1.
New Rocket Motor Procurement
The SRWG was
favorably impressed with the ongoing
process for procurement of new rocket motors and the primary selection
criteria
that will be applied to the expected bids. In
particular, the SRWG agrees that the priority
must be to maintain
current capabilities at the lowest cost. However,
we were concerned that "added impulse" was
lowest of
all criteria in importance, behind even the bidder's marketing plan. For some payloads, the available impulse is
an important science driver. Although in
some cases range safety or the capabilities of the recovery system
limit the
apogee, these constraints may be eased through new systems such as the
DS-19
Impact Dispersion Control system. In
future procurements of new rocket motors, we believe that it would be
beneficial to invite input and comments from the SRWG (or a
subcommittee)
regarding the rocket motor selection criteria.
2.
New Recovery System
The new digital S-19
system with its extended boost
phase guidance capability will further reduce the dispersion in impact
point. Combined with a higher
performance motor, the sounding rocket delivery systems will be able to
fly
higher and land more accurately than ever before. Recovery
system development, however, has not
kept apace with even the current suite of delivery systems.
For example, the ORSA
recovery systems are stretched to
their limit. Flights above 300 km, now
routine with the BB IX with a MK70 Terrier, are exhibiting damage to
the skins
and exposed ORSA hardware on rentry prior to chute deploy.
The situation will only worsen if a new motor
is used with higher performance than the current Black Brant. In addition, there are no recovery systems
for the high flying BB X -- XII. Development
of recovery systems for these high
flyers would provide
longer "hang" times for astronomy and solar payloads as well as
potentially lower costs to users who do not use recovery systems at
this time
(typically a space physics payload) as they could rebuild upon recovery
instead
of starting each time from scratch. It
would also allow, in conjunction with the new digital S-19, the use of
high
flying BB X -- XII flights at WSMR, which could increase science return
for the
typical astronomy/solar mission. We urge
Wallops and NSROC to develop new high altitude recovery systems, which
can keep
pace with the current suite of delivery systems and which could
accommodate the
potential increased performance of new motors.
3.
Rocket Trajectory by GPS and Radar
Since the early days
of rocket probing of the upper
atmosphere, the use of radar for the tracking of payloads has been the
most
reliable and accurate method to obtain the rocket’s position in space
as a
function of time. However, with the
rapid development of GPS for very accurate determination of position
for a host
of applications, it is obvious that this system represents an important
improvement for sounding rockets. NASA
Wallops launched the first of numerous GPS hardware systems in 1994. The GPS has not only provided position,
velocity, and time data, but also has been used for vehicle performance
analysis, for locating payloads for recovery, for data time tagging,
and for
mother-daughter timing, separation and interferometry enabling. Present capabilities include uninterrupted
track from launch to LOS of all standard 14” and 17” diameter WFF
sounding
rockets with real time differential tracking and display with <10m
accuracy
and post mission processing <1m accuracy.
The GPS NAVSTAR
Documentation states that for a single
point solution, the position will be within 100 meters in the
horizontal and
156 meters in the vertical 95% of the time. A
differential solution, which is more complex and
takes longer, would
provide more accuracy. We request that
such solutions be made available to the experimenter, when required by
the
science.
With respect to the
accuracy of the GPS compared to the
radar, the SRWG is interested in reviewing detailed comparisons of GPS
and
other solutions. For example, we
understand that NASA is using the GPS data from Mission 21.122 flown at
ESRANGE, Sweden, and the Swedish
radar results
as a test, along with other suitable missions. The
SRWG looks forward to detailed comparisons of
the rocket trajectory
results for all flights that used both radar and GPS.
4.
TM Simulators
The SRWG commends
NASA Wallops and NSROC contractor for
initiating the development of a standard telemetery simulator for use
by
experimenters. This new simulator will
speed the integration process by allowing experimenters to verify their
hardware interfaces to the rocket telemetry system before arriving at
Wallops. It is suggested that the
development of this
simulator first proceed with most common type of interface, serial
transfer,
and then proceed to parallel transfer. Once
functionality is obtained for these two types
of data transfer, it
may then be desirable to add features that would give added
functionality for
the user. By proceeding in this manner,
the most needed features will be ready the soonest, and 'bells and
whistles'
can come later.
5.
Commercialization and Priority of Machine
Shop
The SRWG is alarmed
that the costs of the Wallops machine
shop appear to be higher than the costs of comparable machine shops
outside of
Wallops. It is our understanding that
Wallops would offer lower cost machine work to attract new business. Furthermore, we believe that discounts should
be available to NASA-funded scientists to encourage business, better
structure
operations, and save program costs. In
some cases, university overhead charges might be avoided in cases where
direct
payment is possible.
The SRWG is also
concerned that NSROC's commercialization
of the machine shop will eventually lead to priority conflicts between
the
commercial and sounding rocket sectors. The
SRWG believes that in these cases, sounding
rockets should always
retain priority.
The SRWG was
impressed by the shop tracking metrics that
NSROC has instituted, and presented at the December 1999 SRWG meeting,
showing
the month number of jobs submitted and completed. To
better appreciate the shop time
allocation, we suggest that NSROC further break down this analysis to
show the
monthly commercial and sounding rocket shop usage (submitted and
completed)
along with a measure of what fraction of total shop capacity was used
by each
sector.
6.
Solar ACS Future Requirements
Solar missions
require accurate pointing and low jitter. The
new digital LISS has reduced the jitter
to approximately 0.3 arcsec. Improvement
of the jitter toward 0.1 arcsec is required by the next generation of
solar
instruments.
The primary problem
with the current ACS system is the
relatively poor absolute pointing. This
is especially troubling for instruments which do not have full sun
field of
view. Instruments with 0.1 arcsec
resolution will need 10 arc sec (100
pixel) absolute pointing error to assure that the desired solar targets
are
observed. This will likely require
significant modification of the current system which relies on magnetic
field
measurements to determine roll angle.
The SRWG urges NSROC
and Wallops to develop a plan to
improve the solar jitter and ACS performance in order to enable
state-of-the-art observations to be made in the future.
7.
Recommendation for Dedicated Flights for
Instrument Development
The SRWG recommends
that Wallops implement as standard
procedure a "new technology" sounding rocket test flight at a rate of
approximately one/year. The purpose is
to provide continuous availability of a test-bed for new and innovative
instrumentation. The flight could be
performed from WFF and instruments would be proposed through normal
NASA
Research Announcements. By dedicating
one such flight per year, NASA opens the door to new technology
development by
allowing flight tests of developing instrument concepts.
In concert with this
initiative, we urge that the
sounding rocket program explore obtaining additional operating funds
through
the New Technology branch of NASA HQ to the fullest extent possible, as
discussed at the meeting.
8.
Miniaturization
The SRWG was
impressed with the new miniaturized,
rugged systems for use in small sounding rocket applications that are
being
developed under the Hardened Subminiature Telemetry and Sensor System (HSTSS) program by the Army Research
Laboratory. Such systems include rate
and attitude sensors, transmitters, and data encoders that fit within
less than
a cubic inch of volume and can withstand loads of up to 100,000g for
projectile
and munitions tracking purposes. The
HSTSS program is currently developing an S-band transmitter with an
output
range between 250 mW and 2W at data rates up to 10 Mbits/sec, and fits
on a
board about the size of a quarter. A PCM
encoder is also available in a similar form factor (see figure) which
is FPGA
based and includes four 8 bit A/D channels. An
integrated PCM-DAC (PCM-Data-Acquisition-Chipset)
combines a
transmitter delivering up to 10 Mbits/sec of NRZ-L or RNRZ-L with
digital and
analog data interfaces, including a 16-bit parallel and a modified 115
kbs
RS-232 interface. Micro-electromechanical
sensor (MEMS) based
accelerometers and angular
rate sensors are also being developed for attitude determination uses.
The systems described
above have potential uses in
sounding rocket experiments where low volumes and high g’s represent
significant design considerations. Miniature
rocket systems currently under development
at NASA Wallops and
in foreign space agencies may be able to leverage these new devices in
order to
make small payloads an effective, inexpensive tool for low-altitude
ionospheric
science. In addition, these devices have
useful applications in deployed micro-payload constellations from
mother
sounding rocket payloads, such as the free-flying-magnetometers (FFMs)
on the
February 1999 Enstrophy payload (UNH). These
devices represent commercial-off-the-shelf
(COTS) solutions for
programs that may otherwise have to resort to unique development
efforts for
miniaturized systems.
We recommend that
Wallops and NSROC explore utilizing
and supporting such miniaturized systems where feasible.
NASA Sounding Rocket
Working
Group
Dr.
Robert F. Pfaff, Jr. (Chair)
NASA/Goddard
Space Flight Center
Prof.
David Burrows
The Pennsylvania State University
Dr.
Joseph Davila
NASA/Goddard
Space Flight Center
Dr.
Greg Delory
University of California at Berkeley
Prof.
Greg Earle
University of Texas at Dallas
Dr.
Mark Hurwitz
University of California, Berkeley
Prof.
Craig Kletzing
University of Iowa
Dr.
Kristina Lynch
University of New Hampshire
Dr.
Stephan McCandliss
Johns Hopkins University
Dr.
David Slater
Southwest
Research Institute
Dr.
James Ulwick
Utah State University
|