Posted on 07/28/2006 9:47:24 AM PDT by BenLurkin
NASA's acquisition plan for a spacecraft to replace the space shuttle is inadequate and runs the risk of exceeding predicted costs and schedules, according to a report by the Government Accountability Office released Wednesday. The Crew Exploration Vehicle, or CEV, a capsule-like spacecraft reminiscent of the Apollo program, will succeed the space shuttle for NASA's manned space missions following its retirement in 2010. The vehicle is expected to first fly no later than 2014, although agency officials hope to have it ready by 2012.
"NASA's current acquisition strategy for the CEV places the project at risk of significant cost overruns, schedule delays and performance shortfalls because it commits the government to a long-term product development effort before establishing a sound business case," the report stated.
The program lacks well-defined requirements, a preliminary design, mature technology and firm cost estimates, the report stated.
The contract for development and manufacture of the CEV that NASA plans to award in September will extend through at least 2014, possibly 2019. Two teams are in competition for the contract - one led by Lockheed Martin Corp. and the other a joint effort of Northrop Grumman Corp. and The Boeing Co.
The report recommends that Congress consider restricting NASA's annual funding to only those activities necessary to complete the spacecraft's preliminary design review, not the long-term contract commitment the space agency proposes.
While agreeing with the GAO that a "knowledge-based" approach is preferred in order to reduce risk, Deputy Administrator Shana Dale defended NASA's plans for selecting a prime contractor for a long-term contract and said the agency does not expect to change them.
(Excerpt) Read more at avpress.com ...
Put the money into space exploration/exploitation applications of nanotech. The Verne/von Braun paradigm is collapsing.
> Put the money into space exploration/exploitation applications of nanotech.
Errr.... how do you launch humans into space with nanites?
Note that the article does NOT contain any dollar figures -- that is because the dollars involved are nothing compared to what the government is spending on war and illegal aliens combined. This has always been the case with the space program -- liberals scream about costs when they just want those "small" dollars for socialist programs and entitlements to buy votes and power. It is no differernt than their calculated decimation of our military.
The technology gained from the space program is invaluable. It was with Apollo and the cancellation of that effort was fool-hardy, stupid and a waste for America. Again just pols looking to steal the dollars.
We could easily continue to fund the entire space program with what this government spends on ILLEGAL ALIENS per year -- in excess of $100 BILLION and that does not include all the rest of the welfare fraud that funds votes.
NASA should not be retiring the Space Shuttle until such time as they have successfully lifted a crew into orbit in the replacement vehicle. Period. There should not be another multi-year gap in between launches, this technology must move forward, in spite of the risks.
They still need to address the lifting of heavy cargo into orbit and beyond... such as a space station module.
Use nanites to construct infrastructure in space that supports human exploration/exploitation.
"and runs the risk of exceeding predicted costs and schedules,"
Impossible.
It's never happened before!
;)
This is what I mean by "going beyond the Verne/von Braun paradigm".
Can/will the new capsule have dual-use for the Apollo II project to go back to the Moon? Sounds like the same vehicle, unless I missed something.
"Errr.... how do you launch humans into space with nanites?"
One nanometer at a time of course.
1. Get the U.S. out of the UN, and the UN out of the U.S.
2. Close the borders and deport criminal aliens.
3. Park the spaceships, shut down NASA.
The three most important things a leader could do for this country.
"The procurement and manufacture of a new space vehicle needs to be put totally in the hands of private enterprise and a private company that can only make money if they produce a viable space craft like the air craft manufacturers do"
I vote for Haliburton.
Maybe so. But such is the plan imposed by the experts in congress.
Moonbase, okay.
Boeing for transportation system.
ping
"Boeing for transportation system."
Oh cmon, lets give Airbus a chance. /sarc
>Use nanites to construct infrastructure in space that supports human exploration/exploitation.
Doesn't explain how to get humans there.
I don't disagree, but it's difficult to see anything in the current space program (other than military surveillance and weather satellites, neither of which require the shuttle) that justifies extorting money from citizens with the threat of prison.
The Shuttle is already obsolete. We need new science.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.