1. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Exploration Systems Development
Program Management Overview
Dan Dumbacher
February 2012

2. The NASA Vision
To reach for new heights and reveal the unknown, so that what we do
and learn will benefit all humankind.
NASA Strategic Goals
1. Extend and sustain human activities across the solar system.
2. Expand scientific understanding of the Earth and the universe in which
we live.
3. Create the innovative new space technologies for our exploration,
science, and economic future.
4. Advance aeronautics research for societal benefit.
5. Enable program and institutional capabilities to conduct NASA‟s
aeronautics and space activities.
6. Share NASA with the public, educators, and students to provide
opportunities to participate in our mission, foster innovation, and
contribute to a strong national economy
2

3. Stepping Stone Exploration
3

4. Human Exploration & Operations: Organization
4
Current as of February 2012

5. Exploration Systems Development
These programs will develop the launch and
spaceflight vehicles that will provide the initial
capability for crewed exploration missions
beyond LEO.
– The Space Launch System (SLS) program is
developing the heavy lift vehicle that will launch the
crew vehicle, other modules, and cargo for these
missions
– The Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV)
program is developing the vehicle that will carry the
crew to orbit, provide emergency abort capability,
sustain the crew while in space, and provide safe re-
entry from deep space return velocities
– The Ground Systems Development and Operations
(GSDO) program is developing the necessary launch
site infrastructure to prepare, assemble, test, launch
and recover the SLS and Orion MPCV flight systems
5

6. Organization and Interfaces
ESD Division and Programs
HEO/ESD Level Exploration Systems
Line of Authority Development HEO RMAO
Line of Communication (ESD)
Cross-Program Programmatic and ESD
Systems Integration Strategic Integration RMO
(CSI) (PSI)
ESD HQ
Program Agents PP&C Integration Team
to (Reach back (PIT)
Support)
Program
Technical Budget Schedule
Working Integration WG Integration WG
Groups
Config Mgt &
Risk Document Mgt
Integration WG WG
Integrated
Transition Programmatic
Integration WG Communication
Program Level
Ground Systems
Development & Space Launch Multi-Purpose Crew
Operations System Vehicle
(GSDO) (SLS) (MPCV)
6

7. Analysis of Alternatives
Overview
7

8. Objectives of Analysis of Alternatives (AoA)
• Focus on delivering beyond Low Earth Orbit (BEO) capability for
human exploration as expeditiously and safely as possible
• Assume a flat-line budget
• Develop an integrated capability by aligning MPCV, SLS, and
GSDO concepts through a set of common ground rules and
assumptions
• Develop a budget profile to enable a wedge to be created for
future in-space systems development
8

9. Integrated Plan Leading to Orion, SLS, and GSDO
Information & Decisions
FY 2011
FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT
FORMULATION PLAN
SLS, Orion, 21CGS ALT
Integrate SLS, Orion, GSDO
ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS
INTEGRATED SLS, Orion, GSDO
FINAL ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS
DRAFT PRG GUIDANCE
INTEGRATED SLS, Orion, GSDO ALTERNATIVE ARCHITECURE ARCHITECURE
SELECTION ANNOUNCEMENT
INDEPENDENT COST ASSESSMENT (ICA) FINAL REPORT
TO NASA
SLS ACQUISITION
SECTION 309 REPORT December 23
9

10. Orion MPCV Analysis Approach
• The MPCV Analysis sought to validate or challenge whether the beyond-LEO version of the
Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (the Reference Vehicle Design) is the most effective
approach through:
– Understanding progress to date on the Orion development effort
– Validating whether the Orion requirements closely match MPCV requirements consistent
with the Authorization Act
– Examining and implementing ways to be able to deliver an affordable and achievable
crew vehicle as soon as possible. For example:
• Streamlining government oversight and insight activities to ensure we are focusing on
the key-risk items
• Implementing an incremental approach to developing and building vehicle capabilities
• Planning a more innovative and cost-effective vehicle qualification plan, utilizing
distributed test labs, for example
• NASA is also exploring other affordability measures including consolidating facilities
and re-using test assets
10

11. Decision for Orion as MPCV
• Examined technical, risk and cost implications of replacing functionality of MPCV with in-
space vehicle and planned Commercial Crew capabilities
• CC-Based Approach produces large increases in required mission mass and associated
number of launches (factor of 2 - 3) over Capability-Driven Reference with significant
impacts on safety risk and P&O cost
– Increases complexity of in-space vehicle assembly and number of elements required
implying lower reliability system
– Increases ground launch infrastructure and/or technology development
– Introduces unique mission-critical events and additional Loss-of-Crew scenarios
– “Launch-on-Demand” CC capability required to assure crew survivability in many
abort scenarios
– Parametric costs estimates indicate recurring cost delta per mission provides
insufficient P&O funding for SLS and eliminates funding wedge for future capabilities
given the flat-line budget
Assessment confirms the requirements for an MPCV
11

12. SLS Analysis Approach
Approach:
• Leverage three government Requirement Analysis Cycle (RAC) Teams to create and
study different design concepts that leverage capability across American industry
• In parallel, solicit industry input and concepts via study contract input
Implementation:
• Team studies (Fall 2010) concluded without architecture decisions
• Government Requirements Analysis Cycle (RAC)
– Three competing configurations with fourth team looking at cross-cutting affordability
– Approaches to affordability addressed by all 3 teams
– Common requirements, goals/threshold approach - tradable
– Incorporate incremental inputs from NASA Heavy Lift study contracts
– Out brief to SLS Feb 16-18
• Contractor Heavy Lift Study Contracts–awarded November 2010
– 13 Contractors, $650K each, 6 month studies – broad SOW ideas
– Initial Out briefs Feb 22-24
– Final Out briefs Apr 25-28
12

13. Analyzed SLS Concepts
LOX/H2 – Reference Vehicle Design LOX/RP Modular
Large RP configuration (large Modular RP configuration
Hydrogen core configuration with
diameter tanks) with multiple (smaller diameter tanks) with
Description solid strap-on boosters;
engine options, incl. NASA/USAF multiple engine options, incl.
multiple evolution paths
common engine NASA/USAF common engine
Lift Capability 70 mT – 150 mT 100 mT – 172 mT 70 mT – 130 mT
Note: Images based on government design solutions from RAC teams
13

14. SLS Decision
Philosophy/Rationale
• Maintains US leadership in LOX/LH2 technology
– LOX/LH2 core uses RS-25E engines; LOX/LH2 Upper Stage uses J-2X
– Establishes fixed central design path with logical use of existing strength in design and
manufacture
– Maintains existing knowledge base, skills, infrastructure, workforce, and industrial base
for existing state of the art systems
• Minimizes Unique Configurations
– Evolutionary Path to 130mT allows incremental development; thus progress to be
made even with constrained budgets
– Allows early flight tests for MPCV
– Provides flexible/modular design and system for varying launch needs
– Gains synergy, thus reducing DDTE by building core and upper stage in parallel,
allowing common tooling and engine feed components
• Provides a Balanced Approach for Acquisition
– Opportunity for use of existing contracts for development phase enabling a fast start
– ASM will provide official agency decision on acquisition strategy
– Allows for competition for best value to the government
14

15. Orion MPCV Overview
15

16. Orion MPCV Vehicle
The Orion MPCV Crew Module
(CM)
design divides
• Provide safe habitat
critical functions from launch through
landing and recovery
among multiple • Conduct reentry and
modules to landing as a stand
alone module
maximize the Launch Abort System
performance of • Provide protection for the CM
from atmospheric loads and
the integrated heating during first stage flight
• Safely jettison after successful
spacecraft design pad operations and first stage
flight
Service Module (SM)
• Provide support to the CM from launch
through CM separation to missions
with minimal impact to the CM
Spacecraft Adapter
• Provide structural connection to the launch vehicle
from ground operations through CM Separation
• Provide protection for SM components from
atmospheric loads and heating during first stage flight
16

17. Orion MPCV Technology Advancements
Propulsion Avionics
Abort Motor, Attitude Control Motor, Algorithmic Autocode Generation, ARINC-653/DO-
High Burn Rate Propellant for Solid 178 Standard Operating System, Baseband
Rocket Motors Processor, High Speed/High Density Memory
Benefits: High reliability launch abort, Devices, Honeywell HX5000 Northstar ASIC
steerable solid rocket motors Benefits: Low cost, high performance, open
architecture
Navigation Communications
Atmospheric Skip Entry, Flash
Interoperable Communications,
Lidar, Vision Navigation
Communication Network Router Card, Digital
Sensors, Autonomous Rendezvous and
Video Recorder, Phased Array Antennas
Docking, Fast Acquisition GPS
Benefits: Low cost, high reliability, open
Receiver, High Density Camera Sensors
architecture
Benefits: Low cost, high
reliability, autonomous docking
Life Support & Safety
Solid Amine Swing-Bed, Backup and Structures
Survival Systems, Closed Loop Life Composite Spacecraft
Support, Contingency Land Landing, Structures, Human Rated Spacecraft
Enhanced Waste Management, Primary Structures
Environmental Control, Hazard Detection, Development, Advanced Manufacturing
Isolation and Recovery Benefits: Low cost, low mass
Benefits: Low consumables, long mission
duration, high reliability, low operations
cost
Thermal Protection Power
High Energy Density Lithium Ion
System Batteries, Column Grid Array
Ablative Heatshield with Composite Packaging (CGA), Direct Energy
Carrier Structure Power Transfer System
Benefits: Low cost, high reliability, high Benefits: Low cost, high
energy (Beyond LEO) entry reliability, low mass, long mission
duration
17

18. SLS Overview
18

19. SLS Planned Evolution
Block 1A – 105 t
incorporates
Advanced Boosters
Block 1 – 70 t Block 2 – 130 t
19

20. SLS Key Characteristics
• Human-Rated
• Affordable
– Constrained budget environment
– Maximum use of common elements and existing
assets, infrastructure and workforce
– Competitive opportunities for affordability on-ramps
• Initial Capability: 70-100 metric tons (t), 2017-2021
– Serves as primary transportation for Orion and exploration
missions
– Provides back-up capability for crew/cargo to ISS
• Evolved capability: 105 t, post-2021
– Includes Advanced Booster
– Allows incorporation of any products from the Advanced
Development NRA focusing on risk reduction
• Evolved capability: 130 t, post-2021
– Offers large volume for science missions and payloads
– Modular and flexible, right-sized for mission requirements
SLS First Flight (Non-crewed) in 2017
20

21. Summary by Element:
Risk Reduction Incorporated in Design
• Boosters (3-phased approach)
– Phase I: 5-segment Solid Rocket Booster in-scope modification to existing Ares contract with ATK for initial
flights through 2021
– Phases II and III: Advanced Boosters
• II: Engineering demonstration and risk reduction via NASA Research Announcement (NRA): Full and Open
Competition in FY12; award by FY13
• III: Design, Development, Test & Evaluation (DDT&E): Full and Open Competition (RFP target FY15)
• Stages
– Core/Upper Stage: Justification for Other Than Full and Open Competition (JOFOC) to Boeing, modifying current
Ares Upper Stage contract
– Instrument Unit Avionics: In-scope modification to existing Ares contract with Boeing; consolidated with Stages
contract to Boeing
• Engines
– Core Stage Engine: RS-25d JOFOC to existing Space Shuttle contract with Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne (PWR)
– Upper Stage Engine: J-2X in-scope modification to existing Ares contract with PWR
– Future Core Stage Engine: Separate contract activity to be held in the future
• Spacecraft and Payload adapter and Fairing
– Initial design: Adapter and Fairing design and development in-house through early design phase
– Fairing Full and Open Competition planned for FY13
21

22. SLS Trades and Vehicle Reliability
SLS Trades consider impacts on performance, safety and budget.
• SLS has multiple trade studies (20+) on-going
– Number of engines, stage testing at SSC vs. FRF, etc.
• Results of all trades must be reconciled prior to establishing a complete baseline
configuration addressing all 3 factors
• Planning to baseline configuration at end of SRR/SDR – May 2012
• SLS Program is still in formulation phase
Reliability predictions for all vehicles
• Models use STS data for heritage and heritage derived hardware, e.g. SSME
• Model includes flight path and time
• Model used to predict LOM and LOC for 4 cases for each vehicle configuration: No
Engine-Out (EO), Core EO, Upper Stage EO, and Both Stages EO
• Estimates used to trade against performance and costs
• Estimates will be used to develop reliability allocations for Elements post SDR
22

23. SLS Procurement Milestones
• SLS Acquisition Overview Synopsis, posted September 22, 2011
• Industry Day at Marshall Space Flight Center on September 29
• SLS Advanced Development RFI, posted October 7, 2011
• SLS Advanced Booster Engineering Demonstration and Risk Reduction RFI, posted
October 7, 2011
• Industry Day at Michoud Assembly Facility on November 14
• SLS Advanced Booster Engineering Demonstration and Risk Reduction Draft NRA,
posted December 12, 2011
• SLS Advanced Development Draft NRA, posted February 1, 2012
• SLS Advanced Booster Engineering Demonstration and Risk Reduction NRA, posted
February 9, 2012
• Industry Day at Marshall Space Flight Center on February 14
23

24. SLS Philosophy for Evolutionary Upgrades
Stakeholders
&
Customer
Needs
Improvements in Affordability, Reliability, and Performance
Missions Block 0 Design/Development Block 0 Mission
Requirements
Block 1 Advanced Development Block 1 Design/Development Block 1 Mission
Requirements
Block 2 Technology Advanced Development Block 2 Design/Development Block 2
Requirements Maturation* Mission
Block 3 Advanced Development Block 3
Requirements Technology Maturation* Design/Development
Block 4 Advanced Development
Requirements Technology Maturation*
* NASA, Office of Chief Technologist 24

25. SLS Development Key Tenets
• Utilize an evolutionary development strategy that allows for
incremental progress within constrained budgets
• Incorporate mature technical solutions into SLS program-phased
block upgrades
• Optimize use of common elements and existing assets for a
flexible/modular design
Improve Affordability, Reliability, or Performance
25

26. Ground Systems Development and Operations
(GSDO) Overview
26

27. Flexible Approach
Horizontal Launch & Landing Small Vehicle Launch
Clean Floor Processing
Flexible Launch Capability
Heavy Class Launch Capability
Multi-Use Integration (VAB)
27

28. GSDO Program Highlights
• The demolition of the Fixed Service Structure/Rotating Service Structure
(FSS/RSS) at Launch Complex 39-B was completed.
Before After
• Multi-Purpose Processing Facility (MPPF) Phase 1 modifications (HVAC) are
progressing.
• Space Shuttle Program facility turnover is underway.
• Provided significant contribution to the Interagency Working Group Launch
Infrastructure Modernization Report
28

29. Orion MPCV Ground Test Article
29

30. SLS Configurations
385 ft
315 ft
209 ft
0
70t - Block l crew 105 - Block lA cargo 105t - Block IA crew 130t_Block ll cargo 130t Block ll crew
30

31. Notional GSDO Range

32. Overall Flight Test Strategy
32

33. Mission/Flight Test Objectives
• Flights are needed to test critical mission events and demonstrate
performance in relevant environments
– Abort, jettison, separation, chute deploy, Re-entry and TPS performance in
BEO conditions, Integrated vehicle systems performance, and
environments validation
– Data collected from flights will be used to eliminate additional SLS test
flights as the SLS configuration evolves
– Dedicated flight tests will not be required for incorporation of competitive
boosters, RS-25E, or the upper stage (with J-2X)
• Four missions/test flights planned to meet minimum mission/flight
test
– Exploration Flight Test-1 (EFT-1), an orbital, uncrewed test flight in 2014
provides MPVC system level tests and risk reduction opportunity
– Ascent Abort-2 (AA-2), an abort test in high dynamic pressure environment
– Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1), an Un-crewed BEO (lunar flyby) and EM-2,
a crewed BEO flight (includes 3-4 day lunar orbit) will provide more system
level testing and shakedown
33

34. MPCV Test Campaign
Reduces Risk While Maturing the Design
GTA Acoustic, Modal, Vibe Testing
Environment compatibility
Water Drop Tests
Correlate structural math models in water
landing conditions
Parachute Tests
Nominal and contingency parachute
performance tests
Wind Tunnel Testing
Aero/aerothermal database validation
for Orion configuration
TPS Arc Jet Testing
Heatshield model correlation for entry
performance
EFT-1 Test Article Manufacturing
and Assembly
First production primary structure built
for orbital flight
Pad Abort Test - May 6, 2010
Demo abort capability with prototype LAS
34

35. Exploration Flight Test 1
35

36. Exploration Mission – 1 (EM-1)
BEO Un-crewed Flight
• Mission description
– Un-crewed circumlunar flight – free return trajectory
– Mission duration ~7 days
• Mission objectives
– Demonstrate integrated spacecraft systems performance prior to
crewed flight
– Demonstrate high speed entry (~11 km/s) and TPS prior to
crewed flight
• Spacecraft configuration
– Orion “Block 0 Lunar”
• Launch vehicle configuration
– SLS Block 0, 5 segment SRBs, 3 SSMEs, 70-80 t
– Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS)
• Launch site
– KSC LC-39B
35

37. Exploration Mission – 2 (EM-2)
BEO Crewed Flight
• Mission description
– Crewed lunar orbit mission
– Mission duration 10-14 days
• Mission objectives
– Demonstrate crewed flight beyond LEO
• Spacecraft configuration
– Orion “Block 0 Lunar”
• Launch vehicle configuration
– SLS Block 0, 5 segment SRBs, 3 SSMEs, 70-80 t
– Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS)
• Launch site
– KSC LC-39B
36

38. Affordability

39. Improving Affordability
of Human Spaceflight Programs
Accelerate Decision- Manage Program RQ & Maintain Competition &
Making Velocity Contractor Interfaces Improve Acquisitions
Flatten Organization - Make Affordability a Focus on Key Driving
Clear Authority & Requirement Requirements
Accountability
Eliminate Non-Value Maximize Use of
Push Reserves to Added NASA & FAR RQ Industry Standards
Programs
Define Strategy & Clear Implement “Should Cost”
Reduce Frequency of Roles for Oversight/Insight Based Management
Agency-level Reviews
Develop Mitigation Plans for Incentivize Contractors
Identify Best Practices & High Risks / Cost Drivers for Effective Cost Mgmt
Implement Lessons Learned
Adopt Appropriate Maximize Competition
Streamline Certificate of Safety & Risk Posture thru the Life of Program
Flight Readiness Process
Leverage Use of Capitalize on Progress
In-House Capability Payment Structures

40. Accelerate Decision-Making
• Overhauled the Governance Structure
– Flattened organization – removed a layer
– Clear authority and accountability
– Fewer decision-boards
– Pushed reserves to the programs
– Fewer meetings and streamlined reporting
• Implementing a New, Efficient, Distributed Integration Approach
– ESD leads with reach back to the Programs & Centers through -
• ESD Office of Cross Program Systems Integration (CSI)
• ESD Office of Programmatic & Strategic Integration (PSI)
• Leveraging Lessons Learned
– Constellation Program
– Ares 1X Flight Demonstration Project
– Standing Review Board
– Booz Allen Hamilton
– Industry Input on Affordability – 1-on-1 meetings and SLS BAA input
– DoD Better Buying Power Initiatives
– NASA/DAU Program Executability Workshop

41. Manage Program RQ & Contractor Interfaces
• Including Affordability as a Requirement
– Encouraging commonality and utilization of industry standards vs NASA
unique requirements.
– Streamlined and Minimized Key Driving Requirements
• ESD issued only 21 level one requirements; CxP had several hundred.
• Strategically focused staffing of insight / oversight of contractor
performance
– Minimize number of Gov‟t staff performing insight/oversight
– Follow a Risk-based or a Hybrid approach
– Focus and clarify Government roles pertaining to interactions with and
direction to contractor.
• Risk Management
– ESD cannot afford to mitigate all risks; risk acceptance needs to be
approved and documented.
– Connecting risk approach to use of reserves will allow ESD to strategically
choose the most important risks to mitigate.

42. Maintain Competition & Improve Acquisitions
-
• Conducting ‘Will Cost’ and ‘Should Cost’ Reviews
– Conducted a „Should Cost‟ training session
– Booz Allen support of Independent Cost Assessment
– DoD Price Fighters assisting SLS IATs
– DCMA to assist with „Should Cost‟ review of Contractor overhead
• Implementing Contract Incentives for Cost Reductions
• Issuing Multiple Lower-Level Contracts vs Large System Level
– Reduces pass through of subcontracting overhead & fees
– Enables greater insight and ability to define requirements
– Enable direct employment of contractor performance incentives
– Improves competition
• SLS: Element-level contracts
• Ground Dev & Ops: FP IDIQ contracts
• Leveraging Existing Assets

43. ESD - A fresh start to improve affordability…
• Major cost drivers in human space flight are organizational structures,
requirements and acquisition strategy / contract management.
• ESD and its programs are new, very different development programs in
comparison to prior NASA experiences
• This new beginning has enabled NASA to pursue a more efficient and
affordable future to human space flight by implementing approaches to
secure better buying power, such as:
– Accelerating Decision-Making Velocity
– Better Managing Program Requirements & Contractor Interfaces, and
– Improving Acquisition Strategy and Implementation
43

44. Space Launch System
Affordability Begins with Accountability
• Evolvable Development Approach
– Manage requirements within constrained, flat budgets
– Leverage existing National capabilities
• Liquid oxygen/hydrogen propulsion infrastructure
• Manufacturing and launch-site facilities
– Infuse new design solutions for affordability
• Robust Designs and Margins
– Performance traded for cost and schedule
– Heritage hardware and manufacturing solutions
– Adequate management reserves controlled at lower levels
• Risk-Informed Government Insight/Oversight Model
– Insight based on:
• Historic failures
• Industry partner past performance and gaps
• Complexity and design challenges
– Judicious oversight:
• Discrete oversight vs. near continuous
• Timely and effective decisions
• Right-Sized Documentation and Standards
– 80% Reduction in the number of Type 1 Data Requirement Documents from the Ares Projects
– Increased use of industry practices and tailored NASA standards
• Lean, Integrated Teams with Accelerated Decision Making
– Simple, clear technical interfaces with contractors
– Integrated Systems Engineering & Integration organization
– Empowered decision makers at all levels
– Fewer control Boards and streamlined change process
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 8094_Affordability.44

45. Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle
Affordability Actions
• Orion/MPCV affordability initiatives over the past 12 months have reduced
DDT&E cost and enabled schedule acceleration.
• Initiatives include:
– Streamlined government oversight and insight that focuses on key-risk items and
collocation with Prime contractor in selected areas
– Incremental approach to building and testing vehicle capabilities
– Reduction in formal deliverables and simplified processes while retaining adequate rigor
– Partnering with suppliers to analyze cost drivers and possible efficiencies
– Consolidation of test labs and re-use of test articles
45

46. Ground Systems Development and Operations
Approach to Affordability
• Architecture leverages existing Shuttle/ISS and Constellation assets and avoids
unnecessary costs to be affordable.
– Relies heavily on “grandfathering” of these heritage systems with respect to
code compliance.
• LC39 Pad B (clean pad)
• Uses modified Ares 1-ML
• Integration: VAB – High Bay-3
• Utilizes CxP Crew/Crew Module Recovery Approach
• Civil Servants perform the traditional “Prime” role for management & integration
– Allows Ground Operations to quickly respond to changing program direction with
minimal cost/schedule impact
– Avoids overhead costs on subcontracts, and is different from the Shuttle-USA
experience
• Acquisition approach enables flexibility and maximizes competition.
– Reduce schedule and procurement costs through „best value‟ fixed-price IDIQ
contracts. Pre-qualify and pre-stage supplier pools (designers, fabricators,
constructors):
• Design IDIQ contracts (in place)
• Construction IDIQ contracts (in place)
• GSE Fabrication IDIQ contracts (in place)
• Craft Labor contract for installation support (in planning)

47. We Can Reach Multiple Destinations
Mars and Its Moons,
Phobos and Deimos:
– A premier destination for discovery:
Is there life beyond Earth?
How did Mars evolve?
– True possibility for extended,
even permanent, stays
– Significant opportunities
for international collaboration
High-Earth Orbit (HEO)/Geosynchronous-
– Technological driver for
Earth Orbit (GEO)/Lagrange Points:
space systems
– Microgravity destinations beyond LEO
– Opportunities for construction, fueling,
and repair of complex in-space systems
– Excellent locations for advanced space
telescopes and Earth observatories
Near-Earth Asteroids:
Earth’s Moon: – Compelling science questions:
– Witness to the birth of the Earth and How did the Solar System form? Where
inner planets did Earth‟s water and organics come from?
– Has critical resources to sustain humans – Planetary defense: Understanding and
– Significant opportunities for commercial mitigating the threat of impact
and international collaboration – Potential for valuable space resources
– Excellent stepping stone for Mars
Increasing Our Reach and Expanding Our Boundaries
8032 SLS 101 Briefing.47

48. MPCV Test Campaign - Status
Reduces Risk While Maturing the Design
GTA Acoustic, Modal, Vibe Testing
Environment compatibility
Water Drop Tests
Correlate structural math models in water
landing conditions
Parachute Tests
Nominal and contingency parachute
performance tests
Wind Tunnel Testing
Aero/aerothermal database validation
for Orion configuration
TPS Arc Jet Testing
Heatshield model correlation for entry
performance
EFT-1 Test Article Manufacturing
and Assembly
First production primary structure built
for orbital flight
Pad Abort Test - May 6, 2010
Demo abort capability with prototype LAS
48

49. SLS Status
• SLS Program Office
– Presented “Pass the Torch” lecture at U.S. Space and Rocket Center‟s Davidson Center for Space Exploration on Feb 2
– Kickoff meeting on Feb 15 for System Requirements Review (SRR) / System Definition Review (SDR) in Mar 2012
• Program Planning & Control
– Baselined SLS Program Plan at the Program Control Board on Jan 26
– Hosted technical interchange meeting (TIM) for the Exploration Systems Division‟s integrated programmatic communications
working group from Jan 30 – 31
• Procurement
– Held SLS Industry Days for the SLS Program, Stages, and NASA Research Announcement (NRA) Advanced Booster
Engineering Demonstration and Risk Reduction (EDRR), attended by over 670 companies and potential partners
– Conducted SLS Advanced Development and Academia Industry Day on Feb 14
• Boosters
– Held kick-off for Integrated Acquisition Team on Jan 13
– Discussed systems engineering and integration at ATK-Lakeside from Jan 23 – 26
• Engines
– Completed 10 tests for J-2X Upper Stage Engine E10001 (~1,040 sec cumulative hot-fire time)
– Successfully demonstrated full flight mission duration (500 sec) and 100 percent power level (235 sec) in 2011
– Conducting engine to facility control system checkouts in preparation for PPA-2 Test #1
• Stages
– Baselined Integrated Acquisition Team Board on Jan 17
• Spacecraft & Payload Integration
– Successfully tested 3‟ by 5‟ Manufacturing Test Panel 6003 at LaRC on Jan 19
– Baselined Exploration Flight Test 1 (EFT-1) MPCV-To-Stage Adapter (MSA) detailed schedule on Jan 20

50. GSDO Status
• Mobile Launcher move to Pad B
• Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) designs for cable removal and VAB
door modifications complete
• Crawler Transporter-2 moved into VAB HB-2 to continue modification
• VAB Door Project contract awarded to USA
• Pad B LH2/LO2 Cross Country Pedestal Refurbishment complete
• Tank Refurbishment sandblasting and painting started
• ML Structural Design Contract awarded to RS&H
• Received tilt-up umbilical arm test article at the the Launch Equipment
Test Facility (LETF)
• LETF Testing is scheduled to start beginning of May, 2012
• Initiated construction on CRF facility to support Orion Launch Abort
System (LAS) assembly for EFT1
• Orion Ground Test Article (GTA) at KSC for GSE development
50

51. Questions?
www.nasa.gov
51