mangalyaan

1. A Project Management Case Study on ISRO’s Mars
Orbiter Mission

2. Introduction
• On 5th November 2013, ISRO launched a space probe Mangalyaan,
which orbits MARS from 24th September 2014
• The MOM mission concept began with a feasibility study in 2010 by
the Indian Institute of Space Science and Technology after the
launch of lunar satellite Chandrayaan-1 in 2008
• The total project cost was estimated to cost US$67 million.
• The satellite costs US$23 million and the rest of the budget has
been attributed to ground stations and relay upgrades
• The total cost of the mission was approximately US$73 million

3. Things worthnoting..
• The Mars Orbiter Mission was completed with the total cost
amounting to US$ 73 million making it the least expensive mars
project in the world
• The mission’s budget was even less than the movie GRAVITY
whose budget was US$100 million
• The satellite's development was fast-tracked and completed in a
record 15 months
• The cost effectiveness of this project was due to the following
reasons:
1) Simple design
2) Home grown technology
3) Long working hours
4) Low worker costs
5) Time management

4. Main Objectives
• First Indian mission to Mars is to develop the technologies required for
design, planning, management and operations of an interplanetary
mission.
Technological Objectives
• Design and realization of a Mars orbiter with a capability to survive and
perform Earth bound maneuvers, cruise phase of 300 days, Mars orbit
insertion / capture, and on-orbit phase around Mars.
• Deep space communication, navigation, mission planning and
management.
• Incorporate autonomous features to handle contingency situations
Scientific Objectives
• Exploration of Mars surface features, morphology, mineralogy and
Martian atmosphere by indigenous scientific instruments.

5. EXTENDED
VEE MODEL

6. Life cycle process

7. Feasibility Study
• The Indian Space Research Organization completed ₹1.25 billion (US
$21 million) of required studies for the orbiter.
• As originally conceived, ISRO would have launched MOM on its new
Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV),but the GSLV has failed
twice in two space missions in 2010, ISRO is still sorting out issues with
its cryogenic engine, and it was not advisable to wait for the new batch
of rockets since that would
• have delayed the MOM project for at least three years.
• ISRO had to make a choice between delaying the Mars Orbiter Mission
and switching to the less-powerful PSLV.
• They opted for the latter. There is no way to launch on a direct-to-Mars
trajectory with the PSLV as it does not have the power.
• Instead, ISRO launched it into Earth orbit first and slowly boosted it into
an interplanetary trajectory with the help of gravity assist maneuvres.
ISRO uses a method of travel called a Hohmann Transfer Orbit – or a
Minimum Energy Transfer Orbit – to send a spacecraft from Earth to
Mars with the least amount of fuel possible.

8. Design:In comparisonwithNASA’s MAVEN
MAVEN MOM
MAVEN’s body has a cubical shape of
about 2.3 m x 2.3 m x 2 m high, spans a
total of 11.4 m with its solar panels
deployed
Mangalyaan’s body is a cuboid
measuring about 1.5 m per side, a span
of 4.2 m with solar panels deployed
lift-off mass of 2,454 kg (including fuel)
and has a dry payload of 903 kg.
Lift-off mass of 1337 kg of which 852 kg
is fuel
Power load: 1215W Power load: 840W
Payload of MAVEN is 65 kg Payload of MOM is 15Kg
Atlas 5 weighing 7000kg was able to
place the MAVEN directly in the Trans-
Mars orbit
PSLV’s lifting capacity was 1300kg
however the MOM weighed 1337kg.
Hence the PSLV placed the MOM on the
GTO. The satellite gradually increased
its trajectory following the Hohman
course thereby conserving fuel and
then entered the trans mars orbit

9. Systems Engineering Phase

10. Fuel Conservation:
MAVEN’s Trajectory MOM’s Trajectory (Hohman orbit)

11. Organization structure

12. Organizational Structure

13. Work Breakdown
Structure
Foreign Travel/ITAR
01.07
Facilities
01.06
Review Support
01.05
Project Plng Spt
01.04
Risk Mgmnt
01.03
Business Mgmnt
01.02
Project Mgmnt
01.01
Project Management
01
Project V&V
02.08
Launch Sys Eng
02.07
Planetary Protection
02.06
Config Mgmnt
02.05
Information Systems
02.04
Project SW Eng
02.03
Mission & Nav Design
02.02
Project Sys Eng
02.01
Project Sys Eng
02
SW IV&V
03.09
Contamination Control
03.08
SW Q&A
03.07
HW Q&A
03.06
EEE Parts Eng
03.05
Reliability
03.04
Environments
03.03
System Safety
03.02
MA Mgmnt
03.01
Mission Assurance
03
Education & Outreach
04.06
Sci Environment
Characterization
04.05
Sci Investigatio
& Ops Spt
04.04
Sci Data Support
04.03
Science Team
04.02
Science Mgmnt
04.01
Science
04
P/L I&T
05.06
Common P/L Systems
05.05
Instrument N
05.04
Instrument 1
05.03
P/L Sys Eng
05.02
P/L Mgmnt
05.01
Payload
05
Spacecraft assembly
test & verification
06.12
Testbeds
06.11
Spacecraft Flt SW
06.10
GN&C Subsys
06.09
Propulsion Subsys
06.08
Thermal Subsys
06.07
Mechanical Subsys
06.06
Telecomm Subsys
06.05
Command & Data S/s
06.04
Power Subsys
06.03
Flt Sys - Sys Eng
06.02
Flt Sys Mgmnt
06.01
Spacecraft Contract
06.00
Flight System
06
MOS V&V
07.05
Operations
07.04
Ground Data Sys
07.03
MOS Sys Eng
07.02
Mission Ops Mgmnt
07.01
Mission Ops System
07
Launch Services
08.01
Launch System
08
Mangalyan Project

14. Procurement : PPP and E-Procurement
• A public–private partnership (PPP) is a government service or private
business venture which is funded and operated through a partnership of
government and one or more private sector companies.
• Involving a huge number of public and private industries, ISRO has
transferred the technology to the local manufacturers and they in turn
have built the engine according to ISRO's specification.
• Totally 170 industries were involved for the Mars orbiter mission.
• The public private partnership seems to be quiet high.
• This high level of public private partnership could possibly be a reason
for lowering the mission cost
• Two-thirds of its parts manufactured by domestic firms such as Godrej &
Boyce and India's largest engineering company, Larsen & Toubro.
• Godrej Aerospace built mission-critical items for this launch such as the
liquid engine used in (PSLV), precision components for the orbiter
thruster as well as the ground system antenna together with on board
antenna.
• Larsen & Toubro, which manufactured motor casings and the antenna
for India's Mars probe.

15. Cost Estimation
Part 1: Project Definition Tasks
Define or Obtain the
MOM’s technical
structure
Build WBS of MOM
Understanding the MOM
project . Opinion form
stakeholders and
Government
Part 2: Cost Methodology Tasks
Develop ground
rules and
assumptions
Select cost
estimating
methodology
Select/
build Cost
model
Part 3: Cost Estimate Tasks
Gather and
normalize
data
Develop
Cost
Estimate
Develop and
incorporate
cost risk
assessment
Document
the cost
estimate for
MOM
Present
the cost
estimate
Update the
cost
estimate as
required

16. Cost Control

17. Cost control (ISRO Vs NASA)
• Entry level engineer’s monthly salary : ISRO-> 863.39USD
NASA -> 5825.25USD
• Average age of engineer of MARS mission in ISRO is 27, thus reducing the
overall manpower cost.
• ISRO scheduled the work as per hour, not weeks or months as is the
norm with NASA. This frugal approach enabled them to fast-track their
satellite in just 18 months
• ISRO's modest budget did not allow for multiple iterations. So, scientists
built the final flight model right from the start. Expensive ground tests
were also limited
• The GSLV engine dates back to 1970’s making it too old to carry out
modern missions but to control cost the scientists updated the GSLV
rather than designing a new launch vehicle
• Payload of MOM was comparatively lesser than the MAVEN and MOM
conserved a lot of fuel by using gravitational slingshot
• ISRO’s engineers started working 20 hours per day form a couple of
months before the launch period