GAO Report on SLS Issued
SLS Resources Need to be Matched to Requirements to Decrease Risk and Support Long Term Affordability, GAO
“NASA also faces challenges integrating existing hardware that was not originally designed to fly on SLS. For example, SLS is using solid rocket boosters from the Constellation program, but integrating a new non-asbestos insulating material into the booster design has proven difficult and required changes to the booster manufacturing processes.”
Silly GAO…bless their hearts they don’t give up. Still think they can talk all nice and professional with SLS and Orion leadership and get them to do that little math homework about money, time and all that. Why would they, as this never adds up.
Is there an Augustine II in the offing?
It would technically be Augustine III
There was one in 1990, then the more well known one in 2009.
NRC’s “Pathways to Exploration” = Augustine III, no? It’s pretty much the same as Augustine II: NASA’s not going to send people anywhere if it must pay for a NASA-managed heavy launch vehicle.
Hillary’s NASA Administrator, Garver will probably be appointing one… smiles
There’s a difference between “doing the thing right” and “doing the right thing.” GAO addresses the former, not the latter.
Can we say Eek! ?
“NASA has not established an executable business case based on matching the SLS program’s cost and schedule resources with the requirement to develop the SLS and launch the first flight test in December 2017 at the required confidence level of 70 percent. NASA delayed the SLS key decision point C decision from October 2013 to at least July 2014, as the agency considered future plans for the program. If the agency determines the current funding plan for SLS is insufficient to match requirements to resources for the December 2017 flight test at the 70 percent confidence level, the agency’s options for matching resources to requirements are largely limited to increasing program funding, delaying the schedule or accepting a reduced confidence level for the initial flight test. While the program’s decision authority is allowed in some instances to approve a confidence level of less than 70 percent, doing so increases the likelihood that the program will miss the launch date or overrun the current cost estimate. Should cost growth or schedule delay occur, it could place other programs’ funding at risk if NASA chooses to take planned funding from those programs in order to maintain the SLS schedule. Although cost and schedule growth can occur on any project, increases associated with NASA’s most costly and complex missions—such as SLS, which makes up about 9 percent of NASA’s annual budget—can have dramatic effects on the availability of funding for NASA’s portfolio of major projects.”
Translation: “SLS will suck the life out of all other NASA programs”.
with all due respect – the Webb telescope has beaten it to the punch.
Yes, but SLS will, if it continues, continue to bleed NASA dry.
Point taken 🙂
Resources matched to requirements? Why would they ever do that? That would be a new concept for HSF management. Besides, the resources are fixed so to do that they would have to get rid of a boat load of requirements, like being able to launch.
GAO did not seem to be too concerned with the lack of any prospect for the funds for a decades-long campaign of human exploration of Mars, or the fact that the Orion is designed for the lunar mission, which is no longer the objective.