Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “cost risk”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 235 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1991

Project UM-HAUL: A self-unloading reusable lunar lander

The establishment of a lunar base is technologically and financially challenging. Given the necessary resources and political support, it can be done. In addition to the geopolitical obstacles, however, there are logistical problems involved in establishing such bases that can only be overcome with the acquisition of a significant transportation and communications network in the Earth-Moon spatial region. Considering the significant number of payloads that will be required in this process, the mass-specific cost of launching these payloads, and the added risk and cost of human presence in space, it is clearly desirable to automate major parts of such an operation. One very costly and time-consuming factor in this picture is the delivery of payloads to the Moon. Foreseeable payloads would include atmospheric modules, inflatable habitat kits, energy and oxygen plant elements, ground vehicles, laboratory modules, crew supplies, etc. The duration of high-risk human presence on the Moon could be greatly reduced if all such payloads were delivered to the prospective base site in advance of crew arrival. In this view, the idea of a 'Self-Unloading Reusable Lunar Lander' (SURLL) arises naturally. The general scenario depicts the lander being brought to low lunar orbit (LLO) from Earth atop a generic Orbital Transfer Vehicle (OTV). From LLO, the lander shuttles payloads down to the lunar surface, where, by means of some resident, detachable unloading device, it deploys the payloads and returns to orbit. The general goal is for the system to perform with maximum payload capability, automation, and reliability, while also minimizing environmental hazards, servicing needs, and mission costs. Our response to this demand is UM-HAUL, or the UnManned Heavy pAyload Unloader and Lander. The complete study includes a system description, along with a preliminary cost analysis and a design status assessment.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2015

Neutron Spectrometer Prospecting During the Mojave Volatiles Project Analog Field Test

We know there are volatiles sequestered at the poles of the Moon. While we have evidence of water ice and a number of other compounds based on remote sensing, the detailed distribution, and physical and chemical form are largely unknown. Additional orbital studies of lunar polar volatiles may yield further insights, but the most important next step is to use landed assets to fully characterize the volatile composition and distribution at scales of tens to hundreds of meters. To achieve this range of scales, mobility is needed. Because of the proximity of the Moon, near real-time operation of the surface assets is possible, with an associated reduction in risk and cost. This concept of operations is very different from that of rovers on Mars, and new operational approaches are required to carry out such real-time robotic exploration. The Mojave Volatiles Project (MVP) is a Moon- Mars Analog Mission Activities (MMAMA) program effort aimed at (1) determining effective approaches to operating a real-time but short-duration lunar surface robotic mission, and (2) performing prospecting science in a natural setting, as a test of these approaches. We know there are volatiles sequestered at the poles of the Moon. While we have evidence of water ice and a number of other compounds based on remote sensing, the detailed distribution, and physical and chemical form are largely unknown. Additional orbital studies of lunar polar volatiles may yield further insights, but the most important next step is to use landed assets to fully characterize the volatile composition and distribution at scales of tens to hundreds of meters. To achieve this range of scales, mobility is needed. Because of the proximity of the Moon, near real-time operation of the surface assets is possible, with an associated reduction in risk and cost. This concept of operations is very different from that of rovers on Mars, and new operational approaches are required to carry out such robotic exploration. The Mojave Volatiles Project (MVP) is a Moon- Mars Analog Mission Activities (MMAMA) program effort aimed at (1) determining effective approaches to operating a real-time but short-duration lunar surface robotic mission, and (2) performing prospecting science in a natural setting, as a test of these approaches. Here we describe some results from the first such test, carried out in the Mojave Desert between 16 and 24 October, 2014. The test site was an alluvial fan just E of the Soda Mountains, SW of Baker, California. This site contains desert pavements, ranging from the late Pleistocene to early-Holocene in age. These pavements are undergoing dissection by the ongoing development of washes. A principal objective was to determine the hydration state of different types of desert pavement and bare ground features. The mobility element of the test was provided by the KREX-2 rover, designed and operated by the Intelligent Robotics Group at NASA Ames Research Center.

Moon- Mars Analog Mission Activities (MMAMA)↗
NASA NTRS1977

Space-based solar power conversion and delivery systems study. Volume 5: Economic analysis

Space-based solar power conversion and delivery systems are studied along with a variety of economic and programmatic issues relevant to their development and deployment. The costs, uncertainties and risks associated with the current photovoltaic Satellite Solar Power System (SSPS) configuration, and issues affecting the development of an economically viable SSPS development program are addressed. In particular, the desirability of low earth orbit (LEO) and geosynchronous (GEO) test satellites is examined and critical technology areas are identified. The development of SSPS unit production (nth item), and operation and maintenance cost models suitable for incorporation into a risk assessment (Monte Carlo) model (RAM) are reported. The RAM was then used to evaluate the current SSPS configuration expected costs and cost-risk associated with this configuration. By examining differential costs and cost-risk as a function of postulated technology developments, the critical technologies, that is, those which drive costs and/or cost-risk, are identified. It is shown that the key technology area deals with productivity in space, that is, the ability to fabricate and assemble large structures in space, not, as might be expected, with some hardware component technology.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2015

Testing of an Arcjet Thruster with Capability of Direct-Drive Operation

Electric thrusters typically require a power processing unit (PPU) to convert the spacecraft provided power to the voltage-current that a thruster needs for operation. Testing has been initiated to study whether an arcjet thruster can be operated directly with the power produced by solar arrays without any additional conversion. Elimination of the PPU significantly reduces system-level complexity of the propulsion system, and lowers developmental cost and risk. The work aims to identify and address technical questions related to power conditioning and noise suppression in the system and heating of the thruster in long-duration operation. The apparatus under investigation has a target power level from 400-1,000 W. However, the proposed direct-drive arcjet is potentially a highly scalable concept, applicable to solar-electric spacecraft with up to 100's of kW and beyond. A direct-drive electric propulsion system would be comprised of a thruster that operates with the power supplied directly from the power source (typically solar arrays) with no further power conditioning needed between those two components. Arcjet thrusters are electric propulsion devices, with the power supplied as a high current at low voltage; of all the different types of electric thruster, they are best suited for direct drive from solar arrays. One advantage of an arcjet over Hall or gridded ion thrusters is that for comparable power the arcjet is a much smaller device and can provide more thrust and orders of magnitude higher thrust density (approximately 1-10 N/sq m), albeit at lower I(sub sp) (approximately 800-1000 s). In addition, arcjets are capable of operating on a wide range of propellant options, having been demonstrated on H2, ammonia, N2, Ar, Kr, Xe, while present SOA Hall and ion thrusters are primarily limited to Xe propellant. Direct-drive is often discussed in terms of Hall thrusters, but they require 250-300 V for operation, which is difficult even with high-voltage solar arrays. The arcjet requires under 100 V, which is more in-line with what is easily possible with a solar array. Direct-drive of an electric propulsion system confers the advantage of reducing or eliminating the power processing unit (PPU) that is typically needed to convert the spacecraft-provided power to the voltage and current needed for thruster operation. Since the PPU is typically the most expensive piece of an electric thruster system, from both a fabrication and qualification standpoint, its elimination offers the potential for major reductions in system cost and risk. The design of the arcjet built for this effort was based on previous low power (1 kW class) arcjets. It has a precision machined 99.95% pure tungsten anode which also serves as the nozzle. The anode constrictor region is 1 mm (0.040-in) diameter and 1 mm (0.040-in) long. The cathode is a tungsten welding electrode doped with LaO2; its tip was precision ground to a 30◦ angle ending in a blunt end. The two electrodes are separated by a boron-nitride insulator which also serves as the propellant injection manifold; it ends in six small holes which introduce the propellant gas in the diverging section of the nozzle, directly adjacent to the cathode. The electrodes and insulator are housed in a stainless-steel outer-body, with a Macor insulator at the mid-plane to provide thermal isolation between the front and back halves of the device. The gas seals were made using Grafoil gaskets. Figure 1A shows the assembled thruster in the vacuum chamber; figure 1B shows the thruster in operation on argon at a flow rate of 676 sccm (20 mg/s). Initial testing was conducted in a 3.5-ft diameter vacuum chamber; the ultimate pressure reached during quasi-steady operation of the thruster was about 330 millitorr. The thruster was powered with a high-current, 0-100A, 15 kW power supply. The discharge was initiated with a high-voltage (approximately 10 kV) spark initiator that was isolated from the supply by a stack of diodes. The testing indicated that an operating point exists within the I-V characteristics that is compatible with direct-drive solar-electric operation; for a flow rate of 20 mg/s (argon) the arc could be sustained at a voltage of about 20 V and a current of 25 A (500W).

Martin, Adam K.↗
NASA NTRS2016

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.

0↗
NASA NTRS2016

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.

Foreman, Veronica L.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Streamlining the Design Tradespace for Earth Imaging Constellations

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.

Science Data Processing↗
NASA NTRS2016

Satellite Constellation Cost Modeling: An Aggregate Model

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.

Science Data Processing↗
NASA NTRS2002

Developing a corss-project support system during mission operations: Deep Space 1 extended mission flight control

NASA is focusing on small, low-cost spacecraft for both planetary and earth science missions. Deep Space 1 (DS1) was the first mission to be launched by the NMP. The New Millennium Project (NMP) is designed to develop and test new technology that can be used on future science missions with lower cost and risk. The NMP is finding ways to reduce cost not only in development, but also in operations. DS 1 was approved for an extended mission, but the budget was not large, so the project began looking into part time team members shared with other projects. DS1 launched on October 24, 1998, in it's primary mission it successfully tested twelve new technologies. The extended mission started September 18, 1999 and ran through the encounter with Comet Borrelly on September 22,2001. The Flight Control Team (FCT) was one team that needed to use part time or multi mission people. Circumstances led to a situation where for the few months before the Borrelly encounter in September of 2001 DSl had no certified full time Flight Control Engineers also known as Aces. This paper examines how DS 1 utilized cross-project support including the communication between different projects, and the how the tools used by the Flight Control Engineer fit into cross-project support.

New Millennium Project NMP DS flight control↗
NASA NTRS2020

A Robotically Assembled and Serviced Science Station for Earth Observations

In this paper we present the overall architecture of a ”Science Station”, a robotically assembled and serviced persistent platform that can host multiple payloads for Earth observations. Recent decadal survey findings motivate the need to have spatial and temporal concurrency in measurements from multiple instruments. We have architected the science station to simultaneously host up to twelve Earth Venture class instruments at a time. These instruments can be replaced by newer instruments periodically to take advantage of evolving science needs and technology capabilities. The Science Station can also concurrently host science, commercial, defense and other national interest payloads. The Science Station may provide a cost-effective paradigm by mitigating some of the risks and costs associated with multiple free-flyers that may otherwise be needed for the various instruments. It leverages emergent and existent technologies in robotic assembly and servicing, lower cost commercial launch vehicles, secondary launch vehicles, and rendezvous and proximity operations. In this paper, we report the findings of a survey we conducted on the desired performance of the Science Station from various instrument hosting perspectives. We report the various trade studies that we conducted to developed a feasible architecture that meets the goals of the Science Station while also meeting the constraints of a space system. We also report the various considerations in the configuration, thermal system, pointing system, overall concept of operations, and the robotic system of the Science Station architecture. The paper then describes a testbed activity we are undertaking to evaluate the supervised autonomy robotics needed for the Science Station as well as to conduct a riskreduction demonstration of the end-to-end robotics behaviors.

Mukherjee, Rudranarayan↗
NASA NTRS2010

Heritage and Advanced Technology Systems Engineering Lessons Learned from NASA Deep Space Missions

In the design and development of complex spacecraft missions, project teams frequently assume the use of advanced technology systems or heritage systems to enable a mission or reduce the overall mission risk and cost. As projects proceed through the development life cycle, increasingly detailed knowledge of the advanced and heritage systems within the spacecraft and mission environment identifies unanticipated technical issues. Resolving these issues often results in cost overruns and schedule impacts. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Discovery & New Frontiers (D&NF) Program Office at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) recently studied cost overruns and schedule delays for 5 missions. The goal was to identify the underlying causes for the overruns and delays, and to develop practical mitigations to assist the D&NF projects in identifying potential risks and controlling the associated impacts to proposed mission costs and schedules. The study found that optimistic hardware/software inheritance and technology readiness assumptions caused cost and schedule growth for four of the five missions studied. The cost and schedule growth was not found to result from technical hurdles requiring significant technology development. The projects institutional inheritance and technology readiness processes appear to adequately assess technology viability and prevent technical issues from impacting the final mission success. However, the processes do not appear to identify critical issues early enough in the design cycle to ensure project schedules and estimated costs address the inherent risks. In general, the overruns were traceable to: an inadequate understanding of the heritage system s behavior within the proposed spacecraft design and mission environment; an insufficient level of development experience with the heritage system; or an inadequate scoping of the system-wide impacts necessary to implement an advanced technology for space flight applications. The paper summarizes the study's lessons learned in more detail and offers suggestions for improving the project's ability to identify and manage the technology and heritage risks inherent in the design solution.

Barley, Bryan↗
NASA NTRS2010

Heritage Systems Engineering Lessons from NASA Deep Space Missions

In the design and development of complex spacecraft missions, project teams frequently assume the use of advanced technology systems or heritage systems to enable a mission or reduce the overall mission risk and cost. As projects proceed through the development life cycle, increasingly detailed knowledge of the advanced and heritage systems within the spacecraft and mission environment identifies unanticipated technical issues. Resolving these issues often results in cost overruns and schedule impacts. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Discovery & New Frontiers (D&NF) Program Office at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) recently studied cost overruns and schedule delays for 5 missions. The goal was to identify the underlying causes for the overruns and delays, and to develop practical mitigations to assist the D&NF projects in identifying potential risks and controlling the associated impacts to proposed mission costs and schedules. The study found that optimistic hardware/software inheritance and technology readiness assumptions caused cost and schedule growth for all five missions studied. The cost and schedule growth was not found to be the result of technical hurdles requiring significant technology development. The projects institutional inheritance and technology readiness processes appear to adequately assess technology viability and prevent technical issues from impacting the final mission success. However, the processes do not appear to identify critical issues early enough in the design cycle to ensure project schedules and estimated costs address the inherent risks. In general, the overruns were traceable to: an inadequate understanding of the heritage system s behavior within the proposed spacecraft design and mission environment; an insufficient level of development experience with the heritage system; or an inadequate scoping of the systemwide impacts necessary to implement an advanced technology for space flight applications. The paper summarizes the study s lessons learned in more detail and offers suggestions for improving the project s ability to identify and manage the technology and heritage risks inherent in the design solution.

Barley, Bryan↗
NASA NTRS1986

Cost effective management of space venture risks

The development of a model for the cost-effective management of space venture risks is discussed. The risk assessment and control program of insurance companies is examined. A simplified system development cycle which consists of a conceptual design phase, a preliminary design phase, a final design phase, a construction phase, and a system operations and maintenance phase is described. The model incorporates insurance safety risk methods and reliability engineering, and testing practices used in the development of large aerospace and defense systems.

Giuntini, Ronald E.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling Logistics and Supportability for Crewed Missions Beyond Low Earth Orbit

NASA’s future missions aim to establish a sustained human presence on the lunar surface and send humans to Mars. These missions will send crews farther from home than previous missions, limiting the opportunities for resupply missions. Additionally, the use of multiple launches and reusable elements will increase mission and campaign complexity. Logistics and supportability analysis evaluates the link between mission and system characteristics and key metrics such as logistics and spares mass and volume, crew time, and risk. As missions become increasingly complex and crews are logistically isolated for longer periods of time, logistics and supportability will become more powerful drivers of risk and cost and, therefore, more important considerations during system and mission development. When logistics and supportability are considered from the beginning of system and mission development, opportunities arise to create more efficient, lower-risk systems. Design choices made without detailed consideration of logistics and supportability have the potential to result in greater risks and increased costs as all options may not have been analyzed. This paper provides an overview of a methodology used for space mission logistics and supportability analysis, including key metrics, assumptions, and required inputs. Example applications of this methodology to explore the impacts of system architecture, dormancy, and synergies between lunar and Mars missions are also presented. Conducting these holistic analyses enables informed decision-making for mission planning and system design, which can help mitigate the risk of loss of mission, vehicle, or crew. Using the knowledge of historical missions, experiences gained on the lunar surface, and logistics and supportability analyses, NASA can examine and optimize supportability characteristics for safer and more effective operations for future lunar and Mars missions.

Supportability↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling Logistics and Supportability for Crewed Missions Beyond Low Earth Orbit

NASA’s future missions aim to establish a sustained human presence on the lunar surface and send humans to Mars. These missions will send crews farther from home than previous missions, limiting the opportunities for resupply missions. Additionally, the use of multiple launches and reusable elements will increase mission and campaign complexity. Logistics and supportability analysis evaluates the link between mission and system characteristics and key metrics such as logistics and spares mass and volume, crew time, and risk. As missions become increasingly complex and crews are logistically isolated for longer periods of time, logistics and supportability will become more powerful drivers of risk and cost and, therefore, more important considerations during system and mission development. When logistics and supportability are considered from the beginning of system and mission development, opportunities arise to create more efficient, lower-risk systems. Design choices made without detailed consideration of logistics and supportability have the potential to result in greater risks and increased costs as all options may not have been analyzed. This paper provides an overview of a methodology used for space mission logistics and supportability analysis, including key metrics, assumptions, and required inputs. Example applications of this methodology to explore the impacts of system architecture, dormancy, and synergies between lunar and Mars missions are also presented. Conducting these holistic analyses enables informed decision-making for mission planning and system design, which can help mitigate the risk of loss of mission, vehicle, or crew. Using the knowledge of historical missions, experiences gained on the lunar surface, and logistics and supportability analyses, NASA can examine and optimize supportability characteristics for safer and more effective operations for future lunar and Mars missions.

Supportability↗
NASA NTRS2011

Systems Engineering Using Heritage Spacecraft Technology: Lessons Learned from Discovery and New Frontiers Deep Space Missions

In the design and development of complex spacecraft missions, project teams frequently assume the use of advanced technology or heritage systems to enable a mission or reduce the overall mission risk and cost. As projects proceed through the development life cycle, increasingly detailed knowledge of the advanced or heritage systems and the system environment identifies unanticipated issues that result in cost overruns or schedule impacts. The Discovery & New Frontiers (D&NF) Program Office recently studied cost overruns and schedule delays resulting from advanced technology or heritage assumptions for 6 D&NF missions. The goal was to identify the underlying causes for the overruns and delays, and to develop practical mitigations to assist the D&NF projects in identifying potential risks and controlling the associated impacts to proposed mission costs and schedules. The study found that the cost and schedule growth did not result from technical hurdles requiring significant technology development. Instead, systems engineering processes did not identify critical issues early enough in the design cycle to ensure project schedules and estimated costs address the inherent risks. In general, the overruns were traceable to: inadequate understanding of the heritage system s behavior within the proposed spacecraft design and mission environment; an insufficient level of experience with the heritage system; or an inadequate scoping of the system-wide impacts necessary to implement the heritage or advanced technology. This presentation summarizes the study s findings and offers suggestions for improving the project s ability to identify and manage the risks inherent in the technology and heritage design solution.

Barley, Bryan↗