The world's premier source of mass properties knowledge and technical excellence since 1939.
3332. Generic Space Shuttle Program (SSP) Flight Feasibility Assessment Techniques
SAWE Members get 10 free product downloads each year. *
For more information, see FrequentlyAsked Questions.
* Discount will be applied at checkout. One free product per order. Current year conference papers are not included.
Title | 3332. Generic Space Shuttle Program (SSP) Flight Feasibility Assessment Techniques |
Publication Type | Conference Paper |
Paper Number | 3332 |
Year of Publication | 2004 |
Authors | Abotteen, Ross A. |
Paper Category | 18. WEIGHT ENGINEERING - SPACECRAFT DESIGN |
Conference | 63rd Annual Conference, Newport, California |
Conference Location | Newport, California |
Publisher | Society of Allied Weight Engineers, Inc. |
Date Published | 5/15/04 |
Abstract | The SSP at National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)/Johnson Space Center (JSC) employs these Generic Flight Feasibility Assessment Techniques (FFAT) presented in this paper. The FFAT results are used for flight baseline, ?what-if?/?trade-off? flight analysis, and flight planning of the Shuttle manifest. The FFAT are early analysis tools in the SSP. These early analysis results are refined using NASA Flight Ops simulators. The FFAT process starts by selecting a flight from the SSP Flight Assignment Working Group (FAWG) Planning Manifest referred to as Flight Under Design (FUD). This flight would have an Orbiting Vehicle assignment (OV-103 Discovery, or OV-104 Atlantis, or OV-105 Endeavour). It would also have a Payload Bay (PLB) manifested complement of payloads and a projected Launch Date. A historically flown Shuttle mission is selected from the SSP database. It is referred to as Reference Flight (RF). The RF mission parameters are very similar to the FUD parameters. The RF Main Engine Cut-Off (MECO) Mass Lift Capability is compared to the FUD flight MECO Mass requirements in order to determine if the flight can lift such Mass requirements. In effect, the Ascent Performance Margin (APM) in this comparison must be positive and meeting/exceeding SSP Manager?s Reserve Policy value. All applicable flight Ascent Performance Partials (APP) are considered in this comparison for determining the APM. |
Pages | 13 |
Key Words | 18. Weight Engineering - Spacecraft Design |
Purchase/download this paper | https://www.sawe.org/papers/3332/buy |
Price | Non-Member Price: $20.00; Member Price: $10.00 Members: <a href="/faq/store">First 10 product downloads are Free.</a> |
Full Text |
SAWE product downloads are copyrighted and shall not be reproduced, distributed, performed, publicly displayed, or made into a derivative work without permission from SAWE.