Engineering topics

Hamaker, Joseph W.

Publications and source records attributed to Hamaker, Joseph W..

7 records

NASA NTRS2001

The Launch Systems Operations Cost Model

One of NASA's primary missions is to reduce the cost of access to space while simultaneously increasing safety. A key component, and one of the least understood, is the recurring operations and support cost for reusable launch systems. In order to predict these costs, NASA, under the leadership of the Independent Program Assessment Office (IPAO), has commissioned the development of a Launch Systems Operations Cost Model (LSOCM). LSOCM is a tool to predict the operations & support (O&S) cost of new and modified reusable (and partially reusable) launch systems. The requirements are to predict the non-recurring cost for the ground infrastructure and the recurring cost of maintaining that infrastructure, performing vehicle logistics, and performing the O&S actions to return the vehicle to flight. In addition, the model must estimate the time required to cycle the vehicle through all of the ground processing activities. The current version of LSOCM is an amalgamation of existing tools, leveraging our understanding of shuttle operations cost with a means of predicting how the maintenance burden will change as the vehicle becomes more aircraft like. The use of the Conceptual Operations Manpower Estimating Tool/Operations Cost Model (COMET/OCM) provides a solid point of departure based on shuttle and expendable launch vehicle (ELV) experience. The incorporation of the Reliability and Maintainability Analysis Tool (RMAT) as expressed by a set of response surface model equations gives a method for estimating how changing launch system characteristics affects cost and cycle time as compared to today's shuttle system. Plans are being made to improve the model. The development team will be spending the next few months devising a structured methodology that will enable verified and validated algorithms to give accurate cost estimates. To assist in this endeavor the LSOCM team is part of an Agency wide effort to combine resources with other cost and operations professionals to support models, databases, and operations assessments.

Prince, Frank A.↗

NASA NTRS2001

Improving Space Project Cost Estimating with Engineering Management Variables

Current space project cost models attempt to predict space flight project cost via regression equations, which relate the cost of projects to technical performance metrics (e.g. weight, thrust, power, pointing accuracy, etc.). This paper examines the introduction of engineering management parameters to the set of explanatory variables. A number of specific engineering management variables are considered and exploratory regression analysis is performed to determine if there is statistical evidence for cost effects apart from technical aspects of the projects. It is concluded that there are other non-technical effects at work and that further research is warranted to determine if it can be shown that these cost effects are definitely related to engineering management.

Hamaker, Joseph W.↗

NASA NTRS1999

The Faster, Better, Cheaper Approach to Space Missions: An Engineering Management Assessment

NASA was chartered as an independent civilian space agency in 1958 following the Soviet Union's dramatic launch of the Sputnik 1 (1957). In his state of the union address in May of 1961, President Kennedy issued to the fledging organization his famous challenge for a manned lunar mission by the end of the decade. The Mercury, Gemini and Apollo programs that followed put the utmost value on high quality, low risk (as low as possible within the context of space flight), quick results, all with little regard for cost. These circumstances essentially melded NASAs culture as an organization capable of great technological achievement but at extremely high cost. The Space Shuttle project, the next major agency endeavor, was put under severe annual budget constraints in the 1970's. NASAs response was to hold to the high quality standards, low risk and annual cost and let schedule suffer. The result was a significant delay in the introduction of the Shuttle as well as overall total cost growth. By the early 1990's, because NASA's budget was declining, the number of projects was also declining. Holding the same cost and schedule productivity levels as before was essentially causing NASA to price itself out of business. In 1992, the helm of NASA was turned over to a new Administrator. Dan Goldin's mantra was "faster, better, cheaper" and his enthusiasm and determination to change the NASA culture was not to be ignored. This research paper documents the various implementations of "faster, better, cheaper" that have been attempted, analyzes their impact and compares the cost performance of these new projects to previous NASA benchmarks. Fundamentally, many elements of "faster, better, cheaper" are found to be working well, especially on smaller projects. Some of the initiatives are found to apply only to smaller or experimental projects however, so that extrapolation to "flagship" projects may be problematic.

Hamaker, Joseph W.↗

NASA NTRS1998

Benefits of Government Incentives for Reusable Launch Vehicle Development

Many exciting new opportunities in space, both government missions and business ventures, could be realized by a reduction in launch prices. Reusable launch vehicle (RLV) designs have the potential to lower launch costs dramatically from those of today's expendable and partially-expendable vehicles. Unfortunately, governments must budget to support existing launch capability, and so lack the resources necessary to completely fund development of new reusable systems. In addition, the new commercial space markets are too immature and uncertain to motivate the launch industry to undertake a project of this magnitude and risk. Low-cost launch vehicles will not be developed without a mature market to service; however, launch prices must be reduced in order for a commercial launch market to mature. This paper estimates and discusses the various benefits that may be reaped from government incentives for a commercial reusable launch vehicle program.

Shaw, Eric J.↗

NASA NTRS1994

But what will it Cost? The history of NASA cost estimating

Within two years of being chartered in 1958 as an independent agency to conduct civilian pursuits in aeronautics and space, NASA absorbed either wholly or partially the people, facilities, and equipment of several existing organizations. These included the laboratories of the National Advisory Committee of Aeronautics (NACA) at Langley Research Center in Virginia, Ames Research Center in California, and Lewis Research Center in Ohio; the Army Ballistic Missile Agency (ABMA) at Redstone Arsenal Alabama, for which the team of Wernher von Braun worked; and the Department of Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) and their ongoing work on big boosters. These were especially valuable resources to jump start the new agency in light of the shocking success of the Soviet space probe Sputnik in the autumn of the previous year and the corresponding pressure from an impatient American public to produce some response. Along with these inheritances, there came some existing systems engineering and management practices, including project cost estimating methodologies. This paper will briefly trace the origins of those methods and how they evolved within the agency over the past three decades.

Hamaker, Joseph W.↗

NASA NTRS1992

New Ways Of Doing Business (NWODB) cost quantification analysis

The cost of designing, producing, and operating typical aerospace flight hardware is necessarily more expensive than most other human endeavors. Because of the more stringent environment of space, hardware designed to operate there will probably always be more expensive than similar hardware which is designed for less taxing environments. It is the thesis of this study that there are very significant improvements that can be made in the cost of aerospace flight hardware.

Hamaker, Joseph W.↗

NASA NTRS1989

Expendable vs reusable propulsion systems cost sensitivity

One of the key trade studies that must be considered when studying any new space transportation hardware is whether to go reusable or expendable. An analysis is presented here for such a trade relative to a proposed Liquid Rocket Booster which is being studied at MSFC. The assumptions or inputs to the trade were developed and integrated into a model that compares the Life-Cycle Costs of both a reusable LRB and an expendable LRB. Sensitivities were run by varying the input variables to see their effect on total cost. In addition a Monte-Carlo simulation was run to determine the amount of cost risk that may be involved in a decision to reuse or expend.

Hamaker, Joseph W.↗