Analysis of Parallel Burn, No-Crossfeed TSTO RLV Architectures and Comparison to Parallel Burn with Crossfeed and Series Burn Architectures

Three dominant Two Stage To Orbit (TSTO) class architectures were studied: Series Burn (SB), Parallel Bum with crossfeed (PBw/cf), and Parallel Burn, no-crossfeed (PBncf). The study goal was to determine what factors uniquely affect PBncf architectures, how each of these factors interact, and to determine from a performance perspective whether a PBncf vehicle could be competitive with a PBw/cf or a SB vehicle using equivalent technology and assumptions. In all cases, performance was evaluated on a relative basis for a fixed payload and mission by comparing gross and dry vehicle masses of a closed vehicle. Propellant combinations studied were LOX: LH2 propelled booster and orbiter (HH) and LOX: Kerosene booster with LOX: LH2 orbiter (KH). The study observations were: 1) A PBncf orbiter should be throttled as deeply as possible after launch until the staging point. 2) A PBncf TSTO architecture is feasible for systems that stage at mach 7. 2a) HH architectures can achieve a mass growth relative to PBw/cf of <20%. 2b) KH architectures can achieve a mass growth relative to Series Burn of <20%. 3) Center of gravity (CG) control will be a major issue for a PBncf vehicle, due to the low orbiter specific thrust to weight ratio and to the position of the orbiter required to align the nozzle heights at liftoff. 4) Thrust to weight ratios of 1.3 at liftoff and between 1.0 and 0.9 when staging at mach 7 appear to be close to ideal for PBncf vehicles. 5) Performance for HH vehicles was better when staged at mach 7 instead of mach 5. The study suggests possible methods to maximize performance of PBncf vehicle architectures in order to meet mission design requirements.