A Survey of Cost Estimating Methodologies for Distributed Spacecraft Missions

Satellite constellations and Distributed Spacecraft Mission (DSM) architectures offer unique benefits to Earth observation scientists and unique challenges to cost estimators. The Cost and Risk (CR) module of the Tradespace Analysis Tool for Constellations (TAT-C) being developed by NASA Goddard seeks to address some of these challenges by providing a new approach to cost modeling, which aggregates existing Cost Estimating Relationships (CER) from respected sources, cost estimating best practices, and data from existing and proposed satellite designs. Cost estimation through this tool is approached from two perspectives: parametric cost estimating relationships and analogous cost estimation techniques. The dual approach utilized within the TAT-C CR module is intended to address prevailing concerns regarding early design stage cost estimates, and offer increased transparency and fidelity by offering two preliminary perspectives on mission cost. This work outlines the existing cost model, details assumptions built into the model, and explains what measures have been taken to address the particular challenges of constellation cost estimating. The risk estimation portion of the TAT-C CR module is still in development and will be presented in future work. The cost estimate produced by the CR module is not intended to be an exact mission valuation, but rather a comparative tool to assist in the exploration of the constellation design tradespace. Previous work has noted that estimating the cost of satellite constellations is difficult given that no comprehensive model for constellation cost estimation has yet been developed, and as such, quantitative assessment of multiple spacecraft missions has many remaining areas of uncertainty. By incorporating well-established CERs with preliminary approaches to approaching these uncertainties, the CR module offers more complete approach to constellation costing than has previously been available to mission architects or Earth scientists seeking to leverage the capabilities of multiple spacecraft working in support of a common goal.

[1]  Katharine Mary Brumbaugh.  The metrics of spacecraft design reusability and cost analysis as applied to CubeSats , 2012 .

[2]  Olivier L. de Weck,et al.  Optimization of Hybrid Satellite Constellations using Multiple Layers and Mixed Circular-Elliptical Orbits , 2004 .

[3]  Joseph H. Saleh,et al.  Software in military aviation and drone mishaps: Analysis and recommendations for the investigation process , 2015, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[4]  Hugh L. Dryden,et al.  THE NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION , 1958 .

[5]  John R. Olds,et al.  Design and Deployment of a Satellite Constellation Using Collaborative Optimization , 2004 .

[6]  G. Filippazzo.  Complexity based cost estimating relationships for space systems , 2004, 2004 IEEE Aerospace Conference Proceedings (IEEE Cat. No.04TH8720).

[7]  David W. Miller,et al.  A framework for orbital performance evaluation in Distributed Space Missions for earth observation , 2015, 2015 IEEE Aerospace Conference.

[8]  Jacqueline LeMoigne,et al.  Cost and risk analysis of small satellite constellations for earth observation , 2014, 2014 IEEE Aerospace Conference.

[9]  Tahani R. Amer.  Development of Risk Uncertainty Factors from Historical NASA Projects , 2011 .

[10]  James R. Wertz,et al.  Performance Based Cost Modeling: Quantifying the Cost Reduction Potential of Small Observation Satellites , 2013 .

[11]  nasa.  A Performance Assessment of NASA's Heliophysics Program , 2011 .

[12]  Jacqueline Le Moigne,et al.  Satellite Constellation Cost Modeling: An Aggregate Model , 2016 .

[13]  Bill Keeter.  PCEC – Project Cost Estimating Capability , 2014 .

[14]  Welfare Administrative Costs.  OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL , 1997 .

[15]  Amy L. Rasmussen.  Cost models for large versus small spacecraft , 1998, Optics + Photonics.

[16]  Joe Mrozinski,et al.  NASA instrument cost/schedule model Hamid Habib-Agahi , 2011, 2011 Aerospace Conference.

[17]  James R. Wertz,et al.  Space Mission Analysis and Design , 1992 .

[18]  David A. Bearden,et al.  Small-Satellite Costs , 2006 .

[19]  Joseph Howard,et al.  Best Practices for Operations of Satellite Constellations , 2006 .

[20]  K. Cahoy,et al.  Ad hoc CubeSat constellations: Secondary launch coverage and distribution , 2013, 2013 IEEE Aerospace Conference.

[21]  Daniel Selva,et al.  Exploring classification algorithms for early mission formulation cost estimation , 2014, 2014 IEEE Aerospace Conference.

[22]  Jacqueline Le Moigne,et al.  TAT-C: A Trade-Space Analysis Tool for Constellations , 2016 .

[23]  Marc R. Hayhurst,et al.  Mission Operations Cost Estimation Tool (MOCET) , 2017, 2017 IEEE Aerospace Conference.

[24]  V. Caron,et al.  United states. , 2018, Nursing standard (Royal College of Nursing (Great Britain) : 1987).

[25]  A. Ward,et al.  GRACE: Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment , 2002 .

[26]  James R. O'Donnell,et al.  Space Technology 5 Launch and Operations , 2007 .

[27]  木股 雅章,et al.  SPIE's International Symposium on Optical Science, Engineering, and Instrumentation報告 , 1998 .

[28]  Olivier L. de Weck,et al.  Staged Deployment of Communications Satellite Constellations in Low Earth Orbit , 2004, J. Aerosp. Comput. Inf. Commun..

[29]  E.J. Finnegan,et al.  Space Technology 5: pathfinder for future micro-sat constellations , 2004, 2004 IEEE Aerospace Conference Proceedings (IEEE Cat. No.04TH8720).

[30]  Thomas J. Kacena.  Mission Design & Implementation of Satellite Constellations , 1998 .

[31]  Leonard E. Miller,et al.  NASA systems engineering handbook , 1995 .

[32]  R. Nastase.  The train. , 1968, The American journal of nursing.