPORT December 23 9
  • 10. Orion MPCV Analysis Approach • The MPCV Analysis sought to validate or challenge whether the beyond-LEO version of the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (the Reference Vehicle Design) is the most effective approach through: – Understanding progress to date on the Orion development effort – Validating whether the Orion requirements closely match MPCV requirements consistent with the Authorization Act – Examining and implementing ways to be able to deliver an affordable and achievable crew vehicle as soon as possible. For example: • Streamlining government oversight and insight activities to ensure we are focusing on the key-risk items • Implementing an incremental approach to developing and building vehicle capabilities • Planning a more innovative and cost-effective vehicle qualification plan, utilizing distributed test labs, for example • NASA is also exploring other affordability measures including consolidating facilities and re-using test assets 10
  • 11. Decision for Orion as MPCV • Examined technical, risk and cost implications of replacing functionality of MPCV with in- space vehicle and planned Commercial Crew capabilities • CC-Based Approach produces large increases in required mission mass and associated number of launches (factor of 2 - 3) over Capability-Driven Reference with significant impacts on safety risk and P&O cost – Increases complexity of in-space vehicle assembly and number of elements required implying lower reliability system – Increases ground launch infrastructure and/or technology development – Introduces unique mission-critical events and additional Loss-of-Crew scenarios – “Launch-on-Demand” CC capability required to assure crew survivability in many abort scenarios – Parametric costs estimates indicate recurring cost delta per mission provides insufficient P&O funding for SLS and eliminates funding wedge for future capabilities given the flat-line budget Assessment confirms the requirements for an MPCV 11
  • 12. SLS Analysis Approach Approach: • Leverage three government Requirement Analysis Cycle (RAC) Teams to create and study different design concepts that leverage capability across American industry • In parallel, solicit industry input and concepts via study contract input Implementation: • Team studies (Fall 2010) concluded without architecture decisions • Government Requirements Analysis Cycle (RAC) – Three competing configurations with fourth team looking at cross-cutting affordability – Approaches to affordability addressed by all 3 teams – Common requirements, goals/threshold approach - tradable – Incorporate incremental inputs from NASA Heavy Lift study contracts – Out brief to SLS Feb 16-18 • Contractor Heavy Lift Study Contracts–awarded November 2010 – 13 Contractors, $650K each, 6 month studies – broad SOW ideas – Initial Out briefs Feb 22-24 – Final Out briefs Apr 25-28 12
  • 13. Analyzed SLS Concepts LOX/H2 – Reference Vehicle Design LOX/RP Modular Large RP configuration (large Modular RP configuration Hydrogen core configuration with diameter tanks) with multiple (smaller diameter tanks) with Description solid strap-on boosters; engine options, incl. NASA/USAF multiple engine options, incl. multiple evolution paths common engine NASA/USAF common engine Lift Capability 70 mT – 150 mT 100 mT – 172 mT 70 mT – 130 mT Note: Images based on government design solutions from RAC teams 13
  • 14. SLS Decision Philosophy/Rationale • Maintains US leadership in LOX/LH2 technology – LOX/LH2 core uses RS-25E engines; LOX/LH2 Upper Stage uses J-2X – Establishes fixed central design path with logical use of existing strength in design and manufacture – Maintains existing knowledge base, skills, infrastructure, workforce, and industrial base for existing state of the art systems • Minimizes Unique Configurations – Evolutionary Path to 130mT allows incremental development; thus progress to be made even with constrained budgets – Allows early flight tests for MPCV – Provides flexible/modular design and system for varying launch needs – Gains synergy, thus reducing DDTE by building core and upper stage in parallel, allowing common tooling and engine feed components • Provides a Balanced Approach for Acquisition – Opportunity for use of existing contracts for development phase enabling a fast start – ASM will provide official agency decision on acquisition strategy – Allows for competition for best value to the government 14
  • 16. Orion MPCV Vehicle The Orion MPCV Crew Module (CM) design divides • Provide safe habitat critical functions from launch through landing and recovery among multiple • Conduct reentry and modules to landing as a stand alone module maximize the Launch Abort System performance of • Provide protection for the CM from atmospheric loads and the integrated heating during first stage flight • Safely jettison after successful spacecraft design pad operations and first stage flight Service Module (SM) • Provide support to the CM from launch through CM separation to missions with minimal impact to the CM Spacecraft Adapter • Provide structural connection to the launch vehicle from ground operations through CM Separation • Provide protection for SM components from atmospheric loads and heating during first stage flight 16
  • 17. Orion MPCV Technology Advancements Propulsion Avionics Abort Motor, Attitude Control Motor, Algorithmic Autocode Generation, ARINC-653/DO- High Burn Rate Propellant for Solid 178 Standard Operating System, Baseband Rocket Motors Processor, High Speed/High Density Memory Benefits: High reliability launch abort, Devices, Honeywell HX5000 Northstar ASIC steerable solid rocket motors Benefits: Low cost, high performance, open architecture Navigation Communications Atmospheric Skip Entry, Flash Interoperable Communications, Lidar, Vision Navigation Communication Network Router Card, Digital Sensors, Autonomous Rendezvous and Video Recorder, Phased Array Antennas Docking, Fast Acquisition GPS Benefits: Low cost, high reliability, open Receiver, High Density Camera Sensors architecture Benefits: Low cost, high reliability, autonomous docking Life Support & Safety Solid Amine Swing-Bed, Backup and Structures Survival Systems, Closed Loop Life Composite Spacecraft Support, Contingency Land Landing, Structures, Human Rated Spacecraft Enhanced Waste Management, Primary Structures Environmental Control, Hazard Detection, Development, Advanced Manufacturing Isolation and Recovery Benefits: Low cost, low mass Benefits: Low consumables, long mission duration, high reliability, low operations cost Thermal Protection Power High Energy Density Lithium Ion System Batteries, Column Grid Array Ablative Heatshield with Composite Packaging (CGA), Direct Energy Carrier Structure Power Transfer System Benefits: Low cost, high reliability, high Benefits: Low cost, high energy (Beyond LEO) entry reliability, low mass, long mission duration 17
  • 19. SLS Planned Evolution Block 1A – 105 t incorporates Advanced Boosters Block 1 – 70 t Block 2 – 130 t 19
  • 20. SLS Key Characteristics • Human-Rated • Affordable – Constrained budget environment – Maximum use of common elements and existing assets, infrastructure and workforce – Competitive opportunities for affordability on-ramps • Initial Capability: 70-100 metric tons (t), 2017-2021 – Serves as primary transportation for Orion and exploration missions – Provides back-up capability for crew/cargo to ISS • Evolved capability: 105 t, post-2021 – Includes Advanced Booster – Allows incorporation of any products from the Advanced Development NRA focusing on risk reduction • Evolved capability: 130 t, post-2021 – Offers large volume for science missions and payloads – Modular and flexible, right-sized for mission requirements SLS First Flight (Non-crewed) in 2017 20
  • 21. Summary by Element: Risk Reduction Incorporated in Design • Boosters (3-phased approach) – Phase I: 5-segment Solid Rocket Booster in-scope modification to existing Ares contract with ATK for initial flights through 2021 – Phases II and III: Advanced Boosters • II: Engineering demonstration and risk reduction via NASA Research Announcement (NRA): Full and Open Competition in FY12; award by FY13 • III: Design, Development, Test & Evaluation (DDT&E): Full and Open Competition (RFP target FY15) • Stages – Core/Upper Stage: Justification for Other Than Full and Open Competition (JOFOC) to Boeing, modifying current Ares Upper Stage contract – Instrument Unit Avionics: In-scope modification to existing Ares contract with Boeing; consolidated with Stages contract to Boeing • Engines – Core Stage Engine: RS-25d JOFOC to existing Space Shuttle contract with Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne (PWR) – Upper Stage Engine: J-2X in-scope modification to existing Ares contract with PWR – Future Core Stage Engine: Separate contract activity to be held in the future • Spacecraft and Payload adapter and Fairing – Initial design: Adapter and Fairing design and development in-house through early design phase – Fairing Full and Open Competition planned for FY13 21
  • 22. SLS Trades and Vehicle Reliability SLS Trades consider impacts on performance, safety and budget. • SLS has multiple trade studies (20+) on-going – Number of engines, stage testing at SSC vs. FRF, etc. • Results of all trades must be reconciled prior to establishing a complete baseline configuration addressing all 3 factors • Planning to baseline configuration at end of SRR/SDR – May 2012 • SLS Program is still in formulation phase Reliability predictions for all vehicles • Models use STS data for heritage and heritage derived hardware, e.g. SSME • Model includes flight path and time • Model used to predict LOM and LOC for 4 cases for each vehicle configuration: No Engine-Out (EO), Core EO, Upper Stage EO, and Both Stages EO • Estimates used to trade against performance and costs • Estimates will be used to develop reliability allocations for Elements post SDR 22
  • 23. SLS Procurement Milestones • SLS Acquisition Overview Synopsis, posted September 22, 2011 • Industry Day at Marshall Space Flight Center on September 29 • SLS Advanced Development RFI, posted October 7, 2011 • SLS Advanced Booster Engineering Demonstration and Risk Reduction RFI, posted October 7, 2011 • Industry Day at Michoud Assembly Facility on November 14 • SLS Advanced Booster Engineering Demonstration and Risk Reduction Draft NRA, posted December 12, 2011 • SLS Advanced Development Draft NRA, posted February 1, 2012 • SLS Advanced Booster Engineering Demonstration and Risk Reduction NRA, posted February 9, 2012 • Industry Day at Marshall Space Flight Center on February 14 23
  • 24. SLS Philosophy for Evolutionary Upgrades Stakeholders & Customer Needs Improvements in Affordability, Reliability, and Performance Missions Block 0 Design/Development Block 0 Mission Requirements Block 1 Advanced Development Block 1 Design/Development Block 1 Mission Requirements Block 2 Technology Advanced Development Block 2 Design/Development Block 2 Requirements Maturation* Mission Block 3 Advanced Development Block 3 Requirements Technology Maturation* Design/Development Block 4 Advanced Development Requirements Technology Maturation* * NASA, Office of Chief Technologist 24
  • 25. SLS Development Key Tenets • Utilize an evolutionary development strategy that allows for incremental progress within constrained budgets • Incorporate mature technical solutions into SLS program-phased block upgrades • Optimize use of common elements and existing assets for a flexible/modular design Improve Affordability, Reliability, or Performance 25
  • 26. Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) Overview 26
  • 27. Flexible Approach Horizontal Launch & Landing Small Vehicle Launch Clean Floor Processing Flexible Launch Capability Heavy Class Launch Capability Multi-Use Integration (VAB) 27
  • 28. GSDO Program Highlights • The demolition of the Fixed Service Structure/Rotating Service Structure (FSS/RSS) at Launch Complex 39-B was completed. Before After • Multi-Purpose Processing Facility (MPPF) Phase 1 modifications (HVAC) are progressing. • Space Shuttle Program facility turnover is underway. • Provided significant contribution to the Interagency Working Group Launch Infrastructure Modernization Report 28
  • 29. Orion MPCV Ground Test Article 29
  • 30. SLS Configurations 385 ft 315 ft 209 ft 0 70t - Block l crew 105 - Block lA cargo 105t - Block IA crew 130t_Block ll cargo 130t Block ll crew 30
  • 32. Overall Flight Test Strategy 32
  • 33. Mission/Flight Test Objectives • Flights are needed to test critical mission events and demonstrate performance in relevant environments – Abort, jettison, separation, chute deploy, Re-entry and TPS performance in BEO conditions, Integrated vehicle systems performance, and environments validation – Data collected from flights will be used to eliminate additional SLS test flights as the SLS configuration evolves – Dedicated flight tests will not be required for incorporation of competitive boosters, RS-25E, or the upper stage (with J-2X) • Four missions/test flights planned to meet minimum mission/flight test – Exploration Flight Test-1 (EFT-1), an orbital, uncrewed test flight in 2014 provides MPVC system level tests and risk reduction opportunity – Ascent Abort-2 (AA-2), an abort test in high dynamic pressure environment – Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1), an Un-crewed BEO (lunar flyby) and EM-2, a crewed BEO flight (includes 3-4 day lunar orbit) will provide more system level testing and shakedown 33
  • 34. MPCV Test Campaign Reduces Risk While Maturing the Design GTA Acoustic, Modal, Vibe Testing Environment compatibility Water Drop Tests Correlate structural math models in water landing conditions Parachute Tests Nominal and contingency parachute performance tests Wind Tunnel Testing Aero/aerothermal database validation for Orion configuration TPS Arc Jet Testing Heatshield model correlation for entry performance EFT-1 Test Article Manufacturing and Assembly First production primary structure built for orbital flight Pad Abort Test - May 6, 2010 Demo abort capability with prototype LAS 34
  • 36. Exploration Mission – 1 (EM-1) BEO Un-crewed Flight • Mission description – Un-crewed circumlunar flight – free return trajectory – Mission duration ~7 days • Mission objectives – Demonstrate integrated spacecraft systems performance prior to crewed flight – Demonstrate high speed entry (~11 km/s) and TPS prior to crewed flight • Spacecraft configuration – Orion “Block 0 Lunar” • Launch vehicle configuration – SLS Block 0, 5 segment SRBs, 3 SSMEs, 70-80 t – Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS) • Launch site – KSC LC-39B 35
  • 37. Exploration Mission – 2 (EM-2) BEO Crewed Flight • Mission description – Crewed lunar orbit mission – Mission duration 10-14 days • Mission objectives – Demonstrate crewed flight beyond LEO • Spacecraft configuration – Orion “Block 0 Lunar” • Launch vehicle configuration – SLS Block 0, 5 segment SRBs, 3 SSMEs, 70-80 t – Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS) • Launch site – KSC LC-39B 36
  • 39. Improving Affordability of Human Spaceflight Programs Accelerate Decision- Manage Program RQ & Maintain Competition & Making Velocity Contractor Interfaces Improve Acquisitions Flatten Organization - Make Affordability a Focus on Key Driving Clear Authority & Requirement Requirements Accountability Eliminate Non-Value Maximize Use of Push Reserves to Added NASA & FAR RQ Industry Standards Programs Define Strategy & Clear Implement “Should Cost” Reduce Frequency of Roles for Oversight/Insight Based Management Agency-level Reviews Develop Mitigation Plans for Incentivize Contractors Identify Best Practices & High Risks / Cost Drivers for Effective Cost Mgmt Implement Lessons Learned Adopt Appropriate Maximize Competition Streamline Certificate of Safety & Risk Posture thru the Life of Program Flight Readiness Process Leverage Use of Capitalize on Progress In-House Capability Payment Structures
  • 40. Accelerate Decision-Making • Overhauled the Governance Structure – Flattened organization – removed a layer – Clear authority and accountability – Fewer decision-boards – Pushed reserves to the programs – Fewer meetings and streamlined reporting • Implementing a New, Efficient, Distributed Integration Approach – ESD leads with reach back to the Programs & Centers through - • ESD Office of Cross Program Systems Integration (CSI) • ESD Office of Programmatic & Strategic Integration (PSI) • Leveraging Lessons Learned – Constellation Program – Ares 1X Flight Demonstration Project – Standing Review Board – Booz Allen Hamilton – Industry Input on Affordability – 1-on-1 meetings and SLS BAA input – DoD Better Buying Power Initiatives – NASA/DAU Program Executability Workshop
  • 41. Manage Program RQ & Contractor Interfaces • Including Affordability as a Requirement – Encouraging commonality and utilization of industry standards vs NASA unique requirements. – Streamlined and Minimized Key Driving Requirements • ESD issued only 21 level one requirements; CxP had several hundred. • Strategically focused staffing of insight / oversight of contractor performance – Minimize number of Gov‟t staff performing insight/oversight – Follow a Risk-based or a Hybrid approach – Focus and clarify Government roles pertaining to interactions with and direction to contractor. • Risk Management – ESD cannot afford to mitigate all risks; risk acceptance needs to be approved and documented. – Connecting risk approach to use of reserves will allow ESD to strategically choose the most important risks to mitigate.
  • 42. Maintain Competition & Improve Acquisitions - • Conducting ‘Will Cost’ and ‘Should Cost’ Reviews – Conducted a „Should Cost‟ training session – Booz Allen support of Independent Cost Assessment – DoD Price Fighters assisting SLS IATs – DCMA to assist with „Should Cost‟ review of Contractor overhead • Implementing Contract Incentives for Cost Reductions • Issuing Multiple Lower-Level Contracts vs Large System Level – Reduces pass through of subcontracting overhead & fees – Enables greater insight and ability to define requirements – Enable direct employment of contractor performance incentives – Improves competition • SLS: Element-level contracts • Ground Dev & Ops: FP IDIQ contracts • Leveraging Existing Assets
  • 43. ESD - A fresh start to improve affordability… • Major cost drivers in human space flight are organizational structures, requirements and acquisition strategy / contract management. • ESD and its programs are new, very different development programs in comparison to prior NASA experiences • This new beginning has enabled NASA to pursue a more efficient and affordable future to human space flight by implementing approaches to secure better buying power, such as: – Accelerating Decision-Making Velocity – Better Managing Program Requirements & Contractor Interfaces, and – Improving Acquisition Strategy and Implementation 43
  • 44. Space Launch System Affordability Begins with Accountability • Evolvable Development Approach – Manage requirements within constrained, flat budgets – Leverage existing National capabilities • Liquid oxygen/hydrogen propulsion infrastructure • Manufacturing and launch-site facilities – Infuse new design solutions for affordability • Robust Designs and Margins – Performance traded for cost and schedule – Heritage hardware and manufacturing solutions – Adequate management reserves controlled at lower levels • Risk-Informed Government Insight/Oversight Model – Insight based on: • Historic failures • Industry partner past performance and gaps • Complexity and design challenges – Judicious oversight: • Discrete oversight vs. near continuous • Timely and effective decisions • Right-Sized Documentation and Standards – 80% Reduction in the number of Type 1 Data Requirement Documents from the Ares Projects – Increased use of industry practices and tailored NASA standards • Lean, Integrated Teams with Accelerated Decision Making – Simple, clear technical interfaces with contractors – Integrated Systems Engineering & Integration organization – Empowered decision makers at all levels – Fewer control Boards and streamlined change process National Aeronautics and Space Administration 8094_Affordability.44
  • 45. Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle Affordability Actions • Orion/MPCV affordability initiatives over the past 12 months have reduced DDT&E cost and enabled schedule acceleration. • Initiatives include: – Streamlined government oversight and insight that focuses on key-risk items and collocation with Prime contractor in selected areas – Incremental approach to building and testing vehicle capabilities – Reduction in formal deliverables and simplified processes while retaining adequate rigor – Partnering with suppliers to analyze cost drivers and possible efficiencies – Consolidation of test labs and re-use of test articles 45
  • 46. Ground Systems Development and Operations Approach to Affordability • Architecture leverages existing Shuttle/ISS and Constellation assets and avoids unnecessary costs to be affordable. – Relies heavily on “grandfathering” of these heritage systems with respect to code compliance. • LC39 Pad B (clean pad) • Uses modified Ares 1-ML • Integration: VAB – High Bay-3 • Utilizes CxP Crew/Crew Module Recovery Approach • Civil Servants perform the traditional “Prime” role for management & integration – Allows Ground Operations to quickly respond to changing program direction with minimal cost/schedule impact – Avoids overhead costs on subcontracts, and is different from the Shuttle-USA experience • Acquisition approach enables flexibility and maximizes competition. – Reduce schedule and procurement costs through „best value‟ fixed-price IDIQ contracts. Pre-qualify and pre-stage supplier pools (designers, fabricators, constructors): • Design IDIQ contracts (in place) • Construction IDIQ contracts (in place) • GSE Fabrication IDIQ contracts (in place) • Craft Labor contract for installation support (in planning)
  • 47. We Can Reach Multiple Destinations Mars and Its Moons, Phobos and Deimos: – A premier destination for discovery: Is there life beyond Earth? How did Mars evolve? – True possibility for extended, even permanent, stays – Significant opportunities for international collaboration High-Earth Orbit (HEO)/Geosynchronous- – Technological driver for Earth Orbit (GEO)/Lagrange Points: space systems – Microgravity destinations beyond LEO – Opportunities for construction, fueling, and repair of complex in-space systems – Excellent locations for advanced space telescopes and Earth observatories Near-Earth Asteroids: Earth’s Moon: – Compelling science questions: – Witness to the birth of the Earth and How did the Solar System form? Where inner planets did Earth‟s water and organics come from? – Has critical resources to sustain humans – Planetary defense: Understanding and – Significant opportunities for commercial mitigating the threat of impact and international collaboration – Potential for valuable space resources – Excellent stepping stone for Mars Increasing Our Reach and Expanding Our Boundaries 8032 SLS 101 Briefing.47
  • 48. MPCV Test Campaign - Status Reduces Risk While Maturing the Design GTA Acoustic, Modal, Vibe Testing Environment compatibility Water Drop Tests Correlate structural math models in water landing conditions Parachute Tests Nominal and contingency parachute performance tests Wind Tunnel Testing Aero/aerothermal database validation for Orion configuration TPS Arc Jet Testing Heatshield model correlation for entry performance EFT-1 Test Article Manufacturing and Assembly First production primary structure built for orbital flight Pad Abort Test - May 6, 2010 Demo abort capability with prototype LAS 48
  • 49. SLS Status • SLS Program Office – Presented “Pass the Torch” lecture at U.S. Space and Rocket Center‟s Davidson Center for Space Exploration on Feb 2 – Kickoff meeting on Feb 15 for System Requirements Review (SRR) / System Definition Review (SDR) in Mar 2012 • Program Planning & Control – Baselined SLS Program Plan at the Program Control Board on Jan 26 – Hosted technical interchange meeting (TIM) for the Exploration Systems Division‟s integrated programmatic communications working group from Jan 30 – 31 • Procurement – Held SLS Industry Days for the SLS Program, Stages, and NASA Research Announcement (NRA) Advanced Booster Engineering Demonstration and Risk Reduction (EDRR), attended by over 670 companies and potential partners – Conducted SLS Advanced Development and Academia Industry Day on Feb 14 • Boosters – Held kick-off for Integrated Acquisition Team on Jan 13 – Discussed systems engineering and integration at ATK-Lakeside from Jan 23 – 26 • Engines – Completed 10 tests for J-2X Upper Stage Engine E10001 (~1,040 sec cumulative hot-fire time) – Successfully demonstrated full flight mission duration (500 sec) and 100 percent power level (235 sec) in 2011 – Conducting engine to facility control system checkouts in preparation for PPA-2 Test #1 • Stages – Baselined Integrated Acquisition Team Board on Jan 17 • Spacecraft & Payload Integration – Successfully tested 3‟ by 5‟ Manufacturing Test Panel 6003 at LaRC on Jan 19 – Baselined Exploration Flight Test 1 (EFT-1) MPCV-To-Stage Adapter (MSA) detailed schedule on Jan 20
  • 50. GSDO Status • Mobile Launcher move to Pad B • Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) designs for cable removal and VAB door modifications complete • Crawler Transporter-2 moved into VAB HB-2 to continue modification • VAB Door Project contract awarded to USA • Pad B LH2/LO2 Cross Country Pedestal Refurbishment complete • Tank Refurbishment sandblasting and painting started • ML Structural Design Contract awarded to RS&H • Received tilt-up umbilical arm test article at the the Launch Equipment Test Facility (LETF) • LETF Testing is scheduled to start beginning of May, 2012 • Initiated construction on CRF facility to support Orion Launch Abort System (LAS) assembly for EFT1 • Orion Ground Test Article (GTA) at KSC for GSE development 50

Editor's Notes

  • #30: Work on the heat shield and thermal protection backshell of the Multi Purpose Crew Vehicle ground test article, or GTA, was completed in preparation for environmental testing. This image is of the crew vehicle at the Lockheed Martin Vertical Test Facility in Colorado.
  • #35:  Water drop testsWe have completed all the 9 water drop tests with the Boilerplate Test Article (BTA) - 3 for phase 0 and 6 for phase 1. The last test was on January 8th of this year. The next water drop test series will begin in March, 2013 at which time two tests on the BTA will be followed by 9 tests using the Lockheed Martin Structural Test Article(STA). Our estimate is that this series will continue at least until December of 2013. Parachute Tests We have completed 22 tests to date, and will perform another 25 prior to human flight in Orion per our current test plan.  The previous 22 have been a mixture of single and multiple chute tests.Of the remaining 25, 17 of them are treated as development tests, and 8 are reserved for formal qualification testing. The initial tests were primarily focused on understanding the chute performance and evaluating changes to the hardware as the vehicle design matured/evolved.  Examples include modifications to the main chute porosity; and going from confluence fitting to a single point attachment. The remaining tests will evaluate the parachute system performance for nominal deployments, failure mode cases, and demonstrate repeatability of the system.
  • #45: PRESENTER NOTES:Affordability leads to sustainability.We must live within our means and be fiscally accountable.This drives the decisions we make in the near term, which also affect our long-range plans.
  • #48: PRESENTER NOTES:The SLS will help scientists answer some of the most compelling questions of our time, as well as spur new markets as we expand our boundaries to new territories.It will provide the capability for astronauts to leave Earth’s orbit for the first time in 40 years.
  • #49:  Water drop testsWe have completed all the 9 water drop tests with the Boilerplate Test Article (BTA) - 3 for phase 0 and 6 for phase 1. The last test was on January 8th of this year. The next water drop test series will begin in March, 2013 at which time two tests on the BTA will be followed by 9 tests using the Lockheed Martin Structural Test Article(STA). Our estimate is that this series will continue at least until December of 2013. Parachute Tests We have completed 22 tests to date, and will perform another 25 prior to human flight in Orion per our current test plan.  The previous 22 have been a mixture of single and multiple chute tests.Of the remaining 25, 17 of them are treated as development tests, and 8 are reserved for formal qualification testing. The initial tests were primarily focused on understanding the chute performance and evaluating changes to the hardware as the vehicle design matured/evolved.  Examples include modifications to the main chute porosity; and going from confluence fitting to a single point attachment. The remaining tests will evaluate the parachute system performance for nominal deployments, failure mode cases, and demonstrate repeatability of the system.