Deep Space Network, Calculating mission-specific costs Options

[ElkGroveDan]

This was brought up in the MER forums but I figured it might be useful here where discussion of strategy and planning for missions goes on.

Having visited a DSN station this year I have a new found interest in the amazing mission these sites are tasked with. Unfortunately like everything in these belt-tightening days the DSN is underfunded for what it is they need to accomplish. That said a friend pointed out to me that there is a simple formula to calculate the DSN costs for a mission:

Missions calculate DSN costs using this formula: AF = RB [AW (0.9 + FC / 10)]

Where:
AF = weighted Aperture Fee per hour of use.
RB = contact dependent hourly rate, adjusted annually ($1057/hr. for FY09).
AW = aperture weighting:
= 0.80 for 34m High-Speed Beam Waveguide (HSB) stations.
= 1.00 for all other 34m stations (i.e., 34m BWG and 34m HEF).
= 4.00 for 70m stations.
FC = number of station contacts, (contacts per calendar week).

Online tools available:
DSN Aperture Fee Tool - Excel file 706k
DSN Services Catalogue - PDF 675k

The DSN is so critical to nearly everything we discuss here. Everyone should take the time to learn more about it, and if possible try to schedule a visit or tour. The people who work there are the unsung heroes of the headline grabbing feats that NASA and JPL accomplish.
http://deepspace.jpl.nasa.gov/

[vjkane]

In the case of Spirit and Opportunity, the DSN costs are the costs of communicating with the relay orbiter. I suspect that the relayed data may be a small portion of the total, since the orbiter is also collecting its own data.

[djellison]

The majority of uplink is still done directly to the HGA from the DSN however.

[dvandorn]

I would guess that the answer to how much of the MERs' extended mission costs are DSN costs incurred for uplinks and paid to the MODY /MRO project teams for their relay services lies in the detailed budget accounting. Is the detailed budget data (down to line item) for the MER extensions available publicly? That would be quite instructive, I would think.

It would also be good to see budget detail at that level for other missions, like Cassini, New Horizons and LRO (to name but a few) to see just what the percentage of operations costs commonly consist of DSN charges.

-the other Doug

[tedstryk]

You act as though the DSN is getting rich off of this. The DSN is already underfunded and oversubscribed. Your comments about looking into this, referring to DSN costs as "charges," and your earlier comments make it sound as though it is somehow unjustified.Regardless of what the cost is, unless you have a better idea of how to communicate with a distant spacecraft (and I don't just mean an idea, but something you can actually build and demonstrate to reliably work), acting like this isn't a necessity is like arguing that planetary exploration would be cheaper if we stopped spending money on launch vehicles or stopped maintaining flight teams to operate the missions. Frankly, I find this to be a disrespectful and uninformed way to describe the folks who do the Herculean task of commanding the spacecrafts and recovering data from their faint signals.

[mcaplinger]

It would also be good to see budget detail at that level for other missions, like Cassini, New Horizons and LRO (to name but a few)...

It turns out that LRO doesn't use the DSN, it uses a Ka-band system that GSFC built in White Sands, NM.

http://cio.gsfc.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/p...main_GV3_16.pdf

Some proposed lunar missions I know of planned to use Universal Space Network's system -- http://www.uspacenetwork.com/index.html -- obviously lunar missions don't need big antennas.

[djellison]

Frankly, I find this to be a disrespectful and uninformed way to describe the folks who do the Herculean task of commanding the spacecrafts and recovering data from their faint signals.

That's exactly what I've been thinking as well.

[mcaplinger]

I think you guys are overreacting to some natural curiosity about DSN costs. As with so many other things, DSN costs could be lowered and efficiency increased; DSN isn't perfect. That said, I'd tend to believe that DSN costs are not the majority, or even a very large fraction, of ongoing mission ops costs, except maybe for extremely-extended missions like VIM.

[centsworth_II]

...a disrespectful and uninformed way to describe the folks who do the Herculean task of commanding the spacecrafts and recovering data from their faint signals.

I was set to defend the desire to know the breakdown of costs, including communication costs, of space missions. But in preparing my defense came upon this in the "Getting Unstuck in West Valley" thread:

It's getting to be time to attack the real funding-drain of any and all deep space missions -- the astronomical (pun intended) fees being charged for communicating with the spacecraft.

In all that has been said in these two threads, this is really the only uncalled for accusation. I would assume that if communication fees are high, its because the costs of operating and maintaining the equipment are high. Maybe dvandorn would like to explain or retract this statement.

[Greg Hullender]

It would be interesting to see, per mission, how the costs divide between cost of the probe, cost of the launch, salaries to manage the probe, salaries to analyze the data, and (of course) cost of using the DSN. Among other things, that breakdown would make it easier to see what to try to optimize. Given limited budget dollars, I'd far rather see NASA (and other agencies) optimize the process rather than cut probes.

But I don't think I've ever seen this kind of cost breakdown for any probe -- ever. Does it even exist? That is, does even NASA know?

--Greg

[tedstryk]

I know it exists in the proposals (Discovery, etc.) I don't know whether or not there is a final report available. As I said, I am not criticizing wanting to know what it costs. It is the attitude of the posts that I find offensive (the earlier ones more so than the latest one).

[mcaplinger]

But I don't think I've ever seen this kind of cost breakdown for any probe -- ever. Does it even exist? That is, does even NASA know?

Of course NASA knows. For every mission extension a detailed plan and budget has to be written and reviewed by HQ. I've never seen one of these publicly released, but you could always file a FOIA request if you really care (instead of relying on what was put in wikipedia, as this discussion appears to be doing

There isn't even a breakdown of how much the MER mission will cost in the 2010 NASA budget that I can see, but perhaps I missed it.

[djellison]

To be fair - the calculations for DSN time are from published documents from the DSN itself, not Wikipedia.

[mcaplinger]

It is the attitude of the posts that I find offensive...

I'm a little bemused about why this is so offensive when all kinds of technical misinformation, unfounded opinions, etc, to my ear more technically grating, go uncommented upon in this forum. Seems a bit fanboyish to me.

[mcaplinger]

To be fair - the calculations for DSN time are from published documents from the DSN itself, not Wikipedia.

Certainly, and we could discuss the fraction of cost that went to DSN for a given mission extension, if we knew how much that extension cost, but as far as I know we don't.