Another Big Launch Delay For Webb Space Telescope
NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope to be Launched Spring 2019
“The change in launch timing is not indicative of hardware or technical performance concerns,” said Thomas Zurbuchen, associate administrator for NASA’s Science Mission Directorate at Headquarters in Washington. “Rather, the integration of the various spacecraft elements is taking longer than expected.” … The additional environmental testing time of the fully assembled observatory–the telescope and the spacecraft–will ensure that Webb will be fully tested before launching into space. All the rigorous tests of the telescope and the spacecraft to date show the mission is meeting its required performance levels. Existing program budget accommodates the change in launch date, and the change will not affect planned science observations.”
– Webb, The Giant Money Sponge, earlier post (2010)
– GAO Assessment of NASA Includes a Look at Webb’s Overruns, earlier post (2012)
– TRW Selected as Prime Contractor To Build NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope, earlier post (2002)
This delay (again) is one of the biggest factors other programs are being starved for finances.
JWST has had a hard run of it. It started with bad contractor management, then the other things. Like the contractor talking NASA into using a classified chip in JWST, but they had to heavily modify it for civil use. Cost was very high. I remember the contractor being asked if they are going to build to the documents or just document what they build. Then people coming off classified projects would get put on JWST for 1-3 months (for cover). Then back to the next classified project. Dollars for nothing. Requirements documents filled with “will” statements instead of “shall”. And the contractor telling everyone it would cost way too much to go back and fix them. You’re not obligated to make a “will”. A “will” is a goal. A “shall” is a must be done. They could do anything they wanted. Work was getting done, but a some of it was useless. Many, many things delayed because the money was spent poorly. I remember discussion by NASA people wondering if the Ariane V would still be avaliable by the time JWST was going to launch. JWST is ground breaking. It will change how we see the universe. JWST is a good example of why bad management costs billions. I think by the time it’s done JWST is more expensive than a new Space Shuttle orbiter.
It’s like they’re trapped in one of Zeno’s paradoxes and will never get to the launch date. Only instead of reductio ad absurdum, it’s administratio propositum ad absurdum.
FWIW anyone got a decent figure on the projected cost on this thing? I have seen all sorts of numbers bandied about but I suspect they are mostly agenda driven nonsense. It has certainly been biting chunks out of the NASA cooperative science missions for the best part of ten years now.
It’s entirely possible no one has a useful figure for the total cost. It’s officially $8 billion dollars (the cost cap Congress passed in 2011) although more recent press releases say $8.8 billion. But they have been working on it since 1996. Some of that $8 (or $8.8) billion is not adjusted for twenty-one years of inflation. I don’t think anyone has actually taken the year-by-year costs and inflated them to FY17 dollars. That’s usually not done when costs of long-running NASA missions are quoted. Nor are the available numbers entirely clear about the cost of the European and Canadian contributions. And from what I’ve seen, the accounting for European work is less than transparent.
The relevant line, if accurate, is “Existing program budget accommodates the change in launch date, and the change will not affect planned science observations.” If it’s really true that the project has sufficient contingency for a six-month launch slip, the rest of this is handwaving.
Of course, we’ve been told before that the project had adequate funding. That was about $6B ago.