NASA Continues to Ignore GAO On SLS And Orion

NASA Human Space Exploration: Integration Approach Presents Challenges to Oversight and Independence, GAO

"The approach that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is using to integrate its three human spaceflight programs into one system ready for launch offers some benefits, but it also introduces oversight challenges. To manage and integrate the three programs--the Space Launch System (SLS) vehicle; the Orion crew capsule; and supporting ground systems (EGS)-- NASA's Exploration Systems Development (ESD) organization is using a more streamlined approach than has been used with other programs, and officials GAO spoke with believe that this approach provides cost savings and greater efficiency. However, GAO found two key challenges to the approach:

- The approach makes it difficult to assess progress against cost and schedule baselines. SLS and EGS are baselined only to the first test flight. In May 2014, GAO recommended that NASA baseline the programs' cost and schedule beyond the first test flight. NASA has not implemented these recommendations nor does it plan to; hence, it is contractually obligating billions of dollars for capabilities for the second flight and beyond without establishing baselines necessary to measure program performance.

- The approach has dual-hatted positions, with individuals in two programmatic engineering and safety roles also performing oversight of those areas. These dual roles subject the technical authorities to cost and schedule pressures that potentially impair their independence. The Columbia Accident Investigation Board found in 2003 that this type of tenuous balance between programmatic and technical pressures was a contributing factor to that Space Shuttle accident."

- Previous SLS posts

Keith's note: At the end of this report is a response from NASA HEOMD AA Bill Gerstenmaier. If you want to understand why NASA is clueless as to what SLS/Orion costs, just read this. Small wonder NASA has no idea what things actually cost. The'd rather just mix everything together to make it harder to understand those costs - and they do so deliberately. Tick Tock

"NASA regularly balances available funding with the flight manifest within the context of the Agency's overall exploration objectives. NASA's programmatic decisions are based on optimizing acquisition stratedes and resource allocations (material, people, funding) across multiple missions to ensure efficient implementation of deep space exploration objectives that take several flights to accomplish. NASA believes it has the processes in place to provide stakeholders insight to cost, schedule, and risks that accord with ESD's nature as a multimission space transportation infrastructure. Cost estimates and expenditures are available for future missions; however, these costs must be derived from the data and are not directly available. This was done by design to lower NASA's expenditures. NASA docs not think that structuring acquisition and implementation to ease accounting on a mission-by-mission basis is prudent as it would result in higher overall program costs and is not in keeping with the nature of the program."

  • submit to reddit


Loading





Join our mailing list




Monthly Archives

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Keith Cowing published on October 19, 2017 4:04 PM.

OIG: NASA Chief Information Officer Is Doing A Crappy Job was the previous entry in this blog.

Blue Origin BE-4 Engine Roars To Life is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.