Kelso.robert

Kelso.robert

• 1.
  Lunar Exploration Innovation Challenges PM Challenge 2010 Robert M. Kelso Manager, Lunar Commercial Services February 2010 Used with Permission
• 2.
  Utilization of theMoon for NASA’s Vision •ON the Moon •Exploration and technology development/demonstration to reduce risk/cost avoidance for systems supporting the Altair lander and LSS •FROM the Moon •Observations from the moon toward earth for earth/climate “whole-disc” assessments •Observations from the moon away from earth for far-side astronomy oRadio astronomy oAstrophysics oHeliophysics •ABOUT the Moon •Support scientific research leading to increased understanding about the Moon oIts process, evolution, chronological dating Tied to NRC report Monday, February 22, 2010 2
• 3.
  Lunar Commercialization Goal •Obtain lunar data for NASA through commercial services – Utilize emerging commercial capability to land payloads on the Moon • Includes lunar data purchase and/or NASA lunar instrument delivery – Cost to NASA that is less than a dedicated NASA robotic mission – Contracted services could begin in late 2011 timeframe Monday, February 22, 2010 3
• 4.
  Fundamental Change forNASA Apollo Model From NASA as the customer funding prime contractors on a cost plus fixed fee basis Increased Private Sector Resources Commercial – (COTS/CRS) Model To NASA as a customer and partner, working with other customers, financiers, and emerging space companies on fixed price basis to secure capabilities, services and products
• 5.
  Business Model Feasibility •The shift from small market, highly complex projects to manageable components with appeal to expanded markets enables greater commercial participation - Evolution of the Discussion - Large Landers Launchers Key drivers include: • Complexity Market • Scale Size Surface • Timing/frequency Transportation • Uncertainty Communications Small Services Complex Simple Product Development Cost Structure • 5 5
• 6.
  Demand Framework - US Government - Non-US Government - - Tier 1 ESMD - Space Science Directorate Focused - Planetary Astrophysics/ Earth Tier 2 Science Heliophysics Science - Broad Focus - Academics • 6 6
• 7.
  Current & PlannedNASA Lunar Missions 2008 ’09 ’10 ’11 ’12 ’13 ’14 ’15 ’16 ’17 ’18 ’19 ’20 ’21 ’22 ’23 ’24 &’25 LRO LADEE US ILN US LQ 7 US LQ 8 NASA Unmanned LCROSS (Lunar Orbiter) (Lunar Landers) (Lunar Lander) (Lunar Lander) US LQ 9 Spacecraft (Lunar Orbiter GRAIL (Lunar Lander) and Impactor) (Lunar Orbiter Pair) Mini-SAR* (Chandrayaan-1) NASA Moon Minarology Instruments Mapper* (Chandrayaan-1) Constellation: Current ARES-V View IOC Altair IOC (HLR) Blue = Launched Green = Funded Yellow = Proposed Purple = Inactive 7
• 8.
  Current & PlannedLunar Missions: Tier One International Agencies 2008 ’09 ‘10 ‘11 ‘12 ‘13 ‘14 ‘15 ‘16 ‘17 ‘18 ‘19 ‘20 ‘21 ‘22 ‘23 ‘24 ‘25Chang’e 2 Chang’e 3 Chang’e 4 Chang’e 1 Chinese Manned More Advanced Lunar Rover Lunar Sample Lunar Mission Lunar Orbiter China National Lunar Orbiter Return Space Agency SELENE/Kaguya SELENE 2/Kaguya 2 Japanese Robotic Japanese International Lunar Orbiter Lunar Orbiter Lunar Mission Moon Base Assumed by Inference: Japan Aerospace Japanese Manned First Japanese Manned Mission Exploration Agency Lunar Mission Luna-Glob 1 1 Luna-Glob Luna-Grunt 1 Luna-Grunt 2 Russian Robotic Lunar Orbiter Lunar Orbiter Lunar Orbiter, More Advanced Lunar Base and Impactor Lander, and Lunar Orbiter, Luna-Glob 2 and Impactor Luna-Glob 2 Sample Return Lander, and Luna-Glob 2 2 Lunar Lander Luna-Glob Lunar Lander Roscosmos Lunar Lander Lunar Lander Sample Return Chandrayaan-1 Chandrayaan-2 Indian Manned Lunar Orbiter Lunar Orbiter with Lunar Mission Lunar Rover Assumed by Inference: Indian Space Moon Impact Probe First Indian Manned Mission Research Organisation European European Aurora Autonomous Manned Lunar European Space Lunar Lander Mission Program Agency (possibly with NASA) Blue = Launched Green = Funded Yellow = Proposed Red = Discussed 8
• 9.
  Current & PlannedLunar Missions: Tier Two International Agencies 2008 ’09 ‘10 ‘11 ‘12 ‘13 ‘14 ‘15 ‘16 ‘17 ‘18 ‘19 ‘20 ‘21 ‘22 ‘23 ‘24 ‘25 UK MoonLITE UK MoonRAKER Lunar Orbiter with Lunar Lander British National Four Impactors Space Centre South Korean South Korean Lunar Orbiter Lunar Probe Korea Aerospace Research Institute International Lunar Network (ILN) Program (with NASA) Canadian companies may have manufacturing role Canadian Space in the 4 planned missions launched together Agency Lunar Exploration Orbiter (LEO) German Space Lunar Orbiter Agency Blue = Launched Green = Funded Yellow = Proposed Red = Discussed Notes • Other civil space agencies—e.g. Australia, Israel, Brazil, South Africa—have not yet formulated active plans for lunar activity • Current participants in International Lunar Network (ILN)—signatories to the July 2008 NASA Ames “Statement of Intent” are:  Canada, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, South Korea, the United Kingdom, and the United States 9
• 10.
  NASA Driven LunarTransport LRO& Demand Phasing US ILN 1, Ares-V 180 Day LADEE HLR LCROSS GRAIL 2, 3, & 4 IOC Stay 2009 ‘10 ‘11 ‘12 ‘13 ‘14 ‘15 ‘16 ‘17 ‘18 ‘19 ‘20 ‘21 ‘22 ‘23 ‘24 ‘25 Early demand from science/technology demonstrations Potential heavy lift to Moon in advance/lieu of Ares V Potential commercial resupply of manned outpost Demand Time Description Phase Frame Early 2010-2013 • Driven by science and technology development objectives in preparation for human return • Transport of instruments (as secondary payloads) and microlanders (GLXP) 2014-2017 • Small (LRO-class) spacecraft and landers such as the ILN probes • Farside missions • International organizations begin lander deployment 2018-2020 • Pre-Positioning of assets, site prep for HLR Middle 2020-2025 • Driven by increased robotic activity at the Moon & initial human sorties • Emplacement of infrastructure to enable long-duration human stays • Potential to augment Ares V Late Beyond 2025 • Support of human operations; resupply of human outposts • Emplacement of large-scale and human-serviced science equipment • 10 10
• 11.
  Lunar Objectives Lunar Exploration Analysis Group (LEAG) • LEAG has identified 70 lunar exploration objectives. (Draft Lunar Exploration Roadmap, 2009) – 50 require transport to lunar orbit and/or surface – 46 require data derived from in-situ or orbital measurement/observation of lunar parameters • 19 are classified as “science” objectives which will likely provide data towards the other objectives – 58 are related to human lunar exploration needs or goals – These objectives fall into the following nominal time phasing* Early Middle Late 45 56 54 * As defined by the LEAG, where EARLY includes any robotic precursors and activity up to human lunar return; MIDDLE includes activity related to initial outpost build-up to including human stays of >1 lunar day and • 11 including part of the lunar night, as well as Robotic missions; and LATE includes activities with Lunar Outpost 11 established, human stays of >30 days, including robotic missions.
• 12.
  LEAG Science Objectives: Demand for Lunar Data LEAG Science Objectives which Require Data on Parameter by Time Phase "Science About the Moon" Parameter: (Lunar Observable/Measurable) Early Middle Late Totals by Phase Regolith Structure & Composition 4 4 4 Early: 8 Regolith Weathering 1 1 1 Late: 8 Lunar Geology Structure and Composition of Lunar Rocks, Middle: 8 Crust and Mantle 3 3 3 Terrain- Geological and Geophysical Formations 4 5 5 Early: 6 Mapping Identification and Characterization of Cold Late: 5 Traps 1 Middle: 5 Sunlight/Illuminated Areas (Polar) 1 Exospheric 1 1 1 Early: 5 Volatiles Surface Transport & Characterization 4 5 5 Middle: 6 Lunar Seismic Tomography 1 Early: 3 Other Lunar Electromagnetic Environment 1 1 1 Middle: 2 Lunar Dust- Toxicity and Effect on Late: 1 Equipment 1 1 TOTAL 22 21 20 Source: LEAG, Lunar Exploration Roadmap, 2009 • 12 12
• 13.
  Lunar Commercial Payload Delivery LunEx “I have also long believed it should be a balanced program that includes both robotics and human involvement, and our focus will be on the human space flight aspect and that part of the robotics program that links directly to human space flight.” Norm Augustine on Human Spaceflight Review 5/8/09
• 14.
  Strategies for AchievingCommercial Lunar Communications & Navigation (C&N): Concepts for Industry Comment Collaboration between Exploration Systems Mission Directorate Commercial Crew & Cargo Program Office (C3PO) Rob Kelso, Lead Jon Michael Smith And Space Operations Mission Directorate Space Communications and Navigation (SCaN) Program Office Jim Schier
• 15.
  Mini-ISRU Node andEvaluation of Regolith (MINER) Commercial Lunar Oxygen Rover mounted ISRU Payload Excavator NASA & Commercial Tractor Recover Oxygen from the Lunar Regolith
• 16.
  NASA Lunar CommercialServices : “what’s new over the last year?” • Commercial Lunar Payload Delivery/Data-Buy – Goal: “buy the ride” or “buy the data” using commercially-demonstrated capability …As soon as early 2012 – Service pool from: GLXP, Lockheed “Lunar Express”, others – NASA collection of lunar data ‘desirement’ list of “demand”: ESMD/SOMD – Assessing NASA options for advanced purchase commitments and prizes – Continued discussion w/ NASA Lunar Science Inst. on data acquisition • Lunar Commodities – Commercially-provided lunar oxygen to support human lunar return • Life support, water production, propellant – Performed risk-adjusted cost analysis (RANPC) for Commercial Lunar O2 – ISRU has potential to save >$1B/yr … >5x cost trade – Seeking funding for early flight test demo of O2 extraction (MINER) Monday, February 22, 2010 16
• 17.
  Lunar Commercial activitiesthis fall…. • Collection of “Orphan” equipment list – Assessment of utilization – Assessment of early demand vs science value • Two funded studies – Lunar Transportation Market Assessment (Futron) – MINER Pre-Phase A conceptual assessment (NASA) • Assessment of Augustine Report and resultant NASA strategic planning