NASA NTRS2016
Are NASA’s space flight instruments becoming cheaper or more expensive as time marches forward? After analyzing the costs of hundreds of instruments launched over the last 30 years, the short answer to this question is no… and yes. This paper gives a visual analysis of the cost time trends for various NASA space flight instrument types, such as optical, particles detectors, fields detectors and microwave instruments. In addition to the statistical approaches utilized, such as significance tests, cluster analysis and principle components analysis (PCA), we will also discuss the intangibles which are likely at play, including technological progress, NASA policy and the luck of the draw associated with mission manifests. This analysis was performed as the main driver for the NASA Instrument Cost Model (NICM) recent cost estimating model redesign. Started in 2004, the first version of NICM was based off of instruments launched from 1985-2005, or 20 years’ worth of data. As NICM hit its 10-year anniversary, we wanted to know: should NICM continue to only use the most recent 20 years’ worth of data (1995-2015)? Are instruments becoming cheaper or more expensive as time marches forward? There is evidence in favor of a drop in the median dollar-per-kg value across some instrument types, but little in others. Whereas further research is needed to substantiate, Particles and Optical-Planetary instrument types show moderate to strong evidence of a downward trend in dollar-per-kg. Further research is required to study the nature of this trend (shift, taper, cyclic, etc.). Little evidence for a similar downward trend was detected for Fields or Microwave instruments, or Optical instruments on Earth Orbiting spacecraft. We presented evidence in favor of a drop in the median dollar-per-kg value for Particles and Optical-Planetary instrument types. While similar evidence was weak at best for Fields and Microwave instruments. We can speculate as to the causes for this effect, but we are also equipped to begin to rule out, or at least prioritize, some of the suspected drivers. We observed, for Particles and Optical-Planetary instruments, that perhaps a launch manifest effect was playing part of the role in the observed decrease in dollar-per-kg over the years, noting that the more flagship class missions, which have more money to spend on their instruments, were seen in the earlier years in our data, versus the later years which were dominated by less expensive class missions. However, if this were a dominating driver, would we not have seen the downward trend in the Fields and Microwave instruments as well, which were drawn from that same launch manifest? The fact that we did not observe this helps us rule out the launch manifest effect, and other drivers, such as advances in technology, that seem to be more likely suspects. In that case, however, why would technology advances be helping the Particles and Optical-Planetary instruments only? Why would it not be impacting Optical-Earth Orbiting instruments? Further suspects were looked at as well and ruled out, such as the “Faster, Better, Cheaper”era of NASA development which did not seem to actually impact trends by instrument type on a dollar-perkg scale. VI. Future Work A. Time Series Detailed Statistical Assessment The analysis discussed above sets the foundation for a more rigorous time series analysis of the data. Time series analysis will further explore evidence to-date of time trends for the instrument types which showed the strongest indicators for a decrease in dollar-per-kg: Optical (Planetary) and Particles instruments. More than providing evidence and top-level significance tests, time series analysis would help elucidate what kind of trend that exists in the data, their significance and allow statistically based forecasting (see Figure 10)