A Case Study in NASA-DoD - The Black Vault
A Case Study in NASA-DoD - The Black Vault
A Case Study in NASA-DoD - The Black Vault
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
-148-<br />
(36 <strong>in</strong>. <strong>in</strong> diameter by 55.5 <strong>in</strong>. <strong>in</strong> length) is an exist<strong>in</strong>g flightqualified<br />
design that was developed for the Vik<strong>in</strong>g Orbiter (VO-75)<br />
program. It presently has a surface tension device for propellant<br />
expulsion, which will most likely be replaced with an elastomeric<br />
(AF-E-332) bladder. Such replacement would entail about a 25 percent<br />
modification to the overall tank assembly. As <strong>in</strong>dicated <strong>in</strong> Table E-l,<br />
the structure weight is <strong>in</strong>creased from 29 lb to 81 lb compared to<br />
SPS-I. However, it should be noted that these weights <strong>in</strong>clude propulsion<br />
module structure, drive electronics, remote <strong>in</strong>terface unit, GN 2 ,<br />
and other miscellaneous items; hence, some care <strong>in</strong> cost bookkeep<strong>in</strong>g<br />
appears warranted for both the SPS-I and SPS-II systems. <strong>The</strong> total<br />
SPS-I system costs are estimated to be $500K nonrecurr<strong>in</strong>g and $750K<br />
recurr<strong>in</strong>g on the basis that the SPS-I system will be built first.<br />
In compar<strong>in</strong>g these two MMS hydraz<strong>in</strong>e systems with the STPSS cold<br />
gas systems, the same comments apply as presented earlier <strong>in</strong> the comparison<br />
of STPSS cold gas systems and the AEM hydraz<strong>in</strong>e system, i.e.,<br />
a different cost base is required for cold gas hydraz<strong>in</strong>e components.<br />
With respect to the STPSS hydraz<strong>in</strong>e system, the same cost base should<br />
apply with perhaps some m<strong>in</strong>or adjustments for the required component<br />
modifications noted here<strong>in</strong>. Moreover, the 0.2 lb and 5 lb thrusters<br />
F<br />
F<br />
of the MMS systems are estimated at $12K each compared to $20K and $25K<br />
each for the 0.1 lb and 4 lb F thrusters <strong>in</strong> the STPSS hydraz<strong>in</strong>e system.<br />
This difference is probably reconcilable on the basis that the MMS<br />
thrusters have s<strong>in</strong>gle-seat/s<strong>in</strong>gle-coil propellant flow control valves<br />
versus dual-seal/dual-coil valves <strong>in</strong> the STPSS thrusters and perhaps<br />
less contractor test<strong>in</strong>g and paperwork required, s<strong>in</strong>ce the MKS thrusters<br />
are standard <strong>NASA</strong> items.