|
Items in cart [0] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| 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 R1
Post-Challenger
Assessment
of Space Shuttle
Flight Rates and
Utilization
Prepared by a Panel Convened by the
Committee on NASA Scientific and Technological Program Reviews
Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems
National Research Council
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
October 1986
0~t ~
GHiV
,~9
OCR for page R2
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved
by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members
are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the
National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The
members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for
their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors
consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the
National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was established by the National
Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of
science and technology with the Acaden~y's purposes of furthering
knowledge and of advising the federal government. The Council
operates in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy
under the authority of its congressional charter of 1863, which
establishes the Academy as a private, nonprofit, self-governing
membership corporation. The Council has become the principal
operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the
National Academy of Engineering in the conduct of their services to
the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering
communities. It is administered jointly by both Academies and the
Institute of Medicine. The National Academy of Engineering and the
Institute of Medicine were established in 1964 and 1970, respectively,
under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences.
This study was supported by Contract NASW-3511 between the
National Academy of Sciences and the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration.
Copies available from:
Committee on NASA Scientific and Technological
Program Reviews
National Research Council
2101 Constitution Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20418
Printed in the United States of America
6
OCR for page R3
Members of the Panel
EDWARD E. DAVID, JR., President, EED, Inc., Bedminster, New Jersey,
Chairman
W. BOWMAN CUTTER III, Partner, Coopers & Lybrand, Washington, D.C.
DAVID D. ELLIOTT, Vice President, Science Applications International
Corporation, LaJolla, California
HERBERT FRIEDMAN, Retired Chief ~ - ~ ~~ ~ ^
Space Research, Naval
NnRMAN R . PARNiET . Retired
Scientist, E.O. Hulburt Center for
Research Laboratory, Washington, D.C.
Vice President-Engineering and Quality
Assurance, Trans World Airlines, Fairway, Kansas
BRYCE POE II, Consultant, Retired Commander, U.S. Air Force Logistics
Command, Alexandria, Virginia
EBEKHARDT RECHTIN, President and Chief Executive Officer, The Aerospace
Corporation, Los Angeles, California
HARRISON H. SCHMITT, Consultant, Former Astronaut, Albuquerque, New
Mexico
ABE SILVERSTEIN, Consultant, Retired Director, NASA Lewis Research
Center, Fairview Park, Ohio
GEORGE E. SOLOMON, Executive Vice President and General Manager,
Electronics and Defense Sector, TRW, Inc., Redondo Beach,
California
EUGENE E. COVERT, Professor of Aeronautics, Massachusetts Institute of
Cambridge, Massachusetts, Ex Officio Member
Technology,
ROBERT H. KORKEGI, Study Director
JoANN C. CLAYTON, Assistant Study Director
ANNA L. FARRAR, Administrative Assistant
. . .
111
OCR for page R4
OCR for page R5
Preface
The Committee on NASA Scientific and Technological Program Reviews
was created by the National Research Council in June 1981 as a result
of a request by the Congress of the United States to the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration that it establish an ongoing
the National
Academy of' Engineering for the purpose of providing an independent,
objective review of the scientific and technological merits of NASA
programs whenever the Congressional Committees on Appropriations so
direct. 1
relationship with the National Academy of Sciences and
To date five tasks have been undertaken.2-6 The sixth task,
which is the subject of this report, resulted from a request by the
House Committee on Appropriations to the NASA Administrator in late
April 1986 for an examination of space shuttle flight rates and
utilization following the -loss of the Orbiter Challenger (Appendix A).
Congressional Conference Report 90-147b, November 21, 1950.
2National Research Counctl, The International Solar Polar flission--A
Review and Assessment of Options, 1981, National Academy Press,
Washington, D.C.
3National Research Council, Aeronautics Research and Technology--A
Review of Proposed Reductions in the FY 1983 NASA Program, 1982,
National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
4National Research Council, Assessment of Constraints on Space
~ _ ~
Shuttle Launch Rates, 1983, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
5Nattonal Research Council, Review of NASA's Numerical Aerodynamic
Simulation Program, 1984, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
6National Research Council, Assessment of Candidate Expendable
Launch Vehicles for Large Payloads, 19&4, National Academy Press,
Washington, D.C.
v
OCR for page R6
At its meeting on May 16, 1986, the Committee nominated a panel to
undertake the task. The areas of expertise sought included launch
vehicle systems, airline operations, propulsion systems, aerospace
logistics, and user requirements--space station, military, space
science and applications, and commercial.
In appointing such a group of individuals to make scientific and
technical assessments, it is essential that most have a high degree of
knowledge in the subject of the study. Since such individuals may
appear to have a potential for bias, every effort was made to achieve
a balance in backgrounds and attitudes of the panelists in order to
present as objective a report as possible.
The short period during which the review had to be undertaken put
severe demands on the Chairman and members of the panel, who deserve
much credit for their effective and timely response.
Norman Hackerman
Chairman, Committee on NASA
Scientific and Technological
Program Reviews
~ .
6
V1
OCR for page R7
Contents
1. INTRODUCTION... e · · e · · · e · e · · e · · · ·
Background, 1
Approach of the Study Panel' 1
PREAMBLE e · · · · · · · · · e · · · · · · · · · · · · · · e e e e e ~ e e e e · · · e e
POST-CHALLENGER ASSESSMENT OF SPACE SHUTTLE FLIGHT
RATES AND UTILIZATION e e · · · · · -
Assessment One, 7
Assessment Two, ~
Payload Off-Loadlng, 10
Commercial Satellites, 10
Availability of Launch Vehicles, 11
Assessment Three, 12
Assessment Four, 13
4. SUMMARY. e · · · ... e e...e..e
Policy Assumptions, 15
Flight Rates, 15
Fleet Concept, 15
-Launch Demand, 1b
Payload Partitioning, 16
....ee.. 3
5. APPENDIXES
Ae Background Informationeee eee..ee
Edward Pe Boland Letter of April 21, 1986, LO
List of Briefers and Participants, 23
Committee on NASA Scientific and Technological
Program Reviews Membership, 27
B. Shuttle Launch Rates..~..e..e...e..
Turnaround Time, 30
Flight Rates, 31
Logistics Considerations....
Shuttle Utilization.........
Chest Tr~n~-off~
~ · - ~ ~ ~ - - ~ 29
C.
D.
E.
F. A Sustained Manned Spaceflight Program 47
G. Reference Materials.........
V11
6
OCR for page R8
6
