SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
NASA has begun a study of the SLS rocket's affordability [Updated]:
Original story: NASA is conducting an internal review of the Space Launch System rocket's affordability, two sources have told Ars Technica.
Concerned by the program's outsized costs, the NASA transition team appointed by President Joe Biden initiated the study. The analysis is being led by Paul McConnaughey, a former deputy center director of NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, as well as its chief engineer.
The SLS rocket program has been managed by Marshall for more than a decade. Critics have derided it as a "jobs program" intended to retain employees at key centers, such as Alabama-based Marshall, as well as those at primary contractors such as Boeing, Northrop Grumman, and Aerojet Rocketdyne. Such criticism has been bolstered by frequent schedule delays—the SLS was originally due to launch in 2016, and the rocket will now launch no sooner than 2022—as well as cost overruns.
For now, costs seem to be the driving factor behind the White House's concerns. With a maximum cadence of one launch per year, the SLS rocket is expected to cost more than $2 billion per flight, and that is on top of the $20 billion NASA has already spent developing the vehicle and its ground systems. Some of the incoming officials do not believe the Artemis Moon Program is sustainable with such launch costs.
Update: After this story was published, NASA released the following statement at 11pm ET on Monday regarding the internal study:
NASA is conducting an internal study of the timing and sequence of lunar missions with available resources, and with the guidance that SLS and Orion will be providing crew transportation to the Gateway. The backbone for NASA's Moon to Mars plans are the Space Launch System rocket, Orion spacecraft, ground systems at Kennedy Space Center, Gateway in lunar orbit and human landing system. We currently are alsoassessing various elements of our programs to find efficiencies and opportunities to reduce costs, and this exercise is ongoing. This will include conversations with our industry partners. Budget forecasts and internal agency reviews are common practice as they help us with long-term planning. The agency anticipates taking full advantage of the powerful SLS capabilities, and this effort will improve the current construct associated with executing the development, production and operations of the NASA's Artemis missions.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 22 2021, @10:29AM (5 children)
Rocket production is too important to be left to the government. Fortunately, we have Elon Musk to ensure increased production at lower cost. Cancelling SLS will have spin-off benefits of freeing up government resources to be reallocated to the important job of developing easier-to-climb airplane steps, so America will never again have to witness the traumatic scene of a President stumbling on-camera.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday March 22 2021, @02:11PM (4 children)
Do we "have" Elon Musk, or is he a free man permitted to sell his services, goods, and training to any country on the planet- or off?
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 22 2021, @02:49PM (2 children)
Would we simply like to "have" access to what he has to offer, or is it our additional intention to, at the same time, also *DENY* that stuff to others?
Do note that others might be pondering the same question.
Also do note that one of these angles is "constructive" as judged from the viewpoint of humanity-as-a-whole, while the other variant is a fall-back into ape-like psychological patterns.
And thirdly, note that the combined pondering of all players might be influencing Mr. Musks own planning, which he is certain to entertain, and which he will quite likely also be able to execute, even against considerable opposition.
Choose wisely!
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday March 22 2021, @03:49PM (1 child)
Of course, as long as we're in a competitive world environment (as opposed to cooperative), we must deny access to anything that might hurt our competitive advantages...
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 22 2021, @07:15PM
Cooperation works well right up until the point there is an irreconcilable disagreement. And that point the conclusion of that disagreement will, now and forever, be determined by strength.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Socrastotle on Monday March 22 2021, @02:51PM
Nope, welcome to the world of regulations, in this case ITAR [wikipedia.org]. They're the reason that SpaceX literally cannot hire foreigners, and would also prevent them from transferring any of their technology to another nation. So we do indeed "have" him. Of course he could pull a Snowden, but he would likely see a similar outcome and face international arrest warrants, the seizure of all of his and his companies' assets, and more. These absurdities are undoubtedly one of the countless motivating factors to begin a parallel civilization on a new planet. Much like the founders of the United States were able to learn from the mistakes of the empires and civilizations of their time, the next great civilization and its founders will be able to do likewise of today. Inertia often makes it impossible to genuinely change empires from within, even under nominally democratic systems.