The initial concepts developed for the in-orbit assembly of a Manned Mars Vehicle and for the Earth-to-Orbit (ETO) delivery of the required hardware and propellant are presented. Two (2) Mars vehicle concepts (all-propulsive and all-aerobrake) and two (2) ETO Vehicle concepts were investigated. Both Mars Vehicle concepts are described in Reference 1, and both ETO Vehicle concepts are described in Reference 2. The all-aerobrake configuration reduces the number of launches and time required to deliver the necessary hardware/propellent to orbit. Use of the larger of the 2 ETO Vehicles (HLLV) further reduces the number of launches and delivery time; however, this option requires a completely new vehicle and supporting facilities

Barisa, B.

Solmon, G.

English

NASA Technical Reports Server

N87-17746
NANNEDNARS MISSION
EARTH-TO-ORBIT (ETO) DELIVERY AND ORBIT ASSEMBLY OF THE
MANNED MARS VEHICLE
B. Barlsa and G. Solmon
Narshall Space Flight Center
Narsha]] Space Flight Center, AL
ABSTRACT
The contents of this sectlon contaln the initial concepts deve]oped
for the in-orbit assembly of a Nanned Mars Vehicle and for the Earth-to-
Orbit (ETO) delivery of the requlred hardware and propellant. Two (2)
Nars vehicle concepts (all-propulsive and all-aerobrake) and two (2) ETO
Vehicle concepts were investigated. Both Nars Vehicle concepts are
described in Reference 1, and both ETO Vehicle concepts are described In
Reference 2. The ail-aerobrake configuration reduces the number of
launches and time required to deliver the necessary hardware/propellent
to orbit. Use of the larger of the 2 ETO Vehlcles (HLLV) further reduces
the number of launches and delivery time; however, this option requires a
completely new vehicle and supporting facilities.
INTRODUCTION
Two (2) Nars vehicle concepts were investigated. An "all-propul-
sive" vehicle (t.e , one using propulsive braking for capture at Nars and
Earth) concept (Figure 1) was analyzed and found to require twenty-five
(25) Shuttle-derived (SDV-3R) Vehicle (Figure 2) launches to deliver the
required hardware and propellant to Earth orbit. The SDV-3R vehlcle is
described in Reference 2. An additional Space Shuttle launch is required
for the delivery of the supporting equipment (Assembly System plus asso-
ciated equipment) and crew. Nost of this study was performed on the all-
propulsive vehlcle; however, the same assumptions were applied to an all-
aerobrake concept (Figure 3). This second configuration requires nine
(9) SDV-3R hardware and propellant deliveries to orbit and two (2) Space
Shuttle deliveries. Additional crew deliveries would be required if the
crew is rotated. The assumptions and description of the operations are
presented below, followed by a KSC ground flow concept (Figure 4) for the
processing of the SDV-3R vehlc]e and payloads. Data is also provided for
utilization of the Heavy Lift Launch Vehicle (HLLV) for delivery of the
Nars vehicle e]ements to LEO.
306
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19870008313 2020-03-20T12:29:29+00:00Z
I-.
a,.
Z
0
I.Ll _"
.--m"
C_,_
..I
m
a.. iJ.
0
O.
I
,,-I
..,I
I0
1.0
_D
0
3O7
W
_I
>
0
W
>
n
_W
U-l-
"1-
Z
m
I
Z
i
W
O.
0
_I
W
>
z
W
o
6<
_0
--I
\
b
CN
W
0c
O0 _ W
.j _ o
W
A
w_w
In"<
Z A
>w
w
._I Z 0'_
<0_
w_w
0co__
OC
>
0
_D
308
I--
"1-
(_
..I
u.
I--
g,j
v
t4
UJ
I--
g,)
>-
(4
+
(/)
I--
i11
_1
>-
0
J
a.
,,J
e_
(3
ORIGINAL PAGE I_
OF POOR QUALITY
0
Z
0
,..I
W.
I.-
a.
0
Z
0
0
.i
ee_
0
..J
m
LI.
u_
ID
o 309
to
oo
I
co
310
ASSUMPTIONS
The assumptions given here are applicable to both configurations.
The vehicle buildup crews would be transported to orbit and returned by
the Space Shuttle. More than one crew may be necessary due to
speclalized requirements, such as propellant transfer, electrical or
mechanical operations and posslby due to fairly long assembly times. The
habitat modules would be used by the buildup crews and would be refur-
bished for the flight mission, if assembly times can be kept reasonable.
The Shuttle-derived Vehicle (SDV-3R) would be the primary vehicle
for hardware and propellant deliveries. The aerobrake(s) would be
deployable for SDV-3R payload integration and ETO delivery.
Based on the studies performed by the Martin Marietta Corp. (May
1985) on the KSC ground operations (Reference 3), the launch frequency of
the SDV-3R is six (6) per year for minimum impact to the KSC operations.
An increased launch frequency would require facilities beyond those
presented (Figure 4).
The facility (Assembly System) for orbital assembly of the Mars
vehicle was conceptually viewed as an erectable or deployable structure
with integral subsystems capabilities, derivable from the Space Station
(SS) as discussed in Reference 4. The subsystems required are: (a)
Atltude stabilization, (b) Communication and data handling , (c)
Electrical Power , (d) Mobil RMS (HRNS) or equlvalent, and (e) Crew
aids (lighting, restraints, tools, etc.) The post-assembly disposition
alternatives for the Assembly System and associated equipment are: (a)
Leave in orbit for future applications (e.g., other Mars vehicles or
growth station), (b) Transfer to Space Station via Orbital Maneu-
vering Vehicle/Orbital Transfer Vehicle (OMV/OTV), and (c) Return to
Earth (Requires disassembly if >32,000 ibs). Potential uses of the SS to
augment the Mars vehicle assembly are discussed in Reference 4.
ALL-PROPULSIVE CONFIGURATION
The all-propulslve configuration is illustrated in Figure 1. The
concept of SDV-3R delivery for the propellant and hardware for the Mars
mission vehicle buildup consists of: (a) One (1) Space Shuttle (STS)
flight, (b) Eight (8) hardware flights (SDV-3R), and (c) Seventeen (17)
propellant flights (SDV-3R).
Possibly supplied by the Mars vehicle.
311
Ideally, the vehicle elements would all be delivered "dry" to LEO, would
be assembled into the Mars vehicle, then would be loaded with propellant
Just prior to departure. However, efficient use of the SDV-3R requires
"wet" and partially wet launches of these elements. The flight sequence
is defined in Figure 1. The STS flight would carry the Assembly System
and associated equipment to orbit. The two (2) habitat modules on the
SDV-3R would follow or be launched concurrently with the STS flight.
These modules would be used for the buildup-phase crew quarters and
would later, if necessary, be refurbished prior to the scheduled mission.
The STS crew could assist the buildup crew in the initial setup of the
Assembly System. The remaining seven (7) illustrated hardware/propellant
deliveries have been derived based on the SDV-3R capability and are
listed as follows: (1) Logistic module + one (1) fully loaded LH 2 tank;
(2) Lander + one (I) fully loaded LH 2 tank; (3) Mars Arrival/Depar-
ture Stage engine + one (I) fully loaded LH 2 tank and one (I) partially
loaded (approx. 23%) LO 2 tank; (4) Earth braking stage (fully loaded
LH 2 + LO2 tanks); (5) Partially loaded (5%) L02 tank + engines (LEO
Departure Stage); (6) Fully loaded LH2 tank for Lower Earth Orbit
(LEO) Departure Stage; and (7) Fully loaded LH 2 tank for LEO Departure
Stage. The seventeen (17) propellant flights (163,800 lbs/fllght)
required to fill and replenish boiloff of the vehicle tanks may be meshed
with the above hardware delivery flights for optimization. As previously
stated, the maximum launch rate of SDV-3R vehicles on a mlnimlum impact
basis to the KSC facilities is 6 vehicles per year. Hence, delivery to
LEO of the Mars vehicle hardware elements alone would require 14 months.
Based on 17 required propellant flights, an additional 32 months would be
required, but so much additional boiloff would occur over this tlme
period, the vehicle may never get fully loaded. Obviously, this is not a
viable approach.
ALL AEROBRAKING CONFIGURATION
The all aerobraklng configuration concept is illustrated in Figure
3. This configuration saves approximately 2 million pounds over the all-
propulsive configuration. The concept for ETO delivery of hardware and
propellant consists of: (a) Two (2) Space Shuttle (STS) flights; (b)
Three (3) hardware flights - SDV-3R (2 of the 3 flights will have a
modified shroud to accomodate the larger dlameter/length of the payload);
312
and (6) Six (6) propellant flights - SDV-3R. The Assembly System
would be delivered to orbit by the STS as in the all-propulsive configu-
ration. The second STS flight would deliver the second stage (OTV size).
The SDV-3R would require (2) flights with a modified shroud to deliver
the habitat module, logistics module and one aerobrake as one flight,
and the first stage of the Mars vehicle as the other. The Nars excursion
module (2 aerobrakes) would be the third SDV-3R flight.
This configuration can be delivered to orbit in approximately 1 1/2
years as compared with approximately 4 years for the all-propulsive
configuration, based on the ltmltalon of 6 SDV flights per year. This
analysis includes 172,800 lbs of botloff propellant. Some expansion of
the facilities at KSC and acquisition of additional SDV hardware could
increase the launch frequency. If an HLLV, as described in reference 2
(see Figure 5) is used lnstead of the SDV-3R, the situation would be
further improved. Using HLLV's, the total number of flights to deliver
the Nars vehicle elements (all-aerobrake) to LEO would be 4 flights, of
which 2 are for hardware/propellant and 2 are for propellant only. If
one flight were available every 2 weeks, the delivery time spans would be
6 weeks for hardware and propellant. The significant time advantage of
using an HLLV is readily apparent from these figures. Other related
advantages are that larger segments of the Mars vehicle can be delivered
at a time, reducing the on-orbit assembly, integration, and checkout
effort and time required. The developement of a completely new vehicle
and related facilities may be required, however, unless these were
developed as part of other NASA programs or other agencies' activities.
GROUND OPERATIONS
A conceptual ground operations flow is established for the SDV-3R
vehicle. This concept is based on a minimum impact to KSC, avoiding new
launch facilities. Six (6) SDV flights per year can be accomplished,
resulting in approximately 4 years for hardware delivery for the all-
propulsive concept and 1 1/2 years for the all aerobrake concept. The
ground flow requires a new P/A facility and payload Integration facility.
FUTURE STUDY CONSIDERATION
Items which require future study are: (a) Methods/procedures for
propellant transfer from the ETO vehicle payload tanks to the Mars
vehicle; (b) Disposition of the ETO vehicle (Mars vehicle propellant)
313
oO
Q
1,11
I-.Z
u- 0
m
I,,.J
>,._
>o,.
<0
u.IOC
'-r" o-
1,1,1
Lr_ .-I
03
w,_
rroc
_w
i
,,0
1.1.1
nr"
314
w
<
v
o
I-
0
w
<
.J
o
o
0
rtanks; (c) Assembly system and it's subsystems configuration; (d)
Disposition of the assembly system after Mars mission departures; (e)
Vehicle assembly optimization and procedures; (f) Berthing procedures;
(g) Procedures to transfer payload from ETO delivery vehicle (SDV-3R) to
Assembly System; (h) Increased launch frequency impact on KSC; (t)
Schedule for buildup crews (may not be required for duration between
deliveries); and (J) Trades of on-orbit-deployable vs. on-orbit-
assembleable aeroshells.
SUHHARY
The all-propulsive Mars vehicle is not pracical to utilize if the
SDV-3R ETO vehicle must be used, due to the extensive number of ETO
delivery flights for propellants and hardware and the time it would take
to assemble and load the vehicle. Obviously, a prefered approach for ETO
delivery and on-orbit assembly of the Mars vehicle would be to use an
all-aerobraking vehicle and deliver its elements to LEO with the SDV-3R.
The ETO delivery of the Mars vehicle concepts could be shortened by
expansion of the KSC facilities. Use of the HLLV for the ETO delivery
appears most destreable except that a new vehicle would need to be
developed with costly new facilities. However, if the HLLV vehicles and
facilities costs could be shared with other programs, it would be of
significant benefit for the Mars mission ETO delivery.
REFERENCES
1. Paper in Section III of this report, entitled "Space
Vehicle Concepts," by H. Tucker, O. Meredith, and B.
Brothers of MSFC.
2. Paper in Section III of this report, entitled "Earth-
to-Launch Vehicles for bg_q Application," by H. Page of
MSFC.
3. Final review of "Advanced Space Transportation
4.
Extension," by
May 1985, Contract
Systems Ground Operations Study
Martin Marietta for KSC Operations,
# NAS.I0-I0572.
Paper in Section IX of this report, entitled "Space
Station Utilization and Commonallty," by J. Butler
of HSFC.
315


Manned Mars mission Earth-To-Orbit (ETO) delivery and orbit assembly of the manned Mars vehicle

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NASA Technical Reports Server