Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides 1 Economics of Launch Vehicles & Two Configurations for Tremendous Cost Reductions AIAA th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference Denver, Colorado Douglas G. Thorpe, Thortek Labs, Inc., Irvine, Kentucky Morehead State University, Space Science Center August 2-5, 2009

Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides 2 Market Forecast For the next 10 years, there will be an average annual demand of 26.7 commercial space launches worldwide for GSO and non-GSO. –According to Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation (FAA/AST) & Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee (COMSTAC) for the period 2009 to Revenues from the 28 commercial launch events in 2008 amounted to an estimated US$1.97 billion or $70.4M each. Many US factories have annual gross sales of >$1B and more than 1,000 employees This may explain why it is so difficult to find investors and government funding in the aerospace community As a result: Future rocket designs must go to extreme measures to reduce development & re-occurring costs.

Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides 3 Mid 1980’s Quote for LRB Project

Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides 4 Liquid Rocket Booster Quote Analysis Mid 1980’s quote 12 Shuttle flights per year for 10 years 24 LRB expended per year 96 engines expended per year Total LRB DDT&E = $3,224M Engine development estimated at $1,483M Engine development cost amortized over 10 years with 7.5% cost of money = $2.2M per engine. Total engine unit cost estimated at $5.4M for each of the LOX/LH2 gas- generator cycle engines Hydraulic TVC unit cost estimated at $700k for each of the 8 TVC’s per booster CONCLUSION: Since little has changed in 20 years, using conventional business practices, engine and steering system costs will always amount to many $Millions regardless of the production rate.

Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides 5 Cost of Access to Space

Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides 6 Space Tourism Reality Much publicity and excitement about space tourism increasing launch demand. Using SpaceX dragon and Falcon 9 as an example: –17,600 lb dragon can carry seven passengers to LEO aboard the Falcon 9. –Falcon 9 launch service alone is $36.75M or $5.25M per passenger or $2,088 per pound. –Even if launch service cost is reduced to 10%, it would be unclear if more than 10 times as many passengers would be able to afford $525,000 just for the launch service plus the cost of riding in the dragon plus the cost of the orbital hotel

Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides 7 OEPSS – Operationally Efficient Propulsion System Study What is OEPSS? OEPSS was a late 80’s study based on lessons learned on operational processing of launch vehicles and their ground support equipment. The goal of the study was to identify vehicle design features that caused the most impact to vehicle processing. OEPSS was conducted by senior technical personnel from NASA, Boeing, and Lockheed –And one new hire/recent college graduate

Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides 8 OEPSS – Operationally Efficient Propulsion System Study 1.Enclosed Compartments 2.LOX tank forward 3.Side Mounted Boosters 4.Hypergolic Systems 5.Hydraulic Systems 6.Pneumatic Systems 7.Pressurization Systems 8.Multiple Propellants The 15 top design concerns delineated in OEPSS 9. Pre-Conditioning 10. Excessive Subcomponent Interfaces 11. High Maintenance Turbopumps 12. Ordnance Systems 13. Retractable Umbilical Carrier Plates 14. Engine Gimbal Systems 15. Ocean Recovery & Refurbishment OEPSS determined that size doesn’t matter in launch vehicle processing costs 3 rd stage Saturn V requires ~ same level of effort as much larger 1 st stage 2-stage launch vehicle requires ~ twice ground processing as single stage

Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides 9 Table #2: Examples of 5 Launch Vehicles

Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides 10 Economic Truths about the Launch Service Industry 1.Minimize development costs by utilizing existing engines and infrastructure. 2.Minimize launch vehicle preparation 3.Minimize re-occurring costs by utilizing existing infrastructure. 4.Utilize LOX/LH2 propellants in order to obtain a larger useful payload to orbit; thereby, spreading the re- occurring costs around a larger customer base. Careful observation of Table #2 and strict adherence to OEPSS will reveal the following economic truths about how to obtain maximum profit in the launch service industry

Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides 11 Proposed Launch Vehicles As of result of the economic truths about the launch service industry, two launch vehicle configurations are proposed. For payloads <30,000 lbs to LEO –Proposed: An air-launched, Single-Rocket-Stage LOX/LH2 vehicle. Heavier payloads require more expensive (per pound) configuration, –Proposed: A vertical launch, single-stage-to-orbit LOX/LH2 vehicle that stages one or more engines.

Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides 12 Response to the 1st Economic Truth Minimize development costs by utilizing existing engines and infrastructure NOTE: Every $100M in development costs (engines, stages, or launch towers) will require payback >$700K per mission if amortized over 10 relatively high rate of 20 missions per year. Use existing engines, hardware, & pads –J-2(x), RL-10, RS-68, Centaur… Launch from factory, if possible –Air Launch Recommendation: US govt. should develop LOX/LH2 engine that costs <$1M each

Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides 13 Response to the 2 nd Economic Truth Minimize Launch Vehicle Preparation According to the processing timeline on one American launch vehicle –25 shifts (19.5% of effort) are required for spacecraft encapsulation; –20 shifts (15.6% of effort) are required to horizontally prep and mate the first two stages; & –83 shifts (65% of effort, 7.5 weeks) are required at the pad on an 18 week processing timeline while utilizing more than 100 touch-laborers In comparison, Ariane V requires 50 total employees (including management) to encapsulate & mate the payload to the vehicle, transport the stack to the pad, and to launch the vehicle all within two weeks! NOTE: A single rocket stage eliminates T-O’s, swing arms, pad access platforms, and pad processing for the second or more stages

Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides 14 Response to the 3 rd Economic Truth Minimize re-occurring costs by utilizing existing infrastructure For an air launch system – the commercial air freighter can placed back in service during times when it is not needed for launch operations. Compare to Sea Launch System - two dedicated ships can not be utilized for any other money generating ventures between missions. Recommendation: US govt. should –develop heavy-lift aircraft modified for air launch operations and –develop other facilities to be used by commercial ventures that would pay tolls for their use.

Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides 15 Air Transporters Comparison List of world’s largest air transporters is shown in Table #4 below. Although the F doesn’t have the largest payload capacity, more have been built (and nearing retirement). Therefore, used F may be cheaper than AN-124.

Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides 16 Table #3: Comparisons between Launch Configurations Response to the 4th Economic Truth Utilize LOX/LH2 propellants in order to obtain a larger useful payload to orbit

Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides 17 The Space Tug Payload capacity to GTO is only ~52% of LEO. Going from GTO to GSO further reduces launch vehicle capacity by 76%. Also, three GN&C (Guidance, Navigation, & Control) systems are utilized to place a payload into its precise orbit. –Price of GN&C systems vary with precision from $250K to $2.5M each What is needed: A space tug that could autonomously rendezvous with payloads in LEO and transport same to higher orbits Benefit #1: Launch vehicle would increase payload capacity to GSO by 2.5 times Benefit #2: Price of GN&C for launch vehicle would reduce by ~$6.75M Recommendation: US govt. should develop a non-chemical, in-orbit transportation system Candidates include: : electro-static, electro-magnetic, and electro- dynamic tethers with plasma contactors

Thortek - Economics of Launch Vehicles - 18 Slides 18 Conclusion We compared economic vitality of 5 launch systems We presented 5 methods of reducing launch service costs –Most important for launch provider is minimize development costs We proposed two launch systems that should address the 4 economic truths –A LOX/LH2 Single-Rocket-Stage air-launch system –A LOX/LH2 single-stage-to-orbit system US Government should support the entire US aerospace industry, not mission specific tech (I.e., SSME, J-2X). This can be accomplished by the following 4 recommendations: –Develop LOX/LH2 engine that costs <$1M each. –Develop heavy-lift aircraft modified for air launch operations –Develop common launch facilities to be used by commercial ventures that would pay tolls for their use –Develop a non-chemical, in-orbit transportation system