Session
Technical Session II: From 0 to 7.5 km/s
Abstract
Space Test Program Mission S26 (STP-S26) was a complex multi-payload mission launched from Kodiak Launch Complex, Alaska on November 20, 2010. A Minotaur-IV launch vehicle placed ten objects into two different orbits. The Stage 4 rocket motor placed four Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) Secondary Payload Adapter (ESPA)-class satellites and two CubeSats into the primary orbit. A Hydrazine Auxiliary Propulsion System (HAPS) then delivered two test ballast masses into a secondary orbit as a technology demonstration to prove dual-orbit capability of the Minotaur-IV. In addition, a CubeSat, ejected from one of the free-flying ESPA-class satellites on January 20, 2011, and one of the ESPA-class satellites (FASTRAC) separated into two satellites on March 22, 2011. Multi-payload missions always present unique challenges and STP-S26 was no exception. Through the use of a “lessons learned” database, the STP-S26 program office was able to leverage the experiences gained from previous multi-payload missions. One previous mission in particular was the STP-1 mission launched on an Atlas V in March 2007. STP-1 separated four ESPA-class satellites and a larger satellite pair into two orbits. This paper will review the key challenges and lessons learned from the STP-S26 mission pertaining to multi-payload integration and launch. Lessons were derived from requirements and interface management, technical, logistical, and managerial aspects of the mission. Some of the areas reviewed in the paper include: Unique requirements for multi-payload missions and verification of those requirements; Mechanical fit checks; Procedures for integrated operations such as multi-satellite mate; Integrated tip off and separation analysis; Multi-payload coupled loads analysis; Meeting environmental, debris, and de-orbit requirements; Logistic scheduling of payload arrival and pre-launch checkout in a shared processing facility; Efficient & timely communication across teams; Finite Element Model and mass properties early requirement definition; Risk Management Process; Interface Control Document verifications; and Space Debris Assessment Report (SDAR), Launch Conjunction Assessment Support Package (LCASP), and policy exception processes. The number of multi-payload missions is expected to grow with the trend toward smaller spacecraft. Multi-payload enablers such as ESPA Standard Service, Minotaur-IV Multi-payload Adaptor, and Poly-Picosatellite Orbital Deployer (P-POD) CubeSat capabilities will continue to create rideshare opportunities in the future for the small satellite community. The DoD Space Test Program has been at the center of developing and demonstrating the utility of launching multiple payloads from a single launch vehicle. Applying the lessons learned from STP-S26 andprevious multi-payload missions will reduce the technical risk and help maximize success for future multi-payload missions.
Presentation Slides
Multi-Payload Integration Lessons Learned from Space Test Program Mission S26
Space Test Program Mission S26 (STP-S26) was a complex multi-payload mission launched from Kodiak Launch Complex, Alaska on November 20, 2010. A Minotaur-IV launch vehicle placed ten objects into two different orbits. The Stage 4 rocket motor placed four Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) Secondary Payload Adapter (ESPA)-class satellites and two CubeSats into the primary orbit. A Hydrazine Auxiliary Propulsion System (HAPS) then delivered two test ballast masses into a secondary orbit as a technology demonstration to prove dual-orbit capability of the Minotaur-IV. In addition, a CubeSat, ejected from one of the free-flying ESPA-class satellites on January 20, 2011, and one of the ESPA-class satellites (FASTRAC) separated into two satellites on March 22, 2011. Multi-payload missions always present unique challenges and STP-S26 was no exception. Through the use of a “lessons learned” database, the STP-S26 program office was able to leverage the experiences gained from previous multi-payload missions. One previous mission in particular was the STP-1 mission launched on an Atlas V in March 2007. STP-1 separated four ESPA-class satellites and a larger satellite pair into two orbits. This paper will review the key challenges and lessons learned from the STP-S26 mission pertaining to multi-payload integration and launch. Lessons were derived from requirements and interface management, technical, logistical, and managerial aspects of the mission. Some of the areas reviewed in the paper include: Unique requirements for multi-payload missions and verification of those requirements; Mechanical fit checks; Procedures for integrated operations such as multi-satellite mate; Integrated tip off and separation analysis; Multi-payload coupled loads analysis; Meeting environmental, debris, and de-orbit requirements; Logistic scheduling of payload arrival and pre-launch checkout in a shared processing facility; Efficient & timely communication across teams; Finite Element Model and mass properties early requirement definition; Risk Management Process; Interface Control Document verifications; and Space Debris Assessment Report (SDAR), Launch Conjunction Assessment Support Package (LCASP), and policy exception processes. The number of multi-payload missions is expected to grow with the trend toward smaller spacecraft. Multi-payload enablers such as ESPA Standard Service, Minotaur-IV Multi-payload Adaptor, and Poly-Picosatellite Orbital Deployer (P-POD) CubeSat capabilities will continue to create rideshare opportunities in the future for the small satellite community. The DoD Space Test Program has been at the center of developing and demonstrating the utility of launching multiple payloads from a single launch vehicle. Applying the lessons learned from STP-S26 andprevious multi-payload missions will reduce the technical risk and help maximize success for future multi-payload missions.
