1. Emerging Developments & Issues - Suborbital Commercial Spaceflight
Dr Andy Quinn
Saturn SMS Ltd, UK
&
Chair of the Suborbital Safety Technical Committee for the IAASS
ICAO REMAT
Montreal, Canada
24 May 2013

2. Introduction Suborbital Players, Spaceports & P2P The problem
The Issue – how to Regulate
Aviation Acceptable Level of Safety (ALOS)
UAS Levels of Safety
Previous NASA Spaceflight Levels of Safety
Relevance to Commercial Spaceflight
Proposed standards & ALOS for suborbital (from the IAASS)
Conclusions
Dr Andy Quinn Emerging Developments & Issues – Suborbital Commercial Spaceflight
24/05/2013

3. The Players
Dr Andy Quinn Emerging Developments & Issues – Suborbital Commercial Spaceflight
24/05/2013

4. Emerging Spaceports
Many in the US (Mojave, Edwards AFB, Spaceport America, Oklahoma, West Texas, Spaceport Florida, California Spaceport, Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport, etc.)
Sweden
Singapore
Abu Dhabi
Spain
Hokkaido, Japan
Curacao
Korea
Ibaraki, Japan
Malaysia
Lelystad NL
24/05/2013

5. Point to Point
Dr Andy Quinn Emerging Developments & Issues – Suborbital Commercial Spaceflight
24/05/2013

6. (with new industry with complex & novel technology)
The Problem
(with new industry with complex & novel technology)
Dr Andy Quinn Emerging Developments & Issues – Suborbital Commercial Spaceflight
24/05/2013

7. Risk A new product, a new market …… Product Market Present New Present
Increasing Risk
Present
Market
New
Dr Andy Quinn Emerging Developments & Issues – Suborbital Commercial Spaceflight
24/05/2013 7

8. How Safe is Safe Enough?
Dr Andy Quinn Emerging Developments & Issues – Suborbital Commercial Spaceflight
24/05/2013

9. The Issue - How to Regulate
Current suborbital frameworks include Launch Licensing versus Certification i.e. the US way or the (possible) European way
Regulation should accommodate the types of suborbital vehicles and understand the risks
i.e. the US and those Nations with remote/restricted areas can accommodate Vertical Launch as well as the winged vehicles
Harmonization with safety requirements & safety targets should be answer – this would be a suitable International solution for suborbital players
Dr Andy Quinn Emerging Developments & Issues – Suborbital Commercial Spaceflight
24/05/2013

10. Aviation Acceptable Levels of Safety (ALOS)
Dr Andy Quinn Emerging Developments & Issues – Suborbital Commercial Spaceflight
24/05/2013

11. Aviation ALOS
Commercial Aviation historical accident rates derived a worldwide accident rate of 1x10-6 (1 in 1 million) per flying hour – this is the ALOS
Current achieved rate is 0.1x10-6 pfh
IATA figures say current rate is 2.7 accidents per million flights
Dr Andy Quinn Emerging Developments & Issues – Suborbital Commercial Spaceflight
24/05/2013

12. UAS ALOS
UAS regulatory framework is complex and immature BUT still demands certification to an Equivalent Level of Safety (ELOS) to that of aircraft for platforms above 150kg This means for the Remote Piloted Aircraft (RPA) they must meet requirements of AC the ALOS (i.e. the derived catastrophic safety target and not the individual safety objectives) for Part 23 aircraft is 1x10-4 per flying hour (for GA aircraft) and 1x10-5 for newly built Class I aircraft (under 2751kg) – noted that the RPA is only part of the System

13. Previous Spaceflight Achieved Rates
Space Shuttle – at the last flight the achieved accident rate was 1 in 90 (1.1x10-2 per mission)
Dr Andy Quinn Emerging Developments & Issues – Suborbital Commercial Spaceflight
24/05/2013

14. US Commercial Spaceflight Safety Criteria
The Expected Casualty (Ec) ‘acceptable objective’ probability value is 30x10-6 per mission
This is 30 times worse than the AC (implicit) safety target (ALOS) for aircraft-based vehicles (noted that the Ec is based on exposure over populated flight path and relates to safety of the non-involved public on the ground)
So, is this ALOS applicable to the Operators such as Virgin Galactic or indeed Blue Origin today? (who will not fly over populated areas) – what about the safety of those on board?
FAA-AST looking at future requirements for crew & participants – hopefully hear about that progress later in this REMAT conference
Dr Andy Quinn Emerging Developments & Issues – Suborbital Commercial Spaceflight
24/05/2013

15. NASA ALOS
NASA’s new CCTS Programme has provided safety targets (ALOS):
a. The Loss of Crew (LOC) probability distribution for the ascent phase of a 210 day ISS mission shall have a mean value no greater than 1 in 1000
b. The LOC probability distribution for the reentry phase of a 210 day ISS mission shall have a mean value no greater than 1 in 1000
c. The LOC probability distribution for a 210 day ISS mission shall have a mean value no greater than 1 in 270 (3.7x10-3)
The NASA Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel said this is a concern (3 times less safe than the Constellation program)
Although 1 in 270 sounds a lot, it depends on the number of spaceflights (missions) per year – if there were roughly 1 mission per month then one accident roughly every 20 years MAY be acceptable to society and the regulator (however space accidents are usually spectacularly catastrophic disasters and grab the headlines (and stick with the industry) more than aviation disasters). BUT Space Shuttle Columbia occurred nearly 20 years on from Challenger and the Shuttle was retired. So either the flights need to be restricted to half i.e. 1 every other month or a maximum of 6 per year (meaning one accident every 40 years) OR the technology requires to be better and a stricter target applied (1 in 1000 for the total mission – per Constellation program, not 1 in 270). Restricting flights may be extremely difficult because NASA will no doubt contract to more than one operator i.e. SpaceX is the only player with the technology at the moment but Boeing, Mastens Space, Astium etc all have vehicles in development and so commercially there will be more flights per year (that NASA certify and the FAA-AST regulate).
Dr Andy Quinn Emerging Developments & Issues – Suborbital Commercial Spaceflight
24/05/2013

16. IAASS Spaceflight Safety Target
The International Association for the Advancement of Space Safety (IAASS) comprise members from Industry and have provided an IAASS-ISSB Space Safety Standard manual:
Safety Risk target for Orbital - probability of catastrophic event 1x10-3 per mission (ALOS)
Safety Risk target for Sub-Orbital - probability of catastrophic event 1x10-4 per mission (ALOS) – this target was further rationalised and accepted within the Suborbital Safety TC proposed standards & guidelines
Dr Andy Quinn Emerging Developments & Issues – Suborbital Commercial Spaceflight
24/05/2013

17. ALOS 3.7x10-3 NASA Orbital safety target (per total mission)
Dr Andy Quinn Emerging Developments & Issues – Suborbital Commercial Spaceflight
24/05/2013

18. Conclusions
The regulators should have a harmonized approach (between US and Europe) for international suborbital players
The regulators of new vehicles within new or existing domains (orbital, suborbital, P2P & UAS) should derive an ALOS based on existing methods and statistics BUT rationalised and tailored to their industry…… and tailored to the vehicle types and areas of operation because;
New product, new market (and new environment) = increased risk
So, in conclusion,
Dr Andy Quinn Emerging Developments & Issues – Suborbital Commercial Spaceflight
24/05/2013

19. Thank you Dr Andy Quinn ICAO REMAT Montreal, Canada 24 May 2013
ICAO REMAT
Montreal, Canada
24 May 2013