@article{DachwaldSeboldtLoebetal.2008,
  author    = {Dachwald, Bernd and Seboldt, Wolfgang and Loeb, H. W. and Schartner, Karl-Heinz},
  title     = {Main Belt Asteroid Sample Return Mission Using Solar Electric Propulsion},
  series = {Acta Astronautica. 63 (2008), H. 1-4},
  journal   = {Acta Astronautica. 63 (2008), H. 1-4},
  isbn      = {0094-5765},
  pages     = {91 -- 101},
  year      = {2008},
  language  = {en}
}
@inproceedings{DachwaldOhndorfSpurmannetal.2009,
  author    = {Dachwald, Bernd and Ohndorf, Andreas and Spurmann, J. and Loeb, H. W. and Schartner, Karl-Heinz and Seboldt, Wolfgang},
  title     = {Mission design for a SEP mission to saturn},
  series = {60th International Astronautical Congress 2009 (IAC 2009)},
  booktitle = {60th International Astronautical Congress 2009 (IAC 2009)},
  publisher = {Curran Associates, Inc.},
  address   = {Red Hook, NY},
  isbn      = {978-1-61567-908-9},
  pages     = {11 Seiten},
  year      = {2009},
  abstract  = {Within ESA's Cosmic Vision 2015-2025 plan, a mission to explore the Saturnian System, with special emphasis on its two moons Titan and Enceladus, was selected for study, termed TANDEM (Titan and Enceladus Mission). In this paper, we describe an optimized mission design for a TANDEM-derived solar electric propulsion (SEP) mission. We have chosen the SEP mission scenario for the interplanetary transfer of the TANDEM spacecraft because all feasible gravity assist sequences for a chemical transfer between 2015 and 2025 result in long flight times of about nine years. Our SEP system is based on the German RIT ion engine. For our optimized mission design, we have extensively explored the SEP parameter space (specific impulse, thrust level, power level) and have calculated an optimal interplanetary trajectory for each setting. In contrast to the original TANDEM mission concept, which intends to use two launch vehicles and an all-chemical transfer, our SEP mission design requires only a single Ariane 5 ECA launch for the same payload mass. Without gravity assist, it yields a faster and more flexible transfer with a fight time of less than seven years, and an increased payload ratio. Our mission design proves thereby the capability of SEP even for missions into the outer solar system.},
  language  = {en}
}
@incollection{MacdonaldMcGrathAppourchauxetal.2014,
  author    = {Macdonald, Malcolm and McGrath, C. and Appourchaux, T. and Dachwald, Bernd and Finsterle, W. and Gizon, L. and Liewer, P. C. and McInnes, Colin R. and Mengali, G. and Seboldt, Wolfgang and Sekii, T. and Solanki, S. K. and Velli, M. and Wimmer-Schweingruber, R. F. and Spietz, Peter and Reinhard, Ruedeger},
  title     = {Gossamer roadmap technology reference study for a solar polar mission},
  series = {Advances in solar sailing},
  booktitle = {Advances in solar sailing},
  editor    = {Macdonald, Malcolm},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {Berlin, Heidelberg},
  isbn      = {978-3-642-34906-5},
  doi       = {10.1007/978-3-642-34907-2_17},
  pages     = {243 -- 257},
  year      = {2014},
  abstract  = {A technology reference study for a solar polar mission is presented. The study uses novel analytical methods to quantify the mission design space including the required sail performance to achieve a given solar polar observation angle within a given timeframe and thus to derive mass allocations for the remaining spacecraft sub-systems, that is excluding the solar sail sub-system. A parametric, bottom-up, system mass budget analysis is then used to establish the required sail technology to deliver a range of science payloads, and to establish where such payloads can be delivered to within a given timeframe. It is found that a solar polar mission requires a solar sail of side-length 100-125 m to deliver a 'sufficient value' minimum science payload, and that a 2.5 μm sail film substrate is typically required, however the design is much less sensitive to the boom specific mass.},
  language  = {en}
}
@inproceedings{LoebSchartnerDachwaldetal.2011,
  author    = {Loeb, Horst W. and Schartner, Karl-Heinz and Dachwald, Bernd and Ohndorf, Andreas and Seboldt, Wolfgang},
  title     = {An Interstellar - Heliopause mission using a combination of solar/radioisotope electric propulsion},
  series = {Presented at the 32nd International Electric Propulsion Conference},
  booktitle = {Presented at the 32nd International Electric Propulsion Conference},
  pages     = {1 -- 7},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {There is common agreement within the scientific community that in order to understand our local galactic environment it will be necessary to send a spacecraft into the region beyond the solar wind termination shock. Considering distances of 200 AU for a new mission, one needs a spacecraft travelling at a speed of close to 10 AU/yr in order to keep the mission duration in the range of less than 25 yrs, a transfer time postulated by ESA.Two propulsion options for the mission have been proposed and discussed so far: the solar sail propulsion and the ballistic/radioisotope electric propulsion. As a further alternative, we here investigate a combination of solar-electric propulsion and radioisotope-electric propulsion. The solar-electric propulsion stage consists of six 22 cm diameter "RIT-22"ion thrusters working with a high specific impulse of 7377 s corresponding to a positive grid voltage of 5 kV. Solar power of 53 kW BOM is provided by a light-weight solar array. The REP-stage consists of four space-proven 10 cm diameter "RIT-10" ion thrusters that will be operating one after the other for 9 yrs in total. Four advanced radioisotope generators provide 648 W at BOM. The scientific instrument package is oriented at earlier studies. For its mass and electric power requirement 35 kg and 35 W are assessed, respectively. Optimized trajectory calculations, treated in a separate contribution, are based on our "InTrance" method.The program yields a burn out of the REP stage in a distance of 79.6 AU for a usage of 154 kg of Xe propellant. With a C3 = 45,1 (km/s)2 a heliocentric probe velocity of 10 AU/yr is reached at this distance, provided a close Jupiter gravity assist adds a velocity increment of 2.7 AU/yr. A transfer time of 23.8 yrs results for this scenario requiring about 450 kg Xe for the SEP stage, jettisoned at 3 AU. We interpret the SEP/REP propulsion as a competing alternative to solar sail and ballistic/REP propulsion. Omiting a Jupiter fly-by even allows more launch flexibility, leaving the mission duration in the range of the ESA specification.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{DachwaldSeboldtLaemmerzahl2008,
  author    = {Dachwald, Bernd and Seboldt, Wolfgang and L{\"a}mmerzahl, W.},
  title     = {Solar Sail Propulsion: An Enabling Technology for Fundamental Physics Missions},
  series = {Lasers, Clocks and Drag Free Control : Exploration of Relativistic Gravity in Space / by Hansj{\"o}rg Dittus ..., eds. - ( Astrophysics and Space Science Library ; 349)},
  journal   = {Lasers, Clocks and Drag Free Control : Exploration of Relativistic Gravity in Space / by Hansj{\"o}rg Dittus ..., eds. - ( Astrophysics and Space Science Library ; 349)},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {Berlin [u.a.]},
  isbn      = {978-3-540-34376-9},
  pages     = {379 -- 398},
  year      = {2008},
  language  = {en}
}
@inproceedings{DachwaldSeboldtLoebetal.2007,
  author    = {Dachwald, Bernd and Seboldt, Wolfgang and Loeb, Horst W. and Schartner, Karl-Heinz},
  title     = {A comparison of SEP and NEP for a main belt asteroid sample return mission},
  series = {7th International Symposium on Launcher Technologies, Barcelona, Spain, 02-05 April 2007},
  booktitle = {7th International Symposium on Launcher Technologies, Barcelona, Spain, 02-05 April 2007},
  pages     = {1 -- 10},
  year      = {2007},
  abstract  = {Innovative interplanetary deep space missions, like a main belt asteroid sample return mission, require ever larger velocity increments (∆V s) and thus ever more demanding propulsion capabilities. Providing much larger exhaust velocities than chemical high-thrust systems, electric low-thrust space-propulsion systems can significantly enhance or even enable such high-energy missions. In 1995, a European-Russian Joint Study Group (JSG) presented a study report on "Advanced Interplanetary Missions Using Nuclear-Electric Propulsion" (NEP). One of the investigated reference missions was a sample return (SR) from the main belt asteroid (19) Fortuna. The envisaged nuclear power plant, Topaz-25, however, could not be realized and also the worldwide developments in space reactor hardware stalled. In this paper, we investigate, whether such a mission is also feasible using a solar electric propulsion (SEP) system and compare our SEP results to corresponding NEP results.},
  language  = {en}
}
@inproceedings{LoebSchartnerSeboldtetal.2006,
  author    = {Loeb, Horst W. and Schartner, Karl-Heinz and Seboldt, Wolfgang and Dachwald, Bernd and Streppel, Joern and Meusemann, Hans and Sch{\"u}lke, Peter},
  title     = {SEP for a lander mission to the jovian moon europa},
  series = {57th International Astronautical Congress},
  booktitle = {57th International Astronautical Congress},
  doi       = {10.2514/6.IAC-06-C4.4.04},
  pages     = {1 -- 12},
  year      = {2006},
  abstract  = {Under DLR-contract, Giessen University and DLR Cologne are studying solar-electric propulsion missions (SEP) to the outer regions of the solar system. The most challenging reference mission concerns the transport of a 1.35-tons chemical lander spacecraft into an 80-RJ circular orbit around Jupiter, which would enable to place a 375 kg lander with 50 kg of scientific instruments on the surface of the icy moon "Europa". Thorough analyses show that the best solution in terms of SEP launch mass times thrusting time would be a two-stage EP module and a triple-junction solar array with concentrators which would be deployed step by step. Mission performance optimizations suggest to propel the spacecraft in the first EP stage by 6 gridded ion thrusters, running at 4.0 kV of beam voltage, which would save launch mass, and in the second stage by 4 thrusters with 1.25 to 1.5 kV of positive high voltage saving thrusting time. In this way, the launch mass of the spacecraft would be kept within 5.3 tons. Without a launcher's C3 and interplanetary gravity assists, Jupiter might be reached within about 4 yrs. The spiraling-down into the parking orbit would need another 1.8 yrs. This "large mission" can be scaled down to a smaller one, e.g., by halving all masses, the solar array power, and the number of thrusters. Due to their reliability, long lifetime and easy control, RIT-22 engines have been chosen for mission analysis. Based on precise tests, the thruster performance has been modeled.},
  language  = {en}
}