Boeing warns SLS staff that job cuts could be on the way
- Reference: 1739201290
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2025/02/10/boeing_warns_sls_staff_that/
- Source link:
The aerospace giant is infamous for the Calamity Capsule – [1]Starliner – but is also a major contributor to NASA's monster Moon rocket, the Space Launch System (SLS).
Boeing, Boeing, burned: Over half a billion dollars by Starliner in 2024 [2]READ MORE
Boeing makes the Core Stage for the rocket, but SLS development has been slow and hit by frequent delays. It is also a costly way to get beyond Earth's orbit, but is the only way to send astronauts to the Moon for now. Aside from the Orion capsule on the top of the stack, it is also entirely expendable, unlike SpaceX's Starship.
The rocket finally made its maiden launch in 2022, sending an uncrewed Orion spacecraft around the Moon and back. The next launch, Artemis II, is expected in 2026 and will send a crew around the Moon. A landing mission, Artemis III, is planned for 2027, with a SpaceX Starship as the crewed lander.
A Boeing spokesperson said, "To align with revisions to the Artemis program and cost expectations, we informed our Space Launch Systems team of the potential for approximately 400 fewer positions by April 2025. This will require 60-day notices of involuntary layoff be issued to impacted employees in coming weeks, in accordance with the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act.
[3]
"We are working with our customer and seeking opportunities to redeploy employees across our company to minimize job losses and retain our talented teammates."
[4]
[5]
The current US administration is seeking to reduce costs, with the boss of SpaceX, Elon Musk, at the head of a group charged with making "efficiencies" in US government operations. It is not hard to imagine Musk taking a look at the Artemis program and the SLS and thinking, "That can definitely go."
The SLS contract was also issued on a cost-plus basis, meaning that the US government is on the hook for costs arising from the overruns and delays.
[6]A decade on from maiden flight, NASA's Orion is still waiting for its Moon moment
[7]Musk dreams of launching five Starships to Mars in two years
[8]Report slams Boeing and NASA over shoddy quality that's delayed SLS blastoff
[9]NASA rockets draining its pockets as officials whisper: 'We can't afford this'
Nothing has been announced by NASA or the US administration, so Boeing's action could be regarded as more preemptive than anything else. It is also difficult to imagine that the US Congress agrees to cut or make significant changes to the program since US lawmakers directed NASA down the Artemis path in the first place.
In addition, Artemis is not solely a US program. The European Space Agency (ESA) supplies the Orion service module used to provide power, propulsion and life support during the mission, and would be less than amused if wholesale changes are made.
[10]
The components for Artemis II are already being assembled for next year's mission. Artemis III is also likely safe, although, beyond that, we'd have to say that all bets are off. In December, Elon Musk [11]described the Artemis program as "extremely inefficient" and called it "a jobs-maximizing program, not a results-maximizing program."
The billionaire concluded, "Something entirely new is needed." ®
Get our [12]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2025/02/05/starliner_boeing_losses/
[2] https://www.theregister.com/2025/02/05/starliner_boeing_losses/
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Z6owsR54Ytz0ztFCF7UNGQAAAAk&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Z6owsR54Ytz0ztFCF7UNGQAAAAk&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Z6owsR54Ytz0ztFCF7UNGQAAAAk&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2024/12/11/nasa_orion_10/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2024/09/23/musk_expects_to_launch_five/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2024/08/09/nasa_boeing_sls/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2023/09/08/nasa_sls_cost_concerns/
[10] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Z6owsR54Ytz0ztFCF7UNGQAAAAk&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[11] https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1871997501970235656
[12] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: The only way to send astronauts to the Moon for now?
The puzzling thing is: Sixty years ago, while NASA was learning how to do it, there were two or three launches a year for a decade - four in 1969 alone. Now, we _know_ how to do it and yet simultaneously we seem to have forgotten how... what happened?
Re: The only way to send astronauts to the Moon for now?
NASA knows how to get to the Moon. Congress is the problem here.
For one thing, NASA got a blank check for about 10 years, first because it was political chest beating vs the USSR and second, because JFK was assassinated and no one wanted to mess with his "legacy"
(It's my firm opinion that if JFK had lived, then Congress would have done the usual "everything the president wants to do is wrong" and we would have never made it to the Moon. Instead, it was "sniff [tear in eye] John woulda wanted it that way" until Vietnam cost real money.)
Second, the Saturn V was actually not much different from SLS, being a huge expendable rocket with people on top.
Congress mandated that it use as much Shuttle hardware and jobs as possible, thus the expendable solid boosters and RS-25 Shuttle engines. So it's a rather compromised design to start with, then Congress cuts funds, and it gets worse.
This very article is an example of how SLS has been politically f*cked with until it's a non-starter.
Third, NASA is in a "failure is REALLY not an option" situation - every thing is under a microscope with hundreds of armchair "rocket scientists" complaining about everything, and everything must be PERFECT to satisfy all the critics.
If they had the track record that Starship is currently exhibiting, then there would be screams of "how incompetent is NASA!!" and "Starship needs to be canceled! It's a waste of money!"
So everything NASA does is gold-plated to ensure perfect success on the very first flight.
Whilst I am on record as loathing the MuskRat it's hard to dispute his take on this. Artemis is a standard "use taxpayer money to bribe the voters" ploy. Even by NASA cost plus boondoggle standards it's a huge one.
Don't need this, don't want that...
It is not hard to imagine Musk taking a look at the Artemis program and the SLS and thinking, "That can definitely go."
I am sure that Musk will be looking to cancel anything that might compete with or disfavour his own interests.
The bust-up with Trump will come when Musk tries to cancel something that he didn't know Donnie already had his tiny hands in....
Re: Don't need this, don't want that...
Well, we are all joking about the mess the Calamity Capsule has become, so there's that. Do I want his Muskness to cancel it just because he wants the contract himself? No.
Do I think it is suffering from the overcommitment problem (too big to fail?)? Sure.
Re: Don't need this, don't want that...
fElon already has the "Starliner contract" - Dragon has launched no fewer than 15 flights while Calamity Capsule has done two.
Remember, Boeing was the shoo-in and SpaceX was the "waste of money" before we found out Boeing had outsourced everything including basic engineering knowledge.
If I were Elon, I'd keep the Calamity Capsule around to point to and laugh, and go "look how wonderful we [SpaceX] are!!"
After all, it has loaded Boeing down with $2 billion dollars of pain and already killed them as a competitor.
The only way to send astronauts to the Moon for now?
Whilst they are assembling a craft, it's not a means to send astronauts to the Moon right now .