Esa’s Future Launcher Systems

Which will be the future launcher systems forinvestigated. The first idea are semi-reusable
Europe? To answer this question ESA started inrockets with so called Liquid Fly-Back Boosters
2004 the Future Launcher Preparatory Program(LFBBs) or Reusable First Stage (RFS). As the
(or FLPP). But let us first look at the currentRussians explore the capabilities of Fly-Back
situation.Boosters since several years, a cooperation
Currently ESA has access to space through thebetween Europe and Russia is considered from
Ariane-5 launcher, operated by its commercialthe start on.
offset Arianespace. Developed as a cheaper andAs these designs, mainly the Fly-Back Boosters,
more powerful successor of the very successfulare somewhat conventional, the cost reduction is
launcher family Ariane-4, the Ariane-5 is availablenot for sure. In contrast, the more complex
in three models. The generic version GS, thereusable technology is still a major barrier.
heavy-lift model ECA and a modified vehicle forThat’s why ESA will also investigate and
transporting the ISS supply craft ATV, calledtest technologies to reduce this complexity. For
Ariane-5 ES-ATV.example there are already structures in evaluation
Through the alliance, called Starsem, ofand testing with embedded fiber-optic health
Arianespace, EADS, and Russian partners, ESAmonitoring systems.
can and does also use the Soyuz launchers,The most advanced concepts are certainly fully
especially for interplanetary probes. Currently, thereusable Two Stage to Orbit (TSTO) concepts.
Kourou spaceport gets an additional launch pad forEspecially for this kind of launchers, as also for a
the Soyuz rocket, so in future it will possible toReusable First Stage for a semi-reusable concept,
launch the Soyuz from the equator-near Kourouinvestigation in high performance reusable engines
with an increased payload.are seen as a key objective.
For smaller payloads ESA develops the VegaUp to today, only the Space Shuttle and the
launcher, consisting of three solid propellant stagesEnergia/Buran spacecrafts used reusable engines.
and one liquid propellant stage. The solid rocketBoth are seen as robust but also as technically
engines are based on the Ariane-5 boosterdemanding and relatively expensive.
engines. It is planned to first-launch the Vega inIf SpaceX with its Merlin engine, which also should
2008.be reusable, can achieve a successful complexity
Recently ESA announced a cooperation with theand cost reduction, time will still have to tell. An
Russian Space Agency to build a new spacecraftanalysis of the possible cost reductions is
together. As this craft needs a new launcher orunderway at the Space Fellowship Forum. The
at least a modified launcher, ESA could also usepotential cost reduction is surely the highest but
that launcher for future payloads. The rocketsthe development costs will also be the highest.
currently in consideration are a modified SoyuzAnother key objective would be the development
launcher, called Soyuz-3, a further improved(and maturing) of light-weight reusable stage
Ariane, or another launcher currently instructures with cryogenic propellant tanks. Also
development, the Angara-3.the second stage would need a reentry system,
These launchers will give Europe space access forwhich would add structural mass. Additionally
the next several years. As the private launcherreentry systems showed to be complex and
business is yet unclear, Europe will need a newvery labor-intensive for reuse.
launcher family around 2015 to 2020.Structural mass and additional operational costs
The FLPP calls for a future launcher to befor inspection and re-qualification of the system
operational around 2020. Currently the first studiesafter a launch are the main difficulties to handle
are conducted. Now we will take a look at thewith reusable systems, as compared to an
potential launchers, reusable and expendable both.expendable vehicle.
One important condition for the whole program isAs the reusability adds structural mass, e.g.
the use of matured technologies and concepts.increasing the structural and engine robustness for
Designs like Single Stage to Orbit (SSTO) vehicleswithstanding several launches or adding health
or air-breathing propulsion systems like scramjetsmonitoring systems, it’s necessary to
are not considered because they are not yetfocus on materials and systems science.
proven and sufficiently developed.Inspection and particularly re-qualification of the
The most conservative concepts are expendablehardware is an expensive area as this work is
launchers. Aside from a payload increase, theyvery labor-intensive.
would incorporate better and especially cheaperAlso new procedures are necessary to be
manufacturing and components like low costdeveloped. How much of damage to a certain
engines. But as the launchers would be ratherpart is tolerable before it will be necessary to
conventional, the launch costs would be not veryreplace it? In aviation we have this expertise
different from today’s.today, we can predict for example how a small
If that would be (on the background of a potentialcrack will develop and when it’s necessary
emerging private rocket market) enough toto replace or repair it. In the aerospace sector we
compete with others, that is likely to be anearly have no such experience yet.
question. The advantages clearly would be noThe clear advantage if all these challenges are
dependancies on new breakthrough technologiesmastered is a low-cost high-performance launcher
and a manageable budget.system which will strengthen Europe’s
On the other side, reusable concepts arefuture role in spaceflight.