04 December 2012

Air Force awards up to $900 million in launch contracts


BY STEPHEN CLARK
SPACEFLIGHT NOW

Posted: December 4, 2012



The U.S. Air Force has selected SpaceX, Orbital Sciences Corp., and Lockheed Martin Corp. to launch small military satellites on multiple missions through 2017, the Defense Department announced Monday.

File photo of a Minotaur 4 rocket on the launch pad at Kodiak Launch Complex, Alaska. Credit: Stephen Clark/Spaceflight Now

The contract allows the Pentagon to select the companies to launch small satellites and other space missions.
SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket, Orbital's Minotaur rocket family, and Lockheed Martin's Athena launcher will be available to launch the satellites.
The contract is worth up to $900 million, according to the Pentagon.
The indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract permits SpaceX, Orbital Sciences and Lockheed Martin to compete for individual launches. The Air Force will select one provider for each mission.
The Rocket Systems Launch Program contract runs until Nov. 29, 2017. It extends an expiring Orbital/Suborbital Program contract between the Air Force and Orbital Sciences, which has launched satellites on 13 Minotaur rockets since 2000.
The Minotaur rocket family is comprised of decommissioned Minuteman and Peacekeeper missile stages.
SpaceX and Lockheed Martin will join Orbital Sciences in the next phase of the contract.
SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket, which has launched four times for NASA's commercial cargo transportation program, is being upgraded to launch satellites for NASA, commercial and military customers.
So far, SpaceX has not been awarded a contract for a U.S. military launch.
Lockheed Martin is reviving its Athena rocket line in partnership with ATK Space Systems, the builder of Athena's solid-fueled rocket motors.
United Launch Alliance, the joint launch services firm formed by Boeing Co. and Lockheed Martin, was prohibited from competing for the RSLP contract. ULA builds and operates the Atlas and Delta rocket fleets under the Air Force's Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle program for launches of large, higher-priority military communications, surveillance, and navigation satellites.
The first task orders expected to be awarded under the RSLP contract are the Space Test Program 2 and Deep Space Climate Observatory missions, according to Peggy Hodge, a spokesperson at the Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center, home of the military's space procurement division.

19 November 2012

Kodiak Launch Complex expansion faces delay

KODIAK (AP) — Alaska Aerospace Corporation's plans for a new launch pad have been delayed, not canceled.
In a four-hour board meeting Thursday at the Kodiak Launch Complex, CEO Craig Campbell confirmed that Lockheed-Martin's delays in finding customers for a new, larger Kodiak-launched rocket means at least a one-year delay in construction of Launch Pad 3.
"Now we're projecting into the 2015 period for the launch of the Athena III," Campbell said.
That timeline means construction will not begin until next summer at the earliest.
Work isn't standing still on the project that has been hailed as the future of the Narrow Cape complex. Campbell told board members he's keeping the ball moving on the environmental assessment that must take place before the launch pad can be built. "We expect that to roll forward in the next couple months, then go out to a public comment period," he said.
During the last session of the Alaska Legislature, Gov. Sean Parnell pledged $25 million in state support for the $125 million estimated cost of the launch pad. Financial "gates" are built in to that amount, ensuring Alaska Aerospace cannot move forward with construction and design until a contract is in hand and private financing in place.
Campbell said he has added restrictions of his own and will spend no more than $1 million until Lockheed commits to a launch date and signs a contract.
That amount takes the project to about 65 percent of design, but not engineering work, Campbell said.
The corporation stopped deliberately short of detailed engineering in an attempt to accommodate Orbital Sciences, another space company that has expressed an interest in launching from Kodiak.
Orbital's Antares rocket is designed differently than Lockheed's Athena III, and the new launch pad would need extra equipment to serve both rockets. Orbital is considering both Kodiak and Vandenberg Air Force Base in California as its West Coast launch site for the Antares, but it is not expected to decide between the two until early next year, after it launches its first Antares from a spaceport in Virginia.
"I don't want to get into an engineering and design concept for a solid-based rocket only to find out Orbital is coming here with a liquid-based rocket," Campbell said.
While the delay may pay off for Kodiak if another customer is willing to spend millions for permission to launch rockets from Alaska, the slow pace of development could continue if Congress drags its feet on the federal budget.
The vast majority of America's space projects are at least partially funded by the federal government, and Congress' inability to pass a new defense budget means multibillion-dollar contractors like Lockheed and Orbital don't know how much they can sell. That, in turn, means those companies don't know how many rockets they need to launch from places like Kodiak.
In addition, said Alaska Aerospace chief operating officer Mark Greby, companies like Orbital and Lockheed are awaiting the results of November's presidential election. President Barack Obama and Republican hopeful Mitt Romney have similar space policies, but a few percent difference in funding represents hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars, Greby said. "In all honesty, they're all stalling to see which way the climate is going."
Until that weather forecast changes, Launch Pad 3 looks to be stuck in the cold.
___
Information from: Kodiak (Alaska) Daily Mirror, http://www.kodiakdailymirror.com


Read more: http://www.alaskajournal.com/Alaska-Journal-of-Commerce/October-Issue-1-2012/Kodiak-Launch-Complex-expansion-faces-delay/#ixzz2C8OCyBkr

16 November 2012

Alaska Aerospace lays off 5 Kodiak-based workers


August 21, 2012
KODIAK, Alaska (AP) — The Alaska Aerospace Corp. has laid off five workers, or 20 percent of its Kodiak workforce, after a launch was delayed a year to 2014.
Interim CEO Craig Campbell tells the Kodiak Daily Mirror (http://is.gd/9wH8uH) that the corporation also must stay within its $8 million budget set by the Alaska Legislature.
The layoffs included an engineer, a safety officer, two technicians and a scheduler, all based at the Kodiak launch complex.
The layoffs do not alter the corporation's plans to expand for use by larger rockets. Once those launches are scheduled, Campbell anticipates refilling the positions.
___
Information from: Kodiak (Alaska) Daily Mirror, http://www.kodiakdailymirror.com

13 November 2012

AAC Hires Help to Try to Obtain Launches

ProPricer Delivers Its Industry Proven Government Contracting Proposal Pricing Technology Solution To Alaska Aerospace Corporation

Temecula, California   November 06, 2012   Business News
(PRLEAP.COM) Temecula, CA – November 5, 2012 - Executive Business Services (EBS), a leading software developer and distributor with headquarters in Temecula, California, announced today that Alaska Aerospace Corporation, whose main core business area is space launch, has selected ProPricer to support the company's government contracting cost proposal, proposal pricing, and cost analysis requirements.

As an industry leader in commercial off the shelf pricing applications, ProPricer serves as a multi-user platform where functional groups can collaborate within the same data set, real-time. As an alternative to restricted mainframe applications or unstable, complex spreadsheets, ProPricer offers users an easy-to-use interface, robust database design, advanced import and export features, and the ability to perform and create complex "what if" analysis and custom reports in minutes.

"As Alaska Aerospace Corporation moves in the direction of having a larger customer base, we anticipate ProPricer to become a critical tool that will strengthen their submittal process and enhance their ability to secure contracts", said John Shurance, EBS President and CTO.

About Executive Business Services
As an application solutions provider focusing on meeting the needs of the growing Information Technology marketplace, EBS continues to successfully build, easy-to-use commercial off-the-shelf applications for various industry markets. EBS's industry proven ProPricer proposal pricing application suite has been helping contract management organizations standardize and manage the cost proposal process, thereby improving productivity and profitability time and again. With clients all over the US, Canada, and Europe, EBS attributes its success to its corporate mission of building quality, long-term relationships with its customers, while offering products and services that can meet and exceed the changing demands of its users. For more information about EBS and its product offering, please visit their website at www.propricer.com.

About Alaska Aerospace Corporation
The Alaska Aerospace Corporation was established by the State of Alaska to develop a high technology aerospace industry in the state. AAC's corporate offices are in Anchorage, Alaska. AAC's core business area is space launch, and it developed, owns, and operates the Kodiak Launch Complex, a state-of-the-industry spaceport on Kodiak Island, Alaska, that provides access to space for commercial and government interests. The corporation's charter encompasses more than space launch, and it participates in other aerospace fields as well. For more information about Alaska Aerospace Corporation, please visit www.akaerospace.com.

Media Contact
Yvonne M. Miller
Director of Marketing
Executive Business Services
43398 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Toll-Free: (800) 507-9980
Email: ymiller@propricer.com Yvonne Miller
Executive Business Services

24 October 2012

Spaceport Infrastructure Still an Unknown Frontier

Washington - Infrastructure
Spaceport Infrastructure Still an Unknown Frontier
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
WASHINGTON — Spaceports are popping up all over the United States, as both existing airports and brand-new facilities position themselves to profit from a new age of commercial space travel and transport, but the industry is still in its infancy and faces significant challenges.
Currently eight facilities in the U.S., some of which are bond-funded or are owned by bond-issuing authorities, are licensed for space launches by the Federal Aviation Administration’s office of commercial space transportation.
The facilities that are leading the way are the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport in Wallops Island, Va., the Cecil Field Spaceport in Jacksonville, Fla., Spaceport Florida at Cape Canaveral, Spaceport Oklahoma in Burns Flat, Okla., Spaceport America in New Mexico, Mojave Air and Spaceport in Mojave, Calif., Vandenberg Air Force Base near Lompac, Calif., and the Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska. Those facilities have been planned and financed with an eye to the future.
The idea is that, especially with the end of the Space Shuttle program in 2011, the day is fast approaching when space tourism and transport will be big business, and spaceports capable of handling vertical rocket launches and returning craft will be in position to reap economic benefits for their regions and investors.
These launchpads could also become centers for commercial satellite launches, educational trips sponsored by universities, and other possibilities, causing the FAA to estimate increased demand for them.
The agency annually produces a forecast for space launch demand, and it has been growing. The 2012 report projects a yearly demand for 29.1 commercial space launches worldwide from this year through 2021. That number was 28.6 in the 2011 forecast, and 27.6 in the 2010 projection.
The first U.S. commercial spaceport, Spaceport America, signed a 20-year lease with billionaire Richard Branson’s Virgin Galactic in 2009. Construction of the more than $200 million facility was supported by $100 million of New Mexico oil and gas severance-tax bonds and $51 million of sales-tax revenue bonds issued by a spaceport district comprising the local Sierra and Doña Ana counties.
In September, the Virginia Commercial Space Flight Authority, a body legislatively empowered to issue debt, reached a memorandum of understanding with Orbital Sciences Corp. pledging state support for improvements at the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport. The MARS facility will play host to a series of 10 rocket launches under the agreement, and the VCSFA will retain the improved facility for use by future customers.
Jacksonville’s Cecil Field Spaceport, owned by the Jacksonville Airport Authority, obtained its spaceport designation in August. As with Spaceport America and MARS before it, Cecil’s new space-age bona fides generated excitement about the potential for future economic growth.
“It is critical that we continue to focus on, and invest in, infrastructure projects that will directly benefit our state’s economy,” said Florida Gov. Rick Scott after signing into law the facility’s designation as a spaceport. “Having Cecil Field designated as a spaceport will play a major role in the continued development of Florida’s aerospace and aviation industries and will continue to keep our economy heading in the right direction.”
While both the FAA and private firms agree that demand for commercial spaceports is likely to increase in coming years, the industry is still so young that the potential for growth variance is huge and the unknowns are vast.
“We are dealing with an industry which has not yet begun to operate,” said Derek Webber, director of commercial space flight consultant firm Spaceport Associates in Damariscotta, Me. “It will probably not begin before 2014. How many spaceports will be needed to satisfy the market once it gets started? No one knows.”
A revenue and demand study produced by the Tauri Group in Alexandria, Va., produced three divergent 10-year scenarios, including a “constrained” forecast, a “baseline” scenario, and a “growth” estimate. The baseline estimate, extrapolated from today’s consumer demand and research budgets, predicts $600 million of revenue from suborbital space flights over a decade. The constrained estimate, based on a possible drop in demand, cuts that in half to $300 million.
The growth estimate reflects an increase in demand, and hits $1.6 billion of revenue. The study also notes the possibility that demand could react to “game-changing unknowns,” such as price reductions, new research, sponsorships and other variables.
“Demand for suborbital flights is sustained and appears sufficient to support multiple providers,” the study concludes.
Webber said it’s impossible to know now whether states and localities that undertake the cost of building spaceport infrastructure will see a payoff any time soon. Spaceport America has pledged to be self-sustaining through the collection of tourism revenue from visitors popping by to take a look at the launch pad. Some of the facilities are not yet at the imminent operations stage, and their future is even more uncertain.
A Moody’s Investors Service analyst said said Cecil Field remains a general aviation airport that hopes to become a spaceport someday. Even knowing when the economic payoff has been reached could prove tough, according to Webber.
“We shall have to monitor a whole range of items,” he said. “How many people are employed at the spaceport? How many were employed in building it? What impact has the spaceport had on the education in neighboring schools? Do the kids become more interested in science, math and technology? How much money do the rich space tourists spend in the region of the spaceport in goods and services? How many family and friends do the space tourists bring with them when they do their trip? How long do they spend in the spaceport region before, during and after the flight? How successful is the new spaceport at attracting terrestrial tourists who come merely to visit for the day, and are not necessarily associated with any specific space tourism flight?”
There is a small amount of federal money available for spaceport development. The FAA’s space transportation infrastructure matching grants program provided $500 million for the initial development of three possible new spaceports in Colorado, Hawaii and California.
The majority of costs, though, will still fall on state and local entities and their private sector partners. The grants can fund up to 50% of a project, but require that at least 10% of development dollars come from the private sector.
“Those states that are supporting these developments are betting on a future which is based on known American values,” Webber said. “Pushing boundaries, taking risks, making a buck, looking forwards rather than backwards. The citizens of New Mexico who have supported the building of Spaceport America are doing this to ensure that their children and grandchildren in this poor part of the country will have something exciting in their futures instead of simply tumbleweed.”

24 May 2012

State of Alaska Will End Up Paying Entire 125 Million Dollar Bill for Launch Pad

There have been various news releases recently regarding the Alaska Aerospace Corporation and Kodiak Launch Complex funding for Launch Pad 3 construction. Gov. Parnell recently approved $25 million on top of the $8 million inserted into the state’s operating budget for the AAC for the remainder of 2012 ($33 million total) and the governor and AAC would like the public to believe Lockheed Martin will finance $100 million out of the $125 million needed for Launch Pad 3 and future KLC infrastructure.

However, the State of Alaska Capital Project Summary Fiscal Year 2012 Supplemental (March 8, 2012) proposed budget list for FY13 and FY14 shows the state’s proposed designated general funding of $100 million to the AAC “to complete the facility.” While lying to the public the state is prepared to foot the whole bill. The AAC is back to square one before the launch complex was built, when it had no funding and former CEO Pat Ladner said, “Build it and they will come.”

The Missile Defense Agency (via the Air Force) gave $80 million in 2010 to the University of Alaska Fairbanks for defense programs and for the AAC and Kodiak Launch Complex. How much did the AAC receive?

Regarding larger vehicle launches from the KLC the AAC board of directors is sitting on important environmental hazard information that it does not want the Kodiak public to know, especially those people living in close proximity to Narrow Cape. Concerned residents should check out the Kodiak Launch Complex section in NASA’s Environmental Assessment for Launch of NASA Routine Payloads, dated November 2011, as the hazards are listed. Before any further KLC infrastructure takes place, the public should demand a site-specific environmental impact statement for Narrow Cape because of future contamination to the island and human health risks.

By Carolyn Heitman

05 April 2012

Kodiak Launch Complex - Lockheed Martin Athena 2 Launches Not As Definite As Claimed

After 10 Years in Storage, Athena Rockets Will Attack Small-Sat Launch Backlog Apr. 4, 2012 - 04:20PM | By DEBRA WERNER 
Lockheed Martin was building an Athena rocket to launch a NASA Earth science satellite when space agency officials called back in 2000 with a question. Instead of flying a single, large satellite into orbit, could the rocket deliver four small spacecraft into four distinct orbital slots for NASA and the Pentagon?
After 11 months of engineering work, Lockheed Martin responded in September 2001 with the Kodiak Star mission. The Athena 1 rocket blasted off from the Kodiak Launch Complex in Alaska, placed three Pentagon technology experiments in 800-kilometer orbits, sank down to an altitude of 500 kilometers, dropped off a NASA upper atmospheric research satellite, and used its remaining fuel to deorbit.
The impressive mission turned out to be Athena’s swan song. Lockheed halted the Athena program in 2001, after it became clear that the commercial communication industry’s plans to fill low Earth orbit with constellations of satellites were faltering in the face of cellular towers and mobile phones. Now, officials at Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Littleton, Colo., are planning to revive Athena, citing new markets, including in the defense and intelligence areas.
Top defense and intelligence officials have made no secret of their frustration with high launch costs and their desire to introduce competition into the market. Small satellites featuring commercially produced electronic components are becoming increasingly capable and inexpensive. In addition, the U.S. National Security Space Strategy, approved in 2011 by the then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper, suggests that constellations of small satellites might be more resilient than large, monolithic spacecraft.
Lockheed is pushing ahead with its revival plan, despite recent evidence suggesting the possibility of hard times ahead for small satellite advocates in the defense and intelligence arenas. The Obama administration’s 2013 budget would terminate the Defense Department’s Operationally Responsive Space office, which was working on plans to rapidly build small satellites for crisis responses. Elements of the ORS initiative would be moved to the Air Force’s Space and Missile Systems Center at Los Angeles Air Force Base. In the intelligence realm, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has rejected a proposal made on the Senate side to shift to smaller satellites for the country’s next-generation imaging spy satellites.
“Small satellites do not fit the prevailing paradigm for collection of imagery and signals intelligence,” said consultant Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute by email. “The prevailing approach favors billion-dollar spacecraft that collect massive amounts of information in exquisite detail over long periods.”
Even so, Lockheed Martin sees a healthy defense and intelligence market for smaller spacecraft in the science and technology area. Many such spacecraft have been sitting in clean rooms waiting for an affordable ride to space, said Gregory Kehrl, Lockheed Martin’s Athena mission manager. “We are offering customers a chance to buy a seat on a plane instead of the whole plane,” he added.
Starting in 2014, Lockheed plans to establish an annual rideshare service, filling up the Athena rocket with small satellites. Customers will pay only for their portion of the launch cost and obtain a ride to their desired orbital location. “We like Athena because it was built like an F-150 pickup truck,” said Kehrl. “It’s reliable for moving stuff from here to there.”
For the first flight, set to occur in about two years, Lockheed Martin plans to launch an Athena 2 from Kodiak to carry about six small spacecraft (in the 50 kilogram to 170 kilogram range) into two circular orbits. Remaining payload space will be filled with a collection of government-sponsored cubesats, the miniature satellites that measure 10 centimeters on a side. The Athena 2 flight will feature 32 separation events, “more than anyone has tried before,” Kehrl said.
Athena rockets can perform all those separations because the launch vehicle is designed to remain on orbit for hours, continually reorienting itself and resetting onboard computers in preparation for the next event.
“It can change altitude by hundreds of kilometers and still reserve enough propellant to deorbit the upper stage,” Kehrl said.
The Athena rocket derives its ability to place multiple small payloads into distinct orbital slots from the precision pointing systems company engineers refined while working on the Navy’s Fleet Ballistic Missile program, said Al Simpson, Lockheed Martin’s Athena program manager. That feature is the rocket’s primary selling point for customers seeking to send a single satellite to a precise location or to deploy a satellite constellation. For example, a government agency might opt to use Athena to place four, 200-kilogram surveillance payloads into a single orbital plane to provide persistent coverage of an important target, Kehrl said.
A launch customer focused exclusively on finding the lowest-cost ride for a small payload might choose to fly as a secondary payload on larger rockets built by United Launch Alliance or Space Exploration Technologies. Customers in the market for an entire rocket also may find that buying Athena is more expensive than purchasing a Minotaur rocket, which Orbital Sciences Corp. assembles using retired Minuteman and Peacekeeper missile stages.
For small satellites seeking a dedicated ride, the four-stage, solid-fueled Minotaur 4 has been the vehicle of choice. Orbital Sciences does not publicly discuss the costs of Minotaur rockets, but industry officials said it typically costs $50 million to launch a Minotaur 4, which can carry 1,730 kilograms into low Earth orbit. By comparison, the three-stage Athena 2, which has an advertised price of $65 million on the commercial market, is designed to fly 1,712 kilograms to low Earth orbit.
In spite of the higher cost for the entire launch vehicle, Lockheed is banking on government program managers’ ability to save money by participating in the proposed rideshare program. Government agencies also may support the revived Athena program due to concerns about the U.S. commercial launch industry and solid-rocket motor industrial base, Simpson said.
The National Space Policy unveiled in 2010 cites a goal of “energizing competitive domestic industries,” including space launch. In May, the Pentagon’s undersecretary for acquisition, technology and logistics sent a report to Congress on efforts to preserve the “engineering and design skills and production capabilities” of the solid-rocket motor industry. “The DoD needs to sustain the solid-rocket motor industry because the United States will continue to rely on solid-rocket motors over the long term,” the report added.
When Athena was produced in the 1990s, United Technologies built the upper stage. Since that motor is no longer in production, Lockheed is equipping new Athenas with Castor 30 upper stages built by Alliant Techsystems (ATK), one of the nation’s two remaining solid-rocket manufacturers. Athenas could launch from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Vandenberg Air Force Base and NASA Wallops Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport. Annual rideshare flights will originate from the Kodiak Launch Complex because it offers access to circular and highly elliptical polar orbits, which make extended arcs to maximize surveillance time or communications coverage for specific regions.
The Lockheed Martin-ATK team is keeping close tabs on upcoming Air Force competition for space-launch vehicles of varying sizes, known as the Orbital Suborbital Program-3 (OSP-3). The OSP-3 is designed to provide performance and system design data on launch vehicles for national security and civil space missions “while providing an on-ramp for emerging capabilities,” according to a draft request for proposals published June 16. The new entrant portion of the OPS-3 stems from a pact the Defense Department, NRO and NASA signed in October to enhance launch-vehicle competition and to give government officials greater flexibility in choosing rockets for specific missions based on cost and risk, according to the Air Force Space and Missile System Center's Space Development and Test Directorate. For billion-dollar satellites, agencies are likely to rely on rockets with long histories of success. Program managers seeking inexpensive rides for smaller spacecraft opt to fly newer, less-expensive rockets.
The Air Force was scheduled to release a final OSP-3 RFP in March seeking rockets in two categories: those capable of lifting 400 pounds to 5,000 pounds into low Earth orbit and those designed to place 5,000 pounds to 20,000 pounds into low Earth orbit. The OSP-3 also will enable government agencies to buy rockets for suborbital missions. Program managers plan to award multiple contracts that do not limit the government to specific quantities or delivery dates. Rocket builders who win OSP-3 contracts will be able to compete for specific launch missions.
The Air Force plans to award contracts by September, Air Force Space and Missile System Center’s Space Development and Test Directorate officials said via email.
When the final OSP-3 RFP is released, Lockheed Martin will make a decision on whether to compete, Simpson said. In the meantime, the company is inviting potential customers to participate in its 2014 demonstration flight. Those invitations, which were extended to the Army, Air Force, NRO, NASA and the Naval Research Laboratory, garnered a “huge response,” Kehrl said.
While Kehrl has high hopes for Athena’s future, he acknowledges that it will take time for the rocket’s rideshare service to attract a steady stream of paying customers. Many Defense Department program managers are eager to test hardware and software in space flight, but few have money in their budgets to cover launch cost. Since 1965, government program managers turned to the Pentagon’s Space Test Program for free rides on expendable rockets or space shuttles. President Obama’s 2013 budget sent to Congress in February proposes terminating the Space Test Program and turning the responsibility for finding room for extra payloads over to the Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center.
So while Lockheed Martin plans to keep costs as low as possible by launching multiple payloads on annual rideshare flights, those flights won’t be free. If customers begin designing payloads to fit the mass and volume requirements for the Athena rideshare program, “they will be able to fly very inexpensively and we can fit them on any flight,” Kehrl said. Still, “it’s a new capability that customers will have to build into future budget cycles,” Simpson said. “That takes time.”
This story appeared in the April 2012 issue of C4ISR Journal.