EWR 127-1 PDF

Title: EWR 21AUG95, Version: , Date: Aug, Status: Active, Desc: EWR EASTERN AND WESTERN RANGE (EWR). Tailored EWR , System Safety Program Plan, Noncompliance Requests, and Launch Complex Safety Training and Certification. Find the most up-to-date version of EWR CONT. DIST. at Engineering

Author: Kehn Dakus
Country: Gabon
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Spiritual
Published (Last): 24 February 2008
Pages: 17
PDF File Size: 18.57 Mb
ePub File Size: 3.3 Mb
ISBN: 388-2-76745-486-6
Downloads: 12536
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: JoJojas

Operational responsibilities, such as generating safety requirements, operational testing and evaluation, and all prelaunch and launch safety operational functions, would be retained by AFSPC. At this stage of flight, fuel cutoff often is used for flight termination instead of explosive charges. Findings and Recommendations 43—45 Appendix B: Reformulating EWR as a performance-based requirements document would have several benefits.

Range safety user manual EWR 127-1 (Eastern and Western Range 127-1)

Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif.: This chapter describes a risk management approach to space launch range safety. The National Academies Press.

See Chapter 5 for a discussion of limits on 1277-1 hit probabilities, P ifor ships and aircraft. Switch between the Original Pageswhere you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

Looking for other ways to read this?

Moving the Africa gates uprange has the potential to reduce the cost of safety-related downrange assets, decrease the complexity of range safety operations, and reduce launch holds and delays.


The review focused on two alternatives: Ensuring that safety analyses are accurate and free of unnecessary conservatism will help minimize the temptation to discount their results.

Tailoring provides range users with great flexibility, but it also reveals a serious shortcoming in the usability of EWR Page 23 Share Cite. First, the current risk criteria used by the Air Force are discussed. Supplement to RCC Standard The gates are perpendicular to the nominal trajectory, and the width of the gates accounts for tracking uncertainties and acceptable variations in trajectory.

Page 25 Share Cite. Also, it should be emphasized that the recommended transfer is about functions—not existing organizations or individuals. The 45th Space Wing made the following statement in response to a query from the committee:. The May draft of the new MOA does not indicate any changes in the division of responsibilities described above see Figure The differences may increase costs because of overlap or duplication of effort in developing models, software, and hardware for the two ranges.

Differences in the assumptions and methods used at the ER and WR to determine ship and aircraft exclusion zones are discussed further in Chapter 5. For failure modes in which thrust ends prematurely, a thrust-termination type of FTS would have no added benefit.

Rather than requiring that each user develop its own methods of compliance, the ranges defined many design solutions and included them in EWR as requirements. Users would have the option of 1 implementing the approved method ewwr compliance to streamline the review process, or 2 using an alternate means of compliance, for which users would accept the responsibility for getting approval. Air Force Memorandum of Agreement on Spacelift.


Orbital vehicles are tracked and FTS commands are issued only to the horizon i. No known international agreements would preclude moving the gates. From throughU. 127-11 may also be feasible to move other gates uprange and further reduce the need for downrange facilities.


The Handbook is divided into four separate sections. If the Commander exceeds the criteria it can be argued that the criteria does not exist, or was in fact, never a valid criteria. Also, close working relationships between operational staff at the ranges and acquisition staff within AFMC must be maintained to ensure that new dwr and system modifications are consistent with operational needs and can be efficiently implemented in an operational setting.

If the IIP fails to move downrange at the proper rate as shown on the chevron display, destruct commands are sent.