NASA's manned space plans take another body blow
GAO says NASA not making business case for moving forward with Constellation program
By Layer 8 on Fri, 09/25/09 - 4:30pm.
The folks at the Government Accountability Office have not been all that kind to NASA in recent years and today they issued another harsh report on the future of the manned space flight program.
NASA is still struggling to develop a solid business case--including firm requirements, mature technologies, a knowledge-based acquisition strategy, a realistic cost estimate, and sufficient funding and time--needed to justify moving the Constellation program, which includes the two main spaceflight components, the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle and the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle, forward into the implementation phase, the GAO stated.
Layer 8 Extra:
10 NASA space technologies that may never see the cosmos
Top 10 cool satellite projects
The GAO cites significant technical and design challenges for the Orion and Ares I vehicles, such as limiting vibration during launch, eliminating the risk of hitting the launch tower during lift off, and reducing the weight of the Orion vehicle that must be overcome in order to meet safety and performance requirements.
The GAO went on to say poorly phased funding that runs the risk of funding shortfalls in fiscal years 2009 through 2012, resulting in planned work not being completed to support schedules and milestones. The overall approach has limited NASA's ability to mitigate technical risks early in development and precludes the orderly ramp up of workforce and developmental activities, the GAO stated.
NASA estimates that Ares I and Orion represent up to $49 billion of the over $97 billion estimated to be spent on the Constellation program through 2020. While the agency has already obligated more than $10 billion in contracts, at this point NASA does not know how much Ares I and Orion will ultimately cost, and will not know until technical and design challenges have been addressed, the GAO concluded.
Regardless of NASA's final plans for moving forward, the agency faces daunting challenges developing human rated spacecraft for use after the Space Shuttle is retired, and it is important that the agency lay out an acquisition strategy grounded in knowledge-based principles that is executable with acceptable levels of risk within the program's available budget, the GAO stated.
It is the budget that has the attention of government planers at the moment.
That's because the Review of United States Human Space Flight Plan Committee said in its preliminary report on the future of NASA said: '[NASA] is perpetuating the perilous practice of pursuing goals that do not match allocated resources. Space operations are among the most complex and unforgiving pursuits ever undertaken by humans. It really is rocket science. Space operations become all the more difficult when means do not match aspirations," the report stated.
The committee's report was bleak too but ultimately how its results are interpreted will determine the future of any manned space flights.
The report offered a number of interesting findings and space exploration options, chief among them was the fact that NASA should basically get out of the low orbit business and focus on deeper space research.
For its part, in responding to the GAO report, NASA acknowledged that, while substantial work has been completed, the Constellation program faces knowledge gaps concerning requirements, technologies, funding, schedule, and other resources. NASA stated that it is working to close these gaps before committing to significant, long-term investments in the Constellation program.
Layer 8 in a box
Check out these other cool stories:
1,000 year-old math problem solved
Futuristic security surveillance system brings Big Brother to life
Seven future car technologies your tax dollars are paying for
10 NASA space technologies that may never see the cosmos
Top 10 cool satellite projects
Court to scammer: Give up your house or go to jail
Saturn's never-ending thunderstorm sets solar record
Can the mainframe really grow?
- About Layer 8
- Layer 8 is written by Michael Cooney, an online news editor with Network World
- Archives
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
Sponsored Links
- FREE Encryption Tool - Encrypt and share your confidential files easily- Sophos
- Microsoft Open Specifications - Fostering innovation, interoperability and vibrant developer communities – Learn more- Microsoft
- Learn the advantages of web app acceleration with Akamai- Akamai
- Compuware can help you optimize application performance. Find out how. - Compuware
- Linux and Unix in Your Environment? Don’t Leave Security to Chance- Quest Software
- Securing Virtualized Data Centers - eBook - Trend Micro
- Efficiency goes up. Costs come down.- Microsoft
- SQL Server Experts: Virtually unstoppable- Microsoft
- Stay informed with custom newsletters from Tech Dispenser- Tech Dispenser
- FREE LCD Console and 16 node central management tool with purchase of any KN4 series IP KVM- ATEN
-
Network World, Inc
The Leader in Network Knowledge
Cool... But We Can't Afford It
Though I adore rockets and NASA and the Hubble--it's a luxury that we cannot afford right now. We need to get our fiscal house in order first.
Surely we benefited from a lot of technological enhancements from the original Apollo program but by now our entire economy is technological and we don't really gain any special technologies from chemical-based rocketry. It's old technology.
There are many other things we need to figure out first--such as climate change.
Cool, and we can afford it.
Pay heed to the fact that NASA has a scant few millions, the military has several billions wasted on making troops get bombed by extremists that will never quite give up. I think the military can get rid of the 101st Circlejerk so NASA can get back in space.
People spend more on their
People spend more on their adorable pets than the entire NASA budget. Investing in space is an investment in the future and without space research your kids will be happy to be employed at McD. BTW, the Earth's climate is dynamic not static and it's always been that way.
Cool, and we can afford it.
Tyrone Hed; the "fiscal house" will be a mess forever; the USA economy is complex, describing it as technological is meaningless, in fact "economy" is too abstract to even be relevant to anything; climate change is irrelevant, it will be adapted to if it becomes a problem (using technologies from the science you hate so much); your position on chemical rockets is ridiculous and unsupported.
and what, again, is the *need* for this program?
because it drives science forward? only a tiny fraction as much as federal funds invested in national research labs and universities.
because it's cool? please, not with *my* money.
because it's "not that much money?" the US can't afford to be taking on ill-defined, pointless programs simply because they don't cost that much compared to the US DOD.
because other nations are catching up with us in space? so what.
because we need to prepare to colonize space and get off this poisoned rock called Earth? okay, maybe so, but NASA would need to lay out a strategic plan based on that goal.
NASA Should be Banned From Ever Building Xport Systems
Sorry, but as in favor of space exploration as I am, the ISS and the Space Shuttle are the biggest fiscal disasters in the history of space exploration. NASA should be banned from ever building any transport systems or space stations. They have repeatedly shone themselves to be incompetent in these tasks. All the American people ever get are gold plated shadows of what was promised
NASA Should be Banned From Ever Building Xport Systems
Sorry, but as in favor of space exploration as I am, the ISS and the Space Shuttle are the biggest fiscal disasters in the history of space exploration. NASA should be banned from ever building any transport systems or space stations. They have repeatedly shone themselves to be incompetent in these tasks. All the American people ever get are gold plated shadows of what was promised.
Post new comment