# Presentation: 284661

## Section 32

_***Section 32***_
***Launch Vehicle***

*** ******. . . Dave Breedlove / M. Stowe / A. Piloto***
*Kennedy Space Center*

## Launch Vehicle Integration Status	David Breedlove
Changes Since March Red Team Review	
Mission Unique Hardware Status	Merri Anne Stowe
Payload Fairing	
Launch Vehicle Summary 	David Breedlove
Summary of RFA responses					

***Contents***

***Launch Vehicle Integration Status******	******David Breedlove***
***Changes Since March Red Team Review******	***
***Mission Unique Hardware Status******	******Merri Anne Stowe***
***Payload Fairing******	***
***Launch Vehicle Summary ******	******David Breedlove***
***Summary of RFA responses******	******	******	******	******	***

## Launch Vehicle Integration Status

## Slide 4

## Changes Since March Red Team Review

## Mission Design Changes

***Mission Design Changes***

***The SAC-C injection orbit has changed from 705 km circular to 685x705 km***
***No impact to EO-1 mission***

## EO-1/SAC-C Boost Profile

## EO-1/SAC-C Orbit Injection Profile

## Performance Margin

***IS***

***WAS***

**Based on Oct. 17 Launch**

## Launch Site

***Launch Site***

***Astrotech awarded contract for S/C Processing***
***EO-1 requested to process in Astrotech:***
*To reduce risk in moving Satellite from 836 to Astrotech*
*Provides schedule contingency for S-band integration *
***Requirements change is in work ***
*Swales Team working with KSC, WTR, and Astrotech*
***SLC-2, Level-6 access platforms for EO-1 are in work***
***Design/implementation scheduled to meet Oct. launch date***

## EO-1/SAC-C ELV

***Mission Unique Hardware Status***

## Readiness Reviews

***Readiness Reviews***

_***Meeting***__***	***__***Location***__***	***__***Date***_
*Red Team Review**	**GSFC**	**3/28-31/00*
*Pre-Vehicle On Stand (Pre-VOS)**	**Huntington Beach**	**9/00*
*KSC Center Director’s Launch Vehicle**	**KSC**	**TBD*
*      **Readiness Review**	**	**(1-2 wks prior to MRR)*
*GSFC Spacecraft MRR**	**GSFC**	**TBD*
*Launch Site Readiness Review**	**VAFB**	**1 day prior to S/C **	**	**on stand*
*Flight Readiness Review**	**VAFB**	**TBD*
*Launch Management Coordination Meeting**	**VAFB**	**F-2 Day*
*Mission Rehearsal**	**VAFB**	**F-2 Day*
*Launch Readiness Review**	**VAFB**	**F-1 Day*

## Applicable Launch Vehicle Issues

## Applicable Launch Vehicle Issues

***Applicable Launch Vehicle Issues***

***Payload Fairing Transportation Incident***
***Fairing has been repaired, Boeing and KSC  Engineering are in agreement, formal closure pending ERB ***
***Payload Fairing Acoustic Blanket Modifications***
***Modifications are complete ***
***GN2 Purge Tube Replacement***
***Tubing inside the fairing has been replaced***
***Fluoroglide Contamination Concern***
***Covered in following charts***

## Payload Fairing Contamination Concern Background

***Payload Fairing Contamination Concern ****Background*

***At the time of payload fairing separation, some small debris was seen on video of the Globalstar-7 mission***
***Contamination appears as small, bright flakes and particles***
***Material originates at the fairing rail separation plane, and disperses quickly after separation***
***Possible contaminants investigated by Boeing include ice, rain intrusion, dust, aluminum tape used to tape over rivet heads, Sparesyl, charred paint, and Fluoroglide***
***Boeing’s investigation concluded that the most probable source of the contamination was Fluoroglide applied to the fairing separation rail bellows***
***GS-7’s fairing bellows had received a second application of Fluoroglide due to installation difficulties.  The EO-1/SAC-C fairing bellows received only one application.***

## Payload Fairing Contamination Concern Chronology

***Payload Fairing Contamination Concern ****Chronology*

***Engineering Review Board 00312KSC met on March 3, 2000 concluded Fluoroglide was the only credible root cause of the contamination.***
***Disposition of the EO-1/SAC-C payload fairing was deferred to a later date.***
***The Board was of the opinion that a flight rationale could be developed for EO-1 since the EO-1/SAC-C fairing had received only one application of Fluoroglide vice the two applications on the GS-7 fairing, and fairing separation video of a single Fluoroglide application mission was available.  ***
***The EO-1 Program was given the ERB information and copies of the GS-5 and GS-7 videos to review.  They were asked to identify which instruments had a view of the fairing splitline and to assess the acceptability of the contamination risk.***
*The instrument field of view information was provided on April 27.  *

## On June 16, 2000, the EO-1 Program notified KSC via telecon that the contamination risk was not acceptable.  An official memo followed on June 20.
ERB 00312KSC was reconvened on June 19.  It recommended that the EO-1/SAC-C payload fairing not be flown as-is for this mission
Fluoroglide contamination assessed as undetermined and S/C could not accept the risk.
Official notification of this decision was sent to Boeing at the end of June.

***On June 16, 2000, the EO-1 Program notified KSC via telecon that the contamination risk was not acceptable.  An official memo followed on June 20.***
***ERB 00312KSC was reconvened on June 19.  It recommended that the EO-1/SAC-C payload fairing not be flown as-is for this mission***
***Fluoroglide contamination assessed as undetermined and S/C could not accept the risk.***
***Official notification of this decision was sent to Boeing at the end of June.***

***Payload Fairing Contamination Concern ****Chronology **(continued)*

## A telecon between KSC and Boeing was held on July 17 to discuss alternative ways to get a flightworthy payload fairing for EO-1/SAC-C.  
Boeing maintains that the videos do not show Fluoroglide being deposited on any spacecraft surfaces
Boeing maintains that risk of contamination to the S/C is very low   

***A telecon between KSC and Boeing was held on July 17 to discuss alternative ways to get a flightworthy payload fairing for EO-1/SAC-C.  ***
***Boeing maintains that the videos do not show Fluoroglide being deposited on any spacecraft surfaces***
***Boeing maintains that risk of contamination to the S/C is very low   ***

***Payload Fairing Contamination Concern ****Chronology **(continued)*

## Payload Fairing Contamination Concern Resolution

***Payload Fairing Contamination Concern ****Resolution*

***The selected option for resolving the contamination concern is to install a shield along the part of the fairing splitline that is in the EO-1 instruments’ field of view.***
***The design details are still in work.***
***KSC will have an Engineering Review Board for the final design prior to fabrication.***
***The shield will be qualified by analysis for flight.***
***Installation will be done at Vandenberg AFB.***
***No impact to the launch schedule.***

## Shield Concept

***Shield Concept***

***Task***
***Drill through the heavy half separation rail and bolt on a debris shield from STA 397.57 forward. Coarse sun Sensor Side only (Quad II)***
***Touch up Sparesyl and paint***

## Launch Vehicle Summary

***Launch Vehicle Summary***

***Changes Since The 3/30/00 Red Team Review***
***Minor change to SAC-C separation orbit, no impact to the EO-1 mission***
***Astrotech chosen for Spacecraft Processing ***
***Hardware Status***
***DPAF is complete and qualified for flight***
*No change from the last review*
***A straightforward modification has been identified to allay concerns about possible contamination due to Fluoroglide on the payload fairing separation bellows***
*No impact on launch date*
***The EO-1/SAC-C launch vehicle will be ready to support the launch campaign***