New Challenges for Cost Analysts – Creating Technical Baselines for Point Estimates
Toas, S.1; Frisbie, J.P.1; Thomas, D.D.2
1Northrop Grumman - TASC; 2Air Force Cost Analysis Agency
As cost analysts are integrated into product teams earlier in program lifecycles, we are required to complete estimates and provide budget inputs well before the typical parameters of a program technical baseline are understood. Many times, these conceptual designs (either contractor designs or reference architectures) are based on immature technology rather than historically proven design solutions. This paper details how a satellite working technical baseline can be constructed using a parametric model that utilizes customer requirements, target performance, and cost objectives. This effort began when the Operationally Responsive Space (ORS) program office turned to the Air Force Cost Analysis Agency (AFCAA) to support their 2008 Program Objective Memorandum (POM) submittal of various ORS alternatives. Unfortunately, only basic user requirements were understood and a budget wedge was provided as a starting point. Lack of information on classical cost estimating parameters such as size, weight, and power presented the analysts with unique challenges that necessitated an innovative method for creating satellite technical baselines and resultant cost estimates.
The paper will briefly outline the ORS design concept, and then describes the derivation of sizing relationships (weight and power) for payload and bus subsystems from user requirements and other design constraints. It will present some fundamental physics and engineering principles that translate performance requirements to design variables for electro-optical payloads and the supporting bus subsystems. Trade-offs between these variables, while maintaining a working technical baseline, are also modeled. The paper will conclude with an example of some of the trade studies which can be completed with the model, as well as future enhancements and improvements.
This research was sponsored and supported by the Air Force Cost Analysis Agency (AFCAA).