spaceworks engineering, inc. (sei)

Engineering Today, Enabling TomorrowSpaceWorks Engineering, Inc. (SEI)www.sei.aero

World Space Congress - 2002

SpaceWorks Engineering, Inc. (SEI)

IAC-02-IAA.1.1.07:

Optimization of a Future RLV Business Case Using Multiple Strategic Market Prices

Senior Futurist:Mr. A.C. Charania

October 2002

Overview of the Firm

About

SpaceWorks Engineering, Inc. (SEI)www.sei.aero


SpaceWorks Engineering, Inc. (SEI) is a small aerospace engineering and consulting company located in metro Atlanta. We specialize in providing timely and unbiased analysis of advanced space concepts ranging from space launch vehicles to deep space missions.

Our practice areas include:- Space Systems Analysis- Technology Prioritization- Financial Engineering- Future Market Assessment- Policy and Media Consultation

Engineering Today, Enabling Tomorrow



From Vision to Concept

Including:- Engineering design and analysis- New concept design- Independent concept assessment- Full, life cycle analysis- Programmatic and technical analysis


Recent Firm EngagementsNASA MSFC Advanced Concepts Group: 3rd Gen RLV concept assessment and engineering tool developmentNASA 2nd Gen RLV / Space Launch Initiative (SLI) Program: Advanced Engineering Environment (AEE)NASA Headquarters: FY2002 RLV technology goals assessmentNASA inter-center Value Stream Analysis Program: Micro and macro level technology implications for 3rd Gen RLVsNASA MSFC Integrated Technology Assessment Center (ITAC): Space transportation technology prioritizationRevolutionary Aerospace Systems Concept (RASC) Program at NASA MSFC: Database and tool developmentNASA Institute for Advanced Concepts (NIAC): Phase I Award for Mars Telecommunication NetworksSAIC and NAL (Japan): ATREX engine test program performance assessment Lockheed Martin Astronautics: Assessment of optimization codes for space transportation case studiesDARPA: Responsive Access Small Cargo Affordable Launch (RASCAL) program subcontract for performance analysisNASA MSFC Program Planning Office: Heavy-lift launch vehicle configurations predicated on SLI technologiesWhite paper (available at www.sei.aero) on past case studies and future investment strategies for RLVs




Overview

Motivation

A lack of depth in current paradigm of conceptual level RLVeconomic models

Current modeling methods normally model a single price chargedto all customers, public or private

Resilient examination of the economic landscape requiresoptimization of multiple prices in which each price affects adifferent demand curve



Process Overview

Overview of the CABAM financial model

Application to 3rd Generation Two Stage-To-Orbit (TSTO) RLV

Using several SpaceWorks Engineering, Inc. (SEI) developedoptimizers in the Phoenix Integration ModelCenter© collaborativeEngineering framework

Optimization of business case using market prices



Overview of CABAM Model



Economic Analysis Model

Cost and Business Analysis Module (CABAM)- MS-Excel spreadsheet-based model that attempts to model both the demand and supply for space transportation

services in the future- Demand takes the form of market assumptions (both near term and far-term) and the supply comes from user-defined

vehicles that are placed into the model- Inputs from various other disciplinary models to generate Life-Cycle-Cost (LCC) and economic metrics- One of the major assumptions inherent in CABAM is that the project is modeled as a commercial endeavor with the

possibility to model the effects of government contribution, tax-breaks, loan guarantees, etc. - Operation includes a multi-step process:

User defines a particular program that consists of a certain set of economic and schedule assumptionsThe performance, cost, production, and operational properties of the vehicle are then definedUser can then manipulate the price charged per market to maximize (or meet) a desired financial return

- The model takes a corporate finance mentality as far as economic modeling- Various input financial ratios and rates (debt-to-equity, discount rates, etc.) are need for calculation of financial metrics- The long-term market forecasts are based upon the Commercial Space Transportation Study (CSTS) from the early

1990s



3rd Generation Markets: 1994 Commercial Space Transportation Study (CSTS)Commercial and Government Cargo Elasticity

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000Launch Price [FY2002, $/lb]

Fligh

t Rate

Per

Yea

r

Commercial Cargo Flight Rate: Power Curve Fity = 481293x-1.2859, R2 = 0.9959

Government Cargo Flight Rate: Polynomial Curve Fity = -2E-10x3 + 4E-06x2 - 0.0235x + 56.49, R2 = 0.999

Annual LEO + GTO Comm. Cargo Traffic

Annual LEO + GTO Govt. Cargo Traffic

Assumes 20klb payload vehicle with 15% payload inefficiency factor, with $5,000/lb [FY2018] price asymptote for government cargo markets, this chart does not reflect commercial or government passenger markets



2nd Generation Markets: Interaction of Dynamic Space Transportation Markets

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180


Fligh

t Rate

Per

Yea

r





0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180


Fligh

t Rate

Per

Yea

r





0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180


Fligh

t Rate

Per

Yea

r





Multiple Price Elasticities of Demand for Multiple Markets

Individual RLV Operator

Reaction of Existing and New Competitors (Expendable and Reusable)

Effect on Market Equilibriums

Demand Captured

Market Prices Charged Per Year

Short Term Market Forecasts: Up to 2012Teal Group, Futron SLI/COMSTAC,CSTS, HEDS, Aerospace Corp., etc.

Long Term Market Forecasts: 2025+

Selected Model Algorithms

- Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC), equity and debt financing

- Heuristic based VBA macro that examines the payloads and applies a certain set of rules to the manifesting problem

- VBA macro algorithm for various architecture components (Booster, LEO Module, Booster propulsion, LEO module propulsion, cargo container, and crew container) to determine a production / acquisition schedule

- Once the determination is made as to the actual number of fleet and their production, learning/rate effect though VBA function is applied

Financing and Cost of Capital:

Manifesting Algorithm:

Vehicle Acquisition Algorithm:

Vehicle Learning Curve Algorithm:

Domain of Assessment:

Xcalibur 3rd Generation TSTO VTHLReusable Launch Vehicle (RLV)

Xcalibur Booster

Xcalibur Staging

Xcalibur Orbiter

Xcalibur Booster Internal View

Xcalibur Orbiter Internal View

Design and Analysis Process



Typical Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV) Design Structure Matrix (DSM)

ECONOMICS CLOSURE

PERFORMANCE CLOSURE

Propulsion

Trajectory

Aeroheating and TPS

Weights and Sizing

Operations

Safety and Reliability

Cost and Economics

Aerodynamics and

GeometryReference

Configuration & Packaging



Sample Suite of SEI Space Engineering Design Tools

CABAM, NAFCOM 99, NAFCOM–R, TRANSCOST, SOCM, LMNoP, SSPATE, NASA Mission Market Models, Commercial Space Transportation Study (CSTS) Market Models, FAA COMSTAC Market Forecasts

Economics and Cost

Parametric MERs, historical databases, CONSIZ, INTROS, WATES, GT-Sizer, AC-Sizer

Weights and Sizing

AATe, OCM-COMET, NROC, MSATOperations

GTSafetyII, PRISMSafety and Reliability

REPP, SCORES II, SCCREAM, ROCETS, SRGULL, RJPA, T-BEAT, GECAT, CEA, VFPS

Propulsion

Miniver, TPS-X, TCAT IIAeroheating and TPS

APAS, S/HABP, 2-D Euler/NS CFDAerodynamics

SAS JMP, Matlab, ProbWorks, Crystal Ball, OptWorks, Evolver (Genetic Algorithm), DOT, ADS, ModelCenter, Analysis Server

System Engineering

POST 3D, OTIS, Chebytop, IPOSTTrajectory Optimization

SDRC I-DEAS, SolidEdge, OpenFX, CanvasCAD and Packaging

Tools, Models, SimulationsDiscipline

Vehicle Performance Toolsets

Economic Closure Toolsets

Collaborative Design and Optimization

ModelCenter© Collaborative Environment“Phoenix Integration allows manufacturing companies to integrate and automate numerous software tools, remote locations, and different computing platforms into a cohesive environment for systems design…

…Our client software and back-end server software products help you build an integrated process for your engineering design team.”

Phoenix Integration Inc.http://www.phoenix-int.com

Image Source: Phoenix Integration Inc.http://www.phoenix-int.com/products/index.html






Distributed Collaborative Engineering Design in ModelCenter©

NASA – Langley

Weights and Sizing

Trajectory

NASA – Ames

Safety

OperationsSpaceWorks Engineering, Inc. (SEI)

Assembled Model

Cost

Economics



Engineering Links Within a ModelCenter© Environment

User Control

Sizing Optimizer

Trajectory

Weights

Cost

EconomicsOptimizer

Operations

Economics

Safety

A B C D

E

F G H I

J K

L M N

O

PST

Q

Z

W

V

U

R

Y X

AA



Conceptual Design Processes Within ModelCenter© Collaborative Design Environment

Performance Closure Process

Economic Closure Process

OptWorks



SpaceWorks Engineering, Inc. (SEI) introduces a new suite of optimization tools for incorporation with Phoenix Integration’s ModelCenter© collaborative design environment. Entitled OptWorks, this suite initially consists of eight non-gradient based optimizers each implemented as Java-based components which can function on any platform running Phoenix Integration’s ModelCenter© or Analysis Server©.

These tools enhance the current gradient based optimization tools in ModelCenter© to allow solution of previously intractable problems. Characteristics of these sets of applications include the capability to handle problems with high dimensionality, discrete or mixed variables (continuous and discrete), and multi-modal solutions spaces.

This package is currently available for purchase through individual/group site licenses. The full product suite includes optimizers in Java byte code, documentation with case study examples, and selected online support.

An Eight Component Optimization Suite

OptWorks Suite of Components



Utilizes properties of natural selection found in biological evolution

Same as above but with heuristically-based optimizer setup parameters

Search method based upon metallurgical processes

Same as above but with heuristically-based optimizer setup parameters

Search through random determination of direction for next movement

N-orthogonal search able to handle discontinuities but not multiple local minima

Random determination of analysis point within design space

Area searching with analysis at various refinement levels

OptWorks_GeneticAlgorithm

OptWorks_AutoGA

OptWorks_SimulatedAnnealing

OptWorks_AutoSA

OptWorks_RandomWalk

OptWorks_CoordinatePatternSearch

OptWorks_RandomSearch

OptWorks_GridSearch

Case Study

Problem Setup

- Optimization of the RLV business case using CABAM- Maximize Net Present Value (NPV)

- Up to four market prices- Commercial cargo price per lb [Range: $500 - $4000 / lb]- Government cargo price per lb [Range: $500 - $4000 / lb]- Commercial passenger price per flight [Range: $0.5M - $2M / passenger]- Government passenger price per flight [Range: $0.5M – $5M / passenger]

- Various number of design variables- Class I: One market price available [cargo only]- Class II: Two market prices available [commercial and government cargo only]- Class III: Four market prices available [commercial and government, cargo and passenger]

- Gradient-based- Coordinate Pattern Search (CPS)- Genetic Algorithm (GA)- Grid Search (GS)

Objective:

Design Variables:

3 Classes of Problems:

Four Optimizers:



Design Structure Matrix (DSM) of Sample Metrics Assessment Process

Feed Forward LinksA: Stage 1 Number of Engines

Stage 2 Number of EnginesStage 1 Weights: Airframe + Engine (x15)Stage 2 Weights: Airframe + Engine (x15)

B: Stage 1 Number of EnginesStage 2 Number of EnginesStage 1 Weights: Airframe + Engine (x13)Stage 2 Weights: Airframe + Engine (x13)Stage 1 Propellant Load by Type [lbs]Stage 2 Propellant Load by Type [lbs]Stage 1 Dimensions (L,H,W) [ft]Stage 2 Dimensions (L,H,W) [ft]Stage 1 Area (Wing, Tail, Body) [ft2]Stage 2 Area (Wing, Tail, Body) [ft2]

C: Stage 1 Number of EnginesStage 1 Dimensions (L,H,W) [ft]Stage 1 Total Propellant Load [lbs]

D: Stage 2 Number of EnginesStage 2 Dimensions (L,H,W) [ft]Stage 2 Total Propellant Load [lbs]

E: Vehicle Payload (Stage 2) [lbs]Stage 1 Number of EnginesStage 2 Number of EnginesStage 1 Propellant Load by Type [lbs]Stage 2 Propellant Load by Type [lbs]

F: Fiscal of Outputs [FY]Inflation Rate [%]Stage 1 DDT&E / TFU Cost [$M]Stage 1 Prop. DDT&E / TFU Cost [$M]Stage 2 DDT&E / TFU Cost [$M]Stage 2 Prop. DDT&E / TFU Cost [$M]Stage 1 Number of EnginesStage 2 Number of Engines

G: Fixed Recurring Cost Per Year [$M]Variable Recurring Cost Per Flight [$M/flight]Facilities Development Cost [$M]Turnaround Time (TAT) [days]

H: Overall Vehicle Reliability [flights]I: Price Per lb (Comm. + Govt. Cargo) [$/lb]

Feedback Links J: Target Net Present Value for Price [$M]K: Passenger Flights [flights/year]

Total Flights [flights/year]Passengers Per Flight

L: Passenger Flights [flights/year]Total Flights [flights/year]Passengers Per Flight

M: Flight Rate per Year [ flights]year]N: Stage 2 Loss of Mission (LOM) [Flights]

Stage 2 Loss of Vehicle (LOV) [Flights]Stage 2 Casualty Rate [Casualties/year]

Note: All but J are one-time feedbacksK, L, and M are initial estimatesN sent when GTSafetyII finished

A B

F

C D

G

I

LM

H

ECONOMICS CLOSURE

E

JK

N

[Mass Properties]

NAFCOMCERs[Cost]

AATe[Operations]

GTSafetyIIStage 1[Safety]

GTSafetyIIStage 2[Safety]

CABAMOptimization

CABAM[Economics]

TOOL NAME[Discipline]



Xcalibur TSTO RLVNon-Recurring and First Vehicle Acquisition Cost Summary†

Booster

DDT&E (Airframe)DDT&E Engines (RBCC)DDT&E Engines (Rocket)DDT&E (All Engines)Total DDT&E

TFU (Airframe)TFU Per Engine (RBCC)‡

TFU Per Engine (Rocket)‡

Acquisition Engines (RBCC)¥

Acquisition Engines (Rocket)¥

Total Acquisition (All Engines)Total Acquisition (First Vehicle)

Orbiter Total

$4,748 M$1,411 M

$1,411 M$6,159 M

$980 M$226 M

$755 M

$755 M$1,735 M

$1,404 M

$72 M$72 M

$1,476 M

$265 M

$17 M

$44 M$44 M

$309 M

$6,152 M

$1,483 M$7,635 M

$1,246 M

$799 M$2,045 M

$9,680 M† - rounded FY2002 US$, assuming a 2.1% inflation rate, visible discrepancies due to rounding‡ - Per engine without learning or production rate effects¥ - For all engines (with 4 RBCC engines on booster, 3 rocket engines on orbiter) with 85% learning/production rate effect percentage

Cost Item

Non

-Rec

urrin

g C

ost S

umm

ary

Sour

ce: N

AFC

OM

CER

s

Cost to First Vehicle



Xcalibur TSTO RLVNon-Recurring and First Vehicle Acquisition Cost Breakout

Design, Development, Testing, and Evaluation (DDT&E) Cost Breakout

First Vehicle Acquisition Cost Breakout

Booster Airframe62.2%

Booster Engines (all engines)18.5%

Orbiter Airframe18.4%

Orbiter Engines (all engines)0.9%

Booster Airframe47.9%

Booster Engines (all engines)36.9%

Orbiter Engines (all engines)2.2%Orbiter Airframe

13.0%



Xcalibur TSTO RLVOperations and Safety Summary†

Booster

OPERATIONSAATe_A Input Flight Rate [Flights Per Year]Fixed Operations Cost Per YearVariable Operations Cost Per FlightPropellant Cost Per FlightInsurance Cost Per FlightSite Fee Cost Per FlightTotal Recurring Cost Per FlightFacilities / GSE Acquisition (one time)Vehicle Ground Cycle Time [days]

SAFETYLoss of Mission (LOM) [MFBF]Loss of Vehicle (LOV) [MFBF]Casualty Rate [Casualties Per Year]

Orbiter Total

----------------------------------------

4.40 Days

1,335 Flights2,628 Flights

0.0114

----------------------------------------

3.79 Days

2,887 Flights5,685 Flights

0.0211

55.2 Flights/Year$49.25 M

$3.8 M$0.1 M

$1.10 M$0.50 M

$6.3 M$494.84 M4.40 Days

913 Flights1,798 Flights

0.0325

† - rounded FY2002 US$, 2.1% inflation rate, flights rates going into GTSafetyII used flight rate assumptions. Assuming 4 passenger flights per year with 15 passengers per light, 200 ground touch personnel for booster, 150 ground touch personnel for orbiter, propellant bought for launch assumed to be 1.5 times propellant required from vehicle weight breakdown due to losses in transportation

Item

Sour

ce: A

ATe

_A, G

TSaf

etyI

I



$1,987.81/lb$1,987.81/lb-$13.46 M

5 (5)

Class ICommercial Cargo Price Per lbGovernment Cargo Price Per lbNPVNumber of Function Calls (best iteration at)

CABAM NPV Optimization Results: Gradient-Based

$1,996.06/lb$2.17 M

$2,001.25/lb$10.91 M-$29.54 M

6 (6)

Class IIICommercial Cargo Price Per lbCommercial Passenger Price Per FlightGovernment Cargo Price Per lbGovernment Passenger Price Per FlightNPVNumber of Function Calls (best iteration at)

$1,947.38/lb$2,007.88/lb

-$8.98 M7 (7)

Class IICommercial Cargo Price Per lbGovernment Cargo Price Per lbNPVNumber of Function Calls (best iteration at)

ValueClass

-500

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Iteration (Function Call)

Obj

ectiv

e Fu

nctio

n: N

PV

($M

)

Class III Class II Class I

Note: conjugate gradient method, relative convergence = 0.01, finite difference method, maximum number of function calls = 10000.



$2,493.75/lb$2,493.75/lb$350.34 M

13 (12)

Class ICommercial Cargo Price Per lbGovernment Cargo Price Per lbNPVNumber of Function Calls (best iteration at)

-5,500

-5,000

-4,500

-4,000

-3,500

-3,000

-2,500

-2,000

-1,500

-1,000

-500

0

500

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70Iteration (Function Call)

Obj

ectiv

e Fu

nctio

n: N

PV

($M

)


CABAM NPV Optimization Results: Coordinate Pattern Search (CPS)

$2,987.50/lb$2.00 M

$2,493.75/lb$9.01 M

$364.36 M69 (60)

Class IIICommercial Cargo Price Per lbCommercial Passenger Price Per FlightGovernment Cargo Price Per lbGovernment Passenger Price Per FlightNPVNumber of Function Calls (best iteration at)

$2,493.75/lb$2,493.75/lb$350.34 M

33 (29)

Class IICommercial Cargo Price Per lbGovernment Cargo Price Per lbNPVNumber of Function Calls (best iteration at)

ValueClass

Note: initial step size = 0.2, minimum step size = 0.01, no compass search, maximum number of function calls-limit not used.



2020

$2,477.01/lb$2,477.01/lb$347.19 M

220 (2)

CABAM NPV Optimization Results: Genetic Algorithm (GA)

2020

$3,358.79/lb$25.82 M

$2,723.07/lb$8.76 M

$220.38 M620 (404)

Class IIIBit sizePopulation SizeCommercial Cargo Price Per lbCommercial Passenger Price Per FlightGovernment Cargo Price Per lbGovernment Passenger Price Per FlightNPVNumber of Function Calls (best iteration at)

2020

$38.854.07/lb$2,893.83/lb-$528.66 M581 (365)

Class IIBit sizePopulation SizeCommercial Cargo Price Per lbGovernment Cargo Price Per lbNPVNumber of Function Calls (best iteration at)

Class IBit sizePopulation SizeCommercial Cargo Price Per lbGovernment Cargo Price Per lbNPVNumber of Function Calls (best iteration at)

ValueClass

-10,000

-9,000

-8,000

-7,000

-6,000

-5,000

-4,000

-3,000

-2,000

-1,000

0

1,000

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650Iteration (Function Call)

Obj

ectiv

e Fu

nctio

n: N

PV

($M

)


Note: tournament selection, two-point cross-over, design value mutation type, random seed = 0, tournament participants = 2, crossover probability = 0.6, mutation probability = 0.6, maximum number of generations = 5000, convergence iterations = 10, maximum number of function calls-limit not used.



Class IGrid-points per design variableSub-searchesCommercial Cargo Price Per lbGovernment Cargo Price Per lbNPVNumber of Function Calls

501

$2,663.37/lb$2,663.37/lb$368.95 M100 (60)

CABAM NPV Optimization Results: Grid Search (GS)

101

$2,694.44/lb$2.69 M

$2,694.44/lb$9.03 M

$394.50 M20,000 (14,001)

Class III (Additional case)Grid-points per design variableSub-searchesCommercial Cargo Price Per lbCommercial Passenger Price Per FlightGovernment Cargo Price Per lbGovernment Passenger Price Per FlightNPVNumber of Function Calls (best iteration at)

51

$5,437.50/lb$5.44 M

$5,437.50/lb$10.38 M

-$1,686.49 M1,250 (876)

Class IIIGrid-points per design variableSub-searchesCommercial Cargo Price Per lbCommercial Passenger Price Per FlightGovernment Cargo Price Per lbGovernment Passenger Price Per FlightNPVNumber of Function Calls (best iteration at)

251

$2,214.41/lb$3,037.33/lb$399.81 M1250 (664)

Class IIGrid-points per design variableSub-searchesCommercial Cargo Price Per lbGovernment Cargo Price Per lbNPVNumber of Function Calls

ValueClass

-10,000

-9,000

-8,000

-7,000

-6,000

-5,000

-4,000

-3,000

-2,000

-1,000

0

1,000

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400Iteration (Function Call)

Obj

ectiv

e Fu

nctio

n: N

PV

($M

)


Conclusions

Observations

CABAM can help define landscapes of economic value

Optimization of RLV business case using higher fidelityanalysis than in previous tools is accomplished

Maximization of NPV was performed using various types ofoptimizers in the OptWorks suite

Coordinate Pattern Search (CPS) and Genetic Algorithm (GA) ratedas better than standard gradient-based optimizers for this problem

Use of multiple prices result in better NPV





Economic Landscapes of RLV Value

Project Net Present Value [$B FY2002]-6

-4

-2

0

2

510

1520

2530

3540

200400

600800

1000

-6

-4

-2

0

2

510

1520

2530

3540

200400

600800

1000

-6

-4

-2

0

2

510

1520

2530

3540

200400

600800

1000

-6

-4

-2

0

2

510

1520

2530

3540

200400

600800

1000

]

Government Fleet Acquisition

Gove

rnm

ent D

DT&E

Cos

t Con

tribu

tion

10% 60%

20%

100%

-6

-4

-2

0

2

510

1520

2530

3540

200400

600800

1000

-6

-4

-2

0

2

510

1520

2530

3540

200400

600800

1000

-6

-4

-2

0

2

510

1520

2530

3540

200400

600800

1000

-6

-4

-2

0

2

510

1520

2530

3540

200400

600800

1000

-6

-4

-2

0

2

510

1520

2530

3540

200400

600800

1000

-6

-4

-2

0

2

510

1520

2530

3540

200400

600800

1000

-6

-4

-2

0

2

510

1520

2530

3540

200400

600800

1000

]

-6

-4

-2

0

2

510

1520

2530

3540

200400

600800

1000

]

Government Fleet Acquisition

Gove

rnm

ent D

DT&E

Cos

t Con

tribu

tion

10% 60%

20%

100%

Airframe Lifetime [flights]

Turn Around Time [days]



Results for a Sample 3rd Gen RLV:Scenario Analysis of Cost and Turn-Around-Time Effects on Launch Price ($/lb)

500

1,500

2,500

3,500

4,500

25% 50% 75%Turn-Around-Time Reduction

Pric

e P

er P

ound

Pay

load

[$/lb

]

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Flig

ht R

ate

[Flig

hts

Per

Yea

r]

Price Per Flight [$/lb]

Flight Rate [Flights/Year]

500

1,500

2,500

3,500

4,500


Pric

e P

er P

ound

Pay

load

[$/lb

]

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Flig

ht R

ate

[Flig

hts

Per

Yea

r]



1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000


Pric

e P

er P

ound

Pay

load

[$/lb

]

20

25

30

35

40

Flig

ht R

ate

[Flig

hts

Per

Yea

r]



1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000


Pric

e P

er P

ound

Pay

load

[$/lb

]

20

25

30

35

40

Flig

ht R

ate

[Flig

hts

Per

Yea

r]



Oper

atio

ns C

ost R

educ

tion

DDT&E AND TFU COST REDUCTION25% 75%

25%

75%



SpaceWorks Engineering, Inc. (SEI)

Business Address:SpaceWorks Engineering, Inc. (SEI)1200 Ashwood ParkwaySuite 506Atlanta, GA 30338 U.S.A.

Phone: 770-379-8000Fax: 770-379-8001

Internet:WWW: www.sei.aeroE-mail: [email protected]

President / CEO: Dr. John R. OldsPhone: 770-379-8002E-mail: [email protected]

Director of Hypersonics: Dr. John E. BradfordPhone: 770-379-8007E-mail: [email protected]

Director of Concept Development: Mr. Matthew GrahamPhone: 770-379-8009E-mail: [email protected]

Project Engineer: Mr. Jon WallacePhone: 770-379-8008E-mail: [email protected]

Senior Futurist: Mr. A.C. CharaniaPhone: 770-379-8006E-mail: [email protected]

Contact Information

spaceworks engineering, inc. (sei)

Documents