28 T H INTER NA TIONA L C ONGRESS OF C OND I TI ON MONITOR ING A ND D IA GNOSTIC

ENGINEER ING
( CO MADEM 2015)
  10 T H REGIONA L C ONGR ESS ON NON D ESTR UC TI V E A ND STR UCTUR A L TESTING
( X CO RENDE).

Early Preventive Actions

for Space Mission Success

Edgardo R OGGERO – L e on el GAR ATEGA RAY - L uc a s B ENÍTEZ DEM M LER

Buenos Ai res - December 3 r d - 2015

1 of 49
 Space Mission Arquitecture

SPACE SEGMENT:
Satellite
Launch Services

GROUND SEGMENT:
Control Center
Mission Ground Stations
Processing and Information Distribution Center

USERS SEGMENT:

2 of 49
Space Missions Owners (1957 – 2015)

Spacecraft Owners (not always the same as the entity launching it)
60%
50.5%
50%

40%

30% 26.1%

20%

10%
4.7%
2.4% 8.7%
0% 1.9%
0.9%
a 0.5% 0.2% 2.2%
ssi te
s e 1.9%
ta op a
Ru r in n a
S
Eu
h pa di a
ite
d C Ja In ad el    
n n ra al t
U Ca I s ts rci en
en e d
m m tu
rn m r/S
ov
e Co teu
G a
er Am
th
O

3 of 49
Space Missions Objetives (1957 – 2014)

4 of 49
Worldwide Space Mission Success Rate

Space Missions Space Mission Successful / Failed by Decade (1957 - 2015)

1600

1400

1200

1000

800 Successful

Failed
600

400

200

0
1957 - 1966 1967 - 1976 1977 - 1986 1987 - 1996 1997 - 2006 2007 - 2015

5 of 49
It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble.

It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.

Mark Twain

6 of 49
Contribution to Space Mission Failure

SPACE SEGMENT:

Spacecraft
Launch Vehicle Services

Space Mission Reliability (space segment):

RSS = RLV * RSC

7 of 49
Contribution to Space Mission Failure

Launch Vehicle Failure ≈ 90%

Spacecraft Failure ≈ 10%

8 of 49
Let`s Talk about that 90%

9 of 49
Launch Vehicle Selection – Evolution

10 of 49
Launch Vehicle Selection – Current Cost

Lau n ch C o s t [ k U SD / kg ]
R2=0.9428

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

Spacecraft Mass [kg]

Launch Services Cost mainly depends on Spacecraft Mass,

then cost it is not a key driver when LV load capacity is used efficiently
(chart details FY2013 – Costs 2013 – Same Mass, Orbit & Inclination)

11 of 49
Launch Vehicle Selection - Reliability

Space Mission Reliability (space segment):

RSS = RLV * RSC

LV Reliability:

• It is a key driver because contributes with the 90% of the Mission Success.

• It has no correlation with Launch Vehicle Services price, Spacecraft mass, etc. (R2 < 0.1)

12 of 49
 Launch Vehicle Selection
ROM Cost as a function of Reliability

 Space Segment Cost (SSC) can be simplified as:

SSC = CLVS + CLVI + CSC

Being:

SSC Space Segment Cost [USD / kg of spacecraft]

CLVS Launch Vehicles Services Cost [USD / kg of spacecraft]
CLVI Launch Vehicles Insurance Services Cost [USD / kg of spacecraft]
CSC Spacecraft Cost [USD / kg of spacecraft]

Another equations can be written (S/C Mass < 4000 kg):

CLVI CLVS * (1 – RLV + 0.02)

CSC = Factor * CLVS ( 2 30)
0.9 RLV 1

Final equation for SSC:

SSC CLVS (2.02 + Factor – RLV) 13 of 49
 Launch Vehicle Selection
ROM Cost as a function of Reliability

 
Space Segment Cost (SSC) was:

SSC CLVS (2.02 + Factor – RLV)

Computed for extremal cases:

SSC0.9 / SSC1.0
LV Reliability
! ! !
1.04

1.03 0.9
E R 1 COST RATE
1.02
Cheap
A P 3.1 3.0 3.3%
1.01
S/C Cost
1

H E
Expensive 31.1 31.0 0.3%
0.99

0.98
0 5
C 10 15 20 25 30 35

14 of 49
Launch Vehicle Selection – Real World

Lau n ch C o s t [ k U SD / kg ]

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

Spacecraft Mass [kg]

Current Market of Launch Vehicles only fills some points of the curve,
then some additional cost has to be paid.

15 of 49
Launch Vehicle Selection – Real World

Other Requirements have to be taken into account, like:

• LV restrictions due to agreements

• LV politics restrictions, ITAR free

• S/C Design starts well before LV company contract, during this period
changes can occurs in LV company due to their own dynamics (LV
design changes, greater load capacity, cancel the model, etc.).
• LV Reliability may change since Contract to Launch Date.

16 of 49
 Final Remarks

l i t y
b i
• LV Insurance costs are well correlated with LV Reliability. l ia i t y
R e b i l
e n t l i a
• Almost No correlation between Launch Vehicle
m Services
R e
costs and Reliability.

S e g e s t t )
c e
• LV Reliability must be computed using a
g h
weighted
i average (with more o
weight
C s
to the last flights) using thea
p same LV model
h ech te d
in same configuration. e n t
e S i t l e g m
• LV Reliability is iazmajor keys driver
w e S
i m
x Success. l e e s
because contributes
p c
with
a e the 90% of the
a
Space Segment
h i c d b i n S
m e l c t
To nch v shou n o i m p a

L a u lm o s t
s a
h a
i li ty
b
R e li a
( LV

17 of 49
Let`s Talk about that 10%

18 of 49
More is learned from failure
than from success!

19 of 49
Worldwide Space Mission Success Rate

Space Mission Failure Rate by Decade (1957 - 2015)

Failure Rate [%]
40% 39%

35%

30%

25%

20% Failure Rate

15%
12%
11%
10%
8%
7%

5% 5%

0%
1957 - 1966 1967 - 1976 1977 - 1986 1987 - 1996 1997 - 2006 2007 - 2015

20 of 49
 Failures Cause

r e
Main Reasons for this greater failure rate:
f a ilu
• New Launchers in the Market fr o m !
d e s s
r n e u c c
l e a
• New Players manufacturing
m s
Satellites

e i s
• Faster,rCheaper f r o
M o h a n
and Better Concept
t

21 of 49
From Faster, Cheaper and Better
to Mission Success First

22 of 49
Inseparable Variables Dependencies

23 of 49
Inseparable Variables Dependencies

Technical Technical
Performance Performance

Risk Risk

Cost Schedule Time

Resources
Cost Schedule Time
Resources

Well Balanced Cheaper - Faster - Better

24 of 49
Inseparable Variables Dependencies

25 of 49
 Complexity Index

Developed by Dr. David Bearden to assess the

relative complexity of space systems vs.
development cost and schedule
• Hypothesizes that Complexity Index could be
derived using a broad set of parameters to arrive
at a top-level representation of overall system
capability
• Complexity Index based on performance, mass,
power and technology choices is used to
determine relative ranking of system compared to
over 120 other satellites
• Complexity Index shows good correlation
between complexity, cost and schedule

26 of 49
Complexity Index

27 of 49
Cost vs. Complexity

28 of 49
Schedule vs. Complexity

29 of 49
When is a Mission Too Fast?

Schedule yy==20.084e 1.7203x

20.084e1.7203x
Scheduleas
asFunction
Functionof
ofCom
Complexity
plexity
RR2 2==0.7165
0.7165
144
144 Successful
Successful
132
132
Failed
Failed
(months)

120
Time(months)

120
108
108 Impaired
Impaired
96
96 To-be-determined
To-be-determined
84
84
DevelopmentTime

72
72
60
Development

60
48
48
36
36
24
24
12
12
00
00 0.1
0.1 0.2
0.2 0.3
0.3 0.4
0.4 0.5
0.5 0.6
0.6 0.7
0.7 0.8
0.8 0.9
0.9 11
Com
Complexity
plexityIndex
Index

30 of 49
When is a Mission Too Cheap?

Developm yy==5.6931e 5.9893x

Development
entCost
Costas
asFunction
Functionof
ofCom
Complexity
plexity 5.6931e5.9893x
RR2 2==0.8973
0.8973
10000
10000 Suc
Succces
esssful
ful
Faile d
Failed
Impa ire dd
Impaire
1000
(FY05$M)

1000
Cost(FY05$M)

To-be -de tetermine

To-be-de rminedd
Cost

100
100

10
10
00 0.1
0.1 0.2
0.2 0.3
0.3 0.4
0.4 0.5
0.5 0.6
0.6 0.7
0.7 0.8
0.8 0.9
0.9 11
Com
Complexity
plexityIndex
Index

31 of 49
 Help Proposers to Define Scope of
Mission to Fit Fixed Cost & Schedule

72

75% -
80%
60

Schedule (Months)
Complexity
70% -
75%
0.75-0.8
0.7-0.75
48
0.65-0.7
0.6-0.65
0.55-0.6
0.5-0.55
0.45-0.5
45% - 65% -
50% 70%

36
50% -
55% 55% - 60% -
60% 65%

24
$50 $150 $250 $350 $450 $550 $650
Development Cost (FY04$M)

32 of 49
Complexity vs. Cost & Schedule

Higher
Intuitive Cost,
Result:
Missions that have the
Longer Schedule
greatest complexity, are
Morecost
highest Complex
and longest
Missions
development

33 of 49
 Report on
Project Management in NASA - 2000

“As implementation of this strategy [Faster Cheaper Better] evolved, however, the focus on cost
and schedule reduction increased risk beyond acceptable levels on some NASA projects.”

“The Board finds that implementation of the “Faster, Cheaper, Better” philosophy must be refined
at this stage in a new concept: Mission Success First.”

“This vision, Mission Success First, requires a new NASA culture and new methods for managing
projects. To proceed with this culture shift, mission success must become the highest priority at all
levels of the program/project and the institutional organization. “

“All individuals should feel ownership and accountability, not only for their own work, but for the
success of the entire mission.”

34 of 49
 Report on
Project Management in NASA - 2000

Regarding Successful Teams: “Catching errors early and correcting them is a high priority for these
teams.
During project planning, they develop prototype versions and early testing to uncover design errors,
especially for higher-risk components.
s t !
r test and test some more.”
They perform comprehensive unit testing. Their philosophy is,F
s i
“Test,

c e s
Their maxim is:
S u c
Knownwhat you build.
s i o
sTest what you build.
M i
Test what you fly.
Test like you fly.

35 of 49
Causes for the Past Mission Failures!

36 of 49
Causes for the Past Mission Failures

95% were associated some form of human error:

Management weaknesses, systems engineering shortcomings,
testing deficiencies, missed advanced warnings, etc.

37 of 49
 Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel
2008 Annual Report

[Mike Griffin – NASA Administrator 2005/2009] “Insistence on top-

r t !
level technical and program management talent, as demonstrated
s ta
by a track record of performance in the space business, as a
precondition for holding any significant management position at th e
NASA.
r o m
Far too often in the past, numerous significant leadership positionsf
v e dfor
v o l
at NASA have been filled by people whose primary qualification

process. i n
the job was their relationship with those in control of the selection
e been, literally, the
o
Far too often in the past, such top-level p
jobs
lhave
p e
g h t
very first job these individuals had ever held in the space business.
We spent almost 15 years
e
experiment whose purpose
i conducting an experiment at NASA, an
r seemed to be to demonstrate that it
was possibletfor
t h people without relevant domain expertise to
managee
Git.”
repeat
a highly technical agency. It did not work. We should not

38 of 49
Example: A Product Improvement
More Nutritious Dog Food

Underlying Issue:
In response to consumer complaints, the dog food industry had been searching for a
way to make their dog food more nutritious

Problem:
A major company invented a better formulation, but it unexpectedly resulted in
widespread complaints of dogs becoming mysteriously ill

Impact:
Costly recall; loss of company prestige

Source: Mission Success First - Lessons Learned from Larry Ross NASA Lewis Research Center Director

39 of 49
Dog Owners Noticed a Slow, But
Steady, Deterioration ….

Initial state: Old formula

New formula: Something seems wrong!

40 of 49
Degradation Accelerates

Loss of motivation

Increasing anger
(and also change of breed)

41 of 49
Until: End State Deterioration!

42 of 49
 Improved Dog Food

Investigation:
After intense investigation by company chemists and independent reviewers, the r t !
s
cause could not be found until the manufacturer of the bags was asked to get ta
involved th e
o m
Resolution:
d fr
v e
ol
The chemical bag liner was compatible with the old formula, but incompatible with
the new formula, making the dogs sick
n v
p l ei
p eo
gh t
e r i
If the bag manufacturer had been involved at the start of the reformulation, the
t h
et
costly recall would have been avoided
G

43 of 49
Causes for the Past Mission Failures

95% were associated some form of human error:

Management weaknesses, systems engineering shortcomings,
testing deficiencies, missed advanced warnings, etc.

44 of 49
 System Engineering

Why System Engineering is the root cause in 54%?

• Often due to a culture that doesn’t value it and/or
• Assignment of too few experienced practitioners and/or
• It’s a tough discipline to consistently do right! (especially when things are going well.)

• It is clear, however, that development programs will inevitably fall into serious
trouble without a competent systems engineering function:

“A necessary condition for mission success in all spaceflight programs is a robust,

experienced systems engineering team and well thought-out systems engineering
processes”.

Ref.: Report on Project Management in NASA by the Mars Climate Orbiter Mishap Investigation Board, March 13, 2000.

45 of 49
If System Engineering is not present

i n g
e e r
g i n
e n m s
m s s t e
s te t sy
s y o u .
c e d h t- e s ”
i e n o u g e s s
p e r t h o c
ex e l l p r
s t , d w i n g
b u a n nee r
o
A r team engi

46 of 49
Reliability Assessments

Few space systems will fly often enough to historically validate

Loss Of Mission calculations.

So, what can we do to ensure the safest, most reliable systems?

47 of 49
How to Get Low Probability of LOM

L O M
l
ea nl y
e r
prove it a
1. Get the right design requirements, design it right, and
t h m
2. Make sure you build it like you designedtit, h e n
every times h
u n .
n , w a n o w
a k e l o k
t
3. Test to the greatest extent possible
a s b e
a re b e v e r
4. Instrument thep s
test l
specimeni l(ground
n e
and flight) thoroughly
s te es w ay
e s e
5. Carefully
i
review and
l ti understandm
t all flight data, even if the flight is successful
t h a b i b u
If6. Tightly b l e ,
p ro o s s i b
control changes

48 of 49
Which are the References?

Lesson Learned
Design Principles
Golden Rules
Standards

49 of 49
 Final Remarks
o f
i o n
f u s
d i n e ,
n
a ro u ti n
o n f
t a ti s o s
Some may say that e n the c
foregoing
e t rules are c e
rather boring
e s .
l e m s p a c ti i l u r
pNothing
l l a
earthshaking - all
p r
pretty routine
F a
s i m o a s e o n
u
o ty i n t s e n s i
s ie nc e ! )
o r n M i
Rig q ual i m o exactly
Butmthat’s
o s t the point!
k e t s c
co n t m t ro c
e v e ly n o
l p r r e a l
wi l (It ’
s

50 of 49
Muchas Gracias

51 of 49
Technical Resources Margins

52 of 49
Mechanical Factors of Safety

P=10-α 7

5
PROBABILITY OF FAILURE

ESA
4

NASA
3

0
1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7

Factor of Safety

53 of 49
Thermal Margins

NASA - JPL Aerospace Corporation (1540)

GSFC & Industry

AFT (Allowable Flight Temperatures):

maximum temperatures specified for thermally protected items

54 of 49
 Weighted effectiveness of environmental screens

Te
m
pe
ra
Hi Ran ture
d
360
gh c 330

300

270

240

210

180

150

120

90

60

30

0
-te om yc
m li
pe vib ng
Si r
ne El ratu atio
vi e ct r e n
br ric so
Si
at
io The al a
ne n, r m
st k
r
vi Low fix al ess
br e s
at -tem d f h
io re oc
n p q k
Co , s era ue
m we tur ncy
bi e e
ne p f s
d r e oa
en qu k
vi e
ro ncy
nm
H en
Ac um t
ce idi
le t
ra y
tio
Al n
tit
ud
e
Test Effectiveness

Te
m
pe
ra
Ra tur
Hi n e
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0

gh do cy
-te m clin
m v g
pe ibr
Si r at
ne El atu ion
ec re
vi tri s
br ca oak
at T
io he l st
Si n rm re
ne Lo , fix al ss
vi ed sh
br w-t
at em fre oc
io q k
n, per ue
Co sw a t n c
m ee ure y
bi p so
ne fr
d eq ak
en ue
vi n
ro cy
nm
Hu ent
Ac mi
ce dit
le y
ra
tio
Al n
tit
ud
e
55 of
49
Cost vs. Complexity

56 of 49
57 of 49
58 of 49
Thermal Margins

Design and Analysis Testing

59 of 49
Thermal Margins

AFT (Allowable Flight Temperatures):

maximum temperatures specified for thermally protected items
60 of 49
Apropriate Margins

61 of 49
Apropriate Margins

62 of 49
Apropriate Margins

63 of 49
 Comparison of Schedule Growth Data with Agency Guidelines:
NASA Telescope Missions

120
110 Schedule Growth
Four
Fourof
ofSix
SixTelescope
TelescopeMissions
Missions 100 Initial Schedule
36

System Development Time (Months)

Exceeded
ExceededCommon
CommonSchedule
Schedule
90

Reserve
ReserveGuidelines
Guidelines
80
21
70 16

60
50 7 7 13

40
6.0
30
5.5
20
5.0
10
Growth per Development Year

4.5
0
4.0
0.3 m 0.3 m 0.5 m 0.85 m 0.95 m 2.4 m
3.5

3.0

2.5
NASA/JPL Guidance
1.8 Month per Year
2.0

1.5 General Rule of Thumb

1.0
1 Month per Year
0.5

0.0
0.3 m 0.3 m 0.5 m 0.85 m 0.95 m 2.4 m

© 2008 The Aerospace Corporation 64 of 49

 Comparison of Schedule Growth and Success for
Planetary Missions vs. Earth-orbiting Missions

• Development times for Planetary

Earth-
Orbiting Earth-
Planetary missions less Outcome Planetary
Sample orbiting
10 56
than Earth-orbiting Size % Successful 30% 84%
missions due to Schedule % Partial 40% 7%
3.9% 38.3%
Growth % Catastrophic 30% 9%
constrained launch # of Missions 10 56
windows
96
• Planetary missions
experienced less 84

Actual development time (mos)

schedule slip on average
72
than earth-orbiting
missions 60
• However, planetary
48
missions failed or
Average Development Time
impaired twice as often 36

Successes 24
Earth Orbiting Missions
12
Planetary Missions
Failures 0
0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96

0 10 20 30 40 50 Planned development time (mos)

© 2008 The Aerospace Corporation 65 of 49

 Complexity Index Example
Fa c t o r U n it M in Me an Ma x Ex am ple JU

L au n ch D ate 20 0 5 1 %
T ot al D evel opm en t C os t ( FY 05$M ) 1.5 278 3157 2 6 7
D eve lop me nt T im e (a ctua l) (m o s) 10 4 9 22 8 61
P aylo ad M ass (k g) 0 265 60 65 90 55%
P aylo ad O rb it A ver ag e P o w er (W ) 0 166 16 00 62 38%
P aylo ad Pe ak P owFer
a c t o r (
UWn) it 0
M in 1
M7e4 an 7
M5 0
a x 85 E x am ple 31% J
P aylo ad D a ta R a t e (a vera ge ) (K bps) 0 11 678 3 0453 8 17 5 55%
NLa
uumnc
behr D
o a
f te
n
I st ru men ts 1 4 1 8 2 0
3 05 431%
%
ATo
peta
r l
t Durev
e e
diloa p
m m
e eten
r t C o s t (FY
( 0
cm5$
) M) 1
3.5 62 7
78 3
24105 7 2
60 67 58%
FDo
erveeilg
o npm
P a
ernt n
teTi
rms heip( actu al) (m os) N o
1n0e GS , L V,4S
9 C B us P L , m2u2l
8 t PL 0
6 1 0 %
MPias
yl
s o
i a
ond D
M ea s
sisgn L f
i e (m (okg
s)) 0 0 3
2 6
95 264
006 5 790 555
%%
LPaau
yl
n ocahd M
O arb
s s
it MAv
aergran
i ge P ow er (%( W) ) -4 %0 2 3
1%66 61
06%0 0 24 6%
2 43
38
%%
SPpaa
yl
c oeacd
r a
Pfte a
Lk
a uPnoc
w h eMr ass (We t) (k ( g
W)) 1 20 101776
4 18 1
758
09 9 783
5 73
31
%%
SPp
aay
lcoe
acd
r a
Dftat
MaaR
saste
(D(ray
v)er ag e) (
(Kk b
gp) s) 60 1
8106
678 1
3603
4 5
2 9
3 8 91
1 7
65 75
75
%%
SNpu a
mc be e
c r
r a
off
t IB
n su stru
Dm r y
e M
n t
a sss (k g) 261 598
4 10218
64 5839 74
63
%%
SApp a
ecr te
u crread
ft iaHm e reit
te
arg e ((
%cm ) ) 0 %3 4 26
% 7 1 0 0
2 4%0 576%
0 35
78%%
RFao r
deii
ag tino P
n aTr t
on taelrs
D hoips e (kra d s) N 0on e GS, LV
7 ,4 SC B u s PL ,6m0 0u t
l P L 500 610%
%
LMeisvs
e lioo nf DRee sdi
ug n nd L
a i
nfec y (
(% m )os) 0 %0 3 63
% 9 1 0 0
2 4%0 25 7% 495%
%
OLraubin
t c Rh e M
g a
ims e
s M arg in ( % ) STS I
/ S-
S 4,%G E O LE O/M E O, H
2 3
-L%E O/D i p, NE Interp 6
l a
0n% (a u) 234% 94
03%%
BSOp a
L c eP corwaf
e t
r L a u n ch M a ss (W et) (W( kg
) ) 1 122 1
76 0
17 6 810 8
0 1
0 8 9 1795 73
0 87
93%%
ESO
p a
Lc e
Pc
or wa f
e t
r M a s s ( Dr y) (W( kg
) ) 3 6 68
5 0
36 61
6 6
03
0 29 1695 11
6 97
27
%%
SSo
plaa
creA
crr a
rafyt BAu
r s
e a
D r y M as s ( m ( ^
kg2)) 02 6 5598 1508
2 64 75.589 87
26
%%
SSp
olac
arec
Cr ealf
l t
T H
yper
e i
/ta
P g
o e
w e r S o ur ce ( % ) S
0i % GaA s, G
4 a
2 %
As- mul t Ga As- co
1n0c,
0 %R T G/R GaA 5
s-
7 m
% ul t 73
57
%%
BRa
atd ti
ea rt yio T n
y pT o
e ta l D o s e ( kra d s) e aL d -0 a ci d , 7N
Si C d
4
N i C d N
H 2
i ,
6 L
0 0
i - Io n L i -
5Io0 n 10601%%
BLa
ev
t ete l
r o
y f C Ra e
p d
a u
c n
itdy a nc y (A (
- h
% r
)) 0
1 % 3
3 66% 15 1 0 6
0 % 226 5 6% 94
8 9
% %
#OA
rbr i
tti Rc ue lagitm
e de S t ru ctu r e s S TS /IS0 S , G E O L E O / M E O , H1 -L E O /D i p , N E I n te rp 6l a n (a u) 2 3 89
7 0
% %
#BD
O L e pP loo w
y eed rS tr u c tu re s ( W ) 0
1 2 72 6 1 8 90 0 0 1 37 5 0 88
1 9
% %
MEO
e L
c h P . o
D we e
g rree s o f F r e e d o m (ma x) ( W ) 0 3 61 5 3 6 66 0 0 1 26 5 1 69
3 2
% %
SSo
ollaa rr AA rr r
ra
a yy CA ore
n faig u ra t ion (m ^ 2) b o d y- f0i xe d d e p l oy e d, si 5ng l e -a xi s ar ti cu 5 8
l a te d B7 .5 8
0 2
% %
SSto
r l
ua cr tC
ure e
llsT M
y p
a e
t e
/Pr io
a lw er So u rce A l u m Si ni um A l w G /Ca oA ms,
p -
Gf aac
Aes , -E
m xo
ul tti c G aAC s-
o m
co pn o
c,si t R
eT G /R G a AA ls- m u l t 0
7 5
% %
ABDa t
Ct eSr yTT
y y
p e
p e Non L
e e/Ma d
a - g
a n
ciedt c
i G G , S p i
N n,
C3
i d-a, xi
S s,
N i CH d -
i sp i n 3-a xiNsi H (
2S , TL),i -D
I o
una l 3 -a L
xii -s-
I oS
n T 8
10 0
%0%
PBoaittnetr n
iygC a Ap
c a
c c
u i
rtay c y ( (
d A
e-
g h
) r) 0 1 3
2 6 35 1
5 6 0.0 2 0 636
9 89
8 8
% %
P#oAir ntticn
i u
gl a K
te
n d
o wS tlreud c
g tu
e re s ( d eg ) 0 0 1 1 2 06 0.0 02 36 88
0 7
% %
P#lD
a tef p
o lr o
my e A
dg Silt
itruy c
(stu
le r
wes r ate) ( d eg/ s e c) 0 0 1 2 5 9 0. 63 2 88
0 1
% %
PMo
eicnh
t .
n
i D
g eg
Stre
abeis
l io
tyf (F
Jr
i e
tte
e d
r)om (m ax) ( ura d /se c) 00 8 7
1 524
6 5 .02
0 0 66
43
%%
NSuo l
ma r
b eA r
r ra
o fy TC
h o
r n
usfigte u
r r
s a
+t
Tioan
nk s (#) b o d 0
y-fi xe d d e p l o ye d 6
, si n g l e- a xi
s a rti2cu6l a t e d 18B 860%
%
PSrt
oru pc
u tu
lsrie
o sn M
T a
y t
peeria l N oneAl u
, Cm oilndu-m
G a s MA
o l
n w
o , /CB o
i p m
r o p
p -f
-(a bce
l o ,
w E
,pxo
r eti c
s) O C
B +oUm p,
S oI si
ot
n e m oA
n l
o 400%
%
TAoDtC aS
l ImT yppu else ( de lt a -V ) (m /sec) N o n e / 0
M a g net i c GG , Sp i n ,
3 3
1 -
4a xi s , H i -sp i n 3-a xi s
5 8 (4
S5T ), D ual 3-a
1xi
9 s-
0 ST 68
10%%
DPo
o i
wnnti
lni g
nkACco
c u
mrmacy
B an d (d eg ) U HF /V H0F/S H F S , L2
, X K/ Ka3/
5K u 0.X 0 0 39 78
58
%%
MPao i
xn Dtinogw K
nln
ino wk Dleadtg
ae R a t e (kb (dpeg
s)) 10 14 21
2 4 3 2 72
608 0 0
3.5 0 0
0 36 38
80
%%
MPaa
l t
x fo
Ur p
m linAkgDiliaty
t a(s
Rlaetw e r a te ) ((d
kb
e gp/s)
se c) 00 3 8
1 20 05
0 2
0 ..0
6 2 28
70
%%
TPro
a innsti
mn gittSet
raPb i
o liw
tye(
r J(i
ptt
e e
a r)
k ) (u r(W
a d )
/se c) 10 180
7 65 0
24 5
2 .0
0 0 0 86
54
%%
CNeunm trbaelrP orf
o Tch
e sruss
o t
re r
P s
o +
w Te
arn ks (M i (
p#s)) 00 5 86 16 0
20
6 1 119
8 88
16
%%
OPnrobpo ualrsdioSn o T
f y
twp e
ar e C o d e ( KS L O C ) N one, 2
C ol d-Ga s Mono , B p
i r
7op
8 - (bl ow ,p res) OB+65U0S, Ion 1
m 1o0no 74
90
%%
FTlo
igta
h ltImS op u
ftwlsae re(dR
e l
e ta
u -
s V
e) ( (
m% / se
) c) 0 %0 363%
1 4 9508
% 45 471 %
9 0 46
41
%%
DDa
otwa nS litn
o kr aC
g oemCmap B
a a
cn
it d
y ( M byt es) U H F /V 0H F /S H F 4
S 1
, 8
L 6, X 1 K 3/K
6 0a0
/K0 u 5 12X. 0 67
05
%%
TMh
aexr mD ao w
l Tn
y ip
l n
ek D ata R a te (k bp s) p a ssi 1ve h ea te r s,
1 se
4 2 m
2 4
i - a ct i ve a ct 3
i ve
2 7,6cr
8 y
0 o hea3e
t5 0
r s 23
58
%%
MMu
a x
lt iU
-E p ll
ei n
m ke D
ntat
SayRsta
et
me ? (k bp s) si n g 0
l e-sc C L, m ul t ( a 3
e8
r o b r, re nd ) ent ry/l a 2
n 0 e
d 0d0/d ock m 2
u.0
l t 62
67
%%
CTo
ramn s
p m
l e i
xtt
i e
tyr IP
n o
d w
exe r (pe ak ) ( W ) 3 % 1 4 1 1
%0 7 66%0 2 0 68
05
%%
NCo
e r
nmt ra
a l
l ize
P rdo cC eosm
soprl e
Pxi
ot
wyeI n
r d ex (M i ps ) 0 % 0 5 2 %
58 1 0
1 0
6 %
0 0 1 1 9 79
8%
1%
On b o a r d S o ftw a re C o de (KS L O C ) 2 78 65 0 1 1 0 79%

Fa c to r Un it Min Me an Ma x E x am pl e JU
Fl
ig ht So ft ware Re use ( %) 0 % 36% 90% 47% 44%
Data S to ra ge C a paci ty ( Mbytes ) 0 4 1 86 1 3 60 0 0 512 . 0 60%
The rm a l T yp e p a ss i ve he ate rs, s e m i -a ct i ve a cti ve , cr yo he ate rs 25%
Mul ti-E le m en t S ys te m ? si ngl e- sc C L, m ul t (a e rob r , re n d) en try/l a n d ed / dock mu l t 66%
Com p le x i ty In dex 3 % 4 1% 76 % 60%
Norm a li ze d C o m p lexit y In dex 0 % 5 2% 1 0 0 % 79%

Fa c to r Un it Min Me an Ma x Ex am pl e J
Lau nch Date 2005 1%
TL
oau nch
tal Date
Devel o pmen t C ost (FY05$M ) 1.5 278 3157 2005
267 1%
Develop
T men
o tal Devel otp
Tmim e t
en (actual
C ost ) (mos)
(FY05$M ) 10
1.5 49
278 228
3157 61
267
Devel
Pay op
l o ad Mmen
asst T ime (actual) (mos)
(k g) 10
0 49
265 228
6065 61
90 55%
Pay
Payloload
ad Orb
Mass it Aver age Pow er (W)
(k g) 00 166
265 1600
6065 62
90 38%
55%
Pay
Payloload
ad Peak
Orb it PAver
owerage Pow er (W)
(W) 00 174
166 750
1600 85
62 31%
38%
Pay
Payloload
ad Data
Peak Rate (averag e)
P ower (Kbps)
(W) 00 11678
174 304538
750 175
85 55%
31%
Nu mb
Pay loe r of
ad In str
Data u men
Rate ts
(averag e) (Kbps) 10 4
11678 18
304538 3
175 43%
55%
Aper
Nu mbtureer di ameter
of In stru men ts (cm ) 31 674 240
18 60
3 58%
43%
FA
oprei
erg n
tur Partn ersh ip
e di ameter (cm ) N one
3 GS, LV,67
SC Bus PL , m ult PL
240 060 0%
58%
MFio rei
ssi o g
n nDPartn
esig nersh
L ifeip (mos ) N 0
one 39 SC Bus
GS, LV, PL ,240
mult PL 70 5%
0%
LM
au nch
i ssi on MDass M
esig nar
Lg in
ife (%)
(mos ) -4% 0 23%
39 60%
240 24%
7 43%
5%
Spacecr
Lau nchaft LauM
Mass nch
arg M
inass (Wet) (k g)
(%) 12
-4% 1076
23% 18189
60% 973
24% 73%
43%
Spacecr
Spacecr aft
aftM ass
Lau (Dr y
nch M) ass (Wet) (k g)
(k g) 6
12 806
1076 16329
18189 916
973 77%
73%
Spacecr
Spacecr aft
aftBu s D ry
Mass (D Mryass
) (k
(kg)
g) 26 6 598
806 10264
16329 589
916 76%
77%
Spacecr
Spacecr aft
aftHer
Bui tag
s Dr ey M ass (%)
(k g) 0 26
% 42%
598 100%
10264 57%
589 37%
76%
RSp
adacecr
iati o naft
To Her itag
tal Do see (krads
(%)) 0%
0 74
42% 600
100% 50
57% 61%
37%
LR
evel o fo
ad iati Red
n Toun dan
tal Docy
se (%)
(krads ) 0 %0 36%74 100%
600 25%
50 49%
61%
Orb it R
Level oegim
f Red e un dan cy (%) STS /I SS,
0 %GEO LEO/M EO, H -LEO/ Di p, NE
36% I nterplan
100% (au) 3
25% 90%
49%
BOL it
Orb PoR wer
egi me (W) 12
STS /ISS, GEO LEO/M EO,761
H-LEO/ Di p, NE 8000
I nterplan (au) 1750
3 89%
90%
EOL
BOLPo wer
P ower (W)
(W) 312 653
761 6600
8000 1651
1750 92%
89%
Solar
EOL ArPor ay
wer Ar ea (m(W)
^2) 03 653
5 6600
58 1651
7. 5 92%
82%
Sol ar
Solar C Ar
ell ray
T yp A rP
e/ea ower So u rce (m^2) Si0 GaAs , GaAs
5 -mult GaAs -conc58, R TG/ R GaAs -m ult
7.5 75%
82%
Batter
So l ary C Typ
ell Teyp e/P ower So u rce Lead-ac
Si id NiC d,
GaAs SNiC-mult
, GaAs d N iH2,
GaAs Li-I
-conc , on
R TG/ R Li-Ion
GaAs-m ult 100%
75%
Batter
B atter yy Cap
Typ aci
e ty (A-hr) 1
Lead-ac id 36SNiC d
NiC d, 516
N iH2, Li-I on 266
Li-Ion 98%
100%
#BA r ti cu
atter yl ated
Cap aciStru
ty ctur es (A-hr) 01 1
36 6
516 2
266 87%
98%
##DAep lo
r ti yed StrStru
culated uctu res es
ctur 00 21 96 32 81%
87%
M#eDch.eploD egyedr ees
Stro f F rres
uctu eedo m (max) 00 12 69 23 81%
63%
Solar
Me ch. Ar D ray
egr C on fi
ees ogfuF ration
r eedo m (m ax) body -fix
0 ed deploy ed, singl
1 e-a xis art iculat
6 ed B2 0%
63%
Sol ctur
Stru ar Ar ray
es C on fi
Mater gu ration
ial Alum
body inum
-fix ed Al deploy
w/ C omp-f
ed, ace,
singl Exot ic
e-a xis Cart
om posite
iculat ed Al
B 0%
0%
ADC S
Stru Type
ctur es Mater ial None/ Magnet
Alum inumic GG, Spin,
Al w/ C om3-ax is , HExotic
p-f ace, i-spin 3-axis
C om(ST),
pos D ual
it e 3-axis
Al-ST 80%
0%
Poin
ADC ti
Sng Accur acy
Type (deg) None/ 0
Magnet ic 2
GG, Spin, 3-ax is , H i-spin 3-axis 35(ST), D ual 0.0039
3-axis -ST 88%
80%
Fa c t o r Un i t Min M e an Ma x E x am p l e
Poin ti
Poi n n
tinggK An ow r
ccu led
acy ge Fa c t o r (deg)
(deg) Un it 00 Min 12 M e an 2035 Ma x 0.0036
0.0039 80%
E x am88%
p le
Lau nch Date 2005 1%
Platfo rm
Poi n ti
T
no
gA K
tal
gnili
D
o ty
wD (slew
led ge r ate ) (deg)
(deg/ sec ) 00 11 20
5 0.0036
0. 62 80%
80%
L a un cev
h el o pmen t C ost
ate (FY05$M ) 1.5 2 78 3157 26 7
2005 1%
Poin tin
Platfo D g
rm
T Stab
evel
o Ag
ta o
l il
ili
p
D ity
ty
m
evel (Jitter)
(sl
en oew
t T
pmi r
me ate
ent ) o
(ac
C tual
st ) (urad/s ec)
(deg/ sec(mo
(F )
Y05$ s) M ) 00 10
1.5 871 49
278 524
5 228
3157 5.000
0. 62 61
267 64%
80%
Pay
Devell o ad op Mass (k g) s) 0 2 65 6065 90 55%
NPo
u mbi n ti
en r
Pay
gofStab
lo
Thad
ru
iOlmen
sters+
ity
rb
(Ji
it
t T ime (actual )
A
tter)
Tan ks
ver age P ow er
(#)
(urad/s ec(mo
)
(W)
00 10
00
6
87 49
1265
66
26 228
524 1600 18
5.000 61
62
86%
64% 38%
Pay lo ad M ass (k g) 6065 90 5 5%
Pro
Nupumb lPay
esio
Pay n
r of
lo l Type
Th
ad
o ad ru
P sters+
eak
Or b it oTan
PAvewer ks
r ag e Pow er (#) (W) )
(W None, C old-Gas
0 00 Mono, Biprop-(blow
6 ,pres )
1166
74 OB+U S, Ion
26 750
1600 mono
18 85
62 40%
86% 31%
3 8%
Pay lo ad Data R ate (av
er erag e) (Kbps) 00 1 1678 3045 38 17 5 55%
TPr
o tal
o pu Im
N
lPay
po
si u
u mb
nlo
lse
e
ad (d
Type
r oD
Peak
elta-V)
f ata
In str
P
u
ow
men ts
(m /s ec) (W)
None, 0
C old-Gas
10
314 174
Mono, Biprop-(blow
4
,pres ) 5845
OB+U 750
S, Ion
18
190
mono 3
85 61%
40% 3 1%
43%
Pay lo ad R ate (aver ag e) (Kb ps) 11678 30 4538 175 5 5%
Do
T own
talli Ank
ImNp p
er
u C
mu o
lse
tu bmm
ree r(d
doiB
el
famean
ta-V)
I dter
n strumen ts (m /s ec) (cm ) U HF /VH0F/ SHF
31 S, 314
L, X 674 K/ Ka/
5845Ku 240
18 X
190 60
3 75%
61% 58%
4 3%
F op rei g nr Pea r tn er sh ip
MDaoxwnD own
liAnk li
er C nok
tu mmD ata
d i
B R
amet
an ate
d er (k bps ) (cm ) U HF /VH
1 F/N one
SHF3 G S, LV,67
S,
14224L, X SC Bu s PL , m
K/ Ka/Ku
327680 ult
240 PL
350X 0 60 75%
38% 0%
5 8%
M Fiossi
reo ignn D esi
Par gn
tn L ifep
ershi (mos ) N0one GS, LV,39 S C Bus PL ,240
mult PL 70 5%
0%
MMaaxx U D pl
L au
M
in
own k
nch
i ssi
D
li nata
oknM D
DaRata
ss ate
esig R
Mar
nate
Lgiin
fe (k(kbps
bps ) ) (%)
(mos ) 01 -4% 0 38
14224 23%39 2000
327680 60%240 2. 0
350 24% 7 27%
38% 43%
5%
Sp acecr a ft ass
Lau n ch M a ss (Wet)
TM
r ansm
ax U pl
i tter
L in
a un k Po
cDhata
wer
M R(p
ateeak)
M argi n (W)
(k bps ) (k g)
(%) 10 12
- 4% 1038 10 76
23% 60
2000 18160%89 20
2.0 97
24% 3 85%
27% 73%
4 3%
Sp
Sp acecr
ace cr aaft
ft MLas
au s n (D
ch ry
M) ass (Wet) (k g)
(k g) 6
12 8 06
1076 163 29
1 8189 919736 77%
7 3%
Cen
T tral
r an smiPacecr
Sp
Sp ro
tter
ace cessor
Po
cr wer
aaft
ft BPo
Mu(p
swer
eak)
assD ry (DM
ryass
) (M ips )
(W) (k g)
(k g) 01 26 6 5810 5806
98 1600
60 102 64
1 6329 119
20 589169 81%
85% 76%
7 7%
Onb oar Sp
dP acecr
So aaft
ft H er
oistagDe
Cen tralSp roftware
ace cessor
cr C
BPo
u d e
wer ry M ass (KSLOC)
(Mips ) (%) (k g) 20 0 %
26 7858 42%598 650
1600 100 %
1 0264 110
119 57%589 79%
81% 37%
7 6%
R ad
Sp iati o
ace cr n To
aft Htal
erD it o se
age (krads
(%)) 00% 74
42% 1600
00% 50
57% 61%
3 7%
FOnb
l ig h oar
t So
L dftware
evel
R ad So o fo
iati
Re
ftware
Red
n To
use
u Co
n
tald d
an e cy
Dose
(%)
(KSLOC) (%)
(k ra ds )
0 %2 0 % 0
36%78 36%74
90%
650 100 %
600
47%
110 25% 50
44%
79% 49%
6 1%
Data
F lig hStoOr
t So
L rb
eag
i t
ftwar
vel eo
R C
e fapaci
g
eiRme
Re
ed ty
use
u n da ncy (Mby (%)t es ) (%) 0%
ST
0 S /I SS,
0 % GEO LEO/ 4186
M EO,
36% H-LEO/
36% D i p, NE 136000
I nt erplan
90% 1 00% ( au) 512.0
47% 3
25% 60%
44% 90%
4 9%
B OL P o
Orbit R wegeri me (W) STS /I 12
SS, GEO LEO/ M EO, 7H-LEO/
61 Di p, NE 8000
I nter plan (au) 1750 3 89%
9 0%
TD
hataermal Sto
EOL
BOL
Type
r agPo ew
P o
C apaci ty
er
wer
(Mbytes ) (W(W ) ) pass0 ive 3
12
heaters , 4186
s emi-ac ti ve
6761
53 136000
ac tiv e, c ry o
6600
8000
512.01651
heaters 1750
60% 92%
25% 8 9%
MTu h lermal
ti-Elemen
So
EOL Type
l ar A
Ptr
o System
rwer
ay Ar e ?a (m ^2)
(W ) s ingle-sc
pass ive 03 C L, m ult (aerobr,
heaters , s emi-acrend)
5
653ti ve ent ry/ landed/
ac tiv e, c rdock
y o
58
6600 m ult
heaters 7.
1651 5 66%
25% 82%
9 2%
Sol ar
So larCAell Ty
r ray pAe/
rP
eaower So u rce (m^2) Si 0 GaA s , GaAs5 -mult GaAs -co nc 58 , R TG/ R GaAs-m 7 .5 ult 75%
8 2%
CM
oump
l ti-El
lB
exi
So
emen
ty
atter
lar
In
yC
dex
t
T
System?
yp
el ey
l T p e/P o wer So u rce
3 %Lead-ac
s ingle-sc Si id C L, m ult41%
(aerobr,
G N iC d,
aAs
rend)
SNiC
, GaAs d
- mult
76%
ent ry/GaAs
landed/
N iH 2,
-c
dock
onLi-I
c, oRnTG/ R
m ult L i- Ion
GaA s-m ult
60%
66%100%
7 5%
Noo
C rm
mp allized
Bexi
B ty
atter
att C
eryom
In
y dex
Cap
Typpl exity
aci
e ty I n dex (A-h r) 03%%Le ad-ac
1 id 52%
41% 36SNiC d
NiC d, 100%
76% N iH516
2 , Li-I on 26
Li-I 6on 79%
60% 98%
100%
#B A r tier
cu l ated Stru cture s 01 1 6 2 87%
No rm al i att
zed C yom
Capplexity
aci ty I n dex (A -hr) 0 % 52% 36 100% 516 266 79% 9 8%
##DA ep lo
r ti cuy ed
l atedStr u ctu
Stru crtu
es r es 00 21 96 32 81%
8 7%
M#eDch e.p D
lo ey g
edr ees
Str ouf
ctF r ee
ur es do m (max) 00 12 69 23 63%
8 1%
So
Mle ar
ch A .rDraegy rC onfi
ees ogfuF ration
r eedo m (m ax) body -f ix ed
0 deploy ed, si ngl e-
1 a xis art icu lat
6 ed B2 0%
6 3%
Str
Sou l ctu
ar A rerr s
ay M ate
C on ri
fal
ig u rati on Alum
body inum
-fi x ed Al deploy
w/ C omp-f
ed, ac e,
singl Exot
e- ic
a xis Caom pos
rt i culatited
e AlB 0%
0%
ADC
Str u SctuType
r es Mater ial None/
AlumMagnet
inumic GG,
Al wS/p
C in,
om 3-ax is , H
p-f ace, i-s
Ex pin
ot ic 3-axisom
C (ST ), s
po D ual
it e 3-axis -ST
Al 80%
0%
Po
ADinC ting
S TypAccue r acy (de g) None/ 0Magn et ic GG, 2
S pin, 3-ax is , H i- spin 3-axis 35 (S T), D ual 0. 0039
3-a xis -ST 88%
8 0%
Po i n tin g K n o
Poi n tin g Accur a cyw led g e (de g)
(deg) 00 12 20 35 0.
0.0036
0039 80%
8 8%
Platfo
Po rm
i n ti ng A g
K ilo
n i ty
w l (sl ew
e dg e r at e ) (deg/ sec )
(deg) 00 11 520 0.0036
0. 62 80%
8 0%
Po
Pli n ti
atf nr
o gm Stab
Ag il iilty
ity (s
(Ji
lewt terr)
at e ) (urad/
(de g/ss
ec
ec)) 00 87 1 524 5 5.0 00
0. 62 64%
8 0%
Nu mb
Po en
i n ti r g
of Th ruster
Stab s+
i l it y (Ji Tan
tter) ks (#) s e c)
(urad/ 00 687 26524 18
5.000 86%
6 4%
Pro pu l sion
Nu m be r of Type Th ru st ers+ Tan ks (#) None, C old-
0 Gas Mono , Biprop-(blow
6 ,p res ) OB+U S, Io n
26 mo no
18 40%
8 6%
To tal
Pr o p I
u m pu
l si ol se
n (d
Typ el
e ta- V) (m /s ec) None, 0C o ld-Gas 3 14
Mono , B iprop-(blow ,pres ) OB+U5845 S, Ion 19 0
mono 61%
4 0%
DTo o wn
ta l liInm kp Cuolsemm Ban d
(delta-V) (m /s ec) U HF /VH F/ SHF
0 S, 314
L, X K/ Ka/
5845 Ku X
190 75%
6 1%
MDa o xw D n o liwnn k liCn ok Data
mm B Ra
F
an adte
c to r Un
(k bps ) it 1M
U HF /VH Fi/n
SHF 1S M
4224
, e X
L, a n 3276
K/ Ka/Max
80
Ku 35X
0 E x am 38%
ple7 5%
MMaa xx U D
Launch po l iwn
n kDateD
lin ata
k D R aate
ta FR a ate
c to r (k(kbps
bpsU )n) it 01Mi n 38
14224M e a n 2000
32 Ma x
7680 2. 0
2 005 E x
350 am p27%
le
3 8%
1%
Tr an
M a xsmi
Tota U
Lau nch pl tt
l ier
n
Deve k Po
D
Dat
lo w
atap
e
er
m (peak)
Rate
en t C os t (W
(F
(k Y )05
bps )$M) 10 1.5 1038278 60315 7
2000 20
2.267
0
2005
85%
2 7%1%
Deve l op m en t T ime (ac t ua l ) ( mos)
CTenrP tr
T al
ansmi
o talP tter
ro cess
Dev Po
el o o
wp rer
m Po (p
en we
eak)
t C rost (M ips
(W
(FY ))
0 5$M ) 0110 1.5 5810
49
27 8 160060
2 28
3 157 11 961
20 267 81%
8 5%
ay l o ad Mas s (k g ) 0 265 606 5 90 55%
On
Cen b
Po
D ar
e
tr
ay
vel
al
lo dadP So
opm
ro ftwa
enr
cess
Orbi t
t eTC
or
Aver
imoe
Po de
ag
( actua
were
l)
P ow er (KS(MLOC (m )
ips
(W)
os)
) 20 10
0 7858166
49 650
1600
2 28
160 0 11 062
119
61 79%
8 1%
38%
Pa y l oa d Ma ss (k g) 0 26 5 6 065 90 5 5%
Fl ig
On Ph
b t
ay
o So
lo d
ar adftSo
war
P eake R
ftwar Pe eu
o s
wer
C eo d ee P ow er (%)
(KSLOC (W)) 0 %
2 0 36% 78174 90%
6507 50 47%
110 85 44%31%
7 9%
Pa y l oa d Orb i t Aver a g (W) 0 16 6 1 600 62 3 8%
P ay l o ad Data Rate (a ve ra ge ) (K bp s ) 0 116 78 30 4538 175 55%
DFata
l igh Stor
t So ag de C ap aci ty (Mby t es ) 0% 41 86 1360 00 5 12. 08 5 60%
be ftwar e Re u se (%) 0 36% 90% 47% 4 4%
P a y l oa P ea k P o we r (W) 0 17 4 7 50 3 1%
Nu m r of In strum en ts 1 4 18 3 43%
Thata
D er
Ap
Pmal
a
er
y
Stol
tu
oaTyp
r d
r ag
e e
Dat
e am
di
a
C apa Rat
ete ci e
r ty
( average) ( Kb ps)
(Mbyt es
(c m) ) pass 0ive3
0 he aters , 4186
s em11
67
678
i-ac ti ve ac t13
iv e,3c045
6000 r
2 40yo 38 heat 175
ers
512. 0
60 25% 5 5%
6 0%
58%
N u m be r of In st r u me nt s 1 4 18 3 4 3%
MTu h lermal
ti
For
A
-El ei
per tu
emg n en
T Pa
ryp
e
t
derS
tn ystem
ersh i
i a met er
p? s ingle-s
pasN one
siv ce C L, m ult
heatGS
ers (aerobr,
,
, LV
s em, S Cre
i-acB nd)
tius
ve ent ry/ landed
ac PL ,
c/
mult
tiv e, rdoc
y PL
o k m ult
he 0
aters 66% 0%
2 5%
(cm ) 3 67 2 40 60 5 8%
Mi ssi on D esig n L ife ( mos ) 0 39 2 40 7 5%
Cou
M mplt
F oi
Launch
l
-rexi
El ty
eiemen
gn Inar
P
Ma ss
d
t ex
System?
t ne r sh ip
M argin (% )
3 %
s ingle-sc
N o ne
- 4% C L, m ult
GS 41%
(ae
, LVrobr,
23%
, SC rend)
B us ent ry/ 76%
lande
PL , m
60% d/ doc
ult k
PL m24%
ult 0 60%
6 6%0%
43%
No
Cor
Smal
Mi ss
m pl
pac iexi
zie
ecr
o d
n C
ty
D
afIto
n m
es
de
Lau
ip
g
xl
n
n exL
chit
ifye I n dex
Ma ss (Wet)
(mo s )
(k g ) 03%%12
0 52%
41%
39
1 076 100%
76%
2 40
1 8189 973
7 79%
6 0%
5%
73%
Lau nch Mass Ma r g in (% ) -4% 2 3% 6 0% 24 % 4 3%
NoS pac ecr
rmal i zedaf C
t Mass (Dry ) (k g ) 6 806 1 6329 916 77%
Spacec ra ft oLmau p l
n exi
ch ty
MI n dex
ass (Wet ) (k g) 0 % 12 52%
107 6 100% 1818 9 973 7 9%
7 3%
S pac ecr af t Bu s D ry Mass (k g ) 26 598 1 0264 589 76%
Spacec ra ft Mass (Dr y) (k g) 6 80 6 1632 9 916 7 7%
S pac ecr af t Her ita ge (% ) 0 % 42% 1 00% 57% 37%
Spacec ra ft B u s D r y M ass (k g) 26 59 8 1026 4 589 7 6%
Rad iati o n To ta l Dos e ( krad s ) 0 74 6 00 50 61%
Spacec ra ft H er it ag e (% ) 0 % 4 2% 100% 57 % 3 7%
Level of Red un dan cy (% ) 0 % 36% 1 00% 25% 49%
R a diat i o n Tot al Do se (k r ads ) 0 74 6 00 50 6 1%
Orbit R e gi m e S TS /I SS , G EO LE O/ M E O, H-LE O/ D i p, NE In t e rpla n ( au) 3 90%
Leve l o f Red un da nc y (% ) 0 % 3 6% 100% 25 % 4 9%
BOL P owe r (W) 12 761 800 0 1 750 89%
Or b it R egi m e STS /I S S, GE O LE O/ M EO , H-LE O/ Di p , NE I n terpla n ( au) 3 9 0%
E OL Po we r (W) 3 653 660 0 1 651 92%
B O L P ow er (W) 12 76 1 8 000 1750 8 9%
S ol a r Ar ray Ar ea (m^2) 0 5 58 7.5 82%
EO L P ow er (W) 3 65 3 6 600 1651 9 2%
S ol a r C ell T y pe /P ower So urce Si GaA s , GaA s - mult Ga As -conc , R TG / R GaA s-m ult 75%
Sol ar Array A r ea ( m^2) 0 5 58 7.5 8 2%
Batt er y Ty pe L ead- ac id N iC d , SN iC d N iH2, L i-I o n Li-Ion 100 %
Sol ar C ell T y p e/P ow er Sou r ce Si GaA s , Ga As -mult GaA s - c o nc , R TG/ R Ga As- mult 7 5%
Batt er y Cap aci ty ( A- hr) 1 36 5 16 266 98%
B a tte ry Typ e L ead- ac id NiC d, S NiC d N iH2, L i- I on Li-Ion 10 0%
# Ar ti cul ated S tr u ct ur es 0 1 6 2 87%
B a tte ry Cap ac i ty (A -hr ) 1 36 5 16 266 9 8%
# D e pl o y ed S tr uct ures 0 2 9 3 81%
# Art i cul ate d S tru ctur e s 0 1 6 2 8 7%
Me ch. D egre es o f F re ed o m (m ax) 0 1 6 2 63%
# D epl oy ed S tr uc tu r es 0 2 9 3 8 1%
S ol a r A r r a y C on fi gu r at ion b ody - fix ed depl oy ed, sin gl e -a xis a rt iculat ed B 0%
Me ch. D e gr ees o f F r ee do m (m ax ) 0 1 6 2 6 3%
S truc tur es Mat er ial A lum inum Al w/ C o mp-f ace, Exot ic C om posit e Al 0%
Sol ar Array C onf i gu r a ti on body -fix ed de ploy e d, singl e- a x is art ic u lat ed B 0%
ADC S Type None / Ma gnet ic GG, S pin, 3 -axis , H i-spin 3-axis (S T) , D ua l 3 -axis - ST 80%
St r u cture s Ma ter ial A lum inum Al w/ C omp -f a ce, Exot ic C o mpo sit e Al 0%
P oi n t ing Accur ac y (d eg) 0 2 35 0. 00 39 88%
A DC S Ty pe N o ne/ Magne t ic GG, S pin, 3 -axis , H i- spin 3 -axis (S T), D ual 3-a xis -S T 8 0%
P oi n t ing Know led ge (d eg) 0 1 20 0. 00 36 80%
Poi n tin g Accur acy ( deg ) 0 2 35 0. 00 39 8 8%
P latf o r m Agil i ty ( slew rat e) (d eg/ sec ) 0 1 5 0. 6 2 80%
Poi n tin g Kn ow l e dge ( deg ) 0 1 20 0. 00 36 8 0%
P oi n t ing S tabi l ity (Ji t ter ) (ur ad/s e c ) 0 87 5 24 5.000 64%
Pla tfo r m Ag il i t y (sle w r at e) (deg / sec ) 0 1 5 0. 62 8 0%
Nu mbe r of Th r u st er s +T a nk s (# ) 0 6 26 18 86%
Poi n tin g S ta bi l i t y (J i tt er ) (u rad / s ec) 0 87 5 24 5.000 6 4%
Pr o pu l s ion Type No ne, C old-Ga s Mon o, B ipro p-( blow ,pr es ) OB +U S , Io n mono 40%
N u m be r of Thrus ters+ Tanks ( #) 0 6 26 18 8 6%
Tota l Im pu lse (de l ta -V ) ( m/s e c) 0 314 584 5 190 61%
Propul sio n Ty pe None , C old- Gas Mon o, B ipro p-( blow ,pr es ) OB +U S , Ion mono 4 0%
Do wn l i nk C o mm B a nd U HF /VH F/ S HF S, L, X K / K a/ K u X 75%
To tal Im puls e ( del t a-V ) ( m/s ec) 0 31 4 5 845 190 6 1%
Ma x D own li n k D at a F R aatce to r U)
(k b ps n it 1M in 142 M24e a n 32 7680 Max 350 E x am ple
38%
D o wn li nk Com m Ban d UHF /V H F/ SHF S, L, X K / K a/ K u X 7 5%
Ma x U pl in k D at a R ate (k b ps ) 0 38 200 0 2.0 27%
Ma x D o wn li n k D a ta F Ra a te
c )t o r U n it 1M in M e a n 60 M a x
L au n ch Dat e ( k bp s ) 14 224 3 276 80 350
20 05 E x am ple
3 8%
1%
Transm i tt er Po we r ( p ea k (W) 1 10 20 85%
Ma x U pl in k D a ta R a te ( k bp s) 01.5 38 2 000 2.2
0 67 2 7%
Cen T o tal
tral P Dev
roc el o pm en
essor Po twCer ost (M( FY 05$M
ips ) ) 0 58 278 160 315
0 7 119 81%
Tr DanLau n ch Dat e 20 05 1%
Onboar esm vel d
i t ter
opm
S o ftw
Po
en t
ar
wer
Teim C
(p
oedee ak)
( actual ) (W)
(m os)
( KS LOC) 2
1 10
78
10 49 60
6 50 22 8 20
110 61
8 5%
79%
C e To
nt r tal
al P Dev
r o el o
ces sopm r en
P owet C ostr (M (FY
ip s0)5$M ) 0 1 .5 58 2 78 1 600315 7 119 267 8 1%
P
Fl igh a tySl oa
o ft d M
war a e ss Re use (% ) (k g) 0 % 0 36% 265 90% 606 5 47%90 44% 55 %
On D
b ear
o vel d opm
S o ft enware t T im Coe de(a ctual ) (K S LOC)( mos) 2 10 78 49 6 50 228 110 61 7 9%
Data P a Sy l oa
tora d geOrb C ap it Aver
ac i ty a ge P ow er (Mb y (W)
t es ) 0 0 4 186 166 13 6000 160 0 512 .062 60% 38 %
Fl ig P ha ty l oa
S od fd Mass
tware (k g) 0 2 65 606 5 90 5 5%
ThermP a yal oa
l Typ P eea k Re P o u se
we r (% )
(W) pa s
0 %0
s ive h eater s ,
3 6%
s em174i-ac ti ve ac tiv e,
9 0% 75
c r y0o
47 %
heater 85
s
4 4%
25% 31 %
D Pa
a ta Sy lt oa
or d
ag Oe r bapaci
C it Ave rage P ow er (W) 0 1 66 160 0 62 3 8%
Mu P l tai-Ey lloa
em d Dat
ent ays
S Rat teme t(y
?averag e) (Mby (K tbesps)) 0
s ingle- s 0c C L, m ult
418 6
1 1678
( aer obr, ren d)
1 360
3045
en t ry/ la nded
00 38
/ doc k
512.
mu lt10 75 6 0%
66% 55 %
Th Pa
er m y l oa
al T d P ea k P owe r (W) 0 1 74 750 85 3 1%
Co m N u plm exibe tyrype
of
In d Inex st r u me nt s p ass iv
3 % 1 e h eater s ,
41%
se m 4 i-ac ti ve ac tiv
76%
e, c
18 ry o h eater3 s 2
60%
5%
43 %
Mu Pl a
ti-Ey ll oa
e m d Dat a Rat e ( averag e) ( Kb ps) 0 116 78 30 4538 175 5 5%
No A
rm peral itu
z e r dee Cdn it
omam S yet
p ste
l er
e m
xi ty? I ndex (cm ) s ing
0 % le -s
3 c C L, mu lt (ae
52% robr
67 , re nd) ent ry/ la nded/
10 0% 24 0dock m ult
60 6 6%
79% 58 %
C o N
m up m
l ex be i tyr of
Index In st r u men t s 3N % 1 4 1% 4 7 6% 18 3 6 0%4 3%
Fo r ei g n P ar t ne r sh ip o ne G S, LV, SC Bu s PL , mult PL 0 0%
N o rA m per
al i tu
zed r e C di oam m pe lter
exit y I ndex (cm) 0 % 3 5 2% 67 100% 240 60 7 9%5 8%
Mi ss i on D es i g n L ife (mo s ) 0 39 24 0 7 5%
Fo r ei gn P ar t ne r sh ip N one GS , L V, SC B us PL , mult PL 0 0%
Lau nch Mass Ma r g in (% ) -4% 2 3% 6 0% 24% 43 %
Mi ss i on D es ign Li fe (mos ) 0 39 240 7 5%
Spacec ra ft Lau nc h M ass (Wet) ( k g) 12 107 6 1 8189 9 73 73 %
Lau nch Mass Ma r g in (% ) -4 % 23 % 60% 24% 4 3%
Spacec ra ft Mass (Dr y ) ( k g) 6 806 1 6329 9 16 77 %
Spacec ra ft Lau nch M ass (Wet ) (k g) 12 1 076 1 8189 973 7 3%
Spacec ra ft B u s D r y M ass ( k g) 26 598 1 0264 5 89 76 %
Spacec ra ft Mas s (D r y ) (k g) 6 8 06 1 6329 916 7 7%
Spacec ra ft H er i t ag e (% ) 0 % 4 2% 1 00% 57% 37 %
Spacec ra ft Bus D ry M ass (k g) 26 5 98 1 0264 589 7 6%
R a diat i o n Tot al Do se ( krads ) 0 74 60 0 50 61 %
Spacec ra ft Her itag e (% ) 0 % 42 % 1 00% 57% 3 7%
Leve l o f Red un da nc y (% ) 0 % 3 6% 1 00% 25% 49 %
R a diat i o n To tal Do se (kra ds ) 0 74 600 50 6 1%
Or b it R egi m e STS /I S S , GE O LE O/ ME O, H -L E O/ Di p, NE I nter plan (a u) 3 90 %
Leve l o f Red un dan cy (% ) 0 % 36 % 1 00% 25% 4 9%
B OL P ow er (W) 12 761 800 0 17 50 89 %
Or b it R egi me STS /I S S , GE O LE O/ M EO , H-LE O/ D i p, NE I n terpla n ( au) 3 9 0%
EOL P ow er (W) 3 653 660 0 16 51 92 %
B OL P ower (W) 12 7 61 800 0 17 50 8 9%
Sol ar Array A r ea ( m^2) 0 5 58 7.5 82 %
EOL P o wer (W) 3 6 53 660 0 16 51 9 2%
Sol ar C ell T y p e/P ow er S o u r ce Si GaA s , G aA s -mu lt G aA s -con c , R TG / R Ga As- mult 75 %
Sol ar Array A r ea (m^2) 0 5 58 7 .5 8 2%
B a tter y Typ e L ead- ac id N iC d , SN iC d N iH2, Li- I on L i- Ion 100 %
Sol ar C ell Ty p e/P owe r S o u r ce Si Ga As , GaA s - mult GaA s - c o nc , R TG/ R GaA s-m ult 7 5%
B a tter y Cap ac i ty (A -hr ) 1 36 51 6 2 66 98 %
B a tte ry Typ e Lea d-ac id N iC d , SN iC d N iH2, L i-I o n Li-Ion 100 %
# A r t i cul ate d S tru ctur es 0 1 6 2 87 %
B a tte ry C a pa ci t y (A -hr ) 1 36 516 266 9 8%
# D epl oy ed S tr uc tu r es 0 2 9 3 81 %
# A r t i cul at ed St r uc tur es 0 1 6 2 8 7%
Me c h. D e gr ees o f F r eedom (m ax) 0 1 6 2 63 %
# D epl o y ed S tr uc tu r es 0 2 9 3 8 1%
Sol ar Array C onf i gu r a ti on body -fix ed d eploy ed, sing l e- a xis a rt icula t ed B 0%
Me c h. D e gr ees of Fr eedom (m ax ) 0 1 6 2 6 3%
St r u cture s Ma ter ial A lum inum Al w / C omp -f a c e, E xot ic C o mp osit e Al 0%
Sol ar Array C onf i gu r a ti on bo dy - fix ed dep loy ed , singl e - a xis art iculat e d B 0%
A DC S Ty pe N o ne/ Magn et ic G G, Sp in , 3-a xis , H i-sp in 3 -axis (S T), D ual 3-axis - ST 80 %
St r u cture s Mater ial Alu minu m Al w/ C omp-f ace, Exot ic C om posit e Al 0%
Poi n tin g Accur acy (de g) 0 2 35 0. 003 9 88 %
A DC S Type N o ne/ Magn et ic GG, S pin, 3 -axis , H i- spin 3-a x is (S T), D ual 3 -axis - ST 8 0%
Poi n tin g Kn ow l e dge (de g) 0 1 20 0. 003 6 80 %
Poi n tin g Acc ur acy (d eg) 0 2 35 0. 00 39 8 8%
Plat fo r m Ag il i t y (sle w r at e ) (de g/ sec ) 0 1 5 0. 6 2 80 %
Poi n tin g Kn ow led ge (d eg) 0 1 20 0. 00 36 8 0%
Poi n tin g S ta bi l i t y (J i tt er ) ( urad /s ec) 0 87 52 4 5. 0 00 64 %
Plat fo r m Ag il i t y (s l ew r at e ) (d eg/ s e c) 0 1 5 0. 62 8 0%
N u m be r of Thrus ters+ Tan ks ( #) 0 6 26 18 86 %
Poi n tin g S ta bi l ity (J i tt er ) (u rad/ s ec) 0 87 524 5.000 6 4%
Propul sio n Ty pe None , C old -Gas Mono, Bip rop- (blo w ,pre s ) OB +U S , Ion mo no 40 %
N u m be r of Thrus ters+ Tan ks (#) 0 6 26 18 8 6%
To tal Im puls e ( del t a-V ) (m /s ec) 0 314 584 5 1 90 61 %
Propul sio n Type N o ne, C old-G as Mon o, B ipro p-( blow ,pr es ) OB +U S , Io n mono 4 0%
D o wn li nk Com m Ban d U HF/V H F/ S H F S, L, X K/ Ka / K u X 75 %
To tal Im puls e ( del ta-V ) (m /s ec) 0 3 14 584 5 190 6 1%
Ma x D own li n k D a ta R at e (k bp s ) 1 1 4224 3276 80 3 50 38 %
D o wn li nk Co mm Ban d U HF/V H F/ SHF S, L, X K / Ka / K u X 7 5%
Ma x U pl in k D a ta R a te (k bp s ) 0 38 200 0 2.0 27 %
Ma x D own li n k D at a R at e ( k bps ) 1 142 24 32 7680 350 3 8%
Tr ansm i t ter P o wer (pe ak) (W) 1 10 60 20 85 %
Ma x U pl in k D a ta R a te ( k bps ) 0 38 200 0 2 .0 2 7%
C e nt r al P r o ces sor P owe r (Mip s ) 0 58 160 0 1 19 81 %
Tr ansm i t ter P o wer (pe ak) (W) 1 10 60 20 8 5%
Onb oar d So ft ware Co de (K S LOC) 2 78 65 0 1 10 79 %
C e nt r al P r o ces sor Po we r ( Mips ) 0 58 160 0 119 8 1%
Fl ig ht So f tware Re use (% ) 0 % 3 6% 9 0% 47% 44 %
Onb oar d So f tware Co de (K SL OC) 2 78 650 110 7 9%
D a ta S t or ag e C apaci t y ( Mbyt e s ) 0 418 6 1360 00 5 12.0 60 %
Fl ig h t S of tware Re use (% ) 0 % 36 % 90% 47% 4 4%
Th er m al Type pass ive he aters , s emi- ac ti v e ac tiv e , cryo he aters 25 %
D a ta St or ag e C apa ci t y (Mbyt es ) 0 4 186 13 6000 512.0 6 0%
Mul ti-E l e me nt Sy ste m? s ing le-sc CL, mu lt (a erob r, r end ) ent ry/ land ed/ dock mu lt 66 %
Th er m al Type p ass ive h eater s , s e mi-ac ti ve a c tiv e, c ry o heate rs 2 5%
C o m pl ex i ty Index 3 % 4 1% 7 6% 60 %
N Moul r m ti -E
al ilz em
ed e C n otm Sy stem
pl exit y ? I n dex s in gle-
0 % sc C L, m ult 5 ( aer obr,
2% ren d) ent ry/ la nded
100 % / dock m ult 6 6%
79 %
Co m pl e xi t y Index 3 % 41 % 76% 6 0%
No rm al i zed C om pl exit y I n dex 0 % 52 % 1 00% 7 9%

Fa c to r Unit M in Me a n M ax E x a m ple Fa c to r J UNO Unit M in Me a n M ax Ex am ple

L au nc h Date 20 05 1 % L au nch Da te 2 00 5 1%
T o tal De vel o p men t Co s t (F Y05$ M) 1.5 278 31 57 26 7 T o tal Deve l o pmen t Co st (F Y05$ M) 1. 5 278 31 57 26 7
De vel o p men t Time (a ctu a l) (mo s) 10 49 22 8 6 1 De vel op me n t T im e (actua l ) (mos ) 10 49 228 61
Pa yloa d Mass (k g) 0 265 60 65 9 0 55% Pa yl o ad Mas s (kg ) 0 265 60 65 90 55 %
Pa yloa d O rb it Ave rag e Po w er (W ) 0 166 16 00 6 2 38% Pa yl o ad Orb it Ave ra ge Po w er (W) 0 166 16 00 62 38 %
Pa yloa d Pea k P o w er (W ) 0 174 75 0 8 5 31% Pa yl o ad Pe ak Pow e r (W) 0 174 750 85 31 %
Pa y l o a d Data Rate (a vera ge ) (Kbp s) 0 11 678 3 045 38 17 5 55% Pa yl o ad Da ta Ra te ( avera ge ) (K bps) 0 1 167 8 30 4538 17 5 55 %
Nu m b e r of I n stru men ts 1 4 1 8 3 43% Nu m be r of In s tru me n ts 1 4 18 3 43 %
Ap er tu r e d i a mete r (cm) 3 67 24 0 6 0 58% Ap er tu re d i am eter (cm) 3 67 240 60 58 %
F o rei g n Pa rtn ersh i p Non e GS, LV, SC Bus PL , mult PL 0 0 % F o rei g n Partn ersh ip N one G S, LV, S C Bu s P L , mu lt PL 0 0%
Mi ss i on D es ig n L i fe (mos) 0 39 24 0 7 5 % Mi ss io n De sig n L ife ( mo s) 0 39 240 7 5%
L au nc h Ma ss M arg i n (% ) -4% 23 % 6 0% 24 % 43% L au nch Mass Marg i n (%) -4% 23 % 60 % 24 % 43 %
Sp ace cr aft L a un ch Mas s (Wet ) (k g) 12 1 076 181 89 97 3 73% Sp acec raft L au n ch Mas s (We t) (kg ) 12 107 6 1818 9 97 3 73 %
Sp ace cr aft Mass (Dry) (k g) 6 806 163 29 91 6 77% Sp acec raft Ma ss (Dry) (kg ) 6 806 1632 9 91 6 77 %
Sp ace cr aft Bu s Dry Ma ss (k g) 26 598 102 64 58 9 76% Sp acec raft Bu s D ry Ma ss (kg ) 26 598 1026 4 58 9 76 %
Sp ace cr aft Her ita g e (% ) 0 % 42 % 100 % 57 % 37% Sp acec raft He ri tag e (%) 0% 42 % 100% 57 % 37 %
Ra d iati o n To tal Do se (kr ads) 0 74 60 0 5 0 61% Ra di ati o n To ta l Do se (kra ds) 0 74 600 50 61 %
L eve l o f Red u n dan cy (% ) 0 % 36 % 100 % 25 % 49% L eve l o f Re d un d anc y (%) 0% 36 % 100% 25 % 49 %
O rb it R eg i me STS /I SS, G EO L EO/ M EO, H-LEO / Di p, NE I nter pla n (au) 3 90% O rb it R egi me STS /I SS, G EO L EO / MEO , H-LEO / Di p, NE I n terpl an (a u) 3 90 %
BO L P o w er (W ) 12 761 80 00 17 50 89% BO L P owe r (W) 12 761 80 00 1 75 0 89 %
EO L Po w er (W ) 3 653 66 00 16 51 92% EO L Po we r (W) 3 653 66 00 1 65 1 92 %
So l ar Ar ray Are a (m^2 ) 0 5 5 8 7 .5 82% So l ar Array Ar ea (m^2) 0 5 58 7.5 82 %
So l ar C ell Type /P owe r So u rce Si G aAs, G a As-mult Ga As-conc , RT G / R G aAs-mul t 75% So l ar Ce ll T yp e/P ow er So u rce Si GaA s, Ga As-mult G aAs-conc, RT G/ R G aAs-mul t 75 %
Ba tter y T yp e Lea d-ac id NiC d, S NiC d Ni H2, L i-I on Li-I on 100% Ba tte ry Typ e L ea d-aci d Ni Cd, SNi Cd N iH2 , Li- I on Li-I on 100%
Ba tter y Ca p aci ty (A-hr) 1 36 51 6 26 6 98% Ba tte ry Cap ac i ty ( A- hr) 1 36 516 26 6 98 %
# Ar ti cu l a ted Stru c tu r es 0 1 6 2 87% # Art ic ul ated Stru ctur es 0 1 6 2 87 %
# D ep l o yed Stru ctu res 0 2 9 3 81% # D epl o yed Str uctu res 0 2 9 3 81 %
Me ch . D eg r ee s o f F re ed om (max ) 0 1 6 2 63% Me ch. Deg re es of F re edo m (ma x) 0 1 6 2 63 %
So l ar Ar ray Co n fi gu rati on body -fi xed d ep loye d, sin gl e-a xi s art icul at ed B 0 % So l ar Array C on fi gu rati on body -fi xed dep loy ed, si ngl e-axi s art icula t ed B 0%
Stru c tu r es Mate ri al Alum inu m Al w/ C omp-f a ce , Ex o t ic C omp osit e Al 0 % Stru ctu res Ma teri al A lum inum Al w/ Comp-f ace, Exot ic C omp osit e Al 0%
ADC S Ty p e None / Ma gne t ic GG , Sp in, 3-axis, H i-spin 3 -a xi s (ST ), Du al 3-a xi s-ST 80% ADC S Type None /Ma gnet ic GG , Spi n, 3- axis , H i-spin 3-a xis (S T), Du al 3-axis -ST 80 %

© 2008 The Aerospace Corporation

Po i n tin g Ac cu r ac y (de g) 0 2 3 5 0. 00 39 88% Po i n ti n g Accu ra cy (d eg) 0 2 35 0. 003 9 88 %

66 of
Po i n tin g Kn o w l e dg e (de g) 0 1 2 0 0. 00 36 80% Po i n ti n g Kn ow l ed ge (d eg) 0 1 20 0. 003 6 80 %
Pl atfo rm Ag i l i ty (s lew r ate ) (d eg/ sec ) 0 1 5 0. 6 2 80% Pla tfo rm Ag il i ty (s le w r ate ) (d eg/ sec) 0 1 5 0. 62 80 %
Po i n tin g Sta b ility (Ji tte r) (u rad/ sec) 0 87 52 4 5.0 00 64% Po i n ti n g Stabi li ty (J itte r) (u rad/ sec) 0 87 524 5.0 00 64 %
Nu m b e r o f T h ru sters +T an k s (#) 0 6 2 6 1 8 86% Nu m be r of Th ru ster s+ Tan k s ( #) 0 6 26 18 86 %
Pro p u l si on Typ e No ne, Co ld-G as Mono , Bip rop-(bl ow ,pr es) OB+ US, Ion m o no 40% Pro p ul s io n Ty pe Non e, C ol d-Ga s Mo no, Biprop- (blow ,p res) O B+U S, I on mo no 40 %
T o tal I m p ul s e (de l ta-V) (m/s ec) 0 314 58 45 19 0 61% T o tal Im pu lse (d el ta-V) (m /sec) 0 314 58 45 19 0 61 %
Do w n l ink Co mm Ban d UHF / VHF / SHF S, L , X K/ Ka / Ku X 75% Do w n li nk Co m m Ban d UH F/ VHF/ SHF S, L, X K/ Ka/ Ku X

49
75 %
Ma x Do w n l i n k D ata R ate (kb ps) 1 14 224 3 276 80 35 0 38% Ma x Dow n li n k D ata R ate (k bp s) 1 1 422 4 32 7680 35 0 38 %
Ma x Up l ink Da ta R ate (kb ps) 0 38 20 00 2 .0 27% Ma x Upl i nk D ata R a te (k bp s) 0 38 20 00 2.0 27 %
T ra nsm i tter Po w er (pea k) (W ) 1 10 6 0 2 0 85% T ra nsmi tte r Po w er (pe ak) (W) 1 10 60 20 85 %
Ce n tral P ro ce sso r Po w er (Mips ) 0 58 16 00 11 9 81% Ce nt ra l Pro c ess or Po wer (Mips ) 0 58 16 00 11 9 81 %
On b o ar d So ftw are Co d e (K S L OC ) 2 78 65 0 11 0 79% O nb oa rd S oftw a re Co d e (KSL O C) 2 78 650 11 0 79 %
Flig h t So ftw are Re u se (% ) 0 % 36 % 9 0% 47 % 44% F li g h t So ftwa re Re use (%) 0% 36 % 90 % 47 % 44 %
Da ta Sto r ag e C ap a ci ty (Mbyt es ) 0 4 186 1 360 00 512 .0 60% Da ta Stora g e C a paci ty (Mbyt es) 0 418 6 13 6000 512. 0 60 %
T h erma l Typ e p ass ive hea te rs, se m i -act i ve ac t ive , cryo h eat ers 25% T h ermal Ty pe pa ssi ve h eate rs, se mi -a ct ive ac tive , cryo heat ers 25 %
Mu l ti-El e men t System ? sin gle -sc C L, mul t (aer obr, re nd ) ent ry/ la nde d/ do ck mu lt 66% Mu l ti-El em ent Sys te m? si ng le-sc CL , mu lt (a erobr, r end) en t ry/ la nd ed/ do ck mul t 66 %
Co m pl ex i ty I n dex 3 % 41 % 7 6% 60% Co m pl exi ty In de x 3% 41 % 76 % 60 %
No rm al i zed C o m p l exi ty I n d ex 0 % 52 % 100 % 79% No rma l i zed Co mp l exi ty I n d ex 0% 52 % 1 00 % 79 %
67 of 49