Electric vs Chemical Propulsion for a Large-Cargo Orbit Transfer Vehicle
Techniques for sizing electrically or chemically propelled orbit transfer vehicles and analyzing fleet requirements are used in a comparative analysis of the two concepts for various levels of traffic to geosynchronous orbit. The vehicle masses, fuel requirements, and fleet sizes are determined and...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of spacecraft and rockets 1979-05, Vol.16 (3), p.129-134 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 134 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 129 |
| container_title | Journal of spacecraft and rockets |
| container_volume | 16 |
| creator | Rehder, John J Wurster, Kathryn E |
| description | Techniques for sizing electrically or chemically propelled orbit transfer vehicles and analyzing fleet requirements are used in a comparative analysis of the two concepts for various levels of traffic to geosynchronous orbit. The vehicle masses, fuel requirements, and fleet sizes are determined and translated into launch vehicle payload requirements. Technology projections beyond normal growth are made and their effect on the comparative advantages of the concepts is determined. A preliminary cost analysis indicates that electric propulsion greatly reduces launch vehicle requirements and would be competitive with chemical propulsion if the technology of power generation systems advances to where reusability can be achieved at low cost. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.2514/3.57632 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_aiaa_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_aiaa_journals_3_57632_pdf_fulltext</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2161736965</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a314t-de72fad22c6c0f9f179ee92d054442a7d83dfe502bba40b19de820bdd805ab363</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpt0E1Lw0AQBuBFFKxV_AsLCuIhdb-THCVUKxTqoXpdNtlZm5J2424i9d8bbUEQLzOHeXgHXoQuKZkwScUdn8hUcXaERlRynqg0F8doRAhjiVCSnKKzGNeEUJWpfIRm0waqLtQV_oi4WMGmrkyDn4Nv-ybWfoudD9jguQlvkBTD9HgRyrrDy2C20UHAr7CqqwbO0YkzTYSLwx6jl4fpspgl88XjU3E_TwynoksspMwZy1ilKuJyR9McIGeWSCEEM6nNuHUgCStLI0hJcwsZI6W1GZGm5IqP0dU-tw3-vYfY6bXvw3Z4qRlVNOUqV3JQN3tVBR9jAKfbUG9M-NSU6O-aNNc_NQ3ydi9Nbcxv1uGsW-u065umg1032Ov_7N_ILwD4crI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2161736965</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Electric vs Chemical Propulsion for a Large-Cargo Orbit Transfer Vehicle</title><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Rehder, John J ; Wurster, Kathryn E</creator><creatorcontrib>Rehder, John J ; Wurster, Kathryn E</creatorcontrib><description>Techniques for sizing electrically or chemically propelled orbit transfer vehicles and analyzing fleet requirements are used in a comparative analysis of the two concepts for various levels of traffic to geosynchronous orbit. The vehicle masses, fuel requirements, and fleet sizes are determined and translated into launch vehicle payload requirements. Technology projections beyond normal growth are made and their effect on the comparative advantages of the concepts is determined. A preliminary cost analysis indicates that electric propulsion greatly reduces launch vehicle requirements and would be competitive with chemical propulsion if the technology of power generation systems advances to where reusability can be achieved at low cost.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-4650</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1533-6794</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2514/3.57632</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Reston: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics</publisher><subject>Aerospace industry ; Chemical propulsion ; Cost analysis ; Electric propulsion ; Geosynchronous orbits ; Launch vehicles ; Orbital transfer vehicles ; Organic chemistry ; Spacecraft</subject><ispartof>Journal of spacecraft and rockets, 1979-05, Vol.16 (3), p.129-134</ispartof><rights>Copyright American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics May/Jun 1979</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a314t-de72fad22c6c0f9f179ee92d054442a7d83dfe502bba40b19de820bdd805ab363</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a314t-de72fad22c6c0f9f179ee92d054442a7d83dfe502bba40b19de820bdd805ab363</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Rehder, John J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wurster, Kathryn E</creatorcontrib><title>Electric vs Chemical Propulsion for a Large-Cargo Orbit Transfer Vehicle</title><title>Journal of spacecraft and rockets</title><description>Techniques for sizing electrically or chemically propelled orbit transfer vehicles and analyzing fleet requirements are used in a comparative analysis of the two concepts for various levels of traffic to geosynchronous orbit. The vehicle masses, fuel requirements, and fleet sizes are determined and translated into launch vehicle payload requirements. Technology projections beyond normal growth are made and their effect on the comparative advantages of the concepts is determined. A preliminary cost analysis indicates that electric propulsion greatly reduces launch vehicle requirements and would be competitive with chemical propulsion if the technology of power generation systems advances to where reusability can be achieved at low cost.</description><subject>Aerospace industry</subject><subject>Chemical propulsion</subject><subject>Cost analysis</subject><subject>Electric propulsion</subject><subject>Geosynchronous orbits</subject><subject>Launch vehicles</subject><subject>Orbital transfer vehicles</subject><subject>Organic chemistry</subject><subject>Spacecraft</subject><issn>0022-4650</issn><issn>1533-6794</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1979</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpt0E1Lw0AQBuBFFKxV_AsLCuIhdb-THCVUKxTqoXpdNtlZm5J2424i9d8bbUEQLzOHeXgHXoQuKZkwScUdn8hUcXaERlRynqg0F8doRAhjiVCSnKKzGNeEUJWpfIRm0waqLtQV_oi4WMGmrkyDn4Nv-ybWfoudD9jguQlvkBTD9HgRyrrDy2C20UHAr7CqqwbO0YkzTYSLwx6jl4fpspgl88XjU3E_TwynoksspMwZy1ilKuJyR9McIGeWSCEEM6nNuHUgCStLI0hJcwsZI6W1GZGm5IqP0dU-tw3-vYfY6bXvw3Z4qRlVNOUqV3JQN3tVBR9jAKfbUG9M-NSU6O-aNNc_NQ3ydi9Nbcxv1uGsW-u065umg1032Ov_7N_ILwD4crI</recordid><startdate>19790501</startdate><enddate>19790501</enddate><creator>Rehder, John J</creator><creator>Wurster, Kathryn E</creator><general>American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>L7M</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19790501</creationdate><title>Electric vs Chemical Propulsion for a Large-Cargo Orbit Transfer Vehicle</title><author>Rehder, John J ; Wurster, Kathryn E</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a314t-de72fad22c6c0f9f179ee92d054442a7d83dfe502bba40b19de820bdd805ab363</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1979</creationdate><topic>Aerospace industry</topic><topic>Chemical propulsion</topic><topic>Cost analysis</topic><topic>Electric propulsion</topic><topic>Geosynchronous orbits</topic><topic>Launch vehicles</topic><topic>Orbital transfer vehicles</topic><topic>Organic chemistry</topic><topic>Spacecraft</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rehder, John J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wurster, Kathryn E</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><jtitle>Journal of spacecraft and rockets</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rehder, John J</au><au>Wurster, Kathryn E</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Electric vs Chemical Propulsion for a Large-Cargo Orbit Transfer Vehicle</atitle><jtitle>Journal of spacecraft and rockets</jtitle><date>1979-05-01</date><risdate>1979</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>129</spage><epage>134</epage><pages>129-134</pages><issn>0022-4650</issn><eissn>1533-6794</eissn><abstract>Techniques for sizing electrically or chemically propelled orbit transfer vehicles and analyzing fleet requirements are used in a comparative analysis of the two concepts for various levels of traffic to geosynchronous orbit. The vehicle masses, fuel requirements, and fleet sizes are determined and translated into launch vehicle payload requirements. Technology projections beyond normal growth are made and their effect on the comparative advantages of the concepts is determined. A preliminary cost analysis indicates that electric propulsion greatly reduces launch vehicle requirements and would be competitive with chemical propulsion if the technology of power generation systems advances to where reusability can be achieved at low cost.</abstract><cop>Reston</cop><pub>American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics</pub><doi>10.2514/3.57632</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0022-4650 |
| ispartof | Journal of spacecraft and rockets, 1979-05, Vol.16 (3), p.129-134 |
| issn | 0022-4650 1533-6794 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_aiaa_journals_3_57632_pdf_fulltext |
| source | Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Aerospace industry Chemical propulsion Cost analysis Electric propulsion Geosynchronous orbits Launch vehicles Orbital transfer vehicles Organic chemistry Spacecraft |
| title | Electric vs Chemical Propulsion for a Large-Cargo Orbit Transfer Vehicle |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T22%3A02%3A57IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_aiaa_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Electric%20vs%20Chemical%20Propulsion%20for%20a%20Large-Cargo%20Orbit%20Transfer%20Vehicle&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20spacecraft%20and%20rockets&rft.au=Rehder,%20John%20J&rft.date=1979-05-01&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=129&rft.epage=134&rft.pages=129-134&rft.issn=0022-4650&rft.eissn=1533-6794&rft_id=info:doi/10.2514/3.57632&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_aiaa_%3E2161736965%3C/proquest_aiaa_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2161736965&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |