09-01-2021, 07:33 AM
Although years late and many billions of dollars over budget, the launch of this rocket will in some ways be a minor miracle. For a large bureaucracy like NASA, completing complex human spaceflight tasks is difficult. And the SLS rocket is complex both technically and politically.
Concerned about job losses after the space shuttle retired, Congress imposed this rocket on the space agency, down to dictating its various components to ensure that space shuttle contractors such as Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Aerojet Rocketdyne continue to receive substantial space program funding. Each contractor was given a "cost plus" contract that ensured funding but provided little incentive for on-time delivery.
The legislation creating the Space Launch System was passed in October 2010, at which time the rocket was expected to be ready for operations in 2016. One of the key legislators behind the rocket's creation was then-Florida-Senator Bill Nelson. He relentlessly fought against the Obama administration's effort to see if private companies, such as United Launch Alliance and SpaceX, could more efficiently build a large rocket for NASA. The space agency and its traditional contractors could do the job better than anyone, he said.
"This rocket is coming in at the cost of what not only what we estimated in the NASA Authorization act, but less,” Nelson said at the time. “The cost of the rocket over a five- to six-year period in the NASA authorization bill was to be no more than $11.5 billion.” Later, he went further, saying, "If we can't do a rocket for $11.5 billion, we ought to close up shop."
More than a decade later, NASA has spent more than $20 billion to reach the launch pad. And Nelson is no longer a US Senator—he is the administrator of the space agency. The shop remains open.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/08/...ly-summer/
Concerned about job losses after the space shuttle retired, Congress imposed this rocket on the space agency, down to dictating its various components to ensure that space shuttle contractors such as Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Aerojet Rocketdyne continue to receive substantial space program funding. Each contractor was given a "cost plus" contract that ensured funding but provided little incentive for on-time delivery.
The legislation creating the Space Launch System was passed in October 2010, at which time the rocket was expected to be ready for operations in 2016. One of the key legislators behind the rocket's creation was then-Florida-Senator Bill Nelson. He relentlessly fought against the Obama administration's effort to see if private companies, such as United Launch Alliance and SpaceX, could more efficiently build a large rocket for NASA. The space agency and its traditional contractors could do the job better than anyone, he said.
"This rocket is coming in at the cost of what not only what we estimated in the NASA Authorization act, but less,” Nelson said at the time. “The cost of the rocket over a five- to six-year period in the NASA authorization bill was to be no more than $11.5 billion.” Later, he went further, saying, "If we can't do a rocket for $11.5 billion, we ought to close up shop."
More than a decade later, NASA has spent more than $20 billion to reach the launch pad. And Nelson is no longer a US Senator—he is the administrator of the space agency. The shop remains open.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/08/...ly-summer/
