Documents / Official release
This Defense Intelligence Reference Document, dated 8 March 2010, was prepared by the Defense Intelligence Agency's Defense Warning Office under the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program. It is one of a series of advanced technology reports. It surveys the history of space access concepts, covering hypersonic gliders, air-breathing and rocket propulsion, materials, launch options and operating costs. The report argues that reliable, schedulable access to low Earth orbit is mainly a hardware and organizational problem rather than a technology problem.
From the source:Release of 2026-09-18 Incident: 3/8/10, Las Vegas, Nevada. Released with redactions. This document is a Defense Intelligence Reference Document (DIRD), a technical reference format used by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) to capture baseline knowledge on a specific topic for later analytic use. DIRDs are best understood as reference and synthesis products rather than as original research. It is one of 38 DIRDs produced under the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program (AAWSAP) between 2009 and 2011. Because AAWSAP’s scope permitted a broad range of supporting topics, not every DIRD in the series directly concerns aerospace systems or future threat assessment. The following summary reflects the DIRD’s scope and framing at the time of writing and should not be read as implying current validation of the concepts discussed. This DIRD is a historical and conceptual survey of space access systems, contending that the main barrier to routine access to space is a failure to build durable, reliable, operational hardware and the supporting infrastructure needed for regular service to and from low Earth orbit. The report reviews earlier launch and aerospace concepts, especially reusable and aircraft-like approaches, and suggests that U.S. space access development became too strongly centered on expendable rockets derived from ballistic missiles rather than bespoke systems designed for repeated space access and payload delivery. Its central claim is that meaningful future progress will depend on creating a purpose-built space transportation infrastructure, including frequent round-trip capability and orbital support networks, rather than continuing to rely on one-off launch vehicles. Overall, the document presents a forceful case for infrastructure-first space development, though its characterization of past technological choices is more assertive than a fully neutral account of past U.S. space programming.
UNCLASSIFIED/ /FOR. OFFI@IAL l:181: 8HLY Appendix A: Historical Perspective The four reports listed below and summarized in this paper are as applicable today as they were when they were released in 1964 and 1965: • Robert R. Stephens; "Mission Requirements of Lifting Systems-Engineering Aspects"; Volume I Condensed Summary; McDonnell Aircraft Company Report B831 for NASA Manned Spacecraft Center; contract NAS-9-3562; August 1965. • Robert R. Stephens; "Mission Requirements of Lifting Systems-Engineering Aspects"; Volume II Mission Analysis - Spacecraft Selection - Performance Analysis; McDonnell Aircraft Company Report B831 for NASA Manned Spacecraft Center; contract NAS-9-3562; August 1965. • Robert R. Stephens; "Study of the Engineering Aspects, Mission Requ irements of Lifting Systems"; Summary of Significant Results and Figures from Report MAC B831; McDonnell Aircraft Company Report B947 for NASA Manned Spacecraft Center; contract NAS-9-3562; August 1965. • "Manned Hyperson ic Test Vehicle Study"; McDonnell Aircraft Company Report A9727 for United States Force; contract AF(33)600-2751; August 1964. These reports describe an operational space station with an operationa l spacecraft fleet to support the orbita l station in space. The term operational is used because the concept was not for a research and development spacecraft like an X-15 but a transportation system that moved resources to and from space, much like an operational FedEx or UPS operation . The work in the mid 1960s by a number of aerospace companies set the stage for t he discussion of the development of the spacecraft configurations based on requ irements and the propulsion systems that emerge to meet those requirements. These four reports are representative of the approach and designs that were prevalent in that period. Those involved with developing the orbital station and its supporting fleets of operationa l spacecraft were fully convinced that the industrial capability, materials, and resources perm itted successful accompl ishment of the task in 1962. The space station goals and the spacecraft req uired to meet those goals are especially interesting in light of today's discussion about crew rescue vehicles and the crew complement that should staff the International Space Station . What is different was that the station was a rotating st ation to provide a fraction of the Earth 's gravity and was fabricated primarily from empty Saturn rocket components sent to orbit that were fitted with provisions to make them habitable. The purpose of the study was to establish the operational requirements, spacecraft configuration, and requirements. The principal support mission was designed around a rotating space station constructed from Saturn 1B components and Saturn 1B lifted components. The station was designed for 20 to 27 persons, each on t he station for a 6-month period . The nominal life of a given research program was assumed to be as long as 5 years. The spacecraft that supported the orbital station wou ld be designed to carry 9 to 12 persons or materials to resupply the station. For that goal, a 7-metric ton payload (15,435 lb) was deemed sufficient. The study identified that each replacement person would have a 994-lb (450-kg) resource supply payload to accompany each crewmember. For a 12-person crew-replacement mission, the crew-replacement UNCLASSIFIED/ ,,roA. OlililCI aIs. flili Qllls.¥ 43
Not linked to a story yet.
Official release, from the pursue collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. 56 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.