Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
A Call For A New Human Missions Cost Model
NASA 2019 Cost and Schedule Analysis SymposiumNASA Johnson Space Center, August 13-15, 2019
Joseph Hamaker, PhD
Christian Smart, PhD
Galorath Human Missions Cost Model Advocates
Dr. Joseph HamakerDirector, NASA and DoD Programs
• Founding Director of the Cost
Analysis Division at NASA
Headquarters
• Originator of NASA’s NAFCOM
cost model, the NASA QuickCost
Model, the NASA Cost Analysis
Data Requirement and the NASA
ONCE database
Dr. Christian SmartChief Scientist
• Former Director for Cost Analytics
and Parametric Estimating for the
U.S. Missile Defense Agency
• Oversaw development of the
NASA/Air Force Cost Model
(NAFCOM)
• Provides subject matter expertise to
NASA Headquarters, DARPA, and
Space Development Agency
• Recognized expert on parametrics
2
Agenda
Historical human space
projects
Why consider a new
Human Missions Cost
Model
Database for a
Human Missions
Cost Model
• NASA has over 50 years of Human Space Missions
experience
• NASA’s International Partners have accomplished
additional projects
• There are around 70 projects that can provide cost and
schedule data
• This talk will explore how that data might be assembled
to form the basis for a Human Missions Cost Model
.
WHY A NEW HUMAN MISSIONS COST MODEL?
Lots of projects: Lunar Gateway,
Orion, landers, SLS, commercially
provided elements (which we may
want to independently estimate)
Artemis needs cost and schedule
estimates
Existing tools have some
applicability but it seems obvious
(to us) that a dedicated HMCM is
needed
And this can be done—all we
need is the vision, the will and the
resources to do it
NASA’s Artemis Program plans to
land humans on the moon by 2024
Some of these elements have
ongoing cost trajectories (e.g. SLS,
Orion) while others are conceptual
5
Functional Similarity (Selected Examples)
6
Apollo CSM
Orion
Skylab Apollo LEM
Artemis Lander Gateway
But Does That Old Cost and Schedule Data Apply?
We have no
better data
The basic physics
and engineering
are the same
Human space flight
engineering is
always on the
bleeding edge
7
We submit that the old cost and schedule data is applicable
A Few Example Projects(A Total of 70 Listed On Next Chart)
8
Gemini Apollo CSM Apollo LEM ESA Spacelab
ESA Jules Verne ATV ISS Unity (Node 1)
Skylab
Interim Control Module
About 70 Historical Human Space Projects Altogether
9
Gemini CapsuleApollo Command & Service Module (CSM)Apollo Lunar Excursion Module (LEM)Skylab Space StationESA Spacelab ModuleESA Spacelab PalletSoyuz-TMISS Zarya aka Functional Cargo Block (FGB)ISS Unity (Node 1), Pressurized Mating Adapter (PMA-1 and PMA-2)ISS Pressurized Mating Adapter 1 (PMA-1)Progress M1ISS Interim Control ModuleISS Zvezda (Service Module)aka DOS-8, Service Module or SM (Russian: СМ)ISS Z1 Truss PMA-3ISS P6 TrussISS Solar Array ISS Destiny (also known as the US Laboratory)ISS Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS) aka Canadarm2ISS Quest (Joint Airlock)ISS Pirs (Docking Compartment & Airlock)ISS S0 Truss aka the Center Integrated Truss Assembly Starboard 0 TrussISS Mobile Base System (MBS)ISS S1 Truss aka Starboard Side Thermal Radiator TrussISS P1 Truss aka Port Side Thermal Radiator TrussISS Enhanced ISS Boom AssemblyISS P3/P4 Truss ISS Solar Array 1ISS P5 Truss[13]
ISS S3/S4 Truss & Solar ArraysISS S5 Truss and ESP-3 (External Stowage Platform)ISS Harmony (Node 2)ISS Columbus (European Laboratory)ISS Jules Verne Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV)ISS Special Purpose Dexterous Manipulator (SPDM, aka Dextre or Canada handISS S6 Truss & Solar Arrays
ISS Kibo Japanese Pressurized Module (JEM-PM)ISS H-II Transfer Vehicle (HTV) aka KounotoriISS Cupola ISS Tranquility (Node 3) Dragon CapsuleISS Leonardo (PMM) ISS International Docking Adapter (IDAISS Bigelow Expandable Activity Module[20]
CST-100 StarlinerUzlovoy aka UDM, Prichal and also UMISS Russian NEMS ModuleISS Nauka aka Multipurpose Laboratory Module (MLM) or FGB-2ISS Science-Power Module-1 (SPM-1)aka NEM-1 ISS NanoRacks Airlock ModuleESA Service Module for OrionISS External Stowage Platform-1ISS Mobile Transporter (MT)ISS ESP-2 (Esternal Stowage Platform)ISS External TCSISS External C&TISS External GN&CISS Japanese Logistics Module (ELM-PS)ISS JEM Robotic Arm aka JEM Remote Manipulator System (RMS)ISS Japanese Exposed Facility (JEM-EF)ISS Poisk aka Mini-Research Module 2 (MRM-2)ISS ExPRESS Logistics Carriers 1 & 2ISS EXPRESS Logistics Carrier 4ISS Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer aka AMS-02Orbiter Boom Sensor System (OBSS)ISS EXPRESS Logistics Carrier 3ISS European Robotic ArmISS Science-Power Module-2 (SPM-2)aka NEM-2 Cygnus CapsuleOrion Capsule
Yes, There Are A Few Issues With The Data
Even if total cost exists, it is not at
the subsystem level
Some of the projects are
commercial or even non-U.S.
10
Many of these projects don’t have
documented cost and schedule
data
Many of These Projects Don’t Have Documented Data
11
• Don’t underestimate the power of…
▪ Industrial espionage
▪ Really determined data scroungers
• The total cost, schedule and mass of many of these missions is given on various websites, in space news articles, etc.
▪ Sometimes wet mass, but dry mass can be estimated easily from wet mass
▪ Total cost and schedule can be sanity checked by comparing with some known analogies
Cost And Mass Does Not Exits At The Subsystem Level
12
• We visualize the HMCM to initially operate at the subsystem level
▪ With mass as the principal independent variable at first
▪ Other variables can be added later to address numerous other cost drivers
▪ Let’s just get the basic first step done
• We are proposing that “missing” subsystem data can be imputed
▪ The Galorath Chief Engineer, Dr. Christian Smart, is speaking at this symposium on imputation
▪ A simple way to think about how missing data could be estimated
▪ Tabulate subsystem cost and mass breakouts of all the known data points
▪ Select which historical projects with complete data are analogous to the projects with data holes
▪ Apply those percentages to the projects lacking subsystem data
▪ Balance the books so that all elements add to the total
Some Of The Projects Are Commercial or Even Non-U.S
13
• The physics and engineering are the same
• Institutional culture may be different
▪ NASA, ESA, ASI, JAXA cost scatterplot on top of each other
▪ ESA member countries “eat overruns”
▪ However, there are inefficiencies of assigning work to member nations
▪ These two things seem to about cancel out
▪ Commercial projects in comparison to NASA has been analyzed
▪ Somewhere in the 50% range give or take
▪ Therefore, upward adjustments can be made for commercial cost data to get everything on a level playing field
▪ Again, other variables can be added/re-introduced later
▪ NASA and Roscosmos differences will be more problematic
▪ But not an overwhelming problem
▪ Christian and I could do this between morning coffee and lunch
KEY CONCEPTS
WE CAN DO THIS
ENTERPRISE READY
DATA CAN BE FOUND/IMPUTED
MODEL IS NEEDED
14
