Mission & System Cost Estimation Skill

Read CONVENTIONS.md at the repo root before proceeding.

This skill generates parametric cost estimates for space missions — from early ROM for proposals and investor pitches through detailed cost breakdowns for Phase A/B design reviews.

Before You Begin

Ask the user (if not already known):

1. What is being costed? — Full mission (spacecraft + launch + ground + ops), spacecraft bus only, single subsystem, or a component?
2. What cost class? — NewSpace/commercial (lean teams, COTS parts, agile development) or Traditional/institutional (full documentation, Class B/C, government oversight)?
3. What is the mission type? — Earth observation, comms, science, lunar, interplanetary, constellation, crewed? (Different CERs apply)
4. What cost year (base year)? — All costs must be stated in a specific fiscal year (e.g., FY2026$). Apply NASA New Start Inflation Index or GDP deflator for conversion.
5. What design phase? — Phase A: ROM ±50%; Phase B: ±30%; Phase C: ±15%.
6. Is there a target cost or cost cap? — Design-to-cost constraints change the analysis approach.

Applicable Phases

• Primary: Phase A (ROM for proposals, mission feasibility), Phase B (refined estimates for confirmation review)
• Supporting: Phase C (cost-at-completion tracking), Phase D (actuals reconciliation)

Ownership Boundary

Responsibility	Owner
Subsystem mass and complexity inputs	Domain analysis skills (structural-assessment, power-assessment, etc.)
System-level cost estimate, cost model selection, wraps, and risk	This skill
Trade study cost criterion scoring	trade-study-manager (uses cost estimates from this skill)
Schedule and program timeline	schedule-risk-assessment (when available)

Cost Estimation Methodology

1. Select the Cost Model

Choose the appropriate model based on mission type and available data:

Model	Best For	Key Input	Notes
USCM8/9 (Unmanned Spacecraft Cost Model)	Traditional government S/C	Dry mass by subsystem	NASA/Air Force heritage, well-calibrated
SSCM (Small Satellite Cost Model)	SmallSats < 500 kg	Total dry mass, mission type	Aerospace Corp, better for small missions
NICM (NASA Instrument Cost Model)	Science instruments/payloads	Instrument mass, type, aperture	Separate from bus cost
PCEC (Project Cost Estimating Capability)	NASA missions (full lifecycle)	WBS-level inputs	NASA's primary tool
Analogy	When a heritage mission exists	Historical actual cost + adjustments	Best when strong analog exists
NewSpace Parametric	Commercial/startup missions	Mass, TRL, team size, reuse factors	Calibrated to commercial actuals

Default approach: If the user doesn't specify, use mass-based parametric CERs (USCM-class) with NewSpace adjustment factors where applicable.

2. Spacecraft Bus Cost (Hardware)

Estimate each subsystem using mass-based CERs. Generic form:

$$C_{subsystem} = a \cdot M^b \cdot F_{complexity}$$

Where:

• $M$ = subsystem mass (kg)
• $a$, $b$ = model coefficients (subsystem-specific)
• $F_{complexity}$ = complexity adjustment (1.0 = average, 0.7 = COTS/high-heritage, 1.5 = novel/custom)

Reference CER Coefficients (USCM-class, FY2020$K)

Subsystem	a	b	Typical Mass Range
Structure & Mechanisms	157	0.83	10-500 kg
Thermal Control	394	0.635	2-50 kg
EPS (Power)	62.7	1.00	5-200 kg
TT&C (Communications)	545	0.761	2-50 kg
ADCS (GNC)	464	0.867	3-100 kg
Propulsion	18.4	0.846	5-500 kg
C&DH (Flight Computer)	545	0.761	2-30 kg

⚠️ These are reference values only. Actual CER coefficients vary by source database and should be stated with their provenance. Ask the user if they have project-specific CERs.

NewSpace Adjustment Factors

For commercial/startup missions, apply reduction factors to traditional CERs:

Factor	Typical Range	Rationale
COTS Hardware	0.3 - 0.6	Commercial off-the-shelf vs. custom flight hardware
Lean Team	0.5 - 0.7	Small agile team vs. large institutional workforce
Reduced Documentation	0.7 - 0.85	Streamlined reviews vs. full NASA/ECSS doc suite
Design Reuse / Heritage	0.4 - 0.7	Block-buy, repeat build, product line
Composite NewSpace Factor	0.15 - 0.40	Combined effect (multiply individual factors)

3. Payload / Instrument Cost

Use NICM or analogy:

• Optical instruments: $C = f(\text{aperture diameter}, \text{mass}, \text{detector type})$
• RF instruments (SAR, radiometers): $C = f(\text{antenna area}, \text{power}, \text{bandwidth})$
• In-situ (spectrometers, drills): Best estimated by analogy to heritage instruments.

Rule of thumb: Payload cost is typically 20-40% of spacecraft bus cost for observatory missions, but can exceed bus cost for flagship science instruments.

4. Wrap Factors (Non-Hardware Costs)

Hardware cost alone dramatically underestimates total mission cost. Apply wrap factors:

WBS Element	Typical % of Hardware Cost	Notes
Program Management (PM)	8-15%	Lower for small missions, higher for institutional
Systems Engineering (SE)	10-18%	Includes budgets, interfaces, trade studies
Mission Assurance (MA)	3-8%	Quality, reliability, parts screening
Integration & Test (I&T)	10-20%	AIT campaign, environmental testing, GSE
Ground Segment	15-30% of total	MOC, ground stations, data processing
Launch Services	Market price	SpaceX rideshare: ~$5.5K/kg; Dedicated small LV: $10-30M; Medium/Heavy: $60-150M
Operations (per year)	5-15% of S/C cost per year	Staff, ground network fees, data processing

5. Mission Lifecycle Cost

Assemble the total:

$$C_{total} = C_{payload} + C_{bus} + C_{PM/SE/MA} + C_{I&T} + C_{launch} + C_{ground} + C_{ops} + C_{reserve}$$

Cost Reserve (Unallocated Future Expenses — UFE):

• Phase A: 30-50% of estimated cost
• Phase B: 20-30%
• Phase C/D: 10-15%
• NASA policy (NPR 7120.5): minimum 25% UFE at KDP-C for Class B missions.

6. Cost-Risk Analysis

Go beyond point estimates:

Confidence Levels

• 50th percentile (P50): Equal chance of overrun or underrun. Typical for proposals.
• 70th percentile (P70): Common for budgeting. NASA often uses P70 for Class B/C.
• 80th percentile (P80): Conservative. Used for cost caps and flagship missions.

S-Curve Generation

If uncertainty distributions are available:

1. Assign triangular or log-normal distributions to each subsystem cost (min, most likely, max).
2. Run Monte Carlo simulation (1000+ draws).
3. Plot cumulative probability vs. total cost = S-curve.
4. Read off P50, P70, P80 values.

Simplified approach (Phase A): Apply cost growth factors from historical data:

• Average NASA mission cost growth: 1.4× from Phase A to actuals
• Average commercial: 1.2× (smaller scope, fewer changes)

7. Design-to-Cost (DTC)

When the user specifies a cost cap:

1. Work backward from the cap to allocate subsystem budgets.
2. Identify which subsystems are cost-driving (typically payload, structure, and ADCS).
3. Flag if the cost cap is unrealistic given the mission requirements.
4. Recommend trades: reduce performance, increase COTS usage, descope payload, or change orbit.

Common Reference Costs (FY2025$, approximate)

For quick sanity checks and Phase A estimates:

Mission Class	Typical Total Cost	Examples
3U CubeSat (university)	$0.5-2M	Educational, tech demo
6-12U CubeSat (commercial)	$2-10M	Planet Dove, Spire
Microsatellite (50-150 kg)	$10-50M	ICEYE SAR, BlackSky
Small satellite (150-500 kg)	$30-150M	RCM, WorldView Legion
Medium satellite (500-2000 kg)	$150-500M	Sentinel, GOES-R instruments
Large science mission	$500M-2B	JWST ($10B is an outlier)
Flagship mission	$2-10B	Mars Sample Return, Europa Clipper
Lunar lander (commercial)	$50-300M	CLPS landers (Astrobotic, Intuitive Machines)
Constellation (per sat, at scale)	$0.5-5M	Starlink, OneWeb (unit cost at volume)

⚠️ These are order-of-magnitude reference points. Actual costs vary enormously based on complexity, heritage, and programmatic approach. Always state the basis of estimate.

Output Format

1. Cost Estimate Report (cost_estimate.md)

A Markdown document containing:

• Basis of Estimate (BoE): Model used, key assumptions, cost year, heritage reference
• Cost Breakdown Table: By WBS element (hardware, PM, SE, I&T, launch, ground, ops)
• Subsystem Cost Table: By spacecraft subsystem
• Confidence Level: Point estimate and stated confidence (P50/P70/P80)
• Cost Drivers: Top 3 cost-driving items
• Cost-Risk Summary: Key uncertainties and their cost impact
• 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴 Status: Green if within cap/target, yellow if within reserve, red if exceeds cap

2. Cost Comparison Table (cost_comparison.csv)

If multiple options are being compared (for trade-study-manager):

• Side-by-side cost breakdown for each option
• Lifecycle cost comparison (development + operations over mission life)

Verification & Cross-Checks

• Mass-cost correlation: Verify that $/kg is within reasonable bounds for the mission class (typically $50K-500K/kg for traditional, $10K-100K/kg for NewSpace).
• Historical analog: If possible, compare to a known mission of similar scope.
• Subsystem proportions: Check that no single subsystem exceeds 40% of bus cost unless justified (e.g., a very large solar array).

Interface

• Reads from: /requirements/, /analysis/systems-engineering-assessment/ (mass budget), /analysis/structural-assessment/ (mass properties), all domain skill outputs (for subsystem mass inputs)
• Writes to: /analysis/cost-estimation/
• Consumed by: trade-study-manager (cost as a Figure of Merit), systems-engineering-assessment (mission-level summary), project management / proposal teams