Sometimes—but the available findings do not support a blanket claim that contractors always save NASA money. A NASA Technical Reports Server abstract for a 2025 study says industry-built spacecraft generally cost less on lower-risk Class C and D science missions. It reports no significant effect from developer type on higher-risk Class A/B missions or on total project cost. The record does not provide a universal savings percentage, and the study examines traditional procurement—not NASA’s Commercial Crew service-purchase model.
What did the study find?
Moon J. Kim and Tupper Hyde’s paper, In and Out: A Comparative Analysis of NASA-Built and Industry-Built Spacecraft Costs, uses multivariable regression to examine developer type and spacecraft cost under traditional procurement. NASA’s Technical Reports Server abstract reports three main findings:
- Industry-built spacecraft were generally less costly for lower-risk Class C and D projects.
- For higher-risk Class A and B projects, developer type had no statistically significant effect on cost.
- Developer type also had no significant effect on total project cost regardless of risk class.
The abstract identifies spacecraft mass as the primary cost driver in its analysis. Mission risk classification and deep-space operation also influenced cost. Those findings make the result more specific than a simple NASA-versus-contractor verdict: the reported cost relationship varies by risk category, and the kind of cost being measured matters. NASA Technical Reports Server record and abstract
What the result does—and does not—say about savings
The abstract supports a qualified association between industry development and lower spacecraft costs for Class C and D missions. It does not establish that outsourcing reliably saves money across all spacecraft projects, nor does it report a single percentage that taxpayers can expect NASA to save by hiring contractors.
#1 Best Overall
- ICONIC NASA ARTEMIS I ROCKET MODEL KIT - Recreate the historic Artemis I mission with this highly detailed 1:144 scale Space Launch System (SLS)—a must-have for space enthusiasts, collectors, and model builders.
- AUTHENTIC MULTI-STAGE DETAILING - Features twin solid rocket boosters, detailed core stage with external hydrogen lines, separate stage assembly, and four RS‑25 engines for a realistic, true-to-life build.
- IMPRESSIVE 28" DISPLAY CENTERPIECE - Standing nearly 28 inches tall, this model delivers a striking vertical display that commands attention in any room, office, or collection.
- SKILL LEVEL 4 – ADVANCED BUILD EXPERIENCE - Designed for experienced hobbyists ages 12+ seeking a challenging, rewarding project with intricate parts and detailed assembly.
- READY FOR CUSTOM PAINT FINISH - Molded in light gray plastic so you can paint and detail to your exact preferences for a museum-quality appearance. (Paint & glue required, not included.)
It also distinguishes spacecraft cost from total project cost. A lower cost for one part of a mission does not necessarily mean a lower overall project bill; the abstract reports no significant developer-type effect on total project cost. The available record does not show the sample definition, cost-measure details, regression coefficients, confidence intervals, or model diagnostics, so it is not enough to assess the size or robustness of the estimated differences or make a stronger causal claim.
The NTRS record labels the document “Preprint (Draft being sent to journal)” and lists June 30, 2025 as its publication date. It also lists the Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets and the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. That record alone does not establish whether a later peer-reviewed version appeared. NASA Technical Reports Server record
Rank #2
- STAR TREK USS ENTERPRISE - Build the legendary USS Enterprise NCC-1701 from Strange New Worlds —a true icon of science fiction and a must-have for fans and collectors.
- COMPLETE STARTER KIT – READY TO BUILD - Includes paints, glue, and a brush, so you can start building right out of the box—ideal for beginners and hobbyists.
- AUTHENTIC STARSHIP DETAIL - Designed to capture the Enterprise, including its iconic saucer section, warp nacelles, and engineering hull.
- SKILL LEVEL 3 – FUN & REWARDING BUILD - Offers a balanced build experience ideal for beginner to intermediate modelers, ages 10 and up.
- PERFECT GIFT & DISPLAY PIECE - A great gift for Star Trek fans, collectors, and sci-fi enthusiasts, creating a display-worthy model once completed.
Which NASA procurement arrangement does it examine?
Traditional procurement for science missions
The study’s stated scope is traditional procurement for science missions without commercial value, comparing NASA in-house and industry spacecraft development. Its findings should be read within that context. NASA Technical Reports Server abstract
Commercial Crew is a different model
NASA’s Commercial Crew Program is not the same comparison. Under that approach, companies design, own, and operate their systems; NASA sets requirements, certifies the systems, and buys transportation services. NASA and the companies both invested in development. That is a service-purchase model, not simply a test of whether NASA or a contractor builds a spacecraft under traditional procurement. NASA Commercial Crew Program overview NASA Commercial Crew Program essentials
Windows Errors? Fix Them Before They Spread
Repair common Windows errors and clear accumulated junk for a smoother, more stable PC - no reinstall needed.Free scan · no reinstallOutdated Drivers Are Slowing You Down
One free scan finds every outdated or missing driver and matches the right update for your exact hardware.Free scan · exact hardware matchRank #3
- Model Kit
- May Require Paints and Glues to Assemble
- Accurate Scale Model
- Detailed Instructions Provided
- Decals/Transfers Included
For context—not as evidence for the 2025 study’s result—the NASA Office of Inspector General reported in 2026 that original fixed-price Commercial Crew awards in 2014 were $4.2 billion to Boeing and $2.6 billion to SpaceX, while later contract value exceeded $8 billion. The OIG noted that the later figure excluded several billion dollars in additional NASA and company resources. These figures have different accounting scopes and should not be treated as an all-in program cost or a direct comparison of spacecraft development costs. NASA Office of Inspector General, 2026 Commercial Crew update
Why other NASA cost comparisons do not settle this question
Separate oversight reports describe cost comparisons in other services, but those figures answer different questions from the spacecraft-development regression:
Rank #4
- Replica of the tile structure
- Detailed cockpit
- Cockpit canopy optionally removable
- 2 crew figures
- Opening cargo bay doors
- In a 2023 report, NASA’s Office of Inspector General estimated NASA savings of $1.4 billion to $4 billion from SpaceX cargo services. The same report compared historical crew-transportation costs at $55 million per SpaceX seat and $80 million per Russian seat. These are service and transportation comparisons, not estimates of savings from industry-built spacecraft in the 2025 study. NASA Office of Inspector General, IG-24-001
- A 2019 Government Accountability Office report cited a combined $6.8 billion contract ceiling for Boeing and SpaceX development and initial missions. That is a historical ceiling, not the later contract value reported by the OIG or an all-in measure of total program investment. U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-19-504
These examples show why “NASA saves money by hiring companies” needs a defined service, contract period, and accounting scope. They cannot be added together or used as a general contractor savings rate.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.How to interpret the headline without overreading it
The study’s abstract offers a conditional result, not a verdict that one developer type is universally cheaper. For the missions it describes, risk class and the distinction between spacecraft cost and total project cost change the answer; mass and deep-space operation are also relevant cost factors. Commercial Crew’s service contracts belong in a separate comparison.
Best Value
- HOBBY MODEL KIT – Unassembled model packed in an envelope with easy to follow instructions. Ideal for ages 14 and up.
- NO GLUE OR SOLDER NEEDED – Parts can be easily clipped from the metal sheets. Tweezers are the recommended tool for bending and twisting the connection tabs.
- VOYAGER – 1.5 Sheet Model with a moderate difficulty level. Assembled Size: 1.38 x 1.77 x 6.70 inches.
- FROM STEEL SHEETS TO 3D – Pop out the pieces and connect using tabs and holes. Includes illustrated instructions.
- HIGHLY DETAILED ETCHED MODEL – Display your 3D model once completed - collect and build them all.
In personal-finance terms, the key lesson is about reading a cost claim carefully: ask what was counted, which projects were compared, and whether a finding concerns one component or the full bill. Here, the public abstract does not supply enough detail to calculate a taxpayer-wide savings figure.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
