Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV)
Briefing to 1998 National Space Symposium
Catching a Ride to Orbit Session
Affordability Through Innovation
Col Richard McKinney
System Program Director
Overview
í Program Background
•
Acquisition Strategy Change
•
Summary
2
EELV Mission Statement
•
Mission:
– Partner with Industry to develop a national launch capability
that satisfies the Government’s national mission model
requirements and reduces the cost of space launch by at least
25%
•
Objectives:
– Increase the U.S. space launch industry’s competitiveness in
the international space launch market
– Implement acquisition reform initiatives resulting in reduced
government resources necessary to manage system
development and acquire launch services
3
Background
FY94 Defense
Appropriations Act
Tasking
ALS
NLS
Space Launch
Modernization Plan
(SLMP) [May 94];
Gen Moorman,
Chairman
Options:
SPACELIFTER
$650M
INVESTMENT
ALS - Advanced Launch System
NLS - National Launch System
PDD - Presidential Decision
Directive
NSTC - National Space
Transportation Council
(1) Sustain current
systems
(2) Evolve current
expendable
systems
(3) Develop new
“clean sheet”
expendable system
(4) Develop a new
reusable system
Department of Defense (DoD)
Intelligence
Civil
Industry
Nat'l Space Trans
Policy(PDD/NSTC-4)
[5 Aug 94]
DoD
Implementation
Plan [25 Oct 94]
supported Opt. 2
EELV
4
EELV Contractors’ System Concepts
5
Drivers to EELV Program
•
Key Performance Parameters:
– Launch National Mission Model
– Design Reliability
– Standardized Launch Pads
– Standard Vehicle Interface
•
Cost
– Probably first time a space program has cost as THE driver
– Direct Impact to Warfighter
6
Overview
•
Program Background
í Acquisition Strategy Change
•
Summary
7
Acquisition Strategy
•
Original acquisition strategy formulated in early 1995
– Strategy called for downselecting to one contractor
•
-
Contractor provides a family of launch vehicles to support
Government requirements
-
Contractor in a position to capture a larger share of the
international commercial launch market
Other features of original strategy:
– Cost-type contract for Engineering & Manufacturing
Development (EMD) contract
– Two system test flights during EMD
•
Approach in strategy revised on 6 Nov 97
8
Why Change Strategy?
Larger commercial market
than envisioned two years
ago
Sufficient market to
support two contractors
Industry Involvement
Gov’t leverage commercial market competition
9
Why Change Strategy?
Changes Since the “Moorman Study”
1994, SPACE LAUNCH MOD. PLAN
TODAY
Future med/heavy launch market
dominated by government
Launch market dominated by
commercial market
Little potential in commercial market
for growth or economy
Tremendous growth potential in
commercial market
Conclusion: too many launch
providers/production capacity
Conclusion: sufficient market to
support two EELV concepts
Recommendation: reduce industrial
overhead; downsize; reduce niche
markets; DoD pursue innovative
incentives
Recommendation: Partner with
industry to develop EELV family;
leverage competition in commercial
markets
Led to single EELV contractor
developing a modular family of
vehicles
Leads to two competing EELV
contractors over life of program for
commercial launch services
10
COMSTAC Addressable
Commercial Geosynchronous Transfer
Orbit (GTO) Market
45
1997
Launches per Year
40
High
Most
35
Likely
30
Low
25
20
1994
15
10
Actual
5
0
'88 '89 '90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10
11
Why Change Strategy?
COMSTAC Addressable Commercial GTO Market
Predictions Averaged Over Period
35
1997
Launches per Year
30
1996
25
20
15
1995
1994
Actual
1993
10
5
0
'88 '89 '90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10
12
Commercial Space Market Growth
70
Then Year $Billion
60
50
Services
User Equip
Satellite
Launch
40
30
20
10
0
1986
1991
1996
2000
Does not include
Government spending
which was $38B in
1996 and projected to
be $40B in 2000
13
Summary of Strategy Change
Old
New
•
Cost-type contract for EMD
•
Fixed Gov’t investment for
development in addition to
contractor investment
•
Two system test flights
•
No system test flights
•
Downselect to one
•
Compete two over life of program
•
Production
•
Launch services
14
EELV Acquisition Schedule
FY95
96
MS 0
97
98
MS I
99
00
01
02
MS II
03
04
05
06
07
08
MS III
LCCV Pre-EMD
15 Months 17 Months
2 Ktrs
4 Contracts
Development - 2 Contractors
Initial Launch Services - 2 Contractors
RFP
CFI
TAILORED TAILORED
SRR
PDR
PDR - Preliminary Design Review
DDR - Down-select Design Review
RFP
DDR TCDR
Follow-on Launch Services
First Flights
(Commercial/Military)
RFP - Request for Proposal
CFI - Call For Improvements
SRR - Systems Requirements Review
LCCV - Low Cost Concept Validation TCDR - Tailored Critical Design Review
15
Overview
•
Program Background
•
Acquisition Strategy Change
í Summary
16
Summary
What Does This Mean to You?
•
Ensures two viable U.S. providers of launch services, each
with a Government business base
•
U.S. becomes more competitive in international market and
captures a greater market share
•
EELV will reduce the cost of space launch
17
Affordability Through Innovation