A Comparison of Two Different Approaches to Hydrazine Loading of Spacecraft: The Use of SCAPE and Alternative Approaches

The loading of spacecraft with Hydrazine type fuels has long been recognized as a hazardous operation. This has led to safety strategies that include the use of SCAPE protective suits for personnel. The use of SCAPE suits have an excellent safety record, however there are associated drawbacks. Drawbacks include the high cost of maintaining and cleaning the suits, reduced mobility and dexterity when wearing the suits, the requirement for extensive specialized health and safety training, and the need to rotate personnel every two hours. A study was undertaken to look at procedures and/or equipment to eliminate or reduce the time spent in SCAPE-type operations. The major conclusions are drawn from observations of the loading of the JPL/NASA spacecraft Deep Space One (DS1) at KSC and the loading of a commercial communications satellite by Motorola at Vandenberg AF Base. The DS1 operations require extensive use of SCAPE suits, while the Motorola operation uses only SPLASH attire with a two-man team on standby in SCAPE. The Motorola team used very different loading equipment and procedures based on an integrated approach involving the propellant supplier. Overall, the Motorola approach was very clean, much faster and simpler than the DS1 procedure. The DS1 spacecraft used a bladder in the propellant tank, whereas the Motorola spacecraft used a Propellant Management Device (PMD). The Motorola approach cannot be used for tanks with bladders. To overcome this problem, some new procedures and new equipment are proposed to enable tanks with bladders to be loaded without using SCAPE, using a modified Motorola approach. Overall, it appears feasible to adopt the non-SCAPE approach while maintaining a very high degree of safety and reliability.