Reconstruction of the Apollo Mission Budget

apollo mission budget

Dreier used official NASA budget submissions to Congress and internal documentation describing appropriations for facilities and overhead expenses during FY 1961 to 1973 as the basis of his reconstruction of Apollo costs, then adjusted them for inflation using two inflation indices tailored specifically for aerospace projects.

Exploring the costs involved in beating Soviet spacecraft to the Moon were monumental. Explore all aspects of Project Apollo here, from annual program breakdowns and construction costs, through to construction costs for building facilities on site.

Cost of the Saturn V Launch Vehicle

Landing on the moon was an astounding technical accomplishment, yet at great expense. According to Planetary Society calculations, NASA spent an estimated $21.4 billion between 1960 and 1973 on activities related to Apollo program according to calculations by National Aeronautics and Space Administration – this number seems staggering when adjusted for inflation; all costs related to JFK’s dream of lunar landing had to be covered.

The Saturn V rocket that carried astronauts to the moon was the most expensive part of NASA’s program, costing billions more than originally projected. Conceived and constructed in Huntsville, Alabama by Wernher von Braun’s team as part of a U.S. military requirement for large satellite launches, its development led to more costlier versions such as Falcon Heavy which carried two astronauts at once to space.

Although the total cost of the Saturn V and lunar module was substantial, other components of the mission were relatively inexpensive by NASA standards. Most of Apollo crew’s time on the Moon was spent inside CSMs that were much more cost effective.

Early funding of Apollo was crucial to its success. Without adequate financing, problems may remain unresolved and timelines missed while project costs skyrocket – as evidenced by its famous “cost curve”, which peaked well ahead of any actual landings.

NASA’s financial office staff attempted to reconstruct the cost history of Apollo, but were limited by inconsistent and incomplete data. Due to an absence of canonical cost reporting documents for inflation adjustment purposes over expenditures covering more than 10 years, reconstructing an accurate Apollo spending profile proved challenging; high-fidelity data scattered among various NASA historical collections may help achieve this aim, then providing comparables between current NASA efforts at returning humans back to the Moon and this effort from decades past.

Cost of the Lunar Module

The Apollo program cost the United States government an eye-watering $25.8 billion between 1960 and 1973 – or, adjusted for inflation, approximately $251 billion. When combined with Project Gemini and robotic lunar program costs, that figure swells even further to $283.8 billion according to estimates provided by The Planetary Society, an independent nonprofit that compiles data on NASA expenditure. These calculations were determined after extensive review of historical documents and estimations by an outside body such as itself.

At its height of operations, NASA’s Apollo program accounted for nearly four percent of federal spending. Today, however, NASA has seen its budget drastically reduce due to decreased funding; yet still hopes to return astronauts to the Moon by 2024 using a spacecraft known as Lunar Module which may come at much less of a price than before.

Understanding the costs incurred during Apollo will give us a clear idea of what we might expect if we return to the moon again. One way of understanding spacecraft costs involves comparing their individual components – and there are plenty of historical documents describing each aspect of the Apollo system as it was developed and priced out.

Below is an illustration of the marginal costs per crewed Apollo mission using Saturn family launch vehicles and spacecraft as examples of project development; their marginal cost per mission represents a classic “cost curve,” where costs peak in advance of program activity (landing on the Moon in this instance). Without early funding in projects like these, difficult problems often remain unresolved while deadlines go unmet resulting in greater overall project costs.

NASA provides another useful source of data through its official reporting of its annual financial obligations to Congress. However, these reports are often unhelpful because they fail to detail expenditures by year and often group together expenses for major components like Command/Service Module and Lunar Module into one category labeled “Spacecraft”.

To accurately estimate the total costs of Apollo, it is necessary to carefully study its available documentation and perform more fine-grained cost accounting. One approach might involve looking at original cost data contained within congressional budget justifications from the 1960s; however, such sources often contain inaccuracies of up to 20%-20% of what should have been total costs.

Cost of the Command and Service Module

The Apollo program represented an immense investment of US government resources; yet its mission proved worthwhile both scientifically and geopolitically. America’s technological prowess was showcased during this mission while Cold War tensions were eased and an enduring historical legacy was left behind. But at what cost exactly?

According to data compiled by the Planetary Society, between 1960 and 1973 the Apollo program cost approximately $28.8 billion when adjusted for inflation – this number becomes even more staggering when put in perspective: annual federal spending between 1959 and 1972 totalled $1.9 trillion and thus Apollo represented only 1.1% of this sum.

Apollo project costs included not only direct R&D costs but also infrastructure investments such as building facilities and expanding NASA headquarters. To obtain an accurate picture of its costs, it is necessary to include these “indirect” costs; Table 1 adds them along with congressional appropriations reports and the agency’s R&D obligations to give an accurate comparison between Apollo and modern efforts to return humans to the moon.

Adjusting appropriations amounts for inflation is also useful, enabling more accurate comparisons between project costs and their effects on the economy. Reconstruction employs two indices specifically tailored for aerospace projects – NASA’s New Start Index and Production Workers Compensation Index, both measuring construction spending. This approach is more accurate than using just Consumer Price Index data to measure household goods and services spending.

Results are presented through a series of charts that allow you to compare the total annual costs associated with each component of the Apollo system, such as its command and service module, Saturn V rocket engine and Lunar Module. They can be viewed here in Google Drive folder. In addition, an Excel spreadsheet contains comprehensive Project Apollo annual cost data with non-inflation adjusted dollar amounts, program breakdown costs breakdowns as well as relative GDP adjustments; making this an invaluable resource for anyone interested in space history.

Cost of the Payload

Payload was the hardware used by Apollo spacecraft to carry astronauts to and from the Moon. This included command and service modules, lunar modules, Saturn family rockets and their components that cost an estimated $257 billion in 2020 dollars; more than the Manhattan Project which developed the first atomic bomb! At its peak employing over 400,000 Americans.

An accurate understanding of NASA’s Apollo programs requires detailed year-by-year cost data. Unfortunately, however, due to changes in reporting structure and accounting practices throughout their run, inflation adjustments were difficult. Furthermore, their original presentation did not break out expenses by major component. To address these concerns, The Planetary Society has created its own higher-fidelity version of NASA’s data which includes direct R&D obligations as well as indirect costs such as construction operations deployment tracking data systems plus marginal per mission costs – both provided here by The Planetary Society.

Although costly, the Apollo program was enormously successful and achieved many of its goals. Not only was human travel to the Moon demonstrated, but the mission revealed that its surface contained chemical evidence of an impact-formed galaxy similar to Earth. Its rocks bore witness to catastrophic collisions which resulted in large planets such as our own solar system being formed – and that our own solar system would remain habitable by humans.

Apollo shows that US government can invest in important projects when they commit themselves. Yet its rising costs between 1965 and 1972 coincided with an increasing public outrage against NASA spending and an overall decline in federal funding – evidence of its unsustainable political design. At one time US funding for NASA peaked at only 5% of total expenditures but today only represents a fraction of that sum.

Scroll to Top