The Jupiter Launch System A Direct Derivative of the Space Transportation System

The Jupiter Launch SystemA Direct Derivative of the Space Transportation System

International Space Development Conference Washington DC, May 29th 2008

“The Administrator shall, to the fullest extent possible consistent with a successful development

program use the personnel, capabilities, assets, and

infrastructure of the Space Shuttle program in developing the Crew Exploration Vehicle, Crew

Launch Vehicle, and a heavy-lift launch vehicle.”

-NASA Authorization Act of 2005

DIRECT Delivers what Congress Authorized

“The best civil space policy to have been enunciated by a president in four decades or more, and the best authorization act to be approved by the Congress since the 1960s.” – Dr. Mike Griffin STS Jan. 22, 2008

A DIRECT Derivative of the Space Transportation System

DIRECT ‘is’ the Historic NASA STS Derived Approach

Step 2: Type in “National Launch System” or “Shuttle Derived” into the search box

Step 1: Go to http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp

Result: Over 190 detailed studies from 1978 to 2005 that use the DIRECT approach.True STS derived systems have three things in common

1) They Retain the STS Stack configuration2) They Reuse the 4-Segment SRB3) They Keep the STS External Tank at a 8.4m dia.

Ares-I and Ares-V do none of these three things

Shuttle-C Buzz Aldrin’sAquila

National LaunchSystem (NLS)

Mars Direct’sAres

Shuttle-B

New 5-Seg. SRB

New J-2X Engine

New Configuration

New Infrastructure

New Upper Stage

Existing 4-Seg. SRB

Existing RS-68 Engine

Existing Configuration

Existing Infrastructure

No Upper Stage

Operational Date

Bottom-line: DIRECT Closes the Gap within the Current Budget

Ares-I

STS

Jupiter-120

$9.5 Billion$14.4 Billion*

March 2016**

Total Development Cost

September 2012

*GAO Figure

DIRECT Maximizes the Space Transportation System

** March 2016 recently revealed

• Jupiter core re-uses all existing Shuttle tooling• Parallel construction of Jupiter cores and Shuttle External Tanks• Jupiter test articles at Stennis and KSC before Shuttle retirement• Jupiter Upper Stage begins production 2 years earlier than Ares-V

DIRECT Removes the Workforce “GAP” at Michoud

• The Jupiter vehicles are delivered to KSC before Shuttle retires• The First Jupiter flight occurs 2 months before last Shuttle flight• 11 Jupiter vs. 7 Ares-I flights thru 2015 – requires full workforce• The Jupiter can fly 20mT of mission payload with each crew

DIRECT Removes the Workforce & Flight “GAP” at KSC

One year slide in last 3 months

3

Man-rating of the DIRECT Engine is Five Years Ahead of Ares

GAO Assessment of the Ares-I J-2X Engine*- The J-2X is a new engine development on the critical path for ISS return- NASA is trying to do 29 rework cycles in only 7 years vs. 9 years for SSME- The J-2X has insufficient testing facilities

DIRECT uses theprovenRS-68

*GAO-08-186T April 3, 2008

Speech by Dr. Michael D. GriffinSpace Transportation Association22 January 2008

“The most obvious split involves launching two identical vehicles”

We agree 100% with Dr. Griffin that one Launch System is Superior.

“However… [this] is vastly over designed for ISS logistics.”

This is Dr. Griffin’s Single Point of Contention with DIRECT

“This method … was to be employed [for Apollo]”

“Costs are lower because of only one launch vehicle development”

“Recurring costs are amortized over a larger number of flights”

“Knowledge of system reliability is enhanced by … flight experience”

The Jupiter-120 doesn’t use an upper stage though, making this variant a close match for the ISS Crew and Logistics capabilities of Shuttle

NASA Admits the Benefits of One Launch System

It is true that two Jupiter-232, which has an upper stage, places more mass in orbit than the Ares-I + Ares-V for the Lunar mission.

Ares-I

STS

Jupiter-120

No ISS ModulesISS is Left Unfinished

=Less capable

than the Space Shuttle

more expensive than an EELV

Delivers ISS ModulesWe Can Finish ISS

=More capable

than theSpace Shuttle

and less expensive than Ares-I

The Jupiter-120 is More Capable ,available Sooner and needs Less Money

Operational Date

$9.5 Billion$14.4 Billion

March 2016

Total Development Cost

September 2012

Lunar Class Orion? Lunar Class Orion

Mission PayloadRobust ISS Logistics

No Mission PayloadNo ISS Logistic

Non-Reusable Orion Water Landing

Reusable OrionLand Landing

DIRECT is Ideally Suited for both the ISS & VSE Missions

ISSCrew

ISS Crew &Logistic

s

ISS Elements &

HubbleServicing

CrewLunar Flyby

CargoProbes

MSR etc.

Lunar& Mars

Missions

The Jupiter-120 is Easily Extensible to New Mission Types

Finish the ISS Mars Sample Return

JWST ServiceHubble Service

DIRECT Expands & Joins Manned and Unmanned Efforts

- Three Years Before the first flight of Ares-I to the ISSImagine an ‘Apollo 8’ Lunar Flyby Mission before 2013

DIRECT Enables an Apollo-8 Mission Much Sooner

The Jupiter-120 Protects Our Heavy Lift Infrastructure

Add a 2nd Stage and LSAM and we can Return to the Moon

“The most obvious split involves launching two identical vehicles”

“This method … was to be employed [for Apollo]”

“Knowledge of system reliability is enhanced by flight experience”

Speech by Dr. Michael D. GriffinSpace Transportation

Association22 January 2008

DIRECT Produces a More Capable Lunar Program

“Costs are lower because of only one launch vehicle development”“Recurring costs are amortized over a larger number of flights”

Speech by Dr. Michael D. GriffinSpace Transportation

Association22 January 2008

DIRECT Saves Money Now and Later

• A leaked memo from Constellation indicates that NASA began to prepare an Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) for Jupiter-120.

• These are the results of an 8-week Internal NASA Study performed in October/November 2007.

DIRECT is the Best Based on a Recent Internal NASA Study

It is Too Late to Switch Horses Now

We Agree, It is Too Late to Switch Horses Now

STS is the horse we are onNext launch is this Saturday

We Agree, It is Too Late to Switch Horses Now

STS is the horse we are onNext launch is this Saturday

The Jupiter is a Direct Derivative of STS

Same Foot Print

We Agree, It is Too Late to Switch Horses Now

STS is the horse we are onNext launch is this Saturday

The Jupiter is a Direct Derivative of STS

Ares Retains < 5%of the STS Hardware or

Infrastructure

New 10m Tank

New5-Segment

SRB

Different Foot Print

Same 8.4m Tank

Existing Reusable

4-Segment SRB

Different Upper Stages

Common Upper Stage

Al-LiDisposable

5.5-Segment

SRB

Six RS-68 Engines

Even Longer Tank

Breaking News

Same Foot Print

Summary

Dr. Griffin agrees that one launch system costs less than two launch systems

Congress directed us to leverage the STS infrastructure and workforce

ESAS Appendix 6a-f confirms our cost and performance numbers

Even now the Jupiter-120 is four years ahead of the Ares-I

Dr. Griffin agrees that one launch system is the obvious and safest approach

NASA studies done late last year confirm that DIRECT is the best approach

Ares utilizes < 5% of the STS infrastructure and < 25% workforce

Jupiter utilizes > 95% of the STS infrastructure and >75% workforce

Over 100 NASA studies over 35 years agree with the DIRECT approach

DIRECT is Safer, Simpler and Sooner

Jupiter provides new capabilities while lowering operational costs below Ares-I

DIRECT ‘is’ the NASA engineering recommendation

•Manned Missions to Mars ? No we are at least 6 Presidential and 12 Congressional cycles away

The Critical Decisions before America Now

•Manned Missions to Near Earth Object ? No we are at least 4 Presidential and 8 Congressional cycles away

•Manned Missions to the Lunar Surface ? No we are at least 2 Presidential and 4 Congressional cycles away

Ares-I/V

No

EELV/COTS

Yes

DIRECT

Yes Do we continue

United States access to the ISS ?

Do we save the United States’ second Heavy Lift system ?

No No Yes

Do we remain the leading space faring

nation ? No No Yes

We must not make A New Mistake

• Protect key STS infrastructure from destruction by Ares-I

• Perform an independent evaluation of the Jupiter-120 vs. Ares-I

• Review the recent internal NASA study endorsing Jupiter-120/232

The Key to the Next 50 Years Starts with Clear Thinking Today

Dr. Michael D. GriffinNASA Administrator August 31, 2005AIAA Space 2005 Conference & Exhibition

“From 1975-1981, between the retirement of the Apollo-Saturn system and the first flight of the Shuttle, the United States did not

have the capability to send humans into space, our country was not driving the space exploration agenda, and our aerospace workforce was decimated. We lost valuable people from the

program, people who never came back. We lost valuable skills that were relearned with difficulty, or not at all. We lost momentum. Let us learn from these experiences. Let us not repeat them. Let

us at least make a new mistake.”

www.directlauncher.comwww.directlauncher.com

Fifty years after the Space Age began America must once again answer the same question that began it.

Do we want to be the “world’s leading space faring nation”?-President John F. Kennedy-President John F. Kennedy