Falcon 9 Launch Vehicle

NAFCOM Cost Estimates

August 2011

NASA Associate Deputy Administrator for Policy
Falcon 9 Launch Vehicle NAFCOM Cost Est

• The objective of the analysis was to estimate the cost to develop the F

launch vehicle using two different approaches: 1) traditional NASA

envi /l ronment/culture, and 2) a more commerci l a d l eve opment culture 

• The analysis was performed late 2010‐early 2011 using the NASA‐Air F

Model (NAFCOM) with results provided to ESMD in November 2010.

• These results results were used for Appendix Appendix B of the “Commercial “Commercial Market A

A

for Crew and Cargo Systems” and for the Deputy Administrator’s pres

the National Space Symposium.

• Results: “The activity estimated Falcon 9 would cost $3.977B based o

environment/culture. NAFCOM predicted $1.695B when all technical 

adjusted to a more commercial development approach.

• Working with different inputs from the preliminary data provided by S

a trip to the SpaceX facility, NASA recently inputted revised data into t

model and a different output was the result.
Original Cost Estimates versus SpaceX Ac

• NASA did not perform a detailed analysis to explain the significant diff

between the cost estimates and SpaceX actual costs.

• However, SpaceX attributed their cost efficiencies to a few primary fac

1. Workforce ‐ Total vehicle DDT&E costs are primarily a product o

workforce needed to accomplish the effort (SpaceX workforce numbe

substantiate their development development cost claims) claims),

2. Organizational complexity – SpaceX estimates that every dollar 

the company actually costs between $3 and $5 based on subcontracto

and p , rofit and

3. Infrastructure ‐ Total infrastructure required for the DDT&E effo

infrastructure utilization percentage.

These factors suggest that reducing the total workforce; number of m

layers and infrastructure can substantially reduce DDT&E costs when c

traditional NASA environment/culture.
Update to the Cost Estimates

• The original estimates were based on technical parameters and inputs 

SpaceX in the fall of 2010.

• Provided only a Cost Plus Fee approach

• Included a single first flight unit

• NASA personnel subsequently visited the Space X facilities and spoke 

personnel personnel about the inputs and results results of the initial initial modeling modeling effort.

– The updated estimates provided both Cost Plus Fee and Firm Fixed Price 

and included two flight unites

• The initial and updated cost estimates are not NASA budget estimates

– Do not include all costs that would be included in a NASA project 

– Are schedule and time phasing independent

• Both the initial and updated cost estimates are included in this presen
Falcon 9 NAFCOM Cost Estimate Comp

Falcon 9 Cost Estimates Trace Falcon 9 NAFCOM Cost Estimate Comp

Falcon 9 NAFCOM Cost Estimate Comp

(All Costs Are In FY2010 $ ) M

Initial Estimate Updated Est

Cost Plus Fee Cost Plus Fee Firm Fixed Price 

Total Total Total 

Elements (FY2010 $M) (FY2010 $M) (FY2010 $M) 

Falcon 9 Total $1,695 $3,977 $443 

Assumptions inserted after Space‐X visit:

‐ More heritage from Falcon 1 and use of off‐the‐shelf hardware than the initial information

‐ Nine redundant controllers and wiring harnesses were not identified in the initial information

‐Structure weights were included in the electronics‐ Separation subsystem mass was included in structure

‐ Interstage Interstage (composite (composite material) material) was included included in structures structures (aluminum (aluminum‐lithium lithium material material)‐Falcon 9 test program initially included only one test flight unit

• Excludes Program Support costs (Firm Fixed Price only).

• Excludes Contingency costs (Firm Fixed Price only).

• Excludes Contractor fee (Firm Fixed Price only).
Modeling Explanation of Differen

Primary Differences In Firm Fixed Price Vs. Cost Plus Fee Model Input Assumptions Firm Fixed Price Co

1- Acquisition Strategy No Oversight O

2- Requirements Stability Stable 3- Team Effeciency Efficient Le4 M t St t 4- Management Structure Lean L 

5- Early Phase studies/Sys. Engineering Disciplined Les

6 Funding Commitment - Funding Commitment Fixed 

Note: Order represents relative weighting
Backup Material
Falcon 9 NAFCOM Cost Estimate Comparison

Initial

(Both Estimates Estimates Are Cost Plus Fee)

(All Costs Are In FY2010 $M)

Cost Plus Fee Cost 

Space‐x Approach NASA 

Weight DDT&E Flight Unit Total DDT&E Fli

Elements (lbs) (FY2010 $M) (FY2010 $M) (FY2010 $M) (FY2010 $M) (FY

Stage One (Including Engines) 39,080 $614 $87 $701 $1,535 

Stage Two (Including Engine) 6,520 $331 $12 $343 $608 

Fee (12.5%) $118 $12 $130 $268 

Program Support (10%) $107 $4 $111 $241 

Contingency (30% Vehicle, 10% Engine)) $251 $11 $262 $674 

Vehicle Level Integration (8%) $106 $5 $111 $258 

Total 45,600 $1,528 $131 $1,659 $3,584 

‐ Based on November, 2010 weight estimate and technical data from SpaceX‐ Represents DDT&E and one flight unit‐ Both estimates represent cost plus fee acquisition approach (include fee, program support, and contingenc
Falcon 9 NAFCOM Updated Cost Estimate Comparison

Updated

(Cost Plus Fee Vs. Firm Fixed Price)

Firm Fixed Price Acquisition Cost Plus 

Weight DDT&E 2 Test Flt Units Total DDT&E 2 Tes

Elements ( ) lbs (FY2010 $ ) M (FY2010 $ ) M (FY2010 $ ) M (FY2010 $ ) M (FY2

Stage One (Including Engines) 39,080 $188.7 $109.3 $298.0 $370.6 $

Stage Two (Including Engine) 6,506 $89.0 $23.6 $112.6 $184.7 

Fee (12.5%) $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $69.4 Program Program Support Support (10%) $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $62.5 Contingency (30% Vehicle, 10% Engine)) $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $193.2 

‐ Based on technical corrections and the additional insight in to the mass summary information as well as hgained from a recent trip to the SpaceX facility.

Vehicle Level Integration (8%) $22.2 $10.6 $32.8 $44.4 

Total 45,586 $299.9 $143.6 $443.4 $924.9 $

g p p y‐ Represents DDT&E and two test flight unit‐ Cost plus fee acquisition approach include fee, program support, and contingency where firm fixed price aspace act agreement approach