When NASA canceled the X-33 program on March 1, the ramifications for Utah were bittersweet.
X-33 was to be a half-scale prototype of a space-plane called VentureStar, the world's first vehicle capable of carrying astronauts and cargo into orbit and landing again without dropping off stages or boosters. A single-stage orbiter has been a dream of space travel since Buck Rogers, because it would open the last frontier to affordable exploration and exploitation.
If VentureStar were operating, the cost of putting astronauts and material into orbit would drop from the present amount, just under $10,000 a pound, to $1,000 a pound.
Before that could happen, entire new technologies had to be invented, just as with the moon landings of the 1960s.
The space-plane was to be a lifting body, with the structure itself acting something like a wing. To reduce weight, X-33 relied on composite material. Fuel was to be liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen.
The engine was to be a revolutionary device called a linear aerospike, which has never flown on a large craft. The engine can adjust its performance at different altitudes, unlike the conventional bell nozzle used in other rockets.
X-33 demonstration flights were to take off from Edwards Air Force base near Lancaster, Calif., and land at two sites: shorter duration tests at Michael Army Air Field on Dugway Proving Ground, western Utah, longer ones in Montana.
At launch the X-33 would carry 211,000 pounds of fuel. Its speed would reach 11,000 miles an hour, and it would scream along at an altitude of 50 miles. It would land with a terrific sonic boom.
A few days after landing, the wedge-shaped vehicle — 63 feet long and 68 feet wide — was to be capable of refueling and taking off again.
NASA and its industry partner, Lockheed Martin, funded the project. Under a subcontract from Lockheed Martin, Utah's Alliant TechSystems' factory in Clearfield spun the fiber composite fuel tanks, using a giant spindle controlled by computer.
NASA recently said total cost of the project was nearly $1.27 billion, with NASA budgeting $912 million and Lockheed Martin paying $357 million. In 1997, officials said Alliant's subcontract was worth about $39 million.
In November 1999, the project began to unravel. When the Utah hydrogen tanks were tested, they leaked. Apparently today's technology does not allow sealing of composite material tightly enough to prevent leakage of extremely tiny hydrogen molecules contained under pressure. NASA switched to aluminum tanks.
Construction of the rocket plane is more than 85 percent complete. Technicians at the assembly plant in Palmdale, Calif., have installed the liquid oxygen tank, avionics bay, reaction control system thruster controller and landing gear. By the middle of this year, all hardware except the hydrogen fuel tanks were to be delivered to Lockheed Martin to complete the assembly, according to NASA.
"The body flaps that control vehicle pitch are complete. The canted fins are 75 percent complete. The vertical fins that house the rudders are also complete," says a NASA news release.
Meanwhile, the motors showed great promise. In February, an aerospike engine built by Rocketdyne Propulsion & Power, part of the Boeing Co., was test-fired at NASA's John C. Stennis Space Center in Bay St. Louis, Miss. The engine powered up for 1.12 seconds, the full duration scheduled for the test without any anomalies noted.
It was the first of 14 planned engine tests.
That was the background when NASA canceled X-33 less than two months into a new presidential administration.
The bitter
Evan McCollum, director of communications for Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co., Denver, said that last September the company and NASA negotiated to extend funding through March. Also, "they told us we would be allowed to submit a proposal" for additional X-33 funding through the Space Launch Initiative, the program under which NASA selects industry proposals for a shuttle replacement vehicle and decides which experiments to fund.
"Frankly, because of all that that had been accomplished through the program, we were optimistic that we would receive the additional funding to carry the program forward," McCollum said.
But when NASA canceled the X-33 on March 1, the official statement said, "NASA also announced today it will not add Space Launch Initiative funds to the X-33 or X-34 (another experimental reusable space vehicle) programs."
"Yes, we are disappointed," McCollum said. In light of the current market for launch systems, Lockheed Martin does not see a way for any commercial venture to carry on with the X-33 on its own.
Utahns were sorry to see the project killed, too.
"We were disappointed with the cancellation of the X-33 program," said Melanie Moore, public affairs officer at Dugway. "It was one program that would have given Dugway a lot of visibility."
Dugway's population, both workers who travel to the remote base and families who live there, were looking forward to seeing the spacecraft land.
NASA gave Dugway about $450,000 to prepare for X-33 landing, according to Moore. The only major expenditure was to build a tracking station to pick up the craft's telemetry readings on its approach and guide it safely onto the runway.
The station was built on Cedar Mountain, said Andy DiCarlo, Dugway's project manager for the now-defunct program.
A complete checkout of range systems to ensure they were prepared for the landing was undertaken last spring.
Some minor modifications were made to the Dugway airstrip as well, he said. Marking lights alongside the 13,125-foot landing strip were removed so they could not pose a possible hazard to the X-33 if it "veered to the side," he said.
Boeing Rocketdyne, builders of the aerospike engine, seemed taken aback by the sudden cancellation.
"As rocket engine production programs go, this was enjoying phenomenal success," said Dan Beck, Canoga Park, Calif., spokesman for the company.
"We had overcome some interesting technical challenges. We'd gone through the first round of single-engine tests . . . and we were all set to launch into our dual-engine configuration tests."
Now, he said, "two beautiful flight engines (are) sitting in the test stand." NASA and Lockheed Martin are negotiating about the engines' ownership.
Asked to describe his feelings about the cancellation, Beck said, "You know, we're kind of disappointed about that."
He added that from Boeing's standpoint, the cancellation also is bittersweet.
The sweet
The investment in X-33 was not a waste, says Lockheed Martin's McCollum. "Both we and NASA have learned a great deal through the development of X-33 thus far, and this information will be useful as we go forward."
Among important technological advances were discoveries about cryogenic tank composite materials, lessons about a simpler heat protection system than the shuttle has, and the development of the linear aerospike engine, he said.
"We've learned a lot about self-healing avionics," McCollum added. Someday, such electronic control systems may be able to sense how a space vehicle is operating, diagnose any problems and automatically take corrective actions.
Lockheed Martin has submitted proposals to NASA for other technology demonstration projects under the Space Launch Initiative, "so we certainly hope to be awarded funding to study some of those areas," McCollum said.
Dugway now has a tracking station that can be used with other vehicles, and that alone may make the remote base a more likely candidate for new rounds of tests.
The base is still involved in aspects of two other NASA projects, Moore said, including the Genesis Program scheduled in 2002 and the Stardust Program set for 2006.
"NASA will continue to develop systems that may need testing in the future. If they need to come back to Dugway, we will be waiting," she said.
Scrapping the X-33 and the full-scale VentureStar "does improve the chances other Rocketdyne proposals in the Space Launch Initiative might get funding by NASA," Beck said.
NASA has proposed funding the next stage of the initiative at $4.5 billion over five years.
As the search for a new reusable launch vehicle continues, the present space shuttle fleet will continue to be used. That's good news for Boeing Rocketdyne, because the company not only built the aerospike engine, it also builds the main engines for the shuttle.
What's good for Rocketdyne is also good for Utah's Thiokol — which, ironically, was recently acquired by the builder of the X-33 hydrogen tanks, Alliant.
Thiokol builds the immense solid-rocket boosters that lift every space shuttle off the launch pad. In 1999, Thiokol signed a contract to continue producing the motors through May 2005. The contract, providing 70 flight motors and three test motors, is worth more than $1.7 billion.
"The end of the X-33 program certainly will result in a reliance on the space shuttle through 2020, maybe 2030," said Beck. The reliance should guarantee that funding for the Utah boosters will continue for another generation.
E-MAIL: bau@desnews.com