Hyperion SSTO ETO RLV Concept Documentation - · PDF fileConcept Documentation Hyperion SSTO ETO RLV Concept Ov erview and Model Operation: Reduced Order Simulation for Evaluating

Concept Documentation

Hyperion SSTO ETO RLV

Concept Overviewand

Model Operation: Reduced Order Simulation for Evaluating Technologies and Transportation Architectures (ROSETTA)

ROSETTA Model Version 2.43.III

09 April 2001

Submitted By:

Dr. John Olds [email protected]

Andy Crocker [email protected]

Dr. John Bradford [email protected]

A.C. Charania [email protected]

2

Overview

� Concept Overview» Concept Description and Configuration

» Concept Technology Summary

» EMBEDDED and ENABLING Technology Applications− Structures / TPS

− Propulsion

− Avionics / Power / IVHM

» ENHANCING Technology Descriptions

� Model Operation» General Model Operation

» Category I Modeling Assumptions

» Category II Modeling Assumptions

» Category III Modeling Assumptions

» ROSETTA Model Design Structure Matrix (DSM)

» References

� Configuration Management

Concept Overview: Hyperion SSTO

4

Concept Description

Fully commercial venture

IOC of 2025 with a technology freeze date of 2018

Programmatic

Human rated

Crew survivable abort capability

Cross range capability of several hundred nmiFlight performance reserve: 1% of ∆V

Flight Performance

Reference orbit: 100 nm. circular, 28.5 degrees inclination

Qmax = 2000 psf, Transition Mach = 10

20klb in a 15 ft dia. x 25 ft payload bay

Cargo delivery or passenger delivery and return

Reference Mission

The vehicle has wing-body configuration

Horizontal takeoff, un-powered horizontal landing

Configuration

Hyperion rocket-based combined cycle (RBCC) Single-Stage-To-Orbit (SSTO) Earth-to-orbit (ETO) reusable launch vehicle (RLV)Concept

CharacteristicsItem

5

Concept Configuration

1 7 9 f t

9 8 f t

S H A R P T P S

1 0 x 1 0 x 2 0 f t P a y l o a d

M e t a l l i c T P S5 E S J R B C C

e n g i n e s

H 2 F a n s

O 2 - H 2 O M S / R C S

R C S

3 2 f t

6

Concept Technology Summary

Not included in basic ROSETTA modelAdditional capabilities through new useful overlay technologiesENHANCINGC

Included in basic ROSETTA modelNew required technologies needing further funding developmentENABLINGB

Sunk costs, Included in basic ROSETTA modelState-of-Art (SoA) and Gen 2 technologiesEMBEDDEDA

ROSETTA Model ApplicabilityDescriptionTypeNo.

High T/W ESJ LOX/LH2 RBCC Engine

Extended Life ESJ LOX/LH2 RBCC Engine

Densified LH2 Propellant (slush or triple point)

Extended Life Airframe and Wing Structures (Gr/Ep)

High Temperature MMC Airframe & Wing Structures

Tailored MMC Wing Carry-through structure

Extended Life Airframe and Wing Structures (MMC)

LOX/LH2 Pump-fed OMS

GOX/GH2 Pressure-fed RCS

Integrated Main/OMS/RCS Propellant Delivery

Self Healing TPS in Acreage Areas (tiles, blankets)

ENHANCING Technologies

ESJ LOX/LH2 RBCC Engine

UHTC Leading Edge and Nosecap Materials

Gr/Ep LH2 Honeycomb Tanks with no liner (cold structure)

Long life Gr/Ex Airframe + Wing Structures (cold structure)

Super lightweight MMC/Composite Landing Gear

High Horsepower, High Rate EMAs for Aerosurfaces

ENABLING Technologies

Non-toxic ECLSS cooling fluids

Green OMS/RCS Propellants (LOX/Ethanol)

AETB TUFI Tiles and AFRSI blanket TPS

Airframe and Propulsion System IVHM

Graphite/Epoxy Airframe, Wing Structures (cold structure)

Al-Li Propellant Tanks

Lightweight MMC Landing Gear

Autonomous Flight Controls

Lightweight Avionics, Telemetry, GNC

High Power Density Fuel Cells

EMBEDDED Technologies

7

EMBEDDED and ENABLING Technology Application:Structures / TPS

2.5% of max load (takeoff or landing)Super lightweight MMC/Composite Landing GearB.2Landing Gear

Body flap

Fuselage

Wing and Vertical Tail

Oxidizer Tank

Fuel Tank

Body

Tail

Wing

Sub-type

10% better ops and 10% lighter weight relative to STSAETB TUFI Tiles and AFRSI blanket TPSA.7

10% better ops and 10% lighter weight relative to STSUHTC nose cap, AETB TUFI tiles on lower surfaces and AFRSI blankets on uppersurfaces, TUFI tiles on base.

A.6, B.4

10% better ops and 10% lighter weight relative to STSUHTC leading edge, AETB TUFI tiles on wing lower surfaces and combination of TUFItiles and AFRSI blankets on upper surfaces, TUFI tiles on vertical tails

A.5, B.3Thermal Protection

12% reduction over Aluminum isogrid on STSAl-Li 2195, stiffened skin structure with external ring frames, spray-on foam insulation(SOFI), aft tank installation

A.4

30% reduction over Al isogrid on STS, 500 flight lifeGraphite/Epoxy LH2 Honeycomb Tanks with no liner (cold structure)B.1Main Propellant Tanks

18% reduction over Aluminum skin-stringer on STSGraphite/Epoxy stiffened skin construction for nose, intertank, payload pod, and aft body,Graphite/Epoxy carrier panels for TPS attachment in tank areas, Aluminum thruststructure, Graphite/Epoxy body flap

A.3

18% reduction over Aluminum skin-stringer on STSWing-tip vertical tails constructed of Graphite/Epoxy stiffened skin. Conventional rudders,sized for directional stability at low speeds

A.2

18% reduction over Aluminum skin-stringer on STSGraphite/Epoxy exposed wing and carry-through, primarily stiffened skin construction,Graphite/Epoxy elevon control surfaces

A.1Airframe Structures

Notes, Compatibilities and PrerequisitesTechnologyNo.Type

EMBEDDED Technology ENABLING Technology

8

EMBEDDED and ENABLING Technology Application:Propulsion

Propellants

Pneumatic and purgesystem

Feed system

Gimbal and ValveActuation

Engines

Sub-type

No Hypergols, 10% better ground ops and TATGreen Propellants (LOX/Ethanol), pressure-fed system, Titanium tanksA.13Orbital Maneuvering System(OMS)

No Hypergols, 10% better ground ops and TATGreen Propellants (LOX/Ethanol) , pressure-fed, Titanium tanks, independent forwardand aft modules

A.12Reaction Control System (RCS)

NBP hydrogen, NBP oxygenA.11

Helium system with Titanium tanks with Kevlar overwrapA.10

Composites and Aluminum with new flange designA.9

15% lighter than hydraulics, simpler opsEMA’s for TVC, valvesA.8

28:1 installed T/W, Mach 10 – 12 capable, 250 flightsESJ LOX/LH2 RBCC EngineB.5Main Propulsion



9

EMBEDDED and ENABLING Technology Application:Avionics / Power / IVHM

Conversion andDistribution

Power

Sub-type

Kevlar-Epoxy purge and vent ducts, electromechanically actuated vent doorsA.18Purge, Vent, and Drain

Eliminate Freons, 5% ground ops and TATNon-toxic ECLSS cooling fluidsA.17ECS and Thermal Control

25% weight reduction over STSLightweight GN&C, RF communications, Data Systems, Instrumentation Sensors, RangeSafety, and Controllers

A.16Avionics

30% lighter weight than Hydraulics, simpler opsSurface Controls: Quad-redundant, high power, high rate EMAsB.6Actuation

28 VDC/115 VAC systemA.15

25% weight reduction over STSHigh power density fuel cells integrated with main tanks for reactantsA.14Electrical



10

ENHANCING Technology Description

Increased Isp, eliminate extra fluids, simpler opsLOX/LH2 Pump-fed OMSC.8

Increased Isp, eliminate extra fluids, simpler opsGOX/GH2 Pressure-fed RCSC.9

Prerequisite: C.8 (LOX/LH2 Pump-fed OMS) & C.9 (GOX/GH2 Pressure-fed RCS)

Simplifies ground ops, reduces ops costsIntegrated Main/OMS/RCS Propellant DeliveryC.10

Prerequisite: A.9 (AETB TUFI Tiles and AFRSI blanket TPS)15% better in ops labor, cost, and TATSelf Healing TPS in Acreage Areas (tiles, blankets)C.11

Prerequisite: C5 & C6, Excludes C.4 (Extended Life Graphite/EpoxyStructures)

1000 flight life airframe structuresExtended Life Airframe and Wing Structures (MMC)C.7

Prerequisite: C.5 (High Temp MMC Structures)35% reduction over Aluminum 2024Tailored MMC Wing Carry-through structureC.6

25% reduction over Aluminum, reduced TPS areaHigh Temperature MMC Airframe & Wing StructuresC.5

Prerequisite: B.4 (Long Life Graphite/Epoxy Structures), Excludes C.7(Extended Life MMC Structures)

1000 flight life airframe structuresExtended Life Airframe and Wing Structures(Graphite/Epoxy)

C.4

15% increase in LH2 densityDensified LH2 Propellant (slush or triple point)C.3

Prerequisite: B.1 (ESJ LOX/LH2 RBCC Engine)100% increase in engine life (to 500 flights)Extended Life ESJ LOX/LH2 RBCC EngineC.2

Prerequisite: B.1 (ESJ LOX/LH2 RBCC Engine)25% improvement in RBCC T/W (to 35:1)High T/W ESJ LOX/LH2 RBCC EngineC.1

Compatibilities and PrerequisitesNotesTechnologyNo.

Model Operation: Reduced Order Simulation for EvaluatingTechnologies and Transportation Architectures (ROSETTA)

12

ROSETTA Model

� Reduced Order Simulation for Evaluation of Technologies and TransportationArchitectures (ROSETTA)

- A spreadsheet-based meta-model that is a representation of the design process for aspecific architecture (ETO, in-space LEO-GEO, HEDS, etc.)

- Each traditional design discipline is represented as a contributing analysis in theDesign Structure Matrix (DSM)

- Based upon higher fidelity models (i.e. POST, APAS, CONSIZ, etc.) and refinedthrough updates from such models

- Executes each architecture simulation in only a few seconds» Requirement for uncertainty analysis through Monte-Carlo simulation

- Architectures are modified through influence factors» PIFs: Programmatic Influence Factors (i.e. govt. contribution, market growth, etc.)

» VIFs: Vehicle Influence Factors (i.e. Isp, wing weight, T/We, cost, etc.)

- Outputs measure progress towards NASA Goals ($/lb, safety, etc.)» Standard deterministic outputs as well as probabilistic through Monte Carlo

ROSETTA models contain representations of the full design process. Individual developer of each ROSETTA model determines depth and breadth of appropriate contributing analyses.

More assumptions, fewer DSM links than higher fidelity models due to need for faster calculation speeds.

ROSETTA models contain representations of the full design process. Individual developer of each ROSETTA model determines depth and breadth of appropriate contributing analyses.

More assumptions, fewer DSM links than higher fidelity models due to need for faster calculation speeds.

13

ROSETTA Model Categories

� Category I- Produces traditional physics-based outputs such as transportation

system weight, size, payload and the NASA metric in-space triptime

� Category II- In addition to above, adds additional ops, cost, and economic

analysis outputs such as turn-around-time, LCC, cost/flight, ROI,IRR, and the NASA metric price/lb. of payload

� Category III- In addition to above, adds parametric safety outputs such as

catastrophic failure reliability, mission success reliability, andthe NASA metric probability of loss of passengers/crew

14

ROSETTA Model Operation: Hyperion SSTO

� The ROSETTA spreadsheet model for this concept contains 6 disciplinaryworksheets, an Inputs / Outputs (I/O) worksheet sheet, and a ProgrammaticInfluence Factor (PIFs) worksheet

- The six disciplinary worksheets and the off-line models upon which they are basedinclude:

» Trajectory (POST 3-DOF, NASA LaRC)

» Weights (GT-Sizer CONSIZ MERs, Georgia Tech - various sources including NASA LaRC)

» Operations (AATe, NASA KSC)

» Cost (NAFCOM, NASA Marshall)

» Economics (CABAM, Georgia Tech)

» Safety (GT-Safety, Georgia Tech)

� Any changes of the PIFs and VIFs result in the concept needing to bereconverged both physically (through vehicle length) and financially (throughmarket prices)

15

ROSETTA Model Operation:Sizing Concept Using Vehicle Length

� The concept is assumed to maintain the same payload capability

� When some performance parameter (i.e. a VIF) affects the mass ratio ascalculated from the weights and sizing worksheet, there may be a discrepancybetween this mass ratio and the one required for trajectory

� In this case the vehicle length has to be manipulated in order to make both massratios equivalent

� Manipulation is done through MS Excel Solver

� MS Excel VBA macro written (called by pressing CTRL+I)

16

ROSETTA Model Operation:Closing Financial Case Using Price [$/lb]

� An input to the model is the required financial return of the project on top of thatrequired to be minimally acceptable

� Financial return based upon costs and the price per lb charged for delivery ofpayload

� Any change that results in a change to project cash flows results in a change ofthe price required to converge the economic model to the desired financialreturn

� Thus the vehicle sizing optimization is done first through MS Excel Solver, thenthe required financial case is converged in a separate tasking of MS ExcelSolver

17

Category I Modeling Assumptions:Trajectory

� Response surface equations used for trajectories--calibrated in POST-3D- Independent variables come from user (airbreathing Isp, rocket Isp) and Weights sheet

(Gross liftoff weight (GLOW), vehicle length)- Dependent variables [∆V’s (drag, gravity, atmosphere, TVC), mass ratio (MR), mixture

ratio (O/F)] change based on independent variables- When Excel Solver used, GLOW and length are iterated with ∆V’s, MR, and O/F

between Trajectory and Weights sheets

� Launch due East from KSC with ejector scramjet engine- Ejector rockets on to Mach ~ 3

Ramjet on from 3 < Mach < 5.5 Scramjet on from 5.5 < Mach < 10Rocket engine on at Mach 10

- MECO at 50 x 100 nmi. X 28.5° LEO orbit

- Entry trajectory was not explicitly analyzed

18

Category I Modeling Assumptions:Propulsion

� 5 ejector scramjet LOX/LH2 RBCC engines- Propellants: NPB LOX, NPB LH2- Installed T/We = 28- Developed in SCCREAM online RBCC engine code- 98,500 lbf reference sea level thrust- 46 ft2 reference inlet area- Cowl height = 4.6 ft- Centerline distance from nose to cowl = 111.6 ft- 9 degree external compression angle- Primary rocket: Area ratio = 12, chamber pressure = 3000 psi, O/F = 8, 100% combustor and

nozzle efficiencies- Combustor lengths = 10 ft / 5 ft- Subsonic and supersonic combustion geometry:

A*/A1 = 0.5, A1/A3 = 1.5, A3’/A3 = 1.2, A4/A3’ = 1.2, Ae/A1 = 4, Ae’/A1 = 4- Subsonic start fuel injection = 10 ft, end heat release = 15 ft

Supersonic start heat release = 1 ft, end heat release = 5 ft- Rocket mode: Area ratio = 200, O/F = 7- Baseline rocket Ispvac = 462 sec- Engine life = 250 mean flights before replacement- Reliability = 250 mean flights between failure

19

Category I Modeling Assumptions:Weights

� ROSETTA model includes full three-level GT-Sizer spreadsheet andWBS for this concept

� Vehicle scales photographically to match required MR (from Traj sheet)- Change fuselage length to recalculate new available MR

� MER’s originally based on a mixture of Talay (NASA LaRC VAB) MERsfor Rocket-type RLV’s adjusted + and - by Technology Reduction Factorsapproximated at SEI for Gen3-era- Used 15% overall dry weight margin

- Propulsion weights and geometry are scaled as vehicle resizes

20

Category II Modeling Assumptions:Operations (1)

� Operations worksheet heritage from the NASA-KSC model AATe (Architecture AssessmentTool-enhanced)

- AATe requires both quantitative inputs and qualitative order of magnitude comparison of the conceptvehicle to the Space Shuttle

� Response Surface Equation (RSE) from AATe- Inputs

» Overall Vehicle Reliability, Airframe Life, Payload Weight, Dry Weight, Vehicle Length, Payload Demand Per Year

- Outputs» Ground Turn-Around-Time (Days), Facilities Cost, Labor Cost Per Flight, Labor Personnel Required, LRU Cost Per

Flight, Total Propellant Costs

� Propellant costs based upon production rate effects over current propellant prices- Accounted for extra propellant required at launch site (1.5 * vehicle required amount)

� The total labor personnel required per flight based on total yearly labor cost (from the AATeRSE), yearly flight rate, and a Full Time Equivalent (FTE) salary of $150K (FY$1999)

� Operations Flow:- Vehicle Turnaround: land, single-stage, then turnaround, process at pad- Vehicle Assembly / Integration: no element assembly/integration required- Expendables, Payload, and Crew: Internal Payload but no crew or active passengers

21


Transportation system has no "Criticality 1" failure modes (i.e., completely fault tolerant to support safety of flight, but accepts mission failurethrough safe abort modes)

Failure Modes

Vehicle required only a moderate number of active components to function during flight-requires a few active systems to maintain safe vehicle(I.e. fail safe)-contains a few systems that require monitoring due to hazards which requires corrective action to “safe” the vehicle

Active Systems

Space Transportation that’s very complex-I.e. has s single stage and no integration or similar or like functions to reduce number of systems andcomponents-results in many systems and a large ground support infrastructure with a high parts count.

Integration General

Five main propulsion engine elementsEngines

Active engine throttles required to function during flightDynamic Events

Architectural concept requires no use of pollutive or tox ic materials on the flight vehicle, but may use a few during manufacturing, assembly,cleaning, and ground service operations

Materials

Single stage w/integral propulsion system (including tanks) and with no elements-to-element interfaces-no stand alone engine and no separateaeroshell

Interfaces

Uses a mix of COTS and custom, minimum weight driven components with high technology maturity (TRL)ReliabilityOperability

Single stage vehicle architecture permits component/element replacement requiring no personnel entry into vehicle and without the use of anyspecial access kits—allows external platforms and hardware, and will accommodate changeout and verification in no more than one hour aftergaining external access—requires propellant drain.

Maintainability

Partially integrated propulsion systemsIntegration Propulsion Propulsion

Qualitative DescriptionSub-TypeSystem

AATe Operations Model Qualitative Inputs (1) [related to Questions 1-18 in Step 1: Concept Design in the AATe model]

22


All systems—both passive and active—have BIT/BITE from on-board, with limited use of intrusive sensors, requiring no hands-on or groundsupport aided activity—utilizing an architecture with minimum number of conductor paths, connectors, interfaces, etc.

VHM

All fluid/gas systems use best traditional component connections that are maintainable, with automated process control (no hands-on leak-checking) following removal & replacement without compromising maintainability— remainder of system is all-welded construction (no fittings andflanges between components for ease of assembly)

Connections

Flight vehicle architecture provides adequate environmental control during flight without use of closed compartments and removable heatshields— but, requires ground support systems control during launch preparations and launch operations

Compartments, purges

Single-stage vehicle with separate tanks for each function & different fluids for each function (e.g., main propulsion = LH2/LO2, & orbitalmaneuvering propulsion = MMH/N2O4, & hydraulics & reaction control = MMH/N2O4, & environmental control working fluid = Freon 21, & othercoolants = XXX & etc … )

Fluids, Number

Uses no toxic fluids for flight, minimum ground system restriction for on-line ground handling operations at the launch site (like TPS water-proofing), except those that are serviced and sealed in off-line facilities; some toxics used for manufacturing, assembly and cleaning only

Fluids, ToxicsFluids and Gases

Single stage that requires many different gases for flight operations (e.g., GH2, GO2, GHe, GN2, NH3, etc.) which are stored in many separatevessels and each requiring flight-to-ground interfaces for servicing

Gases, Number

One vehicle ground power system required with minimized ground power infrastructureElec., GoundOther Systems

Flight vehicle architecture provides adequate environmental control during flight without use of closed compartments and removable heatshields— but, requires ground support systems control during launch preparations and launch operations

Margin

Qualitative DescriptionSub-TypeSystem

AATe Operations Model Qualitative Inputs (2) [related to Questions 1-18 in Step 1: Concept Design in the AATe model]

23

Category II Modeling Assumptions:Cost

� NAFCOM weight-based Cost Estimating Relationships (CERs) with complexityfactors at subsystem level

� Assumes development of near full-scale, non revenue generating prototype

� Includes programmatic “wraps”- System Test Hardware (STH), Integration, Assembly, & Checkout (IACO), System Test

Operations (STO), Ground Support Equipment (GSE), System Engineering &Integration (SE&I), Program Management (PM)

� 20% cost margin applied to all DDT&E and TFU costs

� Option for user specified input costs (DDT&E and TFU)

24

Category II Modeling Assumptions:Economics (1)

� Two available pricing schemes (a PIF)- Same price for government and commercial missions (default)- Different prices for government and commercial mission

» Set commercial price at $ 800/lb- Manipulate price to obtain the commercial Incentive Return-IR (a PIF)- Commercial Incentive Return-IR

» Return above the the return at which the project is acceptable» Measure of attractiveness of project

� Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) method used to determine the required discount rate- This is the return at which the project is minimally acceptable- Based upon three kinds of firms: Aerospace, Air Transport, and E-commerce

� Project cash flows based upon income from operations (total operating expenses – gross profit) -taxes

- Referred to EBI (earnings before interest)» Effect of any financing (loan rate) is not included in the calculation of the FCF upon which target

IRR is based» Normally, the effect of financing is included in the discount rate which is used to calculate NPV

- Target for Solver: New Present Value (NPV) based upon WACC rate + IR rate- Input Debt-to-Equity ratio (a PIF) reflection of financing situation

25


� Market assumptions in Economics worksheet originate from curve fits of CSTS elastic market data- Source: Commercial Space Transportation Study (CSTS) for commercial and government cargo markets (LEO-equivalent

payloads)- Inelastic commercial and government passenger markets are included but not used- Market elasticities (price versus payload demand) curve fits include competition effects- Curve fits based on tabular data that did not include “0” payload captured points at high prices in order to generate curves

with high R2, result: small, marginal payloads captured at large prices- Elasticities include options for movement of entire demand curve (market expansion) and yearly market growth rate

� Production- Optional user input to determine number of years to produce airframes or can use estimation algorithm- Production starts 1 year after DDT&E phase ends, this year is set to be 1 year before IOC- Assumes total number of yearly flights required are evenly spread out over each flight year- Amortize total vehicle acquisition cost over production number of years- If the government buys any airframes, then those are the first versions off the assembly line- Production assumes vehicles are generally more turn-around-time limited than life limited- Learning curve input is aggregation of learning, production, and rate effects

� Depreciation- Based upon Double Declining Balance (DDB) method- User input for number of years to depreciate- Use input for salvage value of asset

� Any government contributions are accounted for as non-taxable revenue

26


Price for Comm. Market in FY$20XX

ROSETTA Model PIFs

Price for Govt. Market in FY$20XX

Convert to FY$1994

Using charged price in FY$1994, determine annual cargo payload, from 1994 CSTS

Comm. curve fit, w/o growth

Convert to FY$1994

Annual cargo payload for charged price w/growth:

Commercial

Note: The user pre-selects a price at which the government cargo market becomes completely inelastic and at which there are no more commercial flights. At this asymptotic point[nominally set at $5000/lb in FY$1994], any higher price results in the same number of government flights flown. If the economic objective (in this case IRR) requires higher prices to

be charged, the same number of flights are flown but the price charged per flight now increases. This asymptotic price can be determined through examination of CSTS curve fit data.

Note: In the case of two prices, a higher fidelity economics model is used to pre-determine the commercial cargo price. The model can then manipulate only one price, govt. cargo.The price in this market is manipulated to meet the required economic objective (in this case IRR).

Commercial Government

Payload Capability

Payload Inefficiency

Net Payload Capability

Comm. Market Expansion Factor

&Growth Rate Per Year

Using charged price in FY$1994, determine annual cargo payload, from 1994 CSTS

Govt. curve fit, w/o growth

Annual cargo payload for charged price w/growth:

Government

ROSETTA MODEL PRICE ORIGINATION CHAIN

Govt. Market Expansion Factor

&Growth Rate Per Year

27

Category III Modeling Assumptions:Safety and Reliability

� Quantitative vehicle data coupled with safety and reliability historical knowledgedatabases

� Quantitative vehicle data or user modifications:- No. of engines, Passengers per flight, Single engine or TPS reliability improvements

� Data calculations based on historical safety and reliability knowledge- Single engine reliability, TPS acreage reliability, Component system reliabilities (OMS/RCS,

Avionics, Structure, Tanks, Landing, Electrical, Propellant Feed, Payload, Actuation, AuxiliaryPower)

� Other user input in Safety sheet: Manned flights per year

� Output metrics (per mission and per year)- Loss of mission probability- Loss of vehicle probability- Loss of crew/passenger- Casualty rate

28

ROSETTA Model DSM: Hyperion SSTO

Trajectory

Weights

Operations

Cost

Economics

Safety

A

E

G

I

C D

F

H

K

ROSETTA Inputs

L M N O P Q

ROSETTAOutputs

V

T

U

S

R

ROSETTA Inputs

L: Drag ∆V Losses TVC ∆V Losses

∆V Launch AssistAirbreather IspRocket Isp

M: Payload CapabilityLH2 DensityLOX DensityEngine T/WComponent Weights

N: Airframe LifeFacilities CostPropellant CostsOverall Vehicle Reliability (MTBF)Ground Turnaround Time (TAT)

O: Airframe and Engine DDT&E CostAirframe and Engine TFU Cost

P: Debt-Equity RatioTax Holiday Program DurationCommercial Market Growth FactorGovernment Market Growth FactorCommercial Market Expansion FactorGovernment Market Expansion FactorCargo Pricing OptionVehicle Recurring Cost Per FlightAirframe and Engine DDT&E CostAirframe and Engine TFU CostAirframe LifeEngine LifeStatic Government Cargo Launch priceIRR Goal

Q: Overall Vehicle Reliability (MTBF)Single Engine Reliability (MTBF)

ROSETTA Outputs

R: Vehicle Length and WeightsS: Ground Ops Turn Around Time (TAT)T: DDT&E and Recurring CostU: Gov’t and Commercial Price / Fliight

IRR and NPV ResultsLife Cycle Cost ResultsRevenue and Equity ResultsComm. And Gov’t Flights Per Year

V: Casualty and Loss of Life Rates

Feed Forward Links

A: Modified Mass Ratio, Mixture RatioB: Dry Weight, Vehicle Length

Propellant WeightsC: Vehicle Component WeightsD: Vehicle Payload CapabilityE: Vehicle LengthF: Ground Turnaround Time (TAT)

Facilities CostLabor Cost Per Flight, LRU Cost Per FlightPropellant Cost Per FlightMaximum Flight Rate Per YearOverall Vehicle Reliability (MTBF)Airframe Life (MTBR)

G: Total Labor Personnel Required Per FlightPropellant Load (Oxidizer + Fuel)

H: Airframe and Engine DDT&E CostAirframe and Engine TFU Cost

I: Passengers Per FlightPassenger Flights Per YearTotal Flights Per YearNo. of Engines Per Airframe

Feedback Links

J: Vehicle LengthGross Liftoff Weight (GLOW)

K: No. of Engines Per Airframe

J B

29

References

� Olds, J., Bradford, J., Charania, A., Ledsinger, L., McCormick, D., Sorensen, K., "Hyperion: An SSTOVision Vehicle Concept Utilizing Rocket-Based Combined Cycle Propulsion," AIAA 99-4944, 9thInternational Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, Norfolk, VA,November 1-5, 1999.

30

Configuration Management (1)

Replaced word “free” from “cash flow” with more descriptive tagsNew PIF for required return beyond project acceptance (commercial incentive)Added number of booster and propulsion units as an output to “I/O” sheetRemoved NPV at 20% to NPV at 25%Changed IOSolver VBA code for new jump parameters (up = 2.4, down = 1.4)Changed IOSolver VBA code to use large jumps only when target NPV >$5BModified tax calculation to account for interest rate tax shieldAdded new depreciation schedule, based on Double-Declining MethodFor depreciation, added salvage value and years to depreciate optionAdding learning curve effect table for rates of production in “Economics”Set LOX propellant cost at $0.10/lb, LH2 $1.00/lb (in FY$1999)Added new AATe operations model answers to documentationLCC accounts for time value of money based on inflation and risk free rateAdded separate line item for capital expenditures in cash flow in “Economics”Fixed reference year in principal calculation in “Economics”Added “I/O” output: Magnitude of Incentive Return (IR)Added “I/O” output: Total Govt. Contribution to Life Cycle CostAdded PIF for number of airframes government buys (from first airframes built)Minimum number of airframes purchased set to 3Pointed “current” value column to refer to “value” column in “I/O”Added more detail in fleet definition to reflect correct government purchasesYear to acquire airframes and engines set to 5, starting one year before IOCNew learning curve approximation, to be redone every time effect % changesMade government contribution same as revenue and taxableRemoved tax carryover provisions in cash flowsChanged VBA IOSOlver jump parameter to occur at target NPV > $5BAdded formulas to estimate years for production (starting 1 year before IOC)Years to build a fleet now an explicit optionChanged VBA code for a different method of jumping a large range of pricesChanged LCC outputs on “I/O” to not be discountedAdded total number of flights in program as an output on “I/O”Assumption is that vehicles are more turn-around-time limited than life limitedCorrected formula in cell $D$74 in “Economics”Changed ranges on E.2, E.3, E.4, E.5, and E.6 on “I/O”Set to “0” the default value of government purchases airframesSet to “5%” the default value of incentive returnSet to “10%” the default value of commercial market yearly growthAdded comments to Vo.3 on “Economics”Added insurance cost to recurring cost per flight (item C.G on “Economics”)

New Debt-To-Equity ratio PIFThree output IRRs based upon different cash flowsMore LCC and financing outputsSolver updated to fix problems and increase speedUpdated tags to reflect ATIMS Requirements, version BRemoved PIFs sheet, moved functionality to I/O sheetMinor update to market curve fits after last week’s exerciseAdd VIFs for propellant cost for each type (LH2 and LOX)Zeroed out comm. and govt. passenger marketsAccounted for extra propellant at launch site (1.5* vehicle required)Added PIFs for separate commercial and government overall market expansion factor (movement of thedemand curve)Added PIF for separate commercial and government market growth rate per year (yearly increase indemand from base year)Included and linked new “Safety” sheet, placed color codes on “Safety” SheetReplaced Response Surface Equation (RSE) in “Operations” with new fitNew “Operations” RSE for wider range on input reliabilities with demand inputRemoved unlinked growth rates on “Economics” sheetRemoved Overall Vehicle Reliability VIF on “I/O” sheetAdded TPS Acreage Reliability VIF on “I/O” sheetRemoved selected names from “Safety” sheetLinked selected cells in “Economics” sheet directly to “I/O” sheetChanged the <Version> column B to 1.1Removed the <Category> tag that had no associated <VIF> tagsAdded numerical values for all "Min" "Nom" and "Max" columns (ATIMSrequires some value, even if it isn't used)Added the words "Min" or "Max" to <VIF> col H (ATIMS requires one or other)Reduced all short names to 16 characters or lessAdded Category short names to <Category> col DMoved the <OUT> columns for "Value", "Units", and "Comments" to columns E, F, and G as required byATIMSUsed revised "Safety" sheet with new color codes and revisionsAdded the G. PIF tags that were missing from the previous versionChanged learning curve effect % from 80% to 90% on the "Economics" sheetAdded option to manually modify DDT&E and TFU costs in "Cost" sheetAdded $500M more for engine DDT&E (in FY$1992) using user input optionAdded PIF for govt. contribution to offset engine DDT&E cost (set at 100%)Changed learning curve for both engine and airframe to 85%Added nominal interest rate description to PIF for V.a in “Economics” sheet

03/28/012.40

Revisions and CommentsDateVersion

Note: There may be skips in version number due to intermediate changes by the user

31

Configuration Management (2)

Linked Years before loss of crew metric to “Safety” cell H11Changed Solver jump parameter for target NPV < $50M to 1.3Changed <VIF Titles> to <PIF Titles> in cells A23 and A33Changed <VIF> to <PIF> in cells A24:A29 and A34:A41Added "Government" short name to cell D22Change units for payload to "lbs" in cell K65Changed Airframe/Engine MTBF to %Changed formula cells L81, L82 in “Economics”, link to other sheets from “I/O”Assumed 5% Government / 15% Commercial flights carry passengersMade "casualty rate“ change with demandModified cells H6 / H7 in “Safety” so total # of flights did not include any additional flights above thoseconsistent with the Market modelChanged color code in “Safety” for manned flightsChanged “LOM (Cargo)” to “LOM” name in outputs in “I/O”Made years between LOC on in outputs in “I/O” to relative reference

Set engine DDT&E complexity factor to 7.5 on “Cost”Set engine TFU complexity factor to 1.4 on “Cost”Set engine DDT&E STH factor to 10 on “Cost”Added option to depreciate a certain % of total non-recurring costAdded LCC/lb per and post govt contribution as an output on “I/O”Separated out CSTS curve fit, then applied growth / expansionCaptured % Eq. applied after growth and expansion base upon charged priceGovt. purchases PIF includes both airframe and engines for complete vehiclesAdded years between loss metric for vehicle, mission, and crew as outputsSet vehicle acquisition years to 5Changed propulsion TFU govt. contribution % to formula on “Economics”Made government contributions non-taxable (changed cash flow calculations)Changed VBA Solver code if statements for price jumpChanged Years before Loss of Vehicle / Mission to account for manned flightsTook inverse of annual probability metrics for Years before loss metrics

04/08/01 2.42.III

Changed casualty rate output on “ I/O” to (#passengers per flight)*[1/(flights between LOC event)]*(avg.annual passenger flight rate)Changed jump_up parameter in VBA for target NPV < Level_1from 1.3 to 1.7Fixed bad reference in “Operations” foe estimate of labor personnel required

Corrected number of pass. Flights formula in “Safety” to have a 8.4 flight floorChanged comment on “Safety” sheet about minimum number of crewed flightsChanged output formula of Years b/w LOC to refer to “Safety” cell F16Renumbered outputs on “I/O”

04/09/012.43.III

Corrected misaligned safety VIFs on “I/O” and linked to “Safety”Added updated safety sheet, added new safety VIF on “I/O”Changed VBA code pointer to references on “I/O”

03/29/01 2.41

Revisions and CommentsDateVersion

Note: There may be skips in version number due to intermediate changes by the user

Documents

Hyperion SSTO ETO RLV Concept Documentation - · PDF fileConcept Documentation Hyperion SSTO ETO RLV Concept Ov erview and Model Operation: Reduced Order Simulation for Evaluating