Two possible configurations for the Ariane 6 launch vehicle with two and three strap-on boosters at the base. (Credits: ESA /CNES/Arianespace)

CNES has published an overview of the planned Ariane 6 launch vehicle, which could eventually replace Ariane 5 in 2021 if the project gains the support of ESA members next year.

Ariane 6 would be a three-stage rocket capable of launching communications satellites weighing up to 6.5 metric tons into geosynchronous transfer orbit orbit (GTO). It is designed to launch single communications satellites rather than the pairs of them that the larger Ariane 5 launches.

Ariane 6 would have two solid or powder stages and an upper stage that uses hydrogen and liquid oxygen. (Credit: ESA / CNES / Arianespace)

Ariane 6′s first two stages would use P135 engines powered by solid or powder propellant. The third stage would use a new Vinci motor fueled by hydrogen and liquid oxygen. The rocket would have two or three strap-on solid-rocket motors on its first stage depending upon payload requirements.

The impetus behind the Ariane 6 is the larger growth of communications satellites. Not only are they getting heavier, it is increasingly difficult to find pairs of them to launch on the Ariane 5, which has a capacity of 9.4 metric tons to GTO.

Further, the launch market is very competitive, with Russia’s Proton and Ukraine’s Zenit boosters in the mix. By 2020, the Chinese Long March rockets — which account for very little of the commercial market — could also be a force, according to CNES.

Interestingly, the French space agency makes no mention of SpaceX and the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launch vehicles. The Falcon 9 is already a force in the market, having captured many launch contracts before it has even placed a single communications satellite into orbit. That is a sign that the satellite community really wants competitors to the existing fleet of commercial boosters.

Europe has been divided over how to meet this new threat. The French have favored immediately beginning work on Ariane 6. The Germans — who have replaced France as ESA’s largest national contributor — have favored an interim plan to upgrade Ariane 5 booster.

The Ariane 5 ME (Mid-life Evolution), set to launch in 2016 or 2017, would enable the rocket to lift 11.2 metric tons to GTO.  The Ariane 5 ME could also cut launch current launch costs by up to 20 percent, reducing the need for European governments to subsidize the vehicle. The upgraded launcher also would feature the new Vinci cryogenic upper stage, which is also slated for use on Ariane 6.

When SpaceX CEO Elon Musk was asked last year what Europe should do, he said they should start on Ariane 6 immediately. Even with the upgrades, Ariane 5 had no chance to compete with Falcon 9, he said.

“Does this mean Elon Musk wants to contribute to Ariane 6? I don’t know,” ESA Director General Jean-Jacques Dordain joked. “I must say we are more than ready to have additional contributors.”

It was a funny riposte, but an ironic one: Dordain actually agreed with Musk. He personally backed the French plan to immediately go forward with the development of Ariane 6.

ESA didn’t follow his advice. At the space agency’s ministerial meeting in November, officials instead backed immediate expenditures on Ariane 5 ME while going forward with  detailed definition studies on Ariane 6. They postponed any decision on whether to fully fund the new Ariane 6 booster until they meet again in 2014.

The scientific program at the Mars Desert Research Station in Utah includes ‘space walks’ in a kind of space suit to an outside area in which biological and geological experiments are to be conducted. (Credit: Mars Society)

DLR PR – Near Hanksville, Utah, in the United States, but ‘on Mars’. At least that is what Volker Maiwald will feel when he embarks on his two-week mission in the Mars Desert Research Station on 23 February 2013. The scientist is normally based at the German Aerospace Center (Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt; DLR) Institute of Space Systems in Bremen, where he works determining the feasibility, costs and benefits of space systems and concepts of the future, calculating trajectories and planning habitats for isolated or harsh environments. As a member of Crew 125, he will soon experience being part of a team of six living on Mars.

‘Mars is within reach’ – the Mars Society advertises on the project website. The group of Mars enthusiasts operates the research station in the Utah desert and makes the crew changeover operation safe. Their new home on Mars is very small – a mere 10-metre long ‘box’ for six astronauts. “The rooms consist of a very narrow bed, a small folding table and a half-metre square of space in front – it is very sparse,” says Volker Maiwald. But a station on Mars would hardly offer its occupants more space. In the two-storey Martian station, the upper floor is designated for living, cooking and eating, and the lower level comprises the workstations and the hatch, to go out for a ‘Martian’ stroll. An observatory and a greenhouse complete the station.

Research in the greenhouse

Volker Maiwald works at the Institute of Space Systems in Bremen. In the Space Segment Systems Analysis Department, he works determining the feasibility, costs and benefits of space systems and concepts of the future, calculating trajectories and planning habitats for isolated or harsh environments. (Credit: DLR — CC-BY 3.0)

The greenhouse particularly impresses Volker Maiwald. “A greenhouse is of utmost importance for missions to other planets, or those that involve living and working in remote locations such as Antarctica.” For this reason, the scientist wants to, among other things, get an idea of how effective the crops in the Martian greenhouse are and whether the concepts previously developed by DLR actually stand up to reality. Maiwald is currently working with Daniel Schubert and Dominik Quantius from the Space Segment Systems Analysis Department on various types of closed life-support systems where – isolated from influences of the outside world – for example, plants can grow and be harvested. Where in the artificial Mars habitat could the DLR Micro-Harvester be placed to grow lettuce, herbs and tomatoes as fast as possible? Can the Mars Desert Research Station be used as a greenhouse? The aerospace engineer hopes to gain practical knowledge during his two-week stay. “We will gather knowledge for future Mars missions, but also for applications here on Earth,” he says.

Excursions on the Red Planet

In the two-story Martian station of the Mars Society, the upper floor is designated for living, cooking and eating, and the lower level comprises the workstations and the hatch, to go out for a ‘Martian’ stroll. An observatory and a greenhouse complete the station. (Credit: Mars Society)

As Deputy Commander, Volker Maiwald must support the crew, and as a habitat engineer, he is responsible for taking care of all the technology at the station. “I am responsible, for example, for monitoring the energy and water supply as well as the systems for communicating with the outside world.” He will send a daily report detailing the current status. The scientific programme of Crew 125, devised by the European Space Agency for the habitat, also involves a trip to the exterior in a type of space suit; outside, there will be an area in which biological and geological experiments are to be conducted. A webcam inside the station will record the life and work of the international crewmembers from Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Hungary and Canada. On 9 March 2013 the DLR researcher will return from ‘Mars’ and leave the habitat in the desert. “There aren’t many places on Earth where one can live such an experience,” says Maiwald confidently.

By Douglas Messier

At the European Space Agency (ESA) ministerial meeting on Nov. 20-21 in Naples, there was a new flag flying outside. The red-and-white flag of Poland, which had joined space agency the day before, was raised among those of ESA’s other 19 member states.

Poland became the third — and wealthiest — former Eastern Bloc nation to join ESA behind the Czech Republic and Romania.  The nation’s ascendance brought the number of full ESA member states to 20 from the original 10 countries that created the space agency in 1975. Canada is an associate member.

Ten other European nations, nine of which have cooperative agreements with ESA, attended the quadrennial ministerial meeting as observers with hopes of eventually joining the space agency as full members. Behind them, there is another group of 10 countries — most of which are still emerging from the fall of communism two decades ago — that could one day join ESA.

The possible expansion of the space agency to 30 or even 40 members representing  700 million Europeans raises is an exciting prospect. ESA has successfully pooled the collective talents of Europeans to create a world-class space agency. It also has brought broad practical benefits to the European people and helped to raise up the technology levels of poorer nations on the continent.

However, future expansion also raises some daunting questions. Many of the prospective members are quite poor and under developed. They would offer little additional funding for ESA’s budget (currently $5.38 billion) or much in the way of technical expertise. Another key issue is whether the space agency would be able to continue function effectively under its current one-nation, one-vote rules as more nations join.

The other major issue looming over the space agency involves the European Union, which under a framework agreement now contributes more funding to ESA’s budget than any individual member state. The EU is using its growing clout to propose that the independent space agency be brought under its control.

In the Beginning

During the 1960′s, the Europeans created two different organizations to carry out space exploration. The European Space Research Organization (ESRO) pursued scientific research and built spacecraft.  The European Launch Development Organization (ELDO) focused on developing rockets. ESRO was the fairly successful while ELDO failed to produce a viable launch vehicle.

In May 1975, the 10 nations involved in those efforts decided to merge the two organizations into the European Space Agency. The 10 nations were joined by Ireland at the end of 1975 and associate member Canada in 1979. ESA formally came into being in 1980 after operating on a de facto basis for several years.

The table below shows how the space agency has expanded over the decades. The table also includes each nation’s gross domestic product (GDP), per capita GDP, and population.

As noted, 18 of ESA’s 20 European members are also members of the EU. Switzerland and Norway are the only nations that are not members of the union, although they have close economic and political ties with it.

One clear trend is that ESA’s expansion in the 21st century has drawn in an increasingly poorer set of nations, particularly as it has embraced Eastern Europe that became independent as the Soviet Union collapsed more than 20 years ago.  Beginning with Portugal in 2000 and continuing through Romania and Poland during the past year, five of the six nations have per capita GDP of under $30,000.

The exception is Luxembourg, an extremely wealthy country with a tiny population that boasts the smallest economy of the 20 ESA members. Previous to Luxembourg, the last of Europe’s club of wealthy countries to join the space agency was Finland in 1995.

Contributions to ESA’s Budget

As would be expected, national contributions to ESA’s budget roughly correspond to the relative sizes of each nation’s economy and population. The table below shows ESA’s 2012 budget by contributor. These figures include contributions by the EU and non-member cooperative states as well as other income.

The top two contributors, Germany and France, provided a combined 36.55 percent of ESA’s budget. When you expand out to the top five national contributors by adding Italy, the United Kingdom and Spain, that figure increases to 55.82 percent.

The EU was the top contributor to the budget, providing 867.7 million euros or 21.58 percent of the budget. The EU, France and Germany collectively contributed 58.13 percent of the budget. The figure rises to 77.4 percent when you include the EU with the top five national contributors.

At the bottom of the table, eight full member states and associate member Canada contributed less than 1 percent of the budget apiece.  Three other nations provided less than 2 percent each to the budget.

There is a direct correlation between the size of a nation’s economy — in terms of GDP and per capita GDP — and its contributions to ESA. The United Kingdom traditionally being an outlier by contributing proportionally less than the other large European economies. The UK recently boosted its contribution, vaunting to third place among member nations and fourth place overall for the 2013 budget.

Future Enlargement

The map below shows ESA’s 20 member states in dark blue along with nations with whom the space agency has signed cooperative agreements. The colors represent different levels of cooperation along the way to becoming full members.

For nations that joined ESA after 2004, the space agency adopted a three phase process that typically takes about six years. The phases include:

1. Cooperation Agreement: a pact that lays out the framework for cooperation;
2. European Cooperating State (ECS) Agreement:  a pact that allows the cooperating nation to participate in ESA procurement; and,
3. Plan for European Cooperating States (PECS) Charter: a five year plan under which the country performs a series of activities, develops its space industry, and works more closely with ESA.

The PECS Charter is usually agreed to within a year of finalizing the ECS Agreement.  At the end of five-year PECS agreement, ESA decides whether the nation is ready for full membership. If it is, then negotiations begin. If not, the two parties can sign a second five-year PECS Charter.

The table below shows the 11 nations with whom ESA has at least a Cooperation Agreement and their progress toward becoming full members of the space agency.

Three nations — Hungary, Estonia and Slovenia — have engaged in all three phases required to join ESA.  Hungary could potentially join the space agency the year or in 2014, while Estonia and Slovenia could possibly join by 2016 if ESA is happy with their progress.

All three of these nations are relatively poor, with Estonia having the highest per capita GDP at $24,142. Their combined GDPs total $211.7 billion, which is below Ireland even with a total population that is three times larger. The combined GDP of all 11 nations with cooperative agreements with ESA is just under $1.6 trillion, compared with a combined GDP of $18.2 trillion for all 20 ESA member states.

Of the other eight nations, Israel and Cyprus are the only ones with per capita GDPs above $30,000. Israel has the second largest economy in the group at $242.9 billion, while the Cypriot economy is the second smallest at nearly $24.7 billion.

Both Israel and Ukraine have highly developed space sectors that would both add to ESA’s capabilities and compete with existing members for contracts.  Ukraine produces three launch vehicles — Zenit, Dnepr and Cyclone 4 — and builds the first stage for Orbital Sciences Corporation’s new Antares booster and the upper stage for Europe’s Vega rocket. The nation also is building a launch complex in Brazil for the Cyclone 4 launches.

Israel also has a space sector is internationally competitive, with its own launch vehicle and lines of optical and radar reconnaissance satellites. The nation has arguably the most advanced space technology base among the 11 nations with which ESA has cooperation agreements.

ESA officials say full membership for both Israel and Ukraine is possible, but neither could join any time soon. There are also political obstacles, as Space News recently observed:

Both nations have made repeated inquiries about joining the 20-nation ESA, but neither is currently on the path to membership pending detailed discussions with ESA’s current member states, ESA Director-General Jean-Jacques Dordain said Jan. 24.

Briefing reporters here, Dordain said neither he nor ESA has any objection to non-European Union members joining ESA. Canada is already an associate ESA member, and Norway and Switzerland have been in the agency for many years.

But how far ESA can expand outside the 27-nation European Union (EU) remains a question now that the agency and the EU’s executive commission have closer relations and the commission uses ESA as a technical manager for many of its programs.

The European Commission in November already raised questions about whether ESA-European Commission relations might suffer because of Norway and Switzerland, especially if ESA is asked to perform military space work for the European Commission….

Ukraine has not yet applied formally to join ESA, Dordain said, but has left little doubt that it would do so if ESA governments signaled that this would be welcome.

ESA membership by all 11 nations listed above would expand the space agency’s authority to nearly 637.5 million European citizens. The great bulk of that population expansion would take place in Turkey and Ukraine, two nations with relatively large economies but the lowest per capita GDPs in the group.

Turkey, Ukraine and Israel lie on the periphery of ESA and Europe, which is largely focused on Western and Eastern Europe. If you exclude these three nations as members, the other eight nations have a combined GDP of $412.3 billion and a total population of 25.1 million. So, expansion to this core doesn’t add that much to the ESA’s bottom line.

It should be noted that eight of the 11 nations are members of the EU.  Bulgaria is the only EU member that does not have a cooperation agreement with the space agency. Croatia, which is set to join the EU on July 1, 2013, also lacks an agreement.

Other Potential European Members

Any additional expansion of ESA is likely to track with the enlargement of the EU. The map below shows the current membership of the EU along with other nations that are joining, negotiating to join, or are potential members of the EU. Note that there are two nations in grey — Norway at the top and Switzerland in the middle — that are not part of the EU but are members of ESA.

Croatia is the only acceding nation on the map.  Four other nations in light blue — Iceland, Macedonia, Montenegro and Turkey — are EU candidates while the other nations are shown as potential candidates.

The table below shows 10 nations that might eventually join ESA that do not have cooperative agreements with the space agency. Their statuses relating to the EU are shown. The table includes Moldova, which hopes to eventually become an EU member but is now shown on the above map.

Iceland is the only nation on the list that would fit comfortably among ESA’s upper tier countries in terms of wealth. It also has a very tiny population and a small economy, limiting its ability to contribute much to the space agency’s budget. The other eight nations on the list are quite poor with developing economies.

The combined GDP of all nine countries is $228.7 billion. That figure is slightly less than Portugal, one of ESA’s poorer member states. Portugal contributed $20.4 million to ESA’s $5.38 billion budget in 2012. This was only .39 percent of the total.

The table below shows potential ESA expansion to 40 European nations plus associate member Canada in terms of current combined GDP and population.

Enter the EU

During the past decade, the European Union has become increasingly involved in space research and development. In May 2004, the 27-nation EU signed a framework agreement with the independent ESA that allowed for cooperation between the two organizations. Three years later, the Lisbon Treaty that overhauled the EU’s operating rules gave the union authority over space, defense and security policies on the continent.

The EU has poured billions of euros into funding the European Global Navigation Satellites Systems (GNSS), space research programs, and other initiatives both on its own and in cooperation with the space agency. ESA, for example, has been responsible for building the GNSS satellites and ground systems.

ESA’s 2012 budget shows how important EU funding has become to its operations. The union contributed €867.7 million ($1.144 billion) to the space agency’s budget. That is more than any national government and constituted 21.58 percent of the €4.020 billion ($5.3 billion) total. Germany was the next largest contributor with €750.5 million.

The EU is not entirely happy with its cooperation with ESA. In a recent communication to the European Council and Parliament, the European Commission identified a number of areas where differences between the two organizations are causing problems with cooperation and recommended changes that threaten ESA’s independence.

The commission identified the following issues with cooperation:

Mismatch of financial rules: ESA’s largest programs require geographic return: each nation must get back in contracts the same percentage of funding that it put in. When ESA implements EU programs, the space agency must seek best value regardless of where the contractors are located. These divergent approaches have caused problems with programs jointly funded by both agencies.

Membership asymmetry:  Only 18 of ESA’s 20 member states are members of the EU, with Switzerland and Norway being outside the union. Associate member Canada is also an EU outsider.  ESA’s one-nation, one-vote policy gives non-EU members “a disproportionate leverage over matters that may affect the EU.”  The commission recommends qualified-majority voting over unanimous consent.

Asymmetry in security and defence matters:  The presence of non-EU member states in ESA has complicated the union’s ability to coordinate continental-wide security and defense matters with the space agency.

Absence of mechanisms for policy coordination:“ESA’s space activities lack a structural connection and coordination mechanism within the wider policy-making of the European Union….Specific mechanisms for coordination and cooperation need to be agreed in time-consuming negotiations at programme level. There is no formal mechanism at policy level to ensure that initiatives taken within ESA are consistent with EU policies.”

Missing political accountability for ESA: While the European Union is accountable directly to voters through an elected Parliament, ESA operates on its own and is accountable to national governments.

In the communication, the European Commission suggested three possible options for improving cooperation that could be presented to ESA by the end of next year.

“These options would include: improved cooperation under the ‘status quo’, bringing ESA as an intergovernmental organisation under the authority of the European Union (following, to a certain extent, the model of the European Defence Agency), or transforming ESA into an EU agency (following the model of existing regulatory agencies).

“The Commission, working closely with ESA, will carry out a detailed cost benefit and risk analysis of the different options, with a view to maximising synergies between the different actors including the GSA.

“These options would preserve the current essential features of ESA (i.e. optional programmes subscribed by Member States) while giving ESA key EU features – such as qualified majority decision-making or accountability vis-à-vis the European Parliament.”

Officials admit that making these changes will take some time. “The Commission considers that a clear target date should be set between 2020 and 2025 for this long term objective,” the communication reads.

What exactly would happen with non-EU members Norway, Switzerland and Canada is not entirely clear. The three nations contributed nearly 5 percent of ESA’s budget in 2012.

In a declaration adopted at their November meeting, ESA’s ministers agreed to begin a period of reflection on how to evolve the space agency and to improve cooperation with the EU. Specifically, the declaration requires the following actions over the next two years:

• the Director General to work with the European Commission in order to provide a common analysis on the situation of the European space sector and a common vision on its evolution aiming at building up coherence, convergence and complementarity among the different actors;
• the Director General to elaborate and assess, in consultation with the ESA Council, the different scenarios for ESA to respond to the objectives defined in this Resolution;
• the Co-Chairs of the ESA Council at ministerial level to provide the Director General with the political guidelines for this reflection, in close consultation with the Ministers of Member States and coordination with the EU;
• invite the Director General to report to the co-Chairs of the ESA Council at ministerial level and to the Council on a regular basis, on the progress of the above reflection process and to bring forward proposals for decisions on the further evolution of ESA to be taken by the Member States at the occasion of the next ESA Council meeting at ministerial level scheduled to take place in 2014;
• invite the Director General to make proposals to Council, after consultation with the European Cooperating States, aimed at improving the cooperation with European States wishing to contribute to ESA’s policies and activities, and facilitating their accession to ESA as full Member States.

The declaration says that it is up to the member states to decide the future direction of ESA, and that the space agency must accommodate both EU and non-EU nations.

In February, EU governments backed down, adopting a watered-down version of the November proposal that omitted “references to security concerns with ESA’s non-EU members and glossing over differences in contract-award procedures…. The resolution, adopted without debate, is far from the European Commission’s initial proposal in November. That statement said the fact that the 20-nation ESA includes Canada, Norway and Switzerland as members raises concerns as ESA and the commission work together on dual-use and security- or military-related space projects.”

The idea of bringing ESA under EU control has threatened a rift between the space agency’s two largest national contributors, Germany and France. French officials seem more comfortable with this outcome, viewing ESA’s eventual future as lying with the much larger EU.

“The EU’s increasing power in the space field is a major asset. We desire and support it, while seeking to clarify the different players’ roles in governance,” said Geneviève Fioraso, French Minister of Higher Education and Research, in recent remarks. “Discussions have begun – on the part of both the ESA, at its council in Naples, and the EU, at the Competitiveness Council of 12 December. They will have to continue in 2013.”

Germany — which has surpassed France as the largest national contributor to ESA’s budget — is leaning the other way. Germany has begun to assert its growing power both within the space agency and the larger European continent; the approach to the crisis in the eurozone has been largely dictated by Berlin. In a recent blog post, Johann-Dietrich Wörner — chairman of the German space agency DLR — promoted an approach that stopped short of an EU takeover.

Handling this supposedly hot potato is inflaming tempers for no reason. Obviously, ESA should not relinquish its successful mechanisms, which go beyond industrially and politically important ‘geographical-return’ rules and programme councils. The European Commission’s requirement for adoption of all the EU rules will come to nothing and could be harmful. Nevertheless, making the alliance between ESA and the EU fit for the future is important. The simplest solution, but perhaps therefore not the one being approached in the circles of the professional participants in the discussion, is a separate EU programme within ESA. Here, the commission’s projects could be handled in accordance with EU rules and be carried out using the existing capabilities of ESA as a space agency. This programme area could come under the administrative responsibility of a separate directorate, under the auspices of ESA.

The question of responsibility for European space policy – or, to be more specific – for the formulation of recommendations for coordinating national and supranational space activities remains. Once again, no new institutional acrobatics are required. The Space Council, as the joint instrument of ESA and the EU, already deals with this.

So instead of having on-going heated debates about a cold potato, and in addition to pragmatic approaches for reinforcing institutional European space flight, it is important to push for solutions to specific, truly important and non-trivial matters – decisions concerning the future of launch systems, the Space Station and other activities permit no delay if Europe’s competitiveness is to be maintained and reinforced.

Conclusions

ESA is currently at a crossroads in terms of its expansion. It already incorporates almost all of the wealthy, developed nations within Europe. Further expansion will largely bring in relatively poor member states with weak space and high technology sectors. Most of the new members will add little to ESA’s budget, and they will require additional parceling of the space agency’s budget to ensure that each country gets back in contracts roughly what it puts in financially.

The two nations currently cooperating with ESA that have developed space sectors, Ukraine and Israel, are not currently on membership paths. They would bring technology and expertise to ESA, but they also would be competitive with companies located within existing member nations.

An increasing percentage of ESA’s overall budget is being supplied by the EU, which is demanding an increasing a say in how things are run.  Unless member nations decide to significantly boost their own contributions, the path to growing ESA’s budget will run through Brussels.

Given the frequent complaints about the frustrating level of EU bureaucracy, it’s unclear whether ESA would perform better under the union’s control than as an independent agency. ESA might benefit from the EU’s emphasis on best value in contracting. However, the space agency’s geographic return policy is the glue that helps keep the organization together. Without it, would Germany simply put more money into its own domestic space agency?

Ultimately, the issue of control could be less important than what policies ESA and the EU pursue in space. In the United States, NASA has been shifting over to a commercial approach to servicing the International Space Station and has been making increasing use of flexible Space Act Agreements to spur competition and innovation in the private sector. The U.S. space sector is innovating like crazy in the areas of launch vehicles, reusable suborbital spacecraft, and commercial space stations in ways not seen in Europe or anywhere else in the world.

The outcome of these American efforts is far from clear. They could succeed wildly, or we could be looking at yet another false dawn that ultimately delivers disappointment results in inverse proportion to the extravagant promises that have been made.

My guess is the results will be closer to the former than the latter. The commercial space effort will succeed, if not achieving all its promise, but enough to change the rules of the game. In which case, ESA will need to seriously rethink how it operates on a fundamental level if it wants European industry to maintain its competitiveness.

Information Sources: Eurostat  and The World Bank

DLR PR – The vision is enticing – board in Europe, sit back, and disembark 90 minutes later on the other side of the world, in Australia. But before the SpaceLiner, which is being developed by the Institute of Space Systems at the German Aerospace Center (Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt; DLR), can fly a route like this for the first time, new technologies still have to be tested and basic requirements defined. Scientists from Germany, Austria, Spain, Switzerland, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, France and Sweden have been carrying out research for the Fast20XX (Future high-Altitude high-Speed Transport) project, which is supported by the EU, for three years. The results of the project, which has now been concluded, will influence the future design of the DLR SpaceLiner and the Aerospace Innovation GmbH ALPHA aircraft.

Flying like a space shuttle

The concept already exists; the DLR SpaceLiner is intended to stand upright like a space shuttle before launch and take off on its journey using rocket engines. After the initial burn, the reusable booster stage will separate from the orbiter, in which there will be a capsule with a capacity of 50 passengers. The glide phase will start eight minutes later, at 20 times the speed of sound. The landing, around 80 minutes later, will take place on a normal runway like a conventional aircraft. It is a project for which there are no existing examples: “We are having to define the dimensions ourselves and use computer models of the SpaceLiner to feel our way,” says DLR project coordinator Martin Sippel. “The SpaceLiner is a challenge in terms of both technology and operations.” So it is that the 17 partners in the Fast20XX research project have not been designing an aircraft, but rather investigating important interdisciplinary aspects for an aircraft capable of air and space travel. Multiple DLR institutes have been involved in the project; besides the Institute of Space Systems, the Institute of Aerospace Medicine, the Institute of Structures and Design and the Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow Technology have also contributed digital and experimental results.

Computer simulations

One important issue is cooling the space plane during flight. After the drive phase, the SpaceLiner glides, during which time it encounters friction from Earth’s atmosphere. At this stage, temperatures can reach up to 1800 degrees Celsius. The solution is active cooling on the aircraft nose and the leading edges of the wings. The idea is that water will escape from porous ceramic components and provide cooling as it evaporates. The DLR Institute of Structures and Design is developing and manufacturing suitable ceramics for this transpiration cooling and is simulating their flow on computers. Following work on Fast20XX with tests in the plasma wind tunnel at the DLR site in Cologne, the engineers are now certain that active cooling is possible using porous ceramic materials.

The scientists are also researching the airflow around the aircraft itself and are using computer programmes to model this. “The SpaceLiner will reach a flight altitude where atmospheric pressure is very low, so the flow phenomena change,” explains Sippel. Models were tested in a special wind tunnel at the DLR site in Göttingen and compared with digital simulations from Italian partner organisation CIRA. The agreement between the measurements and the simulations was sufficiently high that the simulations are being used to support the future design of the space plane.

Basic requirements for the high-speed aircraft

Besides researching the aerodynamics, materials and cooling, projects such as the SpaceLiner require numerous other types of research as well. For example, is flight at hypersonic speed even tolerable for the passengers? The Institute of Aerospace Medicine has given a green light. What approval requirements do the constructors of high-speed aircraft face? To what extent will the environment be affected – even though the SpaceLiner will only emit water as it flies? The 17 partners in the Fast20XX research project are also collating data and researching these topics. “Moreover, we have also worked out the situations in which a flight will need to be aborted and how to respond to situations such as an engine failure,” says Sippel. It is already clear that the SpaceLiner can only be launched far from inhabited areas – and that high-speed flight must take place at high altitudes in order to protect inhabited regions from sonic booms.

Many questions are still unanswered; how can the rocket engine be made to operate reliably and safely? What should the tank pressurisation system look like? How must the thermal protection system for the entire aircraft be designed? And what requirements must the passenger cabin meet, since it will also act as a rescue capsule in the event of an emergency? Then, the network of rescue centres on the ground would have to function flawlessly.

From space tourism to scheduled flights

For Martin Sippel, a first step on the road to transportation for long haul flights is Project ALPHA by Aerospace Innovation GmbH. This space plane, which was also researched in Fast20XX, is intended to be launched from an Airbus A330 at an altitude of 14 kilometres with two passengers and one pilot, and then reach an altitude of 100 kilometres. “Space tourism like this might be the first step and be achieved this decade – it is a test to see whether the market for such space vehicles exists,” explains the DLR researcher. The SpaceLiner is not intended for short flights in space, but for transporting passengers and goods in point-to-point travel over large intercontinental distances, and is to be principally privately financed, as normal flight is today. This is a long-term vision, according to Sippel, that will not start to happen before 2050. “We want to acquire a new, big market for spaceflight technology and so significantly reduce the costs for transporting satellites into space.”

DLR Chairman Johann Dietrich Wörner

DLR Chairman Johann-Dietrich Wörner has dismissed the idea that European Space Agency (ESA) needs to be brought under the wing of the European Union (EU) in order to improve cooperation between the two organizations.

The European Commission, the EU’s top body, has recommended several options that would bring the independent space agency under the control of the union.

In the following excerpt from his blog, Wörner rejects the idea, saying that the coordination problems between ESA and the EU can be handled without making such major changes, and that the entire debate is a distraction from far more important issues.

Wörner’s position on this issue is important. Germany has been taking on an increasingly assertive role within ESA, passing France to become the largest national contributor to the budget of the 20-nation space agency. During ESA’s ministerial meeting last month, Germany used its clout to get much of what it wanted.

Meanwhile, the EU’s role in the space agency has increased substantially. The 27-nation organization contributed more money to ESA’s 2012 budget than any the space agency’s member nations. The EU is using its clout and funding in an effort to gain greater over space activities on the continent. France appears to be interested in closer ESA-EU ties, putting it on a possible collision course with Germany.

It’s a fascinating debate. However, living and working as I do in Mojave, I question whether it’s the right one. A commercial revolution is occurring here in the desert, and in places like Hawthorne, McGregor, North Las Vegas,  and even the Kennedy Space Center.

Private suborbital spacecraft are being built. Commercial missions are being flown to the International Space Station. Entrepreneurs are planning private missions to the moon and asteroids designed to unlock the riches of these heavenly bodies.

It’s far from clear to what extent this revolution will succeed. But, if it does, Europe will face far more profound questions than whether ESA remains as an independent body. The continent will need to change much of its approach to space. That doesn’t even seem to be on the table.

Wörner acknowledges some of this reality at the end of the blog excerpt that follows. However, the DLR chairman refers to issues that were due to be settled at the ministerial meeting, which occurred after the post was published.

….At the same time, the subject of the future relationship between the European Space Agency (ESA) and the European Union (EU) or the European Commission is taking centre stage. Documents intended to show the way forward, formulated as ‘resolutions’ or ‘communications’, are being drawn up by both sides. In this regard, very dogmatic positions are being adopted and presented with great seriousness as the ‘true solutions’ for bringing both sides closer together. An analytical consideration of the various stakeholders, of the legal bases of their documents and of their respective competencies does not, on quiet reflection, point in their stated directions.

Firstly there is ESA, with a successful history over the past nearly 50 years as a European space agency under the direct control of delegations from the member states, and with clear industrial policy requirements that are especially indispensible for space. Here, the internal allocation of mandatory and optional programmes continues to be sustainable in the future.

Likewise, the European Commission, as a body acting on behalf of the European Union, has successfully demonstrated in the past that in various fields – especially the funding of research – its mechanisms, which are based mainly on competition, can be viable for Europe.

The problems with the current discussions pertain to those of the participants’ communication and self-conception. Both sides are calling on the authority of the Treaty of Lisbon and the responsibilities specified therein. From this, the European Commission has made an absolute claim on the formulation of and overall responsibility for European space policy. On the other hand, ESA is insistent regarding its international foundations, its scope of activity, again in the area of space policy, as defined in its convention, and its parallel responsibility, which is clearly stated in the Treaty of Lisbon.

Handling this supposedly hot potato is inflaming tempers for no reason. Obviously, ESA should not relinquish its successful mechanisms, which go beyond industrially and politically important ‘geographical-return’ rules and programme councils. The European Commission’s requirement for adoption of all the EU rules will come to nothing and could be harmful. Nevertheless, making the alliance between ESA and the EU fit for the future is important. The simplest solution, but perhaps therefore not the one being approached in the circles of the professional participants in the discussion, is a separate EU programme within ESA. Here, the commission’s projects could be handled in accordance with EU rules and be carried out using the existing capabilities of ESA as a space agency. This programme area could come under the administrative responsibility of a separate directorate, under the auspices of ESA.

The question of responsibility for European space policy – or, to be more specific – for the formulation of recommendations for coordinating national and supranational space activities remains. Once again, no new institutional acrobatics are required. The Space Council, as the joint instrument of ESA and the EU, already deals with this.

So instead of having on-going heated debates about a cold potato, and in addition to pragmatic approaches for reinforcing institutional European space flight, it is important to push for solutions to specific, truly important and non-trivial matters – decisions concerning the future of launch systems, the Space Station and other activities permit no delay if Europe’s competitiveness is to be maintained and reinforced.

In total, space programmes worth around 10 billion Euros have been decided upon. The German Federal Government will be responsible for a total of around 2.6 billion Euros over the next few years. This makes Germany the strongest contributor among the ESA partners, giving it the largest share of the overall programme.

After the conference, on 21 November, Johann-Dietrich Wörner, Chairman of the Executive Board of the German Aerospace Center (Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt; DLR) and a member of the German delegation said: “The European Space Agency has once again shown that it is capable of action even under difficult economic conditions and can lead European space activities in the future. With the decisions taken in Naples, the competitiveness of the European space sector for the coming years is assured. From the German point of view, the continuation of the Ariane 5ME (Mid-life Evolution) programme and the decision to continue utilisation of the International Space Station until 2020 – coupled with the development of a European service module for the future US Orion spacecraft – are the most important results. Germany is very well positioned in weather and climate monitoring, disaster prediction and security matters, and also retains the lead in scientific remote sensing.”

Europe’s autonomous access to space preserved

A joint proposal by Germany and France, which has now been adopted by the Council, resolved that the development of the Ariane 5 ME version in parallel to the start of a programme for the development of Ariane 6, will preserve Europe’s successful position in the global launch vehicle market. Germany and France are equally involved in the Ariane 5ME programme. With the development of the Ariane 5ME upper stage, existing German space transportation expertise will be maintained and enhanced.

The International Space Station until 2020

Looking to the International Space Station, Germany is fulfilling its commitment. The ISS programme is a fundamental component of the German space strategy. Germany contributes 537 million euros to the operation of the Space Station; with 40.37 percent of the total contributions, it is the most important partner. An agreement could be reached via what is known as the Barter Element, used to compensate for the ISS operation costs incurred by Europe as of 2020. This occurs through the delivery of a service module based on ATV technology for the future US Orion spacecraft.

With the control centre for the European Columbus space laboratory at DLR in Oberpfaffenhofen and the European Astronaut Center (EAC) on the premises of DLR in Cologne, important facilities are located in Germany.

Remote sensing

Of central importance for Germany and Europe is remote sensing. Germany leads with 37 percent of the joint Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES) initiative between the ESA and the European Union (EU).

In particular, Germany also holds 27 percent of the second generation of MetOp weather satellites. This should make weather forecasts and climate research more precise as of 2020. Weather forecasts will then be possible for a period of up to nine days. Germany will assume leadership positions in the industrial consortium, building up its expertise in key space-based technologies. DLR will manage the national provision of instruments for the new MetOp satellites, including the METimage instrument, designed and built by Jena-Optronic GmbH. METimage will map Earth’s surface in the optical and infrared spectrum and will, among other things, detect the physical state of clouds to measure the distribution of water vapour in the atmosphere and detect forest and other fires.

Science programme

By 2017, ESA member states will have invested around 3.8 billion euros in the science programme. Contributing 19.8 percent of the total, Germany is the largest contributor and an essential partner of the long-term ‘Cosmic Vision 2015-2025′ programme. ESA has planned seven space and planetary exploration missions by 2022, including the astrometry mission Gaia (scheduled for 2013), the technology mission LISA Pathfinder (2014) and, in cooperation with the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, the Mercury mission BepiColombo (2015). In 2018, and in cooperation with NASA, the James Webb Space Telescope will search for light from the first stars and galaxies formed after the Big Bang.

Satellite telecommunications

Satellite telecommunications have a special meaning, commercially and strategically, for Germany. With its involvement in the ARTES programme, Germany also has a leading role here. Germany will continue to pursue this course with Elektra, a communications satellite fully powered by electric propulsion systems. Germany’s contribution to this project amounts to 45 percent.

The negotiations on behalf of the German government were carried out by Peter Hintze, Parliamentary State Secretary in the Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (Bundesministeriums für Wirtschaft und Technologie; BMWi). At the ESA Council at Ministerial Level, he was supported by the German delegation, chaired by Johann-Dietrich Wörner, Chairman of the German Aerospace Center (DLR), Gerd Gruppe, Executive Board Member responsible for the DLR Space Administration, and Rolf Densing, DLR Director of Space Programmes.

An Ariane 5 rocket soars into orbit on Dec. 29, 2010. Credits: ESA / CNES / Arianespace / Photo Optique vidéo du CSG

Space News reports on the results of a study concerning future ESA programs:

A six-month joint French-German government study of future launch vehicle and space station investment options has reinforced the German space agency’s preference for an upgraded Ariane 5 rocket instead of a new-generation Ariane 6, and cooperation with the United States on a U.S.-led crew vehicle instead of a European-led alternative, the agency’s chief said Aug. 21.

Johann-Dietrich Woerner, chairman of the German Aerospace Center, DLR, insisted in an interview that he was speaking only for himself, and not for the German government….

Opposing that idea was a French view that Europe should bypass Ariane 5 ME and begin immediate investment in a next-generation rocket with a modular design. Unlike its more powerful predecessor, built to carry two satellites at a time to geostationary transfer orbit, the new vehicle would be designed to profitably carry single satellites weighing 2,500 to 6,500 kilograms, with a possible increase to 8,000 kilograms….

The French-German study also examined whether Europe should join the United States in developing the Orion deep-space crew-transport vehicle by investing the 450 million euros Europe owes NASA for space station charges to 2020.

A French alternative, which had found support in Italy, proposed a Europe-led vehicle that would operate in low Earth orbit and perform a variety of missions, including possible removal of orbital debris.

Read the full story.

The SHEFEX II test vehicle prior to launch. (Credit: DLR)

BERLIN (DLR PR) – After a 10-minute flight, the sharp-edged SHEFEX II spacecraft landed safely west of Spitsbergen. Researchers from the German Aerospace Center (Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt; DLR) launched the seven-ton and roughly 13-metre-long rocket and its payload from the Andøya Rocket Range in Norway at 21:18 CEST on 22 June 2012. As it re-entered the atmosphere, SHEFEX withstood temperatures exceeding 2500 degrees Celsius and sent measurement data from more than 300 sensors to a ground station.

“The SHEFEX II flight takes us one step further in the road to developing a space vehicle built like a space capsule but offering the control and flight options of the Space Shuttle much more cost-effectively,” says project manager Hendrik Weihs.

Knowledge of atmospheric re-entry

DLR has been working on the SHEFEX programme for 10 years, developing a technology in which a spacecraft can re-enter the atmosphere and land without suffering damage. SHEFEX is angular and sharp-edged; its structure consists of planar surfaces, which are easier to manufacture and are thus less expensive than the usual rounded shapes. The sharp edges are also aerodynamically advantageous. DLR researchers have developed various thermal protection systems to control the high temperatures that the edges are subjected to during re-entry.

The SHEFEX I spacecraft, launched on 27 October 2005, enabled researchers to collect data during flight for the first time. That flight lasted 20 seconds and the craft re-entered at a speed of Mach seven. SHEFEX II reached a speed of 11,000 kilometres per hour – roughly 11 times the speed of sound – as it re-entered the atmosphere. It reached an altitude of approximately 180 kilometres.

Six DLR institutes involved in the project

The SHEFEX project is a collaboration between six DLR institutes.

The DLR Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow Technology carried out numerous wind tunnel tests, computed the flow field at re-entry and equipped the rocket with sensors for measuring temperature, pressure and thermal stress.

The DLR Institute for Structures and Design built the spacecraft and was responsible for designing and producing the ceramic thermal protection systems; in one of these systems, nitrogen flows through a porous tile, cooling the craft during re-entry.

At the heart of the canard control system, developed by researchers at the DLR Institute of Flight Systems in Braunschweig, are control surfaces – the canards – on the front section of the research vehicle, which can be used to actively control the vehicle.

The Institute of Materials Research manufactured the ceramic tiles and the Institute of Space Systems developed a navigation platform for determining the location of the spacecraft during the flight.

DLR’s MoRaBa mobile rocket base operated the two-stage launch vehicle, controlled the spacecraft and received the data sent by SHEFEX during the flight.

On the way to developing a space plane

A salvage ship and an aircraft are on their way to the landing site to retrieve the spacecraft.  If the recovery is successful, researchers will receive a large amount of additional data.

“The flight of SHEFEX II is a step towards developing a spacecraft that withstands higher temperatures while travelling faster and for a longer duration,” says Weihs. More than 300 sensors measured temperature and pressure, among other things, during the flight. “We have a wealth of data, which will be used for years to come.”

SHEFEX III could be launched in 2016; it will be more like a space plane and will fly through the atmosphere for about 15 minutes. The objective of this research is to allow for experiments in microgravity that last for a number of days and then return to Earth.

Inaugural Vega flight. (Credits: ESA - S. Corvaja, 2012)

Despite committing almost $1.5 billion to developing and flight testing its newest launch vehicle, Vega, Europe will spend even more money to upgrade the rocket.

European officials are eying the developing of a new German fourth stage to replace a Ukrainian-built RD-868 engine that was used on Vega’s successful inaugural flight on Monday. It’s not clear how much the new engine would cost.

In the wake of the successful launch this week, the head of the Italian Space Agency — which funded 58 percent of the rocket’s development — fielded a call from his German counterpart:

Enrico Saggese, president of the Italian space agency, said he received a call Monday from Johann-Dietrich Woerner, executive chairman of the German Aerospace Center, or DLR. Saggese said Woerner suggested Germany was ready to join the Vega program.

“I must say that we are proud of the seven countries who participated in the program,” Saggese said. “We are ready to have with us other fathers.”

Woerner congratulated Saggese on the successful launch and offered to discuss German support for a European upper stage for Vega, according to Andreas Shutz, a DLR spokesperson.

Vega’s Attitude and Vernier Upper Module, or AVUM, is the launcher’s fourth stage. The AVUM is powered by an RD-869 engine provided by Yuzhnoye of Ukraine, while a Spanish subsidiary of EADS, the largest European defense contractor, builds the stage’s structure and skirt.

AVUM is the only liquid stage on the vehicle and the only one built outside of ESA’s member states. France funded 25 percent of the development costy. Other partners in the program include Belgium, Spain, the Netherlands, Switzerland and Sweden. German industry has been involved in building some of Vega’s system, but without a funding commitment from the nation’s government.

Full development and flight testing of the Vega rocket, which can place a 1,500-kilogram (3,307-pound) satellite in a 700-kilometer (435-mile) orbit, will cost 1.1 billion euros ($1.45 billion) before the new upper stage engine. In addition to spending 710 million euros ($930 million) on development, ESA is spending another 400 million euros ($523.5 million) on five development flights.

The market for small satellite launches has been dominated by Russian and Ukrainian rockets such as Dnepr and Rockot, which are converted Soviet-era ICBMs. Space News reports that Vega will be competitive with these launchers:

Europe’s Vega small-satellite launcher, whose inaugural flight is scheduled for mid-February, will be sold commercially for about 32 million euros ($42 million) per launch — a price that can compete with converted Russian ballistic missiles, Vega officials said Jan. 23….

“Our belief is that we can charge up to 20 percent more per launch than our biggest competitors and still win business because of the value we provide at the space center here and with Arianespace,” said Francesco De Pasquale, managing director of ELV SpA, the Italian company that is Vega’s prime contractor.

“What we are saying is that we can now deliver the vehicle for 25 million euros to Arianespace,” De Pasquale said in an interview on the eve of Vega’s final tests before flight approval.

“Arianespace’s marketing and service costs will add about 7 million to that figure, which gets us to 32 million euros. This is assuming that we launch only two Vega flights per year. If we can increase the flight rate to four per year — and we believe the market demand will be there — then our price per vehicle can drop to 22 million euros. We assume a corresponding price drop from Arianespace,” De Pasquale said.

Those are pretty good prices. They don’t seem to be sufficient to recover development costs, but I’m guessing that was probably not part of the plan anyway.

The Institute of Technical Physics at the German Aerospace Center (Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt; DLR) develops and builds lasers. In the future, lasers will be capable of detecting items of space debris and accelerating the decay of their orbits. Credit: DLR (CC-BY 3.0).

DLR and the Laser Station in Graz provide Europe’s first ever demonstration of laser location

DLR PR — Every year, the number of small items of debris in space rises by tens of thousands. This number is currently based on estimates, as it has not been possible to track space debris accurately. Researchers at the German Aerospace Center (Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt; DLR) are developing an optical observation system with a powerful laser, the pulses from which can detect particles only a few centimetres in diameter and allow determination of their orbits. The concept was tested for the first time in January 2012, in collaboration with the Laser Station in the Austrian city of Graz. This is the first time that the orbits of spent launcher components have been measured using a laser in Europe. In the future, an even more powerful laser will be capable of deflecting these particles out of their orbits, causing them to incinerate as they re-enter Earth’s atmosphere.

The laser station in Graz is a part of the Space Research Institute (Institut für Weltraumforschung; IWF) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences (Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften; ÖAW), and the laser beam it sent up into space was able to detect more than 20 different launcher components at distances of 500 to 1800 kilometres. This search for space debris was based on calculations performed by researchers at DLR Stuttgart, and involved detecting them and measuring their distance from Earth. “This provides us with confirmation that our idea really works,” explained Adolf Giesen, Director of the DLR Institute of Technical Physics. Even though the space debris tracked during this test was several metres across in size, the success of the experiment is an important step forward for the researchers. “At present, we are developing and building a system to detect space debris. This will incorporate a laser with higher pulse energy, enabling the detection of significantly smaller items. When this becomes operational, it should be possible to locate objects measuring just 10 centimetres across.”

In addition to active satellites, a large number of items of debris that originated from collisions, decommissioned satellites or the spent upper stages of launch vehicles are currently in Earth orbit. Credit: ESA.

The destructive power of space debris

The need to track space debris, even down to sizes of just one centimetre, and to calculate the orbits of that debris, is growing with each passing year. Decommissioned satellites or spent upper stages of launch vehicles can collide with one another and disintegrate into smaller pieces. When two satellites collide, such as in the event involving Iridium 33 and Kosmos-2251 in February 2009, a large amount of space debris is generated. There are so many pieces of debris, both large and small, in orbit at altitudes between 800 and 1400 kilometres that active satellites run the risk of getting damaged by it. “In the event of a collision, even an item with a diameter of one centimetre can completely destroy a satellite,” explains Wolfgang Riede, Head of the Active Optical Systems Department at the DLR Institute of Technical Physics. Space debris orbits at roughly eight kilometres per second, so if it collides with an object travelling in the opposite direction, the relative impact speed can usually be as high as 14 kilometres per second. Evasive manoeuvres are only effective if the positions of the debris can be calculated with great precision. Conventional radar and telescope observations are only able to accomplish this to a limited extent; for this reason, a number of unnecessary avoidance manoeuvres, each consuming a great deal of propellant, must be performed. Even avoidable collisions are a potential consequence of imprecise orbital data; this was the case in February 2009, when the necessary change in orbit was not performed.

In a laboratory experiment conducted at the European Space Agency (ESA), a small aluminium sphere was fired at an 18-centimetre-thick aluminium block. The projectile was travelling at about 6.8 kilometres per second. The image clearly depicts the resulting damage. An active satellite would experience similar effects in the event of a collision with space debris. (Credit: ESA)

The physicists at DLR Stuttgart have set themselves an ambitious target to be reached by 2014. They are currently designing a transceiver unit and a laser that will send 1000 pulses per second from Earth into space and then record the light reflected from space debris at very high resolution. “We will send high-intensity pulses of laser light up into space, and then quite literally count the individual photons reflected back to us,” explains Institute Director Giesen. The surfaces of launcher and satellite debris are very difficult to detect, as they range from matte black to highly reflective. Not only that, but the researchers must also take into account the perturbing influence of the atmosphere. Nevertheless, the small number of returning photons is still enough to determine the range, direction of travel and position of items of space debris with great precision. Transferred to the ground, it is difficult to find a suitable example to demonstrate the remarkable level of precision; it will be something akin to being able to tell which hand a person in the Baltic Sea is holding up, as viewed from the site of the future observation station in Stuttgart.

Reducing the risk to satellites

After building up a catalogue containing as many of these small debris items as possible and recording their current orbits, the next step – that of reducing the amount of space debris – can follow. “If the amount of space debris continues to increase, we will eventually cease to be able to operate satellites in the more densely populated orbits,” states Giesen. “Their service life would be greatly shortened.” One solution to this could use extremely powerful lasers. When such a laser is directed onto an item of debris, material would evaporate from its surface, reducing its velocity. Even if that retardation only amounted to 200 metres per second, it would be sufficient to ensure the orbit’s decay in the following years, and the debris would eventually burn up upon entry to the denser layers of Earth’s atmosphere. Giesen estimates that this method could become operational in about 10 years. “We would be continuously reducing the amount of debris in space,” he explains. “If this fails, there will be so much space debris in Earth orbit 20 to 30 years from now that vitally important near-Earth orbits will become unusable.”

Credit: DLR

DLR PR –  It is not entirely clear when exactly the last major asteroid impact on Earth occurred. But there are plenty of examples of impact craters, such as the Nördlinger Ries in Bavaria. That there will be other collisions in the future is something of which Alan Harris, asteroid researcher at the German Aerospace Center (Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt; DLR), is certain. Over the next three and a half years, he will be heading the NEOShield (Near Earth Object Shield) international collaboration, established in January 2012. In total, 13 partners from research institutions and industry will jointly investigate the prevention of impacts by asteroids and comets. The investigations will include the impact of a space probe with the asteroids to deflect them from their threatening courses. The European Union is supporting the project with four million Euros. The partners are contributing another 1.8 million Euros.

When asteroids approach the Earth, they typically do so at a speed of between five and 30 kilometres per second. “In order to modify their orbit and prevent a collision with Earth, a force must be exerted on them,” explains Alan Harris. “And at the precise time, as well.” Existing examples of asteroids that have followed their natural course towards Earth include the Barringer Crater in Arizona, with a diameter of 1200 metres, or the Tunguska Region in Siberia, where an asteroid explosion in 1908 uprooted millions of trees. Smaller asteroids or comets could also cause this sort of damage. “The crater in Arizona was caused by an object about 50 metres in diameter.” There are numerous near Earth objects, or NEOs. Thousands have been discovered in the last 20 years. “This means that a dangerous collision with Earth is likely every couple of hundred years,” the asteroid researcher estimates.

Barringer Crater. (Credit: DLR)

NEOs in sight

A prerequisite to investigate possible methods for preventing an asteroid impact on Earth is the precise understanding of the physical properties of NEOs. “We want to find out as much as we can about the enemy that might be on course for Earth,” says Harris. In this international project, the DLR planetary researchers are pooling their knowledge of the composition, structure and surface texture of asteroids and comets. Project leader Alan Harris’s team is also analysing observational data from the past two decades: “So far, the data has not been adequately investigated from the perspective of asteroid defence.” To date, over 8000 NEOs have been discovered, and another 70 are found every month. By the end of the project we should have answers to a number of questions – for example, the asteroid researchers want to determine ways to observe threatening asteroids from the ground, and which space missions can be used to determine their properties. Various methods, which the scientists are investigating in detail, can then come into play, depending on the time between the discovery and the potential entry into Earth’s atmosphere, and on the size of the asteroid.

Impacts on asteroids

One method that the NEOShield consortium will be investigating in more detail involves using a spacecraft to deflect an asteroid from its course by impacting it. “In my opinion, this is a very practical method.” However, there are still many unanswered questions with this method that need investigating. How does such a space probe need to be controlled to reach its target reliably and at the correct angle? How can we minimise the effect that movements of fuel inside the space probe have on its impact? In addition, laboratory experiments in which projectiles will be fired at materials that correspond to those in an asteroid, will be carried out. This, in turn, will enable the scientists to draw conclusions on the behaviour of asteroids in such a collision.

Using gravity to change course

Scientists will also study a method to deflect asteroids on course for Earth without physically contacting them, if they are discovered years before their potential collision. If a spacecraft is guided into the direct vicinity of a potentially dangerous NEO, the added gravity might have an effect on the asteroid and, as if hauling it in on a rope, gradually drag it off course. But a period of several years would be required to achieve a significant change in the asteroid’s orbit. “To date, this method only exists on paper, but it could work.” The research to be conducted over the next three and a half years should show how realistic it is to drag threatening asteroids off track using gravity tractors.

Explosive power in space

Alan Harris would only consider this alternative method if time is pressing: “If a very large, dangerous object with a diameter of one kilometre or more is discovered, the two methods described above would probably not solve the problem,” explains Harris. “The greatest force we would be able to use to divert the asteroid from its path would be a nuclear explosion.” Though there are no actual plans for a mission of this kind, this is a solution that the scientists want to investigate as part of their project. However, they want to know the effects that an explosion in the direct vicinity of an asteroid or on its surface would have in the vacuum of space. “This technique is regarded as a very controversial.”

Proposals for space missions

Data from asteroid observations and the results of laboratory experiments, extrapolated to a realistic scale, are continually being added to computer simulations. At the end of the three and a half years, we should not only have a better understanding of asteroids and a possible method of defence. “We are also planning international space missions in a few years to test the defence methods we have been looking into.” From the large number of asteroids discovered, those that are most suitable for a test mission will be selected for this. Furthermore, there should be a roadmap that could be put into action in the event of a threat to Earth from an asteroid collision. This would be based on realistic events, such as the approach of asteroid Apophis – the orbit of which will bring it dangerously close to Earth in 2029.

The partners

Under the leadership of the German Aerospace Center (Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt; DLR), the following partners are participating in the EU’s NEOShield project: Observatoire de Paris (France), Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique (France), The Open University (Great Britain), Fraunhofer Ernst-Mach-Institut (Germany), The Queen’s University of Belfast (Great Britain), Astrium GmbH (Germany), Astrium Limited (Great Britain), Astrium S.A.S. (France), Deimos Space (Spain), SETI Institute Corporation, Carl Sagan Center (USA), TsNIIMash (Russia), University of Surrey (Great Britain).

Ariane 5

An improved Ariane 5 with greater lifting capacity, or a brand new vehicle built from the ground up?

That’s the question facing ESA this year. The space agency’s two largest contributing nations, Germany and France, are on opposites sides of the issue. So, they have agreed to form two working groups to resolve their differences ahead of ESA’s ministerial meeting in November, Space News reports.

Officials are grappling with three problems: Ariane 5′s payload limitations, high costs, and reliance upon commercial satellites. The rocket must launch communication satellites two at a time, which creates challenges in pairing spacecraft. Communications satellites are also getting heavier, straining payload capacity.

Ariane 5 is also costing European governments money, despite its excellent safety record and commercial success.

ESA governments now pay about 120 million euros ($158 million) per year to the Arianespace launch consortium of Evry, France, to offset fixed costs in Ariane 5 production and permit Arianespace to avoid financial losses.

ESA conducted an audit of the program last year to determine whether cost savings were possible. The answer came back negative, largely due to the “juste retour” policy under which each participating nation must get back roughly what it puts into a program.

France wants to replace Ariane 5 with an entirely new modular rocket that it believes would solve all of these problems.

Early French designs of an Ariane 5 successor rocket show a vehicle of modular design that could place telecommunications satellites weighing between 3,000 and 8,000 kilograms into geostationary transfer orbit, the destination of most commercial spacecraft.

The vehicle would replace both the heavy-lift Ariane 5 and the medium-lift Russian Soyuz rocket, which now operates alongside Ariane 5 at Europe’s Guiana Space Center spaceport in South America.

The Ariane 5 successor, now called the Next-Generation Launcher (NGL), would lift satellites one at a time and be designed from the start to be much less dependent on the commercial satellite market to meet its costs, and much less costly to operate.

Germany is backing the less expensive Ariane 5 Mid-life Extension (Ariane 5 ME) project, which would boost the performance of the rocket in a way that would bring down fixed costs.

In an attempt to position Ariane 5 ME as a cost-saving project, Ariane 5 prime contractor Astrium has said the upgrade — which features a restartable upper stage engine and a 20 percent boost in Ariane 5 performance — could allow ESA to eliminate the Ariane 5 price supports.

The other benefit of this approach is that allow the extremely reliable Soyuz rocket to continue to fly from Kourou for lifting mid-sized payloads. A large investment of funds was made to bring the Russian booster to the South American spaceport, including launch infrastructure and the development of a new upper stage rocket.

DLR PR –

Flight at 10 to 15 times the speed of sound?

Flight at these speeds employs a ‘SCRamjet’ (Supersonic Combustion Ramjet) – an engine designed for hypersonic flight at up to Mach 15. Unlike normal jet engines, there are no moving parts; a scramjet must first be accelerated to hypersonic speed in order to function.

One of the leading countries in scramjet technology research is Australia, where scramjet combustion chamber functionality was first demonstrated during a test flight in 2002. Already then, DLR was also involved in this experiment.

Potential advantages of scramjets

Australians have set great expectations on scramjets for the future of space travel. “They could increase efficiency and reliability and reduce costs,” hopes Russell Boyce of the University of Queensland, SCRAMSPACE project leader. The advantage of scramjets is that they use oxygen from the atmosphere, so only the fuel needs to be carried on board. According to Boyce’s projections, a scramjet would ideally be combined with a multi-stage rocket.

Significant challenges

Testing the scramjet engine complete with intake, combustion chamber and exhaust nozzle requires special facilities. One of these is the High Enthalpy Shock Tunnel in Göttingen (Hochenthalpiekanal Göttingen; HEG), where tests are currently being carried out. “HEG is one of the largest and leading facilities for hypersonic research, where the models investigated can be larger than those we study in Australia,” says Boyce.

During operation of the 62-metre-long wind tunnel, a piston first compresses a gas that will act as a propellant. A steel membrane is then ruptured and a strong shock wave compresses and heats a test gas, before it is accelerated to 8800 kilometres per hour in the wind tunnel.

The gas then flows around the model. “This scenario simulates flight at an altitude of around 30 kilometres,” says Klaus Hannemann, Head of the Spacecraft Department at the DLR Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow Technology in Göttingen.

The researchers are interested in the complex aerothermodynamic processes taking place in the scramjet. How must the fuel be injected? How can the combustion process be improved? They are also investigating whether the physical and chemical conditions can be transferred to a larger engine. Only significantly larger scramjets could be sensibly considered for use in spaceflight.

The possible use of scramjets in spaceflight is still a long way away. “We want to explore the fundamental potential for scramjets in these tests,” explains Hannemann.

Another challenge for scramjets is the development of new types of materials. The DLR Institute of Structures and Design in Stuttgart is a leader in this area and is supplying the control fins for the test flight.

Launch and landing in the desert

SCRAMSPACE I is scheduled for launch at the Woomera Test Range in Australia in March 2013. The 1.8-metre-long spacecraft will be transported to an altitude of 340 kilometres by two rocket stages. After leaving the atmosphere, the scramjet will separate from the launcher and control rudders will stabilise it for the return journey. During the return flight, the vehicle will be accelerated to Mach 8 – about 9900 kilometres per hour. The part of the experiment important to the scientists takes place at an altitude of between 27 and 32 kilometres. This is where the scramjet will ignite and a wide range of instruments will analyse the combustion.

The landing in the Australian desert will be harsh: “It will already have broken apart in the atmosphere and will simply crash land,” says Boyce. The critical data for the researchers will have already been transmitted to the ground through a radio link.

The mobile rocket base (MObile RAketen Basis; MORABA), operated by DLR Oberpfaffenhofen, will carry out the launch of SCRAMSPACE I. DLR Braunschweig has analysed the aerodynamics of the scramjet. International partners involved in the Australian project include the Japanese and Italian space agencies.

Texus 48 launch on 27 November 2011. (Credits: Thilo Kranz/DLR)

ESA PR – ESA and the DLR German Space Center fired a Texus rocket 263 km into space on 27 November to test a new way of handling propellants on Europe’s future rockets.

Texus 48 lifted off at 10:10 GMT (11:10 CET) from the Esrange Space Centre near Kiruna in northern Sweden on its 13-minute flight.
During the six minutes of weightlessness – mimicking the different stages of a full spaceflight – two new devices were tested for handling super-cold liquid hydrogen and oxygen propellants and then recovered for analysis.

Building on over 30 years of Texus missions, flight 48 was the first to demonstrate a new technology for future launchers.

DLR procured the rocket for this flight, which was performed under ESA’s Cryogenic Upper Stage Technologies (CUST) project as part of the Future Launchers Preparatory Programme (FLPP).

Texus 48 launch on 27 November 2011 (Credits: Thilo Kranz/DLR)

Improved upper stage

ESA is working on a restartable cryogenic upper stage to improve Europe’s launchers.

Liquids naturally float around in weightlessness but to ensure engine ignition after a long coast in low-gravity, propellant must be held ready at the tank’s outlet using ‘capillary’ forces – the same force that helps paper towels soak up water.

Although this has already been mastered for launchers and satellites that use storable liquids, higher-performance cryogenic fluids are more difficult to handle.

On Texus 48, liquid nitrogen represented the cryogenic propellants to ease cost and safety constraints, and simplify the thermal design.

“The launch of Texus 48 demonstrating new technologies for future rockets was a success. It also shows great cooperation with DLR, where joint efforts made this flight possible on time,” said Guy Pilchen, Future Launchers Preparatory Programme Manager.

DLR Chairman Johan-Dietrich Wörner

DLR PR — On 15 June 2011, Professor Johan-Dietrich Wörner was appointed Chairman of the Executive Board for the next five years by the Senate of the German Aerospace Center (Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt; DLR).

“For me personally, the decision made by the DLR Senate is a demonstration of confidence and a confirmation of the effective work carried out by the DLR Executive Board under my leadership in recent years. It is also a recognition of the success that DLR has achieved in all its research areas,” said Professor Wörner. “In my second term, I will work towards consolidating DLR’s role as a unique interdisciplinary research institute and space agency. The common goal of all my colleagues must now be to strengthen DLR’s position, with its excellent skills and prospects, both nationally and internationally,” Wörner added.

After a twelve-year term as President of the Technical University of Darmstadt, Johann-Dietrich Wörner took up his position as Chairman of the DLR Executive Board on 1 March 2007. During his first term, he brought about significant decisions in the aerospace industry at the national and international level, thus strengthening and expanding Germany’s position as a valued partner in advanced technology. In addition to his activities at DLR, Professor Wörner is a member of other scientific organisations and academies, has led the mediation process for the expansion of Frankfurt airport since 2000 and, in 2011, prepared the dialogue forum on ‘Stuttgart 21′.

Johann-Dietrich Wörner is married, has three children and lives in Darmstadt.