International Space Station: Investing in Humanity’s Future International Exploration Framework William Russell ASTE 527 December 15, 2009 USC U T I L I Z A T I O N E V O L U T I O N D E C O M M I S S I O N

USC U T I L I Z A T I O N E V O L U T I O N L I F E E X T E N S I O N Background What we do well, and what we need to overcome NASA StrengthsNASA Strengths Capacity: Orion will seat 2X as ApolloCapacity: Orion will seat 2X as Apollo Reliability: USA #1 in safe, manned explorationReliability: USA #1 in safe, manned exploration Infrastructure: ISS Access & many “COTS” suppliersInfrastructure: ISS Access & many “COTS” suppliers NASA WeaknessesNASA Weaknesses –Inadequate time/funding: Ares I, Ares V, Altair, etc –Not Top National Priority: Backseat to job creation

USC U T I L I Z A T I O N E V O L U T I O N L I F E E X T E N S I O N Give ISS partners seats on upcoming NEO/MARS/ MOON mission in return for financingGive ISS partners seats on upcoming NEO/MARS/ MOON mission in return for financing COTS suppliers meet this demand and grow jobs in U.S.COTS suppliers meet this demand and grow jobs in U.S. If necessary, sell mission “privileges” for additional fundingIf necessary, sell mission “privileges” for additional funding –First footsteps on destination surface: $XXB –Mission return off partner’s coastline: $XB Proposed Solution: International Exploration Framework for economic growth ISS would store exploration supplies delivered by COTS flights The first footprints on an exploration mission are probably worth billions in national prestige alone Orion CEV could splashdown near a partners coastline – a huge spectacle

USC U T I L I Z A T I O N E V O L U T I O N L I F E E X T E N S I O N Benefits Harmonize our approach with our constraints   Creates US Jobs NOW with Foreign Investment  Also further international relations & free-trade   Explore Space Despite Inadequate NASA Resources  Little or no increase in NASA budget required   3 Americans act as “mission hosts” on each mission  Leverage investment in ISS rendezvous, interfaces, etc   Fully Compatible with Augustine Study  Don’t need to build additional ARES vehicle or Altair   Can leverage existing work on Orion CEV and Ares I   Utilize COTS heavily   Supports ISS beyond 2015

USC U T I L I Z A T I O N E V O L U T I O N L I F E E X T E N S I O N 1. Int’l funded COTS Pre-Supply Missions 2. Int’l CEV Crew 4. Int’l Exploration Mission 5. Int’l Splashdown & Homecoming 3. ISS Mission Supply Depot Concept of Operations

USC U T I L I Z A T I O N E V O L U T I O N L I F E E X T E N S I O N Concept Implications Necessary adaptations to status quo Political/OrganizationalPolitical/Organizational –NASA Charter must be adapted to accommodate “global trade” mindset TechnicalTechnical –ISS must accommodate depot size, mass & power req’ts –Additional truss structure may be required to depot supplies ISS initially designed to support a “dual keel” for expansion White House is already keen on Int’l partnership

USC U T I L I Z A T I O N E V O L U T I O N L I F E E X T E N S I O N ISS Partners An expanded customer base for COTS services United States (GDP: $13.84T)United States (GDP: $13.84T) Japan (GDP: $4.27T)Japan (GDP: $4.27T) Russia (GDP: $1.29T)Russia (GDP: $1.29T) Canada (GDP: $1.27T)Canada (GDP: $1.27T) ESAESA –Germany (GDP: $2.8T) –France (GDP: $2.6T) –United Kingdom (GDP: $2.13T) –Italy (GDP: $1.8T) –Spain (GDP: $1.36T) –Netherlands (GDP: $827B) –Belgium (GDP: $376.5B) –Sweden (GDP: $338.5B) –Switzerland (GDP: $303.2B) –Norway (GDP: $246.6B) –Denmark (GDP: $203.3B) $ 2.29T $ 12.98T

USC U T I L I Z A T I O N E V O L U T I O N L I F E E X T E N S I O N Mission Logistics Fitting the puzzle pieces together Modest number of Int’l flights can accumulate enough mass at ISS to replace an HLV 1Modest number of Int’l flights can accumulate enough mass at ISS to replace an HLV 1 ESA & Japanese Transfer Vehicles (TV) have enough mass to deliver entire stagesESA & Japanese Transfer Vehicles (TV) have enough mass to deliver entire stages Could explore use of “common design exploration stages”Could explore use of “common design exploration stages” ProviderPL to ISS# of Missions Total Mass OSC2,000 kg1020,000 SpaceX2,500 kg1025,000 Orion5,000 kg210,000 Japan TV7,600 kg17,600 ESA TV7,600 kg17,600 TOTAL1370,200 kg 1: Notional ARES-V claims 71,000Kg to TLI