Risk aversion and optimal satellite systems

Long-term, multiple-payload satellites in Earth orbit can be designed either as consolidated or distributed satellite systems. A consolidated satellite architecture aggregates multiple payload capabilities onto individual large satellites. A distributed (or `disaggregated´) satellite architecture allocates payloads across multiple smaller, heterogeneous satellites. Each system type has certain advantages and disadvantages. A consolidated system often has highly-reliable individual satellites and may offer a lower initial deployment cost. The advantages of a distributed system include the ability to replace a failed unit, or to insert a new technology, more quickly and at a lower cost. Such a system may also be less vulnerable to adversarial threats. We model the value of a satellite program as that of the data that it provides, and use this approach to find optimal sequential decisions to choose and operate the satellite system. The model includes a failure risk analysis to assess and compare the benefits of different system configurations. In sum, we provide a model that enables value-based comparison of entire satellite architectures, where each technical and operational characteristic is optimally exploited. The results of this research indicate that risk-averse decision makers are likely to prefer a distributed satellite system. This work has implications for research on resilience, value, and mission analysis for future space systems.