A GenCorp Company Von Braun Symposium Panel: National Institute of Rocket Propulsion Systems (NIRPS) Aerojet s Perspective On Issues Facing the U.S. Propulsion Industry Presented by Julie Van Kleeck 26 October 2011
Aerojet Today Current Business Units $850.7 $787 $739 $726 $617 $615 $321 $492 Space & Launch Systems Aerojet Heritage 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Divest Electronics Propulsion & Energetics Tactical Systems Missile Defense Systems Pratt & Whitney s Chemical Systems Division (CSD) General Dynamics Space Systems (Redmond Operations) March 2011 Atlantic Research Corporation (ARC) Complementary Acquisitions Force Projection & Protection Aerojet: A Growing Company Focused on Aerospace and Defense 2 11/7/2011 AEROJET PROPRIETARY 1
U.S. Rocket Propulsion Industry Since 1941, more than a dozen U.S. companies had been involved in rocket propulsion business Only a few major U.S. companies are active today, however various new commercial space entities are emerging Retirement of shuttle and Historically low launch rates; Increasingly a World Market From 1941 Today Liquid Rocketdyne Thiokol Solid Pratt & Whitney Hercules TRW Aerojet Atlantic Research Corp General Electric Grand Central Rocket Co. American Pacific Corp Rocket Research Corp Rohm & Hass Co. Hamilton Standard Div. Reaction Motors United Technology Center Liquid Solid Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne Northrop Grumman Space-X Aerojet Small Business Blue Origin, Busek, Exquadrum, Florida Turbine, Orbitec WASK, Williams International, XCOR & many more ATK
U.S. Rocket Engine Development History Ref: Sackheim, AIAA-23257-7531, Journal of Propulsion and Power, Nov. Dec. 2006 There have been no competitive LRE developments for over 3 decades
U.S. Propulsion Programs Rarely Make It To Production A GenCorp Company Aerojet Launch Vehicle Propulsion Programs Over the Last 20 Years
Aerojet Demographics Reflect U.S. Aerospace & Defense Workforce Issues All Employees By Age Age Distribution for Engineers 210 193 222 401 610 448 256 62 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 34 93 73 54 117 162 173 93 51 Total: 874 18 6 19-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 66-70 71+ 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 5 82 620 25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 66-70 71+ Almost half within 5 years of retirement eligibility Recent focus on new grads is paying of Cross Training and Agile Business model is aiding in both attracting and retaining Approximately 30% of Workforce is Composed of Engineers & Scientists 21-25 19-20
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Engine Development Cycle is At Risk if Aging Workforce is Not Replenished EMD Full Scale Development Qual IOC Production 2010 2015 2020 2025 Age Distribution in Aerospace & Defense* Age 50+ Specialists are Still Available to Provide Training to Emerging Technical Base Workforce is Available NOW to Support New Development 20-35 35-50 50+ Age % of Workforce
U.S.-Made Hydrocarbon Engines Are Virtually Non-Existent Today and Have Never Approached Soviet/Russian Designs Hydrocarbon Booster Engines 320 310 300 290 NK-33 (Taurus 2) RD-171 (Sea Launch) RD-180 (Atlas V) RD-191 YF-100 Foreign Modern Technology Ox-Rich Staged Combustion Cycle 280 270 260 250 MA-5 F-1 H-1 LR-87 THOR RS-27 (Delta II) 240 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 Year First Deployed Merlin (Falcon) USA Old Technology Gas Generator Cycle U.S. Russia China U.S., out of production Many U.S.-Based Launchers (Atlas V, Sea Launch and Taurus 2) Now Rely On Hydrocarbon Booster Engines From Russia 7 Performance Isp Sea Level (sec)
Issues Facing the Propulsion Industry Decreasing demand and ever increasing budget pressures overcapacity and obsolete business practices Risk averse culture fear of new developments Minimal use of competition to drive affordability and innovation Lack of sustained research and development (30 years of stops/starts) Minimal new development in last few decades lack of new products and loss of ability to develop new products Loss of US competitiveness in a world market Also makes it hard to attract and retain people to industry Aerospace demographics possible large exodus of remaining talent in near future Lack of a coordinated approach to propulsion by government Less than efficient use of diminishing funds Low production rates due to vehicle specific propulsion Lack of commitment to a long term plan 8