Today's Hearing on SLS, Orion, Artemis
Hearing: Developing Core Capabilities for Deep Space Exploration: An Update on NASA’s SLS, Orion, and Exploration Ground Systems
Watch live
Keith’s note: Doug Cooke was pushing for the Exploration Upper Stage – something Boeing has been trying to get NASA to fund for years. Cooke has worked for Boeing for years. I thought it was a little odd that no one brought up that fact in the hearing – especially when you can see from his Truth in Testimony Disclosure Form that he as been paid $466,250 between 2017 and today. The bio at the end of his prepared testimony makes zero mention of “Boeing” but pushes the EUS. Just sayin’
NASA: Actions Needed to Improve the Management of Human Spaceflight Programs
“The National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) three related human spaceflight programs are in the integration and test phase of development, a phase of the acquisition process that often reveals unforeseen challenges leading to cost growth and schedule delays. Since GAO last reported on the status of these programs in June 2019, each program has made progress. For example, the Orion program conducted a key test to demonstrate the ability to abort a mission should a life-threatening failure occur during launch. As GAO found in June 2019, however, the programs continue to face significant schedule delays. In November 2018, within one year of announcing an up to 19-month delay for the three programs–the Space Launch System (SLS) vehicle, the Orion crew spacecraft, and Exploration Ground Systems (EGS)–NASA senior leaders acknowledged the revised launch date of June 2020 is unlikely. In addition, any issues uncovered during integration and testing may push the date as late as June 2021. Moreover, GAO found that NASA’s calculations of cost growth for the SLS program is understated by more than 750 million dollars.”
Chairwoman Horn’s Opening Statement for Status of NASA’s Exploration Systems Development Programs Hearing
“I ask these questions because we need to know how the near-term status of SLS and Orion affects our overall exploration goals. The House will vote soon on a Continuing Resolution for FY 2020–a relatively “clean” CR with no additional funding for the Moon program. What will this mean for the 2024 date? In the absence of detailed information, a plan, and an estimated budget profile for the Moon program, I can’t get to a clear answer.”
Chairwoman Johnson’s Opening Statement for Status of NASA’s Exploration Systems Development Programs Hearing
“Moreover, it has now been more than two months since the head of the NASA Human Exploration and Operations Directorate was removed from his position, with no permanent replacement yet identified–even though that position is critical to the success of NASA’s Exploration and ISS programs. And we have been told not to expect a cost estimate or budget plan for the President’s Moon program before next year.”
Rep. Frank Lucas’ Statement at Space Subcommittee Hearing on NASA’s SLS, Orion, and Exploration Ground Systems Programs
“Year after year, the Trump Administration has proposed increased funding for NASA Exploration Systems, only to have Congress appropriate even more than the Administration requested. This year the Administration took the extraordinary step of amending their budget by requesting an additional $1.6 billion to accelerate our return to the Moon by 2024. This will serve as a down payment on the systems necessary to enable this goal. The primary elements are already well under development.”
Opening Statement of Rep. Brian Babin at Space Subcommittee Hearing on NASA’s SLS, Orion, and Exploration Ground Systems Programs
“While I am excited by the promise of how strategic assets like SLS and Orion will enable America’s return to the Moon, this Committee has a responsibility to conduct oversight to ensure these programs are successful. All three exploration system elements – SLS, Orion, and Ground Systems — have experienced many delays and cost overruns over the years. Some of the setbacks were caused by Administrations that tried to stifle program budgets and even cancel the programs.”
Moreover, it has now been more than two months since the head of the NASA Human Exploration and Operations Directorate was removed from his position, with no permanent replacement yet identified–even though that position is critical to the success of NASA’s Exploration and ISS programs. And we have been told not to expect a cost estimate or budget plan for the President’s Moon program before next year.”
———————
I’ll send them my resume, I can mismanage a department as well as anyone.
AND I will set a launch date for Artemis 1.
It took a while, but I think I figured out what you meant by, “AND I will set a launch date for Artemis 1.” That’s launching in something along the lines of Langley’s Aerodrome? After failing to fly before the Wright Flyer, it was mothballed until 1914. Then the Smithsonian and Glenn Curtiss refurbished it and got it off the ground (just). Then they claimed it was the first heavier-than-air aircraft “capable of flight”. Is that the sort of first and only flight you’re thinking of for SLS?
Ha ha. I wish I were that clever.
No, it was just the NASAWatch twitter feed was mentioning that Bowersox still couldn’t give Congress a launch date for SLS and they didn’t want to give one until a replacement was onboard for Gerst.
I still maintain I can mismanage the HSF as well as anyone!
I find the on-going drama of the SLS program fascinating, while SpaceX seems to be making such fast progress on its Starship / Super Heavy. I have no doubt in my mind that SLS will be cancelled at some point, it is just a question of when, what achievements they will have made by then, and how much ultimately will have been spent. Congress in the past has been ruthless in cancelling programs which have had severe cost over-runs. The biggest case-in-point that comes to mind is the Superconducting Super Collider (which was in Texas, so you would think it would have had strong congressional backers), cancelled in 1993. Which I thought was a real shame, it would have been three times as powerful as the Large Hadron Collider, who knows what it would have discovered by now? But regardless, after spending about $2B on it, it was cancelled with nothing to show for it. Similarly, and a more recent example, was the Constellation program, cancelled even before the single flight of the Ares 1, an attempt to use a solid rocket booster to launch humans to orbit. Of course Apollo was also cancelled after developing a viable transport system to the moon, but it was also a huge success. I could argue that the cancellation was short sighted after putting such a huge initial investment into developing this system, then walking away. Does anyone think that the Soviets would have walked away from a success such as this, especially given the fact that they are still flying basically the same hardware! Anyway, the saga of the SLS, and of course Orion as well as the Artemis program continues. Cancellations will come, pretty sure of that.
They should said developing AFFORDABLE core
I hope Chairwoman Horn’s comment, “The House will vote soon on a Continuing Resolution for FY 2020–a relatively “clean” CR with no additional funding for the Moon program. What will this mean for the 2024 date?” was rhetorical. No additional funding in FY2020 is clearly BAD for the 2024 date. B as in broken, A as in awful, D as in doomed. 2024 was always very tight, but without money in FY2020 I’m afraid it has disappeared deep into the woods of faierie.
All that money sent Boeing could have been better spent in house with NASA attempting reusable rockets.
NASA shouldn’t be building launch vehicles anymore. Its performance (or lack thereof) on X-33, Ares I, Ares V, and SLS all show that it’s incapable of building and flying anything, let alone anything innovative like a reusable launch vehicle.
Congress needs to cancel SLS and put into law that NASA is not allowed to design its own launch vehicles anymore. Leave that to the US commercial launch providers.
I wonder about that. Don’t forget that Mr. Musk’s reusable rockets have a single unique feature about them: they are existing technology wrapped in a new package.
And that’s the magic about them. Mr. Musk has brought a new way of thinking to the party.