Diploma the second

The analysis of the product.

      Coal, oil and gas prices grow day by day. Furthermore, the exhausting of the known reserves makes people search alternatives to change their leading part in generating the electric power. There was time when the nuclear power seemed to be a good solution of the problem. However, the Chernobyl’s accident showed everybody the reverse side of the nuclear medal. In addition the storages of uranium ores are not boundless. Although, there are quite enough uranium and thorium which can be used as the nuclear fuel now, but their concentration in ores are slight. In many cases the extraction and their concentrating requires more energy than it is possible to generate using them. The alternative sources of power such as: solar power-plants, wind, tidal or geothermic power-plants are not able to generate enough in addition they are quite expensive.

That is why the theoretical base to generate energy using fusion-plants has been developed. In ideal, the ordinary hydrogen can be used to produce energy, but the conditions, temperature and pressure, to start this reaction are too difficult to reproduce. The easiest way to fire the fusion fire is the reaction with helium-3, according to this equation:

It requires softer temperature and pressure conditions than the hydrogen cycle does. There aren’t any radioactive elements in it. The producing energy emits with protons but not with neutrons. It means that it is much easer to transform the energy of the participles into electrical. Herewith, the huge storage of this resource can be found on the Moon surface. It was found that there were from 7 to 36 milligram of He-3 in one tone of regolith. This is the main reason to organize our mission. 
 

 Analysis of the market and competitors.
 

      The mission of the project was formulated as “Let’s make the Moon not only shine, but also heat!”

The general goal of the programme is to deliver 24,2 tones of helium-3 per year.

The different types of main engine systems, the different types of fuel and time of flights, were analyzed as the alternatives. The choice of these types is based on existing analogs. The analysis of advantages and disadvantages of each alternative was made and the choice of the contractor design was done.

According to the formerly research the variant number “four B” was chosen. The following characteristics became the foundation for the choice:

- The minimal starting mass of the spaceship

- The multi-times using of the spaceship

- The minimal cost on the maintaining and launching of the spaceship

Owing to the fact that the main goal of the mission is bringing of the liquefied gas inside a thermal insulating vessel, where the gas escape is less than 10^-2 m³ per year, the time of the deliver is not the determinant. However, the variant number four is not useful for a manned flight because of the long time period. That is why, the parallel so-existing of the variant number four with the variant number two is also possible, which will be used for manned flight. In addition, it can be useful when the necessity of urgent deliver of an equipment are or during an accident.

 
The complex method:

Making of the growth-share matrix:

Competitive analysis:

The evaluation of the prospects for work in the industry: (9+9+8+5+9) / 50 х 100% = 80%. The perspectives on the market are quite favorable.

The industry	The manufacturing of rockets
Clients	The wide group of potential clients: ordinary citizens, research institutes, militaries, etc. They want: the low cost of deliver, the high reliability of deliver, the short terms of delivery.
Competitors	There aren’t any competitors in this market segment now. The high state barriers make the inner competition almost impossible, but the outer competition is quite possible. Customers are united and have large state influence. The danger of suppliers is low. The competition reliability of the product, price competition.
The key success factors	The modernization speed of the flight equipments, using the last scientific researches and developments, price flexibility.

The competitor and the key success factors.
 

The plan of the marketing.
 

          The major efforts are made in the field of advertising to promote the product on the market.

1)         The total ecological safety of the generating energy:

The special researches were made to ensure the ecological safety of the system. One of them was the research of the nuclear power-plant core chemical composition to find the most low-melt-point of them. The core of a nuclear power-plant, which consists of radioactive elements, is melted and divided into very small, until the one thousandth of millimeter, pieces by the air flow and disperse over the huge area without doing any harm.

2)         The new technological development and their use in the daily life.

3)         The low prime cost of generating energy.

 

The rough expenses to create each segment of the mission were calculated:

The total cost of creation for the fleet of inter-orbital spaceships is shown in this example. The approximately calculations (R&D, manufacturing, exploitation, maintenance) were carried out according to the professor Gurov’s method:




, the first sum is: the summation of the stages of system development,
the second sum is: summation of the stages of the life cycle,
Сij is the cost of engines, trusses, tanks, etc producing during the j stage.

The cargo volume: 24,2 tones of heliun-3 have to be delivered per year.

Nтро = Q / mпн – the number of transport operations per year.

Nтро = 24,2/5 = 4,84 = 5 spaceships.

The cost was calculated according to the simplified, univariate model:

 

 

The statistic about the similar projects, Deep Space 1, SMART 1, Moses-C, were used in order to determine the cost of the first fly model

P&D costs:

Соп = С1оп Nоп lоп

, where lоп is the coefficient which characterize the reduction of the cost in the experimental production (0,83), nоп is the size of the pilot batch (4 ships), C1оп is the expenses for the prototype.

СОКР = (1/gоп) Соп

The share of costs: gпр + gоп + gисп = 1. In this case it is: 0,2 + 0,5 + 0,3.

Книр =  Снир /Сокр – according to the statistic data (0,18-0,3), in this case it is 0,24 → Снир = 0,24 · Сокр

The cost of industrial production:

KN = cN-b = 0,7716 К  - the coefficient of cost reduction, by developing the production technology.

Кизг = С1изг / С1оп » 0,82 – the cost of the prototype.

The total expenses to produce the whole fleet:

 = 935,6 million $.


Exploitation costs:

Сexp = Fuel + Сmaintenance  + Сtransportation

Сfuelperyear1 = Cfuel1 Mfuel Klose Nuseperyear

Срег = Сизг.КС Квост.раб – the maintenance costs (0,17)

Сexp = 932,9 million.$

The elements of the system:

СyearКС = Сexpyear + Аamortyear

ККС      Снир + Сокр + Сprod           

Агод   = ККС / Тэ = (Снир + Сокр + Сизг) / Тэ = 310,6 million $

ККС = Снир + Сокр + Сprod

СyearКС = 1243,5 million $ per year, R&D = 2174,1 million $.

Organizational plan. 

The net model, which reflects the preliminary design phase of spaceships, was carried out and optimized.

 

As the result of the optimization, the designing time is 24 weeks. The optimized factors were: the total downtime and the number of workers in each direction.

 

Financial plan. 

The calculation for the overall program:

 

 

 

Years	Investments (billion $)	Discount rate  (i, %)	(1+i)-t	DCFt Discounted stream of payments
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7	-7,674 -5,643 34,857 32,717 34,857 32,717 34,857 34,857	12	1 0,892857 0,797194 0,71178 0,635518 0,567427 0,506631 0,452349	-7,674 -5,03839 27,78779 23,28731 22,15225 18,5645 17,65964 15,76754

 

If all the expenses were taken in zero year:
 

 

Segments	Designing	Exploitation	once per 2 years
Spaceship	2,174	1,243
Rocket-carrier	1,2	0,8
Control centre	0	0,7
Lunar module+ extraction and processing	3,1	2,4
Refueller+ Lander	1,2	0,5
Maintenance			2,14

 

 

Э_{годчист} = 40.5
NVP = Σ DCF_t (discounted stream of payments) = 112,5066
Profitability index: Р_I = Σ(+)/Σ(-) = 9,850155
Payback period: СF_коммул
 

0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
-7,674	-13,317	21,54	54,257	89,114	121,831	156,688	191,545

Static payback period: PPs = 2+(/-13,317/)/34,857 = 2,382 (the project will be profitable since the middle of the second year of exploitation)
 

Dynamic payback period PPd

DCF_{t куммул}

0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
-7,674	-12,7124	15,07539	38,36271	60,51496	79,07947	96,73911	112,5066

MIRR = ^N√(TV / PV) - 1

, where ТV is the value of accrued income (CIFt),
PV is the total discounted cost (/COFt/)

PV = /-2,147 + -1,10982/ = 12,71239
 

for TV - (1+i)^N-t

0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
-	-	1,762342	1,573519	1,404928	1,2544	1,12	1

 

 

 

Factor building ССF

-
-
61,42994
51,48083
48,97158
41,0402
39,03984
34,857

 

TV = Σ CCF = 276,8194


 

Plan for risks

- the insurance

 

The resulting economic efficiency of the project:

 

The total energetic expenses to deliver of helium-3 on the Earth are 2,4*10³ GJ/kg. Herewith it is possible to get 6*10⁵ GJ/kg during the fusion. It means that we get 250 times more energy than we spent. The similar coefficient for coal equals 16 and approximately 20 for uranium. The maximum efficiency approachable with our technology is 30 times. In addition to direct incomes, there are a lot of associated products and gases such as: hydrogen, helium-4, oxygen, nitrogen, water vapor, methane, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, etc. They can be used both in an extraction complex and in a habitable lunar base.

 The economic efficiency for the whole program was determined as 8,6.

 As the result of the analysis it is possible to conclude that the extracting of the lunar helium-3 is profitable. However, it should be noted that the industry of fusion power stations had had to be built and functioned. Unfortunately, it is the perspective for next twenty of even thirty years at least. It also requires considerable efforts of scientists and huge financial donations.