Summary of 1996 Study of Launchers and On-Orbit Assembly Facilities

In 1996, Simon Rowland conducted a cursory study of six options for launching and assembling the Artemis Project reference mission spacecraft, with the goal of determining the lowest-cost method of transporting the spacecraft and crew to low Earth orbit. The study examines only launch systems which are currently operational or under development, and contain a significant bias based on accepting undemonstrated cost and performance for the Ariane 5. However, the documents resulting from this study are useful because they show a general trend in launch costs and collect some data regarding the estimated costs and performance of these launchers.

• Option 1: Space Shuttle
• Option 2: Space Shuttle and Titan
• Option 3: Space Shuttle and Ariane
• Option 4: Space Shuttle and Proton
• Option 5: Ariane+Proton and International Space Station
• Option 6: Arian+Proton and Independent Staging Base

From this limited evaluation, the lowest-cost option appears to be expendable boosters in conjunction with a simplified private transportation node in low Earth orbit. Initially, the transportation node would consist of the minimum equipment necessary to support assembly and servicing of the Lunar Transfer Vehicle and the landing stack. Later, a fuel depot might be added.

That's why our presentation of the current reference mission emphasizes use of a new, commercial service station in low Earth orbit. Note that the artwork shows Soyuz spacecraft used for launching the crew. This study did not consider the alternative of using expendable boosters for the heavy cargo and a Shuttle flight for personnel transportation.

For the first mission, the estimated cost of option 5 (Ariane-Proton combination using the International Space Station as a staging base), and option 4 (Shuttle-Proton combination) are nearly equal. An Ariane launch is required in conjunction with the Proton because SPACEHAB modules will not fit in a Proton's payload shroud.

This plan includes many inherent risks, which remain subjects for future study:

• Payload integration and operations costs were not addressed in this study
• Cost estimates do not include risk factor for increasing the number and type of launchers, or the additional program infrastructure required to work with different launch systems
• The study does not address the political implications of using these launch systems
• We currently have no way to launch a manned Soyuz spacecraft to a low-inclination orbit; the cost of new launch facilities is not reflected in the estimates
• Ariane 5 rocket has not yet demonstrated the advertised performance or cost
• Financial studies for a new LEO support facility have not been evaluated in detail
• Continued availability of Soyuz rockets and spacecraft is in doubt
• We expect that many lower-cost alternative launchers will be available before we are ready to launch the Artemis Project spacecraft
• Launch service providers and the International Space Station program need to be contacted to gather realistic information on costs and availability

Here is Simon's summary of the resulting costs for each option. Note that all the cases examined show launch costs significantly lower than the $800 million assumed in the original reference mission study.