NASA study summary: JPL Solid Propellant Nova vehicle

Here's the second summary I've worked up. This one is about a study from 1962 done at JPL entitled "The Applicability of Solid Propellants for a NOVA class Injection Vehicle and Comparison with a Liquid Vehicle of Comparable Capability". It's 109 pages and probably one of the most "beastial" launch vehicles ever conceived...

Enjoy! OL JR

View attachment NASA study summary-- JPL solid NOVA vehicle.txt

The first pic is of the JPL four stage NOVA all-solid propulsion launch vehicle proposal... it consists of four stages made up of various combinations of clusters of two seperate SRM types... the "A" motor, which was to be 22 feet in diameter EACH (264 inches) and the "B" motor, which was to be 19 feet in diameter EACH (228 inches).

The first stage would consist of a cluster of 7 "A" motors, having a total outer diameter of the first stage of 77 feet (more than TWICE that of Saturn V!) and a first stage height of 81.5 feet from the nozzle exit plane. It would produce FIFTY MILLION POUNDS of liftoff thrust (compared to Saturn V's 7.5 million).

The second stage would consist of a cluster of 3 "A" motors which would take the height of the vehicle to 164.5 feet at the second stage seperation plane.

The third stage would consist of a cluster of 6 "B" motors arranged in a hollow hexagon pattern, which increased the vehicle height to 208.5 feet at the top of the third stage.

The fourth stage was a single "B" type SRM delivered unlit to LEO with the payload attached, partially nestled inside the cluster of 6 "B" motors on the third stage. Small "OMS" type rocket engines would boost the speed sufficiently to achieve orbit since the third stage would burn out just before achieving orbital velocity, for disposal in the atmosphere. When ready for the TLI burn, the fourth stage SRM would be commanded to ignite, and would propel the spacecraft or cargo to escape velocity and be discarded.

The vehicle would weigh 30 million pounds on the launch pad-- about five times what a Saturn V weighed-- and be capable of lifting 500,000 pounds to LEO and inject 130,000 pounds to escape velocity.

The use of low specific-impulse solid fuel in upper stages limited the capabilities of the vehicle, but it was felt reduced complexity, cost, and schedule risk. With hydrogen powered upperstages sized to take advantage of the enormous liftoff thrust and cargo lifting capacity of the first two SRM stages, a payload of 930,000 pounds could be delivered to LEO, or 110,000 pounds delivered to the lunar surface. If the rocket were to deliver an electric propulsion spacecraft to LEO, the delivered mass to the surface of the moon, predicated on using LH2 for descent and landing propulsion, would increase to between 215,000 and 440,000 pounds of delivered cargo on the lunar surface, depending on the trajectory transit time selected.



The second pic is a comparison of the JPL all-solid concept compared to a different solid/liquid propulsion concept vehicle, and an all-liquid engine NOVA concept.



The third pic is basically the same as the last one, from a different part of the report.



The fourth pic is a comparison of different size vehicle concepts depending on the selected landing/mission mode.



The fifth pic is another comparison of all-liquid vehicles using EOR methods for a lunar mission (assembly in Earth orbit-- including a Saturn based propellant tanker on the left) with a Saturn crew launch vehicle second from the left, what came to be the Saturn V we know second from the right, and a four stage all-liquid Saturn V on the right (which is an interesting vehicle proposal in itself-- imagine a Saturn V with a 6 RL-10 powered S-IV stage mounted atop the S-IVB stage... interesting concept especially if it were designed so the S-IV stage was delivered to orbit with essentially full tanks (less final orbital injection and circularization propellant).



Later! OL JR

Here's some more pics...

The first pic is of the steering fluid tank concepts explored for the JPL four stage all-solid NOVA concept. Stability and control of such a large vehicle was believed to be feasible, but the exclusive use of SRMs complicated the design of thrust vector control systems. Three proposals were looked at: 1) the use of jet-vane assemblies in the exhaust outlet of the nozzles, similar to V-2 and Redstone. This was dismissed due to the power-robbing effects of the jet vanes being stuck in the exhaust stream, and the difficulties and technical risks involved in finding suitable materials that could stand up to SRM thrust levels and have sufficient control authority at high altitudes with overexpanded nozzle plumes. 2) Vernier control rockets, IE directional thrusters-- these were considered to have some development risk, be heavy, and complicated systems. They had the advantage of providing continuous stabilizing forces during SRM tailoff and burnout, during staging, before upper stage SRM ignition and coming up to pressure/thrust. 3) Liquid steering fluid injection systems installed on the nozzles, similar to that used on the Titan III SRB's, developed for Polaris and Minuteman, which injects nitrogen tetroxide 'steering fluid' through nozzles placed radially around the nozzle periphery, which when activated by valves controlled by the stabilizing platform, would inject this high-pressure fluid into the exhaust stream of the nozzle in a specific direction, "bending" the exhaust stream of the rocket motor coming out of the fixed nozzle and creating a correcting force similar to that if the nozzle was gimballed. This system was considered the lightest and least risky to develop.



The second pic is a diagram of the CG locations of the stack and their shifts in position at ignition and burnout and after seperation of each successive stage. It's interesting to note that our multistage solid model rockets undergo similar shifts in CG from ignition to burnout and at staging...



The third pic is an 'exploded' diagram showing the location and layout of the interstages, fairings, steering fluid system, etc. proposed for the vehicle.



The fourth pic is a sideview diagram of the JPL Nova proposal... apparently they planned to use "fire in the hole" staging, where the upperstage motors are ignited before complete burnout of the preceding stage, as the Titan II did-- see the blowout panels around the stage seperation planes just below the nozzles of the stage above it... The rocket in this pic, with the payload, is projected a 399.5 feet tall!



The fifth pic is a diagram of the 6 outer first stage SRMs... they had their nozzles canted 5 degrees to align their thrust with the burnout CG of the vehicle to minimize corrective forces (and therefore steering fluid consumption) of the vehicle in flight due to slight thrust imbalances between the SRMs...



More to come! OL JR

Here's some more...

The first pic is the first stage center motor of the cluster... it had a straight nozzle pointing directly aft.



The second pic is a second stage SRM, which were, like the 6 outer SRMs in the first stage cluster, all canted 5 degrees from centerline to direct their thrust through the burnout CG to minimize trajectory impacts from thrust imbalances. They were also to have larger nozzles that were optimized for the upper atmosphere/vacuum...



The third pic is of the third stage SRMs, the smaller "B" motors. These likewise were canted 5 degrees off the centerline to minimize trajectory disturbance, and as all three large motors in the second stage, all six in the third stage were canted away from the centerline.



The fourth pic is of the straight-nozzle fourth stage "B" motor SRM. Since it was to fly as a single SRM, it had a straight nozzle thrusting through the centerline. Storable propellant liquid vernier engines would provide stabilization while on orbit and provide for short duration burns necessary to inject the fourth stage and payload into orbit (from near-orbital speed at third stage burnout, designed so that the third stage would re-enter the atmosphere and break up for ocean disposal). The fourth stage motor would be lit for the TLI/escape trajectory burn.



The fifth picture is a screencap of some of the more interesting text from the study itself... fascinating read.



Bit more to come... OL JR

Here's the last four for this batch... some of these are 'orphans' that I post here merely because they're related to NOVA concepts of the time...

The first pic is another screencap of the study itself, detailing some of the layout.



The second pic is an 'orphan' I picked up somewhere along the way... it isn't related to the JPL study, as the NOVA concepts visualized there aren't layed out like the JPL study is. Interesting nonetheless...



The third pic is a chart someone linked to or posted on nasaspaceflight.com forums. It's an interesting 'gamut' of the main NOVA proposals of the time...



The fourth and last pic is some liquid (obviously Saturn-derived) NOVA proposals... vehicles such as these were competing against the solid designs detailed in this study...



Hope you found it interesting... might make some cool "future/fantasy scale" rockets! Later! OL JR