We Are Closer to Mars Today Than We Have Ever Been…

Aerojet Rocketdyne Capabilities Can Provide the Needed Propulsion and Power Technology

2

1940’s 1950’s 1960’s 1970’s 1980’s 1990’s 2000’s 2010’s

AerobeeFirst

Production Launcher

Apollo SPSFirst Human Rated Lunar

Vehicle VoyagerFurthest,

Longest Life Spacecraft

VikingFirst Mars Lander

NERVA NRX/ESTFirst Nuclear Flight Type Rocket Engine

SNAP 10AFirst Production Space Nuclear Fission Power

NEARFirst Asteroid

Lander

CassiniFirst

Spacecraft to Orbit Saturn

MessengerFirst Spacecraft to Orbit Mercury

New Horizons

First Pluto Flyby

AEHFFirst USA Hall Thruster Flight

MMRTGFirst Multi-mission

Radioisotope

Mars Science Lab

Deepest Throttling Monoprop

Engine

Saturn VLargest Production

Human Rated Rocket Engines

JATOFirst Jet Assisted Take-off from an Aircraft Carrier

PolarisFirst Submarine Launched ICBM

First Solid BallisticMissile

Atlas V SRBLargest US Monolithic

Solid Rocket Motor

TelstarFirst Flight of a Hydrazine

Arcjet

NTP LEU

Concept

SEP Demo

Surface Power

Concept

Some Capabilities Areas AR is Working

FUTURE CAPABILITIES ARE NEEDED TO OPEN THE SOLAR SYSTEM TO HUMAN EXPLORATION AND SETTLEMENT AT MARS

3

Today’s Capabilities No Heavy Lift

− Many flights− In-space assembly

Chemical Propulsion Only− Long trip times to Mars− Very large mass to Earth orbit− Limited split mission benefit

Solar and Radioisotope Power− Limited maximum power

capability and budgets

Future Capabilities In-work Heavy lift (SLS)

• Boost & Upper-stage

Solar Electric Propulsion

Nuclear power & propulsion

Deep Space Habitats Life Support (H2O, Food) Radiation Protection Crew & Cargo Landers ISRU-Resource Utilization Deep-space High Thrust

Foundational Capabilities Needed for Mars

4

Going to Mars with humans requires a diverse set of “tools”

Mars Descent Lander

Mars Ascent Vehicle

Ref: B. Drake/NASA image with modification per CR Joyner

Ascent Vehicle• ISRU*

influenced

Large EDL & Surface Habitat• ISRU* influenced

Transit Habitat

In-Space Propulsion

Earth to Mars to Earth

Solar Electric100 to 200 kWe

Cargo

4 crew for 1000 days

Orion

Space Launch System

Earth and Near Earth

• 4 Crew• 21 Days• < 12 km/s

• 70 & 130 t• EUS• Large shroud

Mars Orbit to Surface

High ThrustCrew

ISRU=In-Situ Resource Utilization – discussed later*

Some Mars Architectures Options Being Considered

5

LRO

LEO

Phobos Orbit

Elliptical Mars OrbitLGA

LEO=Low Earth OrbitLRO=Lunar Retrograde OrbitLGA=Lunar Gravity AssistYr=YearSEP=Solar Electric Propulsion

Mars Stay 300-500 daysIn Orbit or Surface

Earth to Mars Crew300+ days

Mars to Earth180+ days

High & Low Thrust Hybrid

Combined

High Thrust

Earth to Mars Cargo1200 days

Earth to Mars Crew180+ days

Mars to Earth300+ days

SEP Pre-positions

Cargo

6 -12 SLS

~2 SLS Launches per Yr1 Mars Mission per 2 Yrs

Architecture Studies

• AR examined utility of SEP for logistics of deep space exploration dating back into the early 2000’s

– HRT program supporting lunar logistics – 2005

– Augustine committee – 2008– Cis-lunar tugs – 2010– HLPT study - 2011– Waypoint cis-lunar logistics - 2012

• Current work examining SEP cargo vehicle power level trades

– Updates to HLPT using SLS– Trades on departure orbit and power level

• Future Work– LDRO starting orbits to Mars– No Mars entry spiral– Multiple tier approach

Example Copernicus run showing SEP trajectory

Approved for Public Release

Affordable Crew Transportation Options

• If 6 month transfer times are required– LOX/methane with ISRU– LOX/H2 with long-term cryo storage– Nuclear thermal propulsion with long-term cryo storage

• Least number of launches per Mars expedition

• If longer crew transfer times are acceptable then storable chemical + SEP becomes an option

– Potential benefit of commonality between cargo and crew propulsion systems

7

• CHEMICAL PROPULSION OPTIONS ARE HIGH TRL BUT REQUIRE MORE LAUNCHES WITH IN-SPACE ASSEMBLY – CONCERNS ARE ISRU OR LT CRYO-STORAGE

• NUCLEAR THERMAL PROPULSION IS LOWER TRL AND REQUIRES LT CRYO STORAGE

Nuclear Thermal Propulsion

• Twice the Isp of LOX/H2; about 60% the best chem launch mass

• Safety and regulatory issues drive cost

• Key affordability drivers:– Overall DDT&E program approach– Fuel selection drives security, system

complexity and testing costs– Thrust class impacts testing cost and

number of NTRs/mission

8

• A COMBINED SPLIT MARS ARCHITECTURE (SEP ~100 KWE CARGO) HELPS NTP AFFORDABILITY AND HELPS THRUST DOWNSIZING

• NO BIG ENGINES WITH BIG TEST FOOTPRINTS• USE AS MUCH OFF-SHELF TECHNOLOGY AS POSSIBLE

FROM “DETERMINING AN AFFORDABLE MARS MISSION CAPABLE NTP THRUST SIZE”, BY R. JOYNER ET AL.; NETS, FEBRUARY 2015

How Do We Get Sustained Survivability at MarsUse Evolutionary Approach …

9

Cis-Lunar Habitats for Proving Ground Missions in 2020’s

Approved for Public Release

Source: Thales Alenia Space

Source: NASA

• Habs prove out systems requiredfor Mars transfers

• Missions for Orion/SLS in 2020’s ofprogressively longer duration

A Progression of Cis-Lunar Missions

• Using the SLS Block 1B configuration and Orion

• Many options for pressurized volume

• Key to habs is what goes inside • ECLSS,

• Biological experiments,

• Radiation protection, etc.

• Duration can be increased by adding elements

• Logistics support via commercial model - SEP plays well

Key Factors in Cis-Lunar Mission Plans

• Progress toward Mars readiness

• Maintain cadence that keeps public / political interest

• Stay within budget guidelines

• No detours / dead-ends / blind alleys

• Reuse is a “plus” –learn from what we have done on ISS and

shuttle

SLS Launch Configurations

13

Notional Cis-Lunar Mission Progression

Earth

2025 20262024

LEO(407km circ)

2023202220212020 2027 2028 2029

LDRO(70,000km)

Lunar Surface

20 – 30 days

30 – 60 days60 – 90 days

Telerobotics

90 – 120 days

Lunar Sorties (BYOLL)

SLS Cadence of 1

per year

Europa SEP ResupplyMars

First Mars Cargo

Launches

Logistics for Cis-Lunar Habs

• Study results for cis-lunar habitat logistics show significant savings for cargo delivery using SEP

• Additional modules can also be delivered to build hab capability

• Cargo can be delivered using commercial or international LVs

Initial Wet Mass at ISS (kg)

Payload (kg)

Xenon (kg)

Trip Time (years)

5000 2500 1500 0.7

10000 5800 3000 1.4

15000 9000 4500 2.15

20000 12300 6000 2.9

Approved for Public Release

Conclusions

• Split Cargo / Crew Architecture provides large cost savings for early Mars campaign

– Can transfer approximately 80% of required assets by mass– Saves 60% of total campaign cost when compared to earlier DRMs

• Power level of SEP for cargo can be reduced to 150 – 200 kWe– 20 mT – 40 mT payloads can be delivered in less than 3 years

• Modular SEP approach allows for scaling, extensibility, and economies of scale

• Early demonstration of SEP and Deep Space Habitat capabilities can be accomplished via (a) cis-lunar mission(s)

Approved for Public Release