| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 47
Appendix F
A SUSTAINED MANNED SPACEFLIGHT PROGRAM
Perhaps the single most important assumption made in this report
is that the nation is committed to a sustained manned spaceflight
program. If true, that commitment has direct consequences to shuttle
operations. In particular, unless the shuttle fleet is maintained
during the l990s at approximately the realistic flight rates given in
this report, the necessary foundations will not exist for manned Space
Stations, SDI in-flight development, testing of tactical intelligence
and battle management concepts, clinical research, countermeasure
testing related to space adaptation, and development materials-
processing systems that depend on the space environment.
The realistic or sustainable flight rates in this report are based
on supply constraints and mission demands for presently committed
missions, not those still in conceptual design. For example, Space
Station needs cannot be supported without what the Space Station
Director properly calls a "robust shuttle fleet."
The. assumption of a national commitment to a sustained manned
spaceflight program would be self-evident were not an alternative
under discussion in the government. This alternative would not
replace the present Orbiter fleet (either 3 or 4 Orbiters) when
and as needed but would let the shuttle fleet decrease through
attrition, relying on a future vehicle fleet of more advanced vehicles
to pick up the manned flight effort and on ELVs to launch all payloads
not requiring astronaut intervention. The advanced manned vehicle
usually mentioned is the National Aerospace Plane (NASP), though a
modified shuttle (high safety, minimal cargo) is also being discussed.
One difficulty with the alternative assumption (shuttle attrition)
is timing. As the shuttle is demonstrating, it takes at least a
decade to develop a space vehicle to the point of reliable operation
even when the technology is believed to be in hand. Technology for
the National Aerospace Plane is not yet in hand and the size of the
vehicle contemplated for the turn of the century is too small to
handle shuttle-equivalent payloads. Modifications to the shuttle are
under study, but they are not yet past the conceptual design phase.
The alternate assumption, therefore, would predictably result in a
hiatus (5 to 10 years) in manned flight, precluding the Space Station
planned for the l990s.
47
OCR for page 48
48
A more serious difficulty, however, would be the imminent collapse
of the shuttle manifest. As discussed in Appendix C, at 10 flights
per year and a 1-2 percent loss rate, but with no replacements, the
shuttle fleet would be down one Orbiter in about 5 years and down 2 in
10 with corresponding flight rates of 7 and 4, respectively, per
year. Those rates would hardly handle the man-critical missions. In
anticipation of an uncertain launch future and to protect their
missions, mission directors would no longer design shuttle unique
payloads and for planning purposes would schedule on ELVs. ELV
production facilities would expand accordingly. Thus, even before any
losses might occur, the uncertainty in the future of the shuttle fleet
could result in a collapse of the l99Os manifest and an increased cost
per flight, which would deal manned space flight a serious blow.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
sustained manned