US Government Accountability Office dumps sack of coal on NASA's desk over Moon mission naughtiness
- Reference: 1608228130
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/12/17/nasa_artemis_gao/
- Source link:
The GAO's report spelled out just how much trouble the over-budget and behind-schedule Moon mission is in, and remarked that things hadn't really improved since its [2]last report in 2019.
Noting that the first launch of NASA's heavy launcher, for the uncrewed Artemis I mission, "was again delayed, this time due in part to manufacturing challenges," the GAO pointed out that "the new date, November 2021, doesn't take into account any COVID-19 delays."
To put that postponement into context, NASA put in place a schedule to measure performance in 2014. Since then, according to GAO, Artemis I has suffered a 36-month slip. Even the latest launch date (November 2021) might be in doubt due to problems including [3]an issue with the Orion capsule and the impact of COVID-19 on the programme.
The delays to Artemis I will have a direct impact on Artemis II. Bits of the Orion crew module of Artemis I are planned for Artemis II, but refurbishment and installation will take "a minimum of 20 months" meaning the earliest Artemis II could launch would be July 2023. That would mean only 14 months until the Moon landing mission of Artemis III, scheduled for September 2024.
It's all starting to look rather tight, and one can't but help wonder if an incoming US administration might opt to fiddle with the boots-on-Moon-soonest approach of Donald Trump in favour of something a little more sustainable and, dare we say it, achievable.
Costs have also continued to rise. The SLS programme has jumped by 42.5 per cent and the Exploration Ground Systems (EGS) by 32.3 per cent since 2014, according to the GAO. An overall increase of $3bn to $11.5bn, and more revised estimates are due in 2021.
A sizeable chunk of cash has been spent on missions beyond Artemis I, but a lack of focus after Artemis I and the crewed Artemis II by the agency "places billions of dollars at risk of insufficient NASA oversight," according to the GAO.
Indeed, the report reads as though NASA had assembled a set of dominos, with a delay in Green Run testing of the SLS core stage impacting Artemis I, which impacts Artemis II and so on. Sadly, for folk fondly remembering the epic domino runs of old, the only record broken is likely to be in the budget overrun arena. And that's without considering the more powerful versions of the SLS needed for missions after Artemis III.
The GAO did note the progress being made by NASA, but commented: "This progress has also been accompanied by extensive cost overruns and schedule delays for the SLS, Orion, and EGS programs."
"NASA," it added, "is also facing further risks as it begins to commit billions of dollars to the development of future capability upgrades for these programs while mission requirements remain in flux."
Sounding a little like a broken record, the GAO recommended the agency establish cost and schedule baselines for the next round of Artemis and SLS work, as well as adding technical performance updates in its quarterly status reviews.
For its part, NASA concurred with the recommendations and set an estimated completion date of 31 March 2021 for the latter and 30 September 2021 for the former. ®
Get our [4]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-21-105
[2] https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-377
[3] https://blogs.nasa.gov/artemis/2020/11/30/update-on-orion-final-assembly-and-transfer/
[4] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Money for nothing and votes for free
Another article I read recently brought out that the impetus for the project came from Congress. Not so much caring about national reputation (who, them?) but about spreading the contracts all over hither and yon. Thus the Congressoids probably see no problem 'tall about continuing funding for years and years and...
The schedule was driven by Trump
Trump dictated the schedule to have the boots on ground happen while he was still in office. Since he won't have a second term, there's no reason NASA can't reset the schedule next year to something achievable.
Though given how republicans in congress always seem to remember "the deficit" they forget with republican presidents anytime democrats come to power (despite deficits having historically been higher under republican presidents for the past 50 years) I wouldn't be surprised if the whole thing gets shitcanned via the combination of "oh no the deficit suddenly matters again" on the republican side and "we need to help people that are suffering, not go back to the moon" on the democrat side.
Re: The schedule was driven by Trump
So painfully true.
None of this was unexpected
We all know you can't dictate a schedule. It will take as long as it needs to take, and it take as much money as it takes to buy all the things and pay all the people.
The reason the schedule is a row of dominoes is that each one builds on the other. If a test fire goes titsup, then you need to stop and investigate why. If an engine produces less thrust than expected or part A does not talk to part B, ditto.
This is why Musk is not afraid to break things. He does it "mostly right" and learns to do it differently as necessary.
NASA expects perfection the first time, because Congress expects perfection the first time, and that costs time and money.
Which list then?
Does this mean that NASA is officially on Santa's naughty list then? No more fat servings of pork barrel
Even then, is it really up to the task?
It will only just about be able to get a capsule into orbit around the moon. The SLS booster (block 1B, not yet built) will be able to get 43t to the moon, where as the Saturn V could get 48.6t there. Flights will also take longer (something like 5 days each way vs 3).
And then getting into the moon's orbit need to be taken into consideration - the service module only has enough fuel to give a highly elliptical orbit with a period of 6 to 8 days (Apollo was circular with a period of about 2 hours).
Everyday Astronaut has a good comparison on Saturn V, SLS and Starship on YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KA69Oh3_obY), along with another showing the mission profiles (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9O15vipueLs).
Re: Even then, is it really up to the task?
Don't forget the time scales. Artemis has been running for 10 years, and that's on the back of 5 years of the cancelled Constellation program.
Probably to be expected when the contracts are "cost plus".
Infinite loop
If president == republican:
. keep funding Boeing
. say "america great, beat commies, go space"
elif president == democrat
. # if we don't people will call us commies
. say "go space"
. ironically fund commercial space company
else:
. actually go to space