Progress and Challenges with Interplanetary Small

Satellite Missions

^ NASA Cost and Schedule Symposium 2021

April 28th, 2021

Michael Saing, TeamX Lead Cost Engineer, Deputy Systems Engineer

Alex Austin, TeamXc Lead Engineer

Disclaimer - The cost information contained in this document is of a budgetary and planning nature and is

intended for informational purposes only. It does not constitute a commitment on the part of JPL and/or Caltech.

© 2021 Jet Propulsion Laboratory/California Institute of Technology

The research was carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the

National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

jpl.nasa.gov

Agenda

• Motivation and Objective

• History and Background of NASA’s Small Sat Mission

• NASA’s Interplanetary Mission

• Past, Present and Future

• Challenges:– Technology

– Implementation

– Operations

– Costs

– Access to Space

• Comparisons and findings– Show some funding/cost growth

• How NASA can help to address challenges and keep cost from growing, or provide

provide sufficient

• Summary

• References

• Caveats

• Closing

2

jpl.nasa.gov

Motivation and Objective

• Informational presentation on small sat

interplanetary mission challenges

• Understand what’s going on in today’s

cost and schedule related to these

upcoming missions

3

jpl.nasa.gov

NASA Cubesat Small Sat Fleet

4

~20 Interplanetary missions

jpl.nasa.gov

What do you mean by “Interplanetary”

• Interplanetary means traveling between planets. And focus area for

interplanetary is between sun and asteroid belt

5

*Interplanetary

Space*

Deep Space

Interstellar Space and beyond

jpl.nasa.gov

What is a CubeSat? Small Sat?

• CubeSat = nanosatellite in a form of a cube, with each “U” measuring 10cm x 10cm x 10cm and weighs ~1.33kg (weight by

ROT)

• The “U” cube are stackable

• SmallSat mass ranging from 15 kg to ~350 kg (Standard definitions varies depending on who you ask)

• Common form factors are: 1U, 3U, 6U’s. Future planetary missions planned with 12U and MicroSat

• By Definition:

• Mini-satellite, 100-180 kilograms

• Microsatellite, 10-100 kilograms

• Nanosatellite, 1-10 kilograms

• Picosatellite, 0.01-1 kilograms

• Femtosatellite, 0.001-0.01 kilograms

6

Cygnss, Microsats, 28.9 kg each

PhoneSat (1U), ~1 kg INSPIRE (3U), ~5 kg

TechEdSat 8

(1x6U), ~8 kg

RainCube (6U), 13.5kg

j p l . n a s a . g o v

The Rise of SmallSats

7

• SmallSats, including

CubeSats, can range in mass

from 1 kg to ~300 kg

• Customers include

government, industry, and

academia – many successful

missions

• Growth has principally been

driven by:

• Standardization of launch

opportunities

• Miniaturization of digital

electronics due to Moore’s

Law

CYGNSS, a constellation of 8

SmallSats in Earth orbit

https://sciencesprings.wordpress.com/tag/nasa-cygnss/

MarCO, the first interplanetary

CubeSats

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/images/marcos-mars-and-earth/

ASTERIA, an exoplanet hunting CubeSat

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/cubesat/missions/asteria.php

jpl.nasa.gov

Significant Drivers in Interplanetary Missions

• As a spacecraft moves further away from Earth, it gets more challenging

– Larger solar distances and Earth distances driver the telecom and power

subsystems

– Large delta-V’s drive the propulsion subsystem

– Long communication times drives the operations scenario

• Technical Feasibility: “Dead European Problems”*

8

https://www.industryweek.com/technology-and-

iiot/article/21128644/making-miniaturization-

manageable https://www.wiley.com/en-

us/Fundamentals+of+Physics+Extend

ed%2C+10th+Edition-p-

9781118230725

“Understanding the limitations of the classical laws of physics, worked out by Europeans, long since dead, are

fundamental to successful SmallSat Concept Development” – Alfred Nash, TeamX Lead Engineer

While modern physics has

enabled SmallSats through the

miniaturization of digital

electronics…

Classical physics still enforces constraints

on SmallSat technical capabilities

*Austin A., Nash, A., “Fundamental Problems in SmallSat Concept Development”, IEEE 2021 Conference

jpl.nasa.gov

Interplanetary SmallSats: Unique Challenges

•Interplanetary SmallSats have unique challenges in many

areas:

–Technology

–Implementation

–Operations

–Access to Space

-Costs

•Tackling these challenges can be a significant driver on

mission cost

9

jpl.nasa.gov

Challenges - Technology

•Interplanetary missions are driven technically by

power, telecommunications, and propulsion.

•The required capabilities in these areas far

surpasses what is needed for missions in Earth

orbit, which means that additional technology

development is required.

•Development of this new technology can be a

significant cost driver on the mission, and makes

estimating the costs of interplanetary small

satellite missions particularly challenging.

•Complex and state of the art instrument

technologies are often over seen and

underestimated (which are typical cost drivers for

small sat mission cost cap)

10

jpl.nasa.gov

Cost vs Technology Development and Maturation

Typical trend

11

Technology Readiness Level

(TRL)

Cost, $

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

jpl.nasa.gov

Challenges Implementation-

-Implementing interplanetary missions is complex due to their

unique requirements.

-Most small satellite vendors do not currently have

experience in this area, so additional support is often

needed.

-This can especially drive costs for program management,

systems engineering and systems integration, which might

not scale down much with the size of the mission.

–Often times, expert support is needed from experienced

individuals

-Lots of small space start-up companies, not enough

experts, typically can’t afford/sustain them

-Interplanetary small satellite missions often need longer

schedules than typical Earth orbiting SmallSats

-Commercial vendor capability

– Only a few commercial vendor is willing to do

custom products and services, but that comes with

high NRE costs and time

– The uniqueness of technology deters most

company from developing one of a kind technology

due to unpopular demand.

– Costly and timely for

-Long lead items still remains and drives schedule and costs

-Small budget supporting the team, limited support, needs to

multi-disciplinary which isn’t your typical entry level engineers and

scientist

12MarCO – 6U

RainCube – 6U

jpl.nasa.gov

Cost vs Implementation Capabilities

13

Implementation Capability* over time (in many ways)

Established standardization, fundamental technologies,

manufacturing and tooling, experience, expertise,

automation, etc…

Cost`

http://grapgat.blogspot.com/2007/08/stone-age-it.html

https://etinsights.et-edge.com/wp-

content/uploads/2020/06/Automation.jpg

jpl.nasa.gov

Challenges - Operations

•The large distance from Earth can cause significant

challenges for interplanetary mission operations

-Requires the use of the Deep Space Network for

communications

-Likely have only one (or less) communication

opportunities with the spacecraft per day

-Long communication delays require the spacecraft

to be self-sufficient and make troubleshooting

anomalies difficult

• Mission Design and Navigation is a significant driver for

interplanetary missions

-Even small satellites require a mission design and

navigation team

-This area does not shrink as much as other areas,

when compared to larger missions

14

jpl.nasa.gov

Challenges – Access to Space

•Access to Space for interplanetary missions is

significantly more challenging than for Earth

orbiters, since the spacecraft must escape Earth’s

gravity well.

•Typically accomplished via rideshare with a

larger deep space mission (MarCO with Insight,

CubeSats with Artemis-1), but these opportunities

do not come up very often.

• Furthermore, the trajectory that the primary

mission is taking may not be ideal for secondary

SmallSat missions

•New, smaller launch vehicles may provide other

opportunities for SmallSat launch, but currently

they are constrained to Earth orbit and escaping

Earth’s gravity well requires significantly more

delta-V

15

CAPSTONE

jpl.nasa.gov

Making Headlines… “Extra, Extra, Read all

about it!”

16

jpl.nasa.gov

Challenges - Costs

• Science instrument drives the mission costs (typically)

• Lack of full and transparent cost mission data broken down by work

breakdown structure (WBS)

• Limited to no data available on cubesat/smallsat mission and technology

development

• Cost model does not predict well given the limited to no data on

interplanetary type missions

– Business market is changing rapidly and cost models cannot keep up

with the changes– For example, GeneSat (2006) total mission cost was ~$8M for a 3U cubesat,

now it could be more like ~$2M-3M (Factor of 2 to 3 times different)

• Big science goals and small mission doesn’t necessarily mean a reduction in total

mission costs. Still costs a lot for science and engineering experts to do ambitious

science

17

jpl.nasa.gov

• Sparse correlation data, platform and cost varies

• If you plot the mass, volume and costs, does not follow a trendline

Past, Present, and Future

Interplanetary Small Sat Missions

18

Disclaimer - The cost information contained in this document is of a budgetary and planning nature and is

intended for informational purposes only. It does not constitute a commitment on the part of JPL and/or Caltech.

Mission Launch

Launch Delays

Access to Space Platform Estimated Cost, $M

Lunar Trail Blazer Rideshare - IMAP TBD Small Sat $55

Janus Rideshare - Psyche TBD Small Sat $55

Escapade TBD TBD Small Sat $55

Marco Insight Yes 6U $18

Capstone (includes Launch) Rocket Lab TBD Small Sat $30

Mars Helicopter, Ingenuity M2020 No 1U $80

Aeolus TBD TBD Small Sat $75

NEAScout Artemis-1 Yes 6U $45

LunaH-MAP Artemis-1 Yes 6U $6

BioStentinel Artemis-1 Yes 6U TBD

Lunar Flashlight Artemis-1 Yes 6U TBD

AroMoon Artemis-1 Yes 6U TBD

CubeSat for Solar Particles Artemis-1 Yes 6U TBD

Lunar Flashlight Artemis-1 Yes 6U TBD

Lunar IceCube Artemis-1 Yes 6U TBD

SkyFire Artemis-1 Yes 6U TBD

OMOTENASHI Artemis-1 Yes 6U TBD

Cislunar Explorers Artemis-1 Yes 6U TBD

Earth Escape Explorer Artemis-1 Yes 6U TBD

Team Miles Artemis-1 Yes 6U TBD

EQUULEUS Artemis-1 Yes 6U TBD

jpl.nasa.gov

Example Missions

•Luna H-Map

–Implementation: Complexity of instrument

development

–Access to Space: SLS launch delay caused cost

growth

•MarCO

–Technology: Radio and propulsion system

–Access to Space: Insight launch delay caused

cost growth, storage, re-test, etc…

•Mars Helicopter

–Technology: New type of mobility drives cost

-Implementation: Study of rotorcraft on other

planets started back in 1997, Helicopter study

started early 2000s

19

jpl.nasa.gov

The Challenges are Cost Drivers

20

jpl.nasa.gov

Recommendations

•Recognize the challenges and plan for them form the earliest stages of

formulation

•Take advantage of NASA opportunities to work with experts in deep space

mission design, such as the Planetary Science Deep Space SmallSat (PSDS3)

studies

•Continue to collaborate among NASA, industry, and universities to enhance

the SmallSat state of the art in technologies and implementation approaches

•Carry large cost reserves, especially on new technologies

• Have good book keeping practices – start with NASA standard WBS and have

an integrated master schedule. This is how you know when trouble is coming

•Cost estimating, evaluating costs, and cost validation will be a challenge for

interplanetary mission as data is all over the place. Should get input from

experienced PM and experts. Traditional cost models made for larger mission is

not appropriate

21

jpl.nasa.gov

Summary

• Small Satellites have seen a huge growth in the last decade, but interplanetary missions

come with unique challenges which can significantly drive cost and schedule.

– Technology

– Implementation

– Operations

– Access to Space

• It is critical to understand these challenges when scoping new mission concepts to ensure

that they are feasible and will be successful – mission success, on-time, and on budget

22

jpl.nasa.gov23

QUESTIONS

©Michael Saing

Astrophotography

jpl.nasa.gov