Space logistics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to search
hideThis article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these
issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)

The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a worldwide

view of the subject. (August 2011)
This article contains too many or overly lengthy quotations for an
encyclopedic entry. (August 2011)
This article may be weighted too heavily toward only one aspect of its
subject. (August 2011)

According to the AIAA Space Logistics Technical Committee, space logistics is

... the theory and practice of driving space system
design for operability, and of managing the flow of
material, services, and information needed throughout a
space system lifecycle.[1]
However, this definition in its larger sense includes
terrestrial logistics in support of space travel, including any
additional "design and development, acquisition, storage,
movement, distribution, maintenance, evacuation, and
disposition of space materiel", movement of people in
space (both routine and for medical and other
emergencies), and contracting and supplying any required
support services for maintaining space travel.[1]

Contents

 1History
 2Background
 3Current activities
o 3.1Examples of supply classes
 4State of the ISS logistics capability in 2005
o 4.1ISS cargo requirements
o 4.2Cargo vehicle capabilities
o 4.3Commercial opportunity
o 4.4Rack transfer capability
o 4.5Recoverable reentry–pressurized payloads
o 4.6Mixed manifest capability
o 4.7Propellant transfer
 5Downmass
  6See also
 7References
 8External links

History[edit]
Wernher von Braun spoke of the necessity (and the
underdevelopment) of space logistics as early as 1960: [2]
"We have a logistics problem coming up in space ... that
will challenge the thinking of the most visionary logistics
engineers. As you know, we are currently investigating
three regions of space: near-Earth, the lunar region, and
the planets. While it is safe to say that all of us have
undoubtedly been aware of many or most of the
logistics requirements and problems in the discussion,
at least in a general way, I think it is also safe to state
that many of us have not realized the enormous scope
of the tasks performed in the logistics area. I hope the
discussions bring about a better understanding of the
fact that logistics support is a major portion of most
large development projects. Logistics support, in fact, is
a major cause of the success or failure of many
undertakings."

Background[edit]
James D. Baker and Frank Eichstadt
of SPACEHAB wrote, in 2005:[3]
The United States space exploration goals expressed in
January 2004 call for the retirement of the Space
Shuttle program following completion of International
Space Station (ISS) construction. Since the Shuttle is
instrumental in transporting large quantities of cargo to
and from the ISS, this functional capability must be
preserved to ensure ongoing station operations in a
post-Shuttle era. Fulfilling ongoing cargo transport
requirements to the ISS is a prime opportunity for NASA
to reduce costs and preserve and repurpose the unique
and limited Shuttle resource by acquiring cargo
transportation services commercially. Further,
implementing such a service prior to retirement of the
Shuttle reduces risk to the vehicle and her crews by
eliminating their use for routine cargo transport missions
while accelerating the readiness for alternative ISS-
support transportation.
In January 2004, President Bush directed NASA to
begin an initiative that focuses on exploration of the
Moon, Mars, and beyond. This initiative calls for the
completion of International Space Station (ISS)
assembly by the end of the decade coincident with
retirement of the Space Shuttle.[4] Retirement of the
Shuttle while ISS operations are still being conducted
results in reduced capability to supply ISS logistics
requirements. An examination of existing and planned
logistics carriers shows that there are deficiencies in
both capacity and capability to support ISS
needs. SPACEHAB's history of space station logistics
delivery and existing ground infrastructure coupled with
NASA's mandate and documented intent to acquire
commercial space systems and services when possible
has led SPACEHAB to develop a versatile and
affordable cargo transport service for ISS .[5]

Current activities[edit]
According to Manufacturing Business
Technology,[6]
NASA has awarded $3.8 million to two MIT engineering
professors to pursue an interdisciplinary study for
adapting supply chain logistics to support interplanetary
material transport and transfer. Professors David
Simchi-Levi and Olivier de Weck of the MIT Engineering
Systems Division will spearhead the project in
partnership with the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Payload
Systems, and United Space Alliance.
Sustainable space exploration is impossible without
appropriate supply chain management and unlike
Apollo, future exploration will have to rely on a complex
supply network on the ground and in space. The primary
goal of this project is to develop a comprehensive
supply chain management framework and planning tool
for space logistics. The eventual integrated space
logistics framework will encompass terrestrial movement
of material and information, transfer to launch sites,
integration of payload onto launch vehicles and launch
to Low Earth Orbit, in-space and planetary transfer, and
planetary surface logistics. The MIT-led interplanetary
supply chain management model will take a four-phase
development approach:
1. Review of supply chain management lessons learned
from Earth-based commercial and military projects,
including naval submarine and arctic logistics
2. Space logistics network analyses based on modeling
Earth-Moon-Mars orbits and expected landing-
exploration sites
3. Demand/supply modeling that embraces uncertainty
in demand, cargo mix, costs, and supply chain
disruptions
4. Development of an interplanetary supply chain
architecture.
Examples of supply
classes[edit]
Among the supply classes
identified by the MIT
Space Logistics Center:[7]

 Propellants and
Fuels
 Crew Provisions
and Operations
 Maintenance
and Upkeep
 Stowage and
Restraint
 Waste and
Disposal
 Habitation and
Infrastructure
 Transportation
and Carriers
 Miscellaneous
In the category of space
transportation
for ISS Support, one might
list:

 Space
Shuttle (now
retired)
 Progress
spacecraft,
Russian
 expendable
unmanned
resupply
spacecraft
 Automated
Transfer
Vehicle,
expendable
unmanned
resupply
spacecraft
developed by
the European
Space Agency
 H-II Transfer
Vehicle (HTV)
expendable
unmanned
resupply
spacecraft
developed by
the Japan
Aerospace
Exploration
Agency (JAXA)
 Dragon
spacecraft,
reusable cargo
carrier
developed
by SpaceX

State of the ISS

logistics
capability in
2005[edit]
A snapshot of the logistics
of a single space facility,
the International Space
Station, was provided in
2005 via a comprehensive
study done by James
Baker and Frank
Eichstadt.[3] This article
 section makes extensive
reference to that study.
ISS cargo
requirements[edit]
As of 2004, the United
States Space Shuttle,
the Russian Progress, and
to a very limited extent, the
Russian Soyuz vehicles
were the only space
transport systems capable
of transporting ISS cargo.[3]
However, in 2004, it was
already anticipated that
the European Automated
Transfer Vehicle (ATV)
and Japanese H-IIA
Transfer Vehicle (HTV)
would be introduced into
service before the end
of ISS Assembly. As of
2004, the US Shuttle
transported the majority of
the pressurized and
unpressurized cargo and
provides virtually all of the
recoverable down
mass capability (the
capability of non-
destructive reentry of
cargo).[3][needs update]
Cargo vehicle
capabilities[edit]
Baker and Eichstadt also
wrote, in 2005:[3]
An understanding of the future ISS cargo requirements
is necessary to size a commercial cargo vehicle
designed to replace the Shuttle's capabilities and
capacities and augment currently planned alternative
vehicles. Accurate estimates of ISS cargo transfer
requirements are difficult to establish due to ongoing
changes in logistics requirements, crew tending levels,
vehicle availabilities, and the evolving role the ISS will
play in NASA's space exploration and research goals.
An increased unpressurized cargo delivery requirement
is shown during the years 2007–2010. This increased
rate is a result of a current plan to preposition
unpressurized spares on the ISS prior to Shuttle
retirement. Provision of a commercial cargo carrier
capable of transporting unpressurized spares to
supplement the Shuttle eliminates the prepositioning
requirement and aligns the estimated averages during
2007–2010 to approximately 24,000 kg for pressurized
cargo and 6800 kg for unpressurized cargo. Considering
the delivery capability of the remaining systems after the
Shuttle is retired yields.
Retirement of the Shuttle and reliance on the Progress,
ATV, and HTV for ISS logistics will result in no
significant recoverable down-mass capability. Further,
no evidence suggests that any of these cargo transport
systems can increase production and launch rates to
cover the cargo delivery deficiency.
Commercial
opportunity[
edit]
Baker and
Eichstadt also
wrote, in 2005:[3]
In addition to ISS support deficiencies, alternative
opportunities for a commercial cargo transport system
exist. The retirement of the Shuttle will also result in an
inability to conduct Low Earth Orbit (LEO) research
independent of the ISS. A commercial payload service
could serve as a free-flying research platform to fulfill
this need. As logistics support requirements for NASA's
space exploration initiative emerge, existing commercial
system can be employed.
Finally, nascent interest in the development of non-
government commercial space stations must take
resupply issues into consideration. Such considerations
will undoubtedly be subjected to a make/buy analysis.
Existing systems which have amortized their
development costs across multiple government and
non-government programs should favor a "buy" decision
by commercial space station operators. As these
markets arise, commercial companies will be in a
position to provide logistics services at a fraction of the
cost of government-developed systems. The resulting
economies of scale will benefit both markets. This
conclusion was reached by a Price-Waterhouse study
chartered by NASA in 1991.[8] The study concluded that
the value of SPACEHAB's flight-asset-based
commercial module service with an estimated net-
present-value of $160 million would have cost the US
government over $1 billion to develop and operate using
standard cost plus contracting. SPACEHAB's
commercial operations and developments (such as the
Integrated Cargo Carrier) since 1991 represent further
cost savings over government-owned and operated
systems.
Commercial companies are more likely to efficiently
invest private capital in service enhancements, assured
continued availability, and enhanced service capability.
This tendency, commonplace in non-aerospace
applications, has been demonstrated by SPACEHAB in
the commercial space systems market via continued
module enhancements and introduction of new logistics
carriers.
Shortfalls in ISS cargo transport capacity, emerging
opportunities, and experience gained from
SPACEHAB's existing ground and flight operations have
encouraged development of Commercial Payload
Service (CPS). As a commercially developed system,
SPACEHAB recognizes that to optimize its capability
and affordability requires that certain approaches in
system development and operations be taken.
The first approach levies moderate requirements on the
system. Introducing fundamental capabilities on the
front end and scarring for enhanced capabilities later
reduces cost to launch and shortens development time.
The second one is the utilization of existing technology
and capabilities, where appropriate. A typical feature of
NASA programs is the continual reach for newly
developed technologies. While attractive from a
technical advancement perspective, this quest is
expensive and often fails to create operational
capabilities. A commercially developed cargo module
will maximize the use of existing technologies (off the
shelf where possible) and seek technical advances only
where system requirements or market conditions drive
the need for such advances. Additionally, costs
associated with the development of spacecraft are not
limited to those associated with the vehicle systems.
Significant costs associated with the infrastructure must
also be considered. SPACEHAB's existing logistics and
vehicle processing facilities co-located with the Eastern
launch range and at the Sea Launch facilities enable
avoidance of significant system development costs.
Finally, SPACEHAB has realized cost and schedule
reductions by employing commercial processes instead
of Government processes. As a result, SPACEHAB's
mission integration template for a Shuttle-based carrier
is 14 months, compared to 22 months for a similar
Shuttle-based Multi-Purpose Logistics Module (MPLM). [9]
Rack
transfe
r
capabil
ity[edit]
Baker
and
Eichstadt
also
wrote, in
2005:[3]
The ISS utilizes the International Standard Payload
Rack (ISPR) as the primary payload and experiment
accommodations structure in all US operated modules.
Transferring ISPRs onto and off the ISS requires
passage through the hatch only found at the Common
Berthing Mechanism (CBM) berthing locations. The
diameter of the CBM combined with ISPR proportions
typically drives cargo vehicle diameters to sizes only
accommodated by 5 m payload fairings launched on
Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicles (EELV).
Recovera
ble
reentry–
pressuriz
ed
payloads[
edit]
Baker and
Eichstadt
 also wrote,
in 2005:[3]
The Russian Progress vehicle has long served as a
cargo vehicle which, upon departing a space station,
destructively reenters the atmosphere destroying all
"cargo" on board. This approach works very effectively
for removing unwanted mass from a space station.
However, NASA has indicated that the return of
payloads from the ISS is highly desirable [5]. Therefore,
a commercial system must examine the implications of
including a pressurized payload return capability either
in the initial design or as an enhanced feature of the
service to be introduced in the future. Providing such
capability requires the incorporation of thermal
protection subsystem, deorbit targeting subsystems,
landing recovery subsystems, ground recovery
infrastructure, and FAA licensure. The recovery of
unpressurized payloads presents unique challenges
associated with the exposed nature of unpressurized
carriers. To implement a recoverable reentry system for
unpressurized payloads requires the development of an
encapsulation system. Encapsulation activities must
either occur autonomously prior to reentry or as a part of
the operations associated with loading the
unpressurized cargo carrier with return cargo. In either
case, additional cost associated with spacecraft
systems or increased operational requirements will be
higher than simply loading and departing a pressurized
carrier for a destructive reentry.
Mixed
manifest
capability[e
t]
Baker and
Eichstadt also
wrote, in 2005
Typically, the avoidance of point solutions provides
flexibility for a given system to provide variable
capabilities. Designing a cargo carrier that mixes
pressurized and unpressurized systems can lead to
increased cost if all associated cargo accommodations
must be flown on every flight. To avoid unnecessary
costs associated with designing and flying structure that
accommodates fixed relative capacities of all types of
payloads, a modular approach is taken for CPS.
Anticipated cargo transport requirements for ISS after
the Shuttle is retired indicate that dedicated pressurized
and unpressurized missions can support the ISS up-
mass requirements. Utilizing common base features (i.e.
service module, docking system, etc.) and modularizing
the pressurized and unpressurized carrier elements of
the spacecraft assures flexibility while avoiding point
solutions.
Propellant
transfer[edi
Baker and Eic
also wrote, in
[3]

The Russian Segment of the ISS (RSOS) has the

capability via the probe and cone docking mechanisms
to support propellant transfer. Incorporation of propellant
transfer capability introduces international issues
requiring the coordination of multiple corporate and
governmental organizations. Since ISS propellant
requirements are adequately provided for by the
Russian Progress and ESA ATV, costs associated with
incorporating these features can be avoided. However,
the CPS' modular nature coupled with the inherent
capability of selected subsystems enables economical
alternatives to propellant transfer should ISS needs
require.
Indirect costs considered in developing the CPS
architecture include licensing requirements associated
with International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR)
and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
commercial launch and entry licensing requirements.
ITAR licensing drives careful selection of the vehicle
subsystem suppliers. Any utilization or manufacturing of
spacecraft subsystems by non-US entities can only be
implemented once the appropriate Department of State
and/or Commerce approvals are in place. FAA licensing
requirements necessitate careful selection of the launch
and landing sites. Vehicles developed by a US
organized corporation, even if launched in another
country, require review of the vehicle system,
operations, and safety program by the FAA to ensure
that risks to people and property are within acceptable
limits[10]
Downmas
While significa
space logistics
on upmass, or
mass carried u
from Earth, sp
operations als
significant dow
requirements.
cargo from low
orbit to Earth i
transporting d
the total logist
mass that is re
space to the s
Earth for subs
or analysis.[11] D
logistics are im
aspects
of research an
ring work that
orbital space f
For the Interna
Station, there
periods of time
downmass ca
severely restri
example, for a
ten months fro
the retirement
Shuttle followi
135 mission in
and the resulta
the Space Shu
to return paylo
an increasing
became return
downmass ca
Earth orbit to E
subsequent us
analysis.[11] Du
period of time,
space vehicles
reaching and d
cargo to the In
Space Station
Russian Soyu
could return e
small cargo pa
Earth. The So
downmass ca
limited as the
capsule was fi
capacity with t
crew members
on each Soyu
the time none
remaining carg
vehicles — the
Space Agency
the European
Agency (ESA)
the Japan Aer
Exploration
Agency (JAXA
could return a
downmass ca
terrestrial use
examination.[11
After 2012, wi
successful ber
the commercia
contracted Sp
during the Dra
C2+ mission in
and the initiati
operational ca
October 2012,
capability from
now 3,000 kilo
(6,600 lb) per
a service that
by the Dragon
capsule routin
return capsule
2018 called th
Re-entry Caps
could be used
HTV flights.[14] 
has a maximu
capability of 2
(44 lb).[15]
Nine additiona
cargo resupply
scheduled to d
ISS with down
next several y

See also[e

 Spacefli

 Autonomou
 CSTS Crew
Transporta

Reference
 Rodolfo Mo
"Infinite Po
Realities: S
Proceeding
Internation
Federation
Vancouver
October 20
Astronautic
 Evans, And
2005). "Sp
Ultimate Lo
Challenge"
Spectrum. 
Society of
Retrieved 

1. ^ Jump up to:    A
a b

Space Logisti
Definitions. A
September 2
work= (help)
2. ^ Wernher vo
Braun discuss
logistics.  AIA
Committee. A
18 October 20
publisher=
3. ^ Jump up to:      
a b c d

transport serv
Astronautica.
2005. Bibcod
0.1016/j.actaa
4. ^ G.W. Bush,
Discovery: Th
Space Explor
5. ^ United Stat
Aeronautics a
amended, Pu
6. ^ "Supply cha
transport stud
Logistics". Ma
Technology. 
Archived from
2012.
7. ^ "Classes of
Logistics". Int
Management
MIT Space Lo
from the origi
Retrieved  8 A
8. ^ Price Water
lease and pur
commercial M
1991.
9. ^ National Ae
Administration
implementatio
Integration, S
1997.
10. ^ Federal Avi
Commercial S
CFR, Novemb
11. ^ Jump up to:a b c B
2012).  "Cargo
demonstrate
downmass".  N
Retrieved  23
general are v
not least sinc
capability enjo
Shuttle fleet.
an array of re
take up the sl
Russian Prog
ATV, Japan’s
extent – the R
However, it w
the Shuttle’s d
that was often
years of their
something the
Japanese res
mitigate once
 very small do
Soyuz."
12. ^ "SpaceX ca
landing in Pac
Retrieved  23
13. ^ Black, Char
2012).  "When
spaceflight a
December  20
goods is curre
other regular
Automated Tr
HTV (or "Kou
Progress - all
entry.
14. ^ Hayashi, Ki
2018).  "数多く
り越えて。小
n Japanese).
January 2019
残り 2 機（8 号
り、2021 年度
ステーション
チする。今回
験は 9 号機で
立的な回収カ
になるだろう
15. ^ "日本独自の
ＩＳＳの実験
船に応用も". 
Japanese). 18
April 2018.  ..
ロ。試料を冷
だ。 ...

External l
 Space Log
Categories: 
 Logistics
 Space tech
 Spacefligh
N
a
vi
g
a
ti
o
n
m
e
n
u
 Not
logge
d in
 Talk
 Contr
ibutio
ns
 Creat
e
acco
unt
 Log
in
 Article
 Talk
 Re
ad
 Edi
t
 Vie
w
his
tor
y
Se
ar
ch
Search

Go

 Main
page
 Cont
ents
 Curr
ent
 even
ts
 Ran
dom
articl
e
 Abo
ut
Wiki
pedi
a
 Cont
act
us
 Don
ate
Contr
ibute
 Help
 Lear
n to
edit
 Com
muni
ty
port
al
 Rec
ent
chan
ges
 Uplo
ad
file
Tools
 Wha
t
links
here
 Rela
ted
chan
ges
 Spe
cial
page
s
 Per
man
ent
link
 Pag
e
infor
mati
on
 Cite
this
page
 Wiki
data
item
Print/
expo
rt
 Dow
nloa
d as
PDF
 Print
able
versi
on
Lang
uage
s
 Cata
là
Edit
links
 Thi
s
pag
e
was
last
edit
ed
on
16
Au
gus
t
202
0,
at
04:
19 (
UT
C).
 Tex
t is
ava
ilab
le
und
er
the 
Cre
ativ
e
Co
mm
ons
Att
rib
utio
n-
Sha
reA
like
Lic
ens
e;
add
itio
nal
ter
ms
ma
y
app
ly.
By
usi
ng
this
site
,
you
agr
ee
to
the 
Ter
ms
of
Use 
and 
Pri
vac
y
Pol
icy.
Wi
kip
edi
a®
is a
regi
ster
ed
 trad
em
ark
of
the 
Wi
kim
edi
a
Fou
nda
tion
,
Inc.
,a
non
-
pro
fit
org
ani
zati
on.
 Pri

vac

poli

cy

 Ab

out

Wi

kip

edi

 Dis

clai

mer

 Co

nta

ct

Wi

kip
 edi

 Mo

bile

vie

 De

vel

ope

rs

 Stat

isti

cs

 Co

oki

stat

em

ent