Estimating the Towed Glider Air Launch System (TGALS) Summarizing a Project for NNNAAASASASSSSSSAAAAAA

Estimating the Towed Glider Air Launch System (TGALS) Summarizing A Project For NNNAAASASASSSSSSAAAAAA

August 14, 2019 Doug Howarth, CEO, MEE Inc. [email protected]@meevaluators.com +1 661.713.7531

1 Overview

• Results in brief • Primary models used • X-planes • Gliders • Rocket engines • Civil aircraft • Risk • Cost models compared • Summary

•TGALS development: $57.4M; $36M-$92M, 68.3% confidence • X-plane model • 90% new • Initial empty weight of 8,650 lbs grows to10,000 lbs • All structure made of composites • NASA performs flight test • Rocket engine estimate of $19M from Rocketdyne • Development cost remaining: $15M • Average unit price of $1M for four (4) units • Total cost $57.4M (TGALS) + $19M (engines) = $76.4M

Rocket engines

Civil aircraft

X-planes

TGALS

Modern gliders Historical gliders

We created a dataset that bounds TGALS

This looks like the Dornier 328, upon which it is based…but it is different

LM rebuilt the Dornier 328 fuselage and vertical tail assembly with 301 composite parts, a reduction of 90% of the existing metallic part count

To answer this question, we must estimate the weight of the vehicle built by Dornier This amount, known as Defense Contractors Planning Report (DCPR) is defined as Empty weight of the airplane - Wheels, brakes, tires and tubes - Engines - Starters - Cooling fluid - etc.

Using a DoD DCPR formula for an empty weight of 20,768 lbs we find:

DCPR = 0.246EW1.096 = 13,270 lbs

Typical Weight Statement Struct Struct LM Struct New System Sys lbs Sys % lbs Wing 7,526 0% 0 Tail 1,477 50% 739 Body 6,909 100% 6,909

All 15,912 48.1% 7,648 structure

LM did less than half (7,648/15,912 = 48.1%) of the structural modifications possible; all composites would have > 2X the cost impact

We don’t have a weight statement for the Long-EZ, but found one for the Citation- 500, from which we drew analogies

EZ-Rocket had a new propulsion system, and rebuilt half of its instrument system

System Sys lbs Sys % New lbs MEW % Propulsion 340 100% 340 5.3% Instrument 76 50% 38 0.6% Aircraft 6,379 378 5.9%

FROM: G650 TO: G650ER FROM: 1/3 TGALS TO: TGALS

Does it Wgtd Does it Wgtd Base apply Basis Base apply Basis Newness Factor Description Points here? Wgt Pnts Old New Points here? Wgt Pnts Old New Size (New MEW - Old MEW)/Old MEW 0.1% Yes 0.5 0.1% 53,200 53,263 7042.9% No 0.5 140 10,000 (New Thrst - Old Thrst)/Old Thrst 0.0% Yes 0.5 0.0% 33,800 33,800 100.0% Yes 0.5 50.0% 0 1 Propulsion Any change in engine quantity 15% No 1.0 15% Yes 1.0 15.0% Minimal (Like F/A-18E/F) 5% Yes 1.0 5.0% 5% Yes 1.0 5.0% Avionics Moderate (In between F-18, F-22) 10% No 1.0 10% No 1.0 Changes Extensive (Like F/A-22) 30% No 1.0 30% No 1.0 Other Any other Changes (list) 5% No 1.0 5% No 1.0 < 1 Year 0% No 1.0 0% No 1.0 Development 1 < X < 3 20% No 1.0 20% Yes 1.0 20.0% Lag > 3 Years 50% No 1.0 50% No 1.0 Calculated % new 5.1% 90.0% While some of the contributions used here involve judgment, which we like to avoid, this format has resonated with users – users can change this in the model

A 2010 masters thesis based on Skunk Works data: manufacturing costs vary with part count

That paper reveals how aircraft weight and part count relate to one another

2 points determine a power curve

6,000, 10,000 20,000, 20,000

Copyright 2017 MEE Inc. 13 From A DoD Paper, We Have A Formula For DCPR From MEW16 For MEW <= 10,000 lbs: DCPR = 13.26MEW0.674 => DCPR = 6,585 lbs From the equation: part count = 66.8*6,5850.58 = 10,953; lbs/part = 0.60

Previously…

Thus…

A 90%-part count reduction reduces manufacturing labor by > 70%

Each discipline responds differently to part count reductions

The Boeing X-51A has many more systems and parts than a glider

Gliders have fewer, larger parts

7 observations 3 variables may help Combinations

X-55 dev cost was $57.44M

If made of metal, its dev cost would have been $79.83M

If all the structure in the X-55 were made of composites, dev cost would have been one half of the sheet metal cost Almost all the TGALS structure will use composites – This gives a 50% reduction from X-plane development costs

We averaged alternatives 1 and 2 for flight test

We removed “Diana 2” and rounded to one decimal point:

Copyright 2017 MEE Inc. 24 MEE Approached Multiple Companies: Rocketdyne Gave A Full Estimate38, 39 •Rocketdyne has produced a 30,000 lbf of its Bantam engine, using 3D printing •It is a LOX-kerosene, pressure-fed engine •Rocketdyne needs • $15M for development • $1M/engine: each engine is good for eight (8) launches • MEE assumed NASA would need four (4) engines

This curve’s slope is nearly identical to that for X- planes, but its constant is about 3.2 times greater

Program 1 Normalized MEW over Time Program 2 130% Program 3 125% Program 4 Program 5 W 120% E Program 6 M la M 115% Program 7 nig Program 8 ir 110% Program 9 O fo fo 105% Program 10 % Program 11 100% Program 12 95% Program 13 -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Program 14 Program Flight test Go-ahead % of Schedule complete Program 15 Program 16

Final MEW = 1.472 * starting MEW0.9732; R2 = 99.8%

This baseline model is reconfigurable in Excel and ties to the risk model Here, gliders’ curves are power form equations, which perform best at low values

• MEE approached the problem from multiple angles • X-planes • Gliders • Part counts • Rocket engines (add to X-plane cost) • Civil aircraft (cross check) • Risk • Weight growth • Statistically derived cost risk bands • Cost TGALS development: $57.4M Bantam development: $15.0M Recurring engines: $4.0M (assumes 4 engines, 8 flights/engine) Total Program: $76.4M • The X-plane and the glider cost models converge

1) NASA TGALS picture from http://newatlas.com/nasa-glider-launch-satellites-tgals/36010/ 2) DG-808C Competition glider picture from https://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/en/aircrafts/dg-808c-competition 3) Waco CG-4A glider picture from https://www.pinterest.com/pin/302022718739107381/?lp=true 4) Lockheed Martin X-55A picture from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lockheed-Martin_X- 55A_%E2%80%98N807LM%E2%80%99_(27631301015).jpg 5) Rocketdyne Bantam 30,000 lbf thrust picture from http://www.3ders.org/articles/20170516-aerojet-rocketdyne-successfully-tests-3d- printed-bantam-rocket-with-30000-lbf-thrust.html 6) Diamond D-Jet picture from http://www.airliners.net/photo/Untitled-Diamond-Aircraft/Diamond-D-Jet/1814051 7) Lockheed Martin X-55A picture from op. cit. 8) X-55A diagram from https://thelexicans.wordpress.com/2012/10/24/the-lockheed-martin-x-55-advanced-composite-cargo-aircraft/ 9) DCPR information from Stahl, Joseph W.; Arena, Joseph A.; Knapp, Mark A; Cost-Estimating Relationships for Tactical Aircraft, prepared for the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, November 1984 10) Empty weight for Dornier 328-300JET from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairchild_Dornier_328JET 11) Description of X-55 work from http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/composite-cargo/ 12) Fokker F-28, Citation-500 weight statements from http://www.southampton.ac.uk/~jps7/Aircraft%20Design%20Resources/weight/Sample%20Aircraft%20Weight%20Statements.htm 13) XCOR EZ-Rocket data from http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1746&context=smallsat 14) XCOR EZ-Rocket picture from http://aircraft.wikia.com/wiki/XCOR_EZ-Rocket?file=EZRocket.png 15) Lemke, Aaron M., Part Count: Monolithic Part Effects on Manufacturing Labor Cost, an Aircraft Applied Model, from www.dtic.mil/get-tr- doc/pdf?AD=ADA519654 16) DCPR information from Stahl, Joseph W.; Arena, Joseph A.; Knapp, Mark A; Cost-Estimating Relationships for Tactical Aircraft, prepared for the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, November 1984 17) Boeing X-51A picture from http://keywordteam.net/gallery/742763.html 18) Sailplane construction picture from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ux0o1mbDag 19) Test and Evaluation Trends and Costs for Aircraft and Guided Weapons by Bernard Fox, Michael Boito, John Graser, Obaid Younossi, from https://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG109.html

20) Mrazek, James E., Fighting Gliders of WWII, 1977, LoC 76-57799 21) Devlin, Gerald M., Silent Wings 1985 22) Jane's, All the World Aircraft 1945/6 6th ed., LoC 10-8268 23) Mingos, Howard, The Aircraft Yearbook for 1941 23rd ed., 1941 Aeronautical Chamber of Commerce of America Inc. 24) Mingos, Howard, The Aircraft Yearbook for 1943 25th ed., 1941 Aeronautical Chamber of Commerce of America Inc. 25) Mingos, Howard, The Aircraft Yearbook for 1944 26th ed., 1941 Aeronautical Chamber of Commerce of America Inc. 26) MacRae, Michael, The Flying Coffins of WWII, 2012 https://www.asme.org/engineering-topics/articles/aerospace-defense/the-flying-coffins-of- world-war-ii 27) Waco CG-4 from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_CG-4 28) Waco CG-13 from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_CG-13 29) General Aircraft Hamilcar glider from http://worldwar2headquarters.com/HTML/normandy/airborneAssault/hamilcar.html 30) General Aircraft Hotspur from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Aircraft_Hotspur 31) Airspeed Horsa from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airspeed_Horsa 32) CG-4A images from http://www.williammaloney.com/Aviation/CradleOfAviationMuseum/WacoCG4AHadrianGlider/pages/02WacoNoseArt.htm 33) Military factory data CG-4A from https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=1189 34) XCG-16 data from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Airborne_Transport_XCG-16 35) Norton, Bill, American Military Gliders of WWII, 2012 LoC, 2012934114 36) Modern glider data from http://gliderforsale.org/ 37) BEA table from https://www.bea.gov/national/FA2004/Tablecandtext.pdf 38) Bantam engine estimate in an email from William Sack of Rocketdyne to Doug Howarth, MEE Inc., July 28, 2017 39) Bantam picture from http://www.rocket.com/article/aerojet-rocketdyne-increases-thrust-level-3-d-printed-bantam-rocket-engine-500- percent 40) Civil aircraft data from MEE Inc. 41) Howarth, Doug, “The Checkmark Function for Input Error Correction,” presented to 2008 ISPA conference, May 12, 2008 Copyright 2017 MEE Inc. 36