Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Monday March 22 2021, @04:48AM   Printer-friendly

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.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by takyon on Tuesday March 23 2021, @01:34PM (1 child)

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Tuesday March 23 2021, @01:34PM (#1127916) Journal

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennedy_Space_Center_Launch_Complex_39A#SpaceX [wikipedia.org]

    In August 2019, SpaceX submitted an Environmental Assessment for Starship launch system at Kennedy Space Center. This document included plans for the construction of additional structures at LC-39A to support Starship launches, including a dedicated pad, liquid methane tanks, and a Landing Zone. These are separate from the existing structures that support Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches.

    SpaceX signed a 20-year lease for one of the "mothballed" pads, and they are spending their own money to add facilities. I don't see the lease amount.

    https://spacenews.com/38660nasa-negotiating-pad-lease-with-spacex-after-gao-rejects-blue-origin/ [spacenews.com]

    Pad 39A costs the agency about $1.2 million a year to maintain in a mothballed state. NASA said this summer it wanted to get a lease signed before Oct. 1. If no lessee could be found, NASA told GAO inspectors, the agency would have been willing to let the pad — from which the Apollo 11 Moon mission blasted off — “rust to the ground.”

    It's probably possible to come up with an accurate amount of how much U.S. taxpayer money is going to SpaceX, even including secret Air Force and NRO missions.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday March 23 2021, @07:14PM

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday March 23 2021, @07:14PM (#1128055)

    It's probably possible to come up with an accurate amount of how much U.S. taxpayer money is going to SpaceX

    I'd say it's almost definitely possible to come up with a documented amount of how much U.S. taxpayer money is going to SpaceX through regular FOI channels. Documented, but accurate? Including look-the-other-way tax breaks, inside information on open bidding processes, etc. By definition those are illegal, and so will not be documented, but do they exist?

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]