6 ms·

NASA's SLS rocket's Mobile Launcher-2 increase from $383M to $2.7B

73 points by guardiangod 2y ago

deltamidway 2y ago
[flagged]
LarsDu88 2y ago
Say what we will about Elon, but him gambling his PayPal fortune was the best thing that happened to the US space program (and the global space race as whole!)
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- misiti3780 2y ago
  100% - 1 rocket failure away from financial ruin!
  - mensetmanusman 2y ago
    It’s crazy how different the world would be right now. Ukrainian generals admitted they would have been defeated quickly without Starlink.
    - 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
      https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/sep/07/elon-musk-ordered-starlink-turned-off-ukraine-offensive-biography https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/sep/07/elon-musk... > Musk told engineers to turn off communications network to hobble Ukraine drone attack on Russian warships
      - Diederich 2y ago
        Did you see the amendment at the top? "Update: on 9 September 2023, Walter Isaacson said his biography’s claim about Starlink and Crimea was based on “mistaken” information [see footnote]" Here's a more accurate summary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink_in_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink_in_the_Russo-Ukrainia...
- LarsDu88 2y ago
  Having praised Elon, I will now additionally add that he is pretty much a mouthpiece for rightwing Russian propaganda despite Starlink being vital to Ukrainian war efforts. You've truly achieved wealth when even people you don't like and don't like you in return depend on your shit to stay alive!
  - TMWNN 2y ago
    Context for others: Both sides in the Ukraine War are using "irregular" Starlink dishes. * Russia is reportedly buying dishes (and the service attached to the dishes) in the Middle East. * Ukraine has its own fleet of dishes (being paid for by the US, after Musk initially provided free service early in the war after a Ukrainian request), but also many individual dishes that were donated, and being paid for, by private individuals outside Ukraine. US law prohibits Russia from using Starlink. The problem is, how to stop Russia from doing so? A simple location-based ban won't work, because the front line is constantly shifting. Whitelisting only Ukraine's own dishes to work within Ukrainian territory might work, but 1) what about dishes that get captured by Russia? 2) As noted, what about all the privately paid-for dishes? Another way to think about this is that this demonstrates just how lifesaving for Ukraine Starlink has become in the past two years. Ukraine could ask Starlink to disable all dishes within its territory. On the contrary, it has decided that the benefits of Starlink to Ukrainians outweighs Russians also benefiting from it.
perihelions 2y ago
How is it that government contractors can't build this thing on even a 9-year engineering schedule (July 2019–September 2028) when SpaceX is iterating almost exactly the same thing, on a timescale of months? They've already launched 4 SLS-sized vehicles, and have very visibly been redesigning the ground-support equipment each time around. The next launch for instance (next month!) debuts mechanical arms attached to the launch tower, which will attempt to capture the flying booster on its return. What exactly is it Bechtel and friends struggling with? The OIG document doesn't answer this in a way I can understand.
- deepsun 2y ago
  Well, they do a lot of fundamental try/test that others use then, including SpaceX. Didn't want to defend NASAs schedules, of course, but still they are often the first pioneers in many areas. And that plays not really well with public money, unlike private startups that can do whatever.
  - DennisP 2y ago
    NASA still does great stuff but SLS specifically is not exactly a pioneering program. It's a disposable rocket using Space Shuttle engines, attempting to go to the Moon again. Meanwhile SpaceX got reusable first stages into production, and recently got the world's largest-ever rocket to orbit and attempted to land the second stage. And it's all powered by newly designed engines that significantly advance the state of the art.
    - deepsun 2y ago
      There are _a ton_ of innovations in SLS, especially in the space ship (payload). Engines is just a small piece of the program, not really important one. Over the years a lot of theory improved, a lot of new technologies developed (e.g. materials, IT) and SLS tests them for space. Kinda "deploy in production".
      - DennisP 2y ago
akira2501 2y ago
For perspective 2.7B is 0.04% of the entire US budget for 2024. This is a rocket that goes to the moon. If your reaction is "lord help us" then perhaps space exploration just isn't in your blood.
- ragebol 2y ago
  It's not for the rocket. A moon rocket for 2.7B would be a steal. This is just for a mostly static steel tower (on a mobile carrier?) that holds the rocket up and provides some piping etc to the rocket before launch. The mobile carrier is not included in the price AFAIK, but not sure.
  - bewaretheirs 2y ago
    It's tower on a large steel platform but it also includes significant GSE (ground support equipment) - cabling and cryogenic plumbing to connect to the rocket to let it be fueled and readied for launch, all connected via mechanical arms to pull the quick disconnects away from the rocket, in some cases into armored boxes to protect against the rocket exhaust. Plus a crew access arm to let astronauts board, elevators so they don't have to climb stairs in their space suits, etc., etc., It is carried around by one of the two existing crawler-transporters, which moves it between the VAB where the rocket is built and the launch pad.
    - Animats 2y ago
      What, this isn't even an new crawler/transporter? It's just the gantry and plumbing?
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - bewaretheirs 2y ago
        No need for a new one; the two they built for the Apollo program still work just fine. Note that the crawler-transporter doesn't hang around at the pad during the launch - after setting the mobile launcher down at the pad, it drives away back towards the VAB until it's needed next. During the Apollo era, it also transported the Mobile Service Structure - a tower with work platforms that allowed access to much of the spacecraft on top of the rocket.
imglorp 2y ago
OAG report on Launcher 2: https://www.oversight.gov/report/NASA/NASA%E2%80%99s-Management-Mobile-Launcher-2-Project https://www.oversight.gov/report/NASA/NASA%E2%80%99s-Managem... The contractor is Bechtel. Note, the Senate Launch System is already a huge success: money was transferred from the taxpayer to the contractors as a "jobs program". It doesn't matter if anything flies.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- rdtsc 2y ago
  That't s a good link, thank you. > NASA intends to keep Bechtel accountable to the cost and schedule agreed to in December 2023. It's mind boggling how they heck is Bechtel qualified to handle this project? Bechtel is at the center of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochabamba_Water_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochabamba_Water_War / https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/bechtel-battles-against-dirt-poor-bolivia-2878502.php https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/bechtel-battles-against-.... Talk about an agency that supposedly cares to look progressive and caring for the environment. Then they pick Bechtel as their contractor for the SLS. > We also found that Bechtel’s performance drove the significant cost increases and schedule delays to the design and development of the ML-2. The current contract value of $1.1 billion includes $594 million of Bechtel overruns Shouldn't somebody there fire Bechtel. I guess that significantly reduces your chance of retiring at Bechtel after leaving your NASA job...
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > Shouldn't somebody there fire Bechtel This means cancelling Artemis II.
    - rdtsc 2y ago
      I was exaggerating. It's, of course, too late for that. The OIG recommended "learning a lesson" at least: > (1) ensure lessons learned from the ML-2’s acquisition, contract, and project management are codified to inform future development efforts a
nerdjon 2y ago
And it will be 3 years late! I honestly would love to know how much money is 'wasted' by NASA because of these companies that seem to, over promise and then need a lot more money. And I don't say wasted because I think that the money spent at NASA is not worthwhile. But how much else could be done if that money could be spent elsewhere or at the very least be properly estimated in the beginning so it could have been planned for. That money is (I assume) going to come at the cost of something else. I really don't love the idea of SpaceX not having a serious competition. But... they kinda don't right now anyways it seems. I really hope we have another company step up to be anywhere near what they are doing.
- DennisP 2y ago
  Stoke Space seems like it has potential. Same engineering philosophy as SpaceX, really innovative design, going for 100% reusability from the start. Everyday Astronaut visited them last year: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EY8nbSwjtEY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EY8nbSwjtEY https://www.stokespace.com https://www.stokespace.com
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    Bold design. Re-usable actively-cooled cryogenic second stage is wild.
mahopa 2y ago
von Tiesenhausen's Law of Program Management- To get an accurate estimate of final program requirements, multiply the initial time estimates by pi, and slide the decimal point on the cost estimates one place to the right.

73 points by guardiangod 2y ago

[flagged]

Say what we will about Elon, but him gambling his PayPal fortune was the best thing that happened to the US space program (and the global space race as whole!)

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
misiti3780 2y ago
100% - 1 rocket failure away from financial ruin!
- mensetmanusman 2y ago
  It’s crazy how different the world would be right now. Ukrainian generals admitted they would have been defeated quickly without Starlink.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/sep/07/elon-musk-ordered-starlink-turned-off-ukraine-offensive-biography https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/sep/07/elon-musk... > Musk told engineers to turn off communications network to hobble Ukraine drone attack on Russian warships
    - Diederich 2y ago
      Did you see the amendment at the top? "Update: on 9 September 2023, Walter Isaacson said his biography’s claim about Starlink and Crimea was based on “mistaken” information [see footnote]" Here's a more accurate summary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink_in_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink_in_the_Russo-Ukrainia...
LarsDu88 2y ago
Having praised Elon, I will now additionally add that he is pretty much a mouthpiece for rightwing Russian propaganda despite Starlink being vital to Ukrainian war efforts. You've truly achieved wealth when even people you don't like and don't like you in return depend on your shit to stay alive!
- TMWNN 2y ago
  Context for others: Both sides in the Ukraine War are using "irregular" Starlink dishes. * Russia is reportedly buying dishes (and the service attached to the dishes) in the Middle East. * Ukraine has its own fleet of dishes (being paid for by the US, after Musk initially provided free service early in the war after a Ukrainian request), but also many individual dishes that were donated, and being paid for, by private individuals outside Ukraine. US law prohibits Russia from using Starlink. The problem is, how to stop Russia from doing so? A simple location-based ban won't work, because the front line is constantly shifting. Whitelisting only Ukraine's own dishes to work within Ukrainian territory might work, but 1) what about dishes that get captured by Russia? 2) As noted, what about all the privately paid-for dishes? Another way to think about this is that this demonstrates just how lifesaving for Ukraine Starlink has become in the past two years. Ukraine could ask Starlink to disable all dishes within its territory. On the contrary, it has decided that the benefits of Starlink to Ukrainians outweighs Russians also benefiting from it.

perihelions 2y ago

How is it that government contractors can't build this thing on even a 9-year engineering schedule (July 2019–September 2028) when SpaceX is iterating almost exactly the same thing, on a timescale of months? They've already launched 4 SLS-sized vehicles, and have very visibly been redesigning the ground-support equipment each time around. The next launch for instance (next month!) debuts mechanical arms attached to the launch tower, which will attempt to capture the flying booster on its return. What exactly is it Bechtel and friends struggling with? The OIG document doesn't answer this in a way I can understand.

deepsun 2y ago
Well, they do a lot of fundamental try/test that others use then, including SpaceX. Didn't want to defend NASAs schedules, of course, but still they are often the first pioneers in many areas. And that plays not really well with public money, unlike private startups that can do whatever.
- DennisP 2y ago
  NASA still does great stuff but SLS specifically is not exactly a pioneering program. It's a disposable rocket using Space Shuttle engines, attempting to go to the Moon again. Meanwhile SpaceX got reusable first stages into production, and recently got the world's largest-ever rocket to orbit and attempted to land the second stage. And it's all powered by newly designed engines that significantly advance the state of the art.
  - deepsun 2y ago
    There are _a ton_ of innovations in SLS, especially in the space ship (payload). Engines is just a small piece of the program, not really important one. Over the years a lot of theory improved, a lot of new technologies developed (e.g. materials, IT) and SLS tests them for space. Kinda "deploy in production".
    - DennisP 2y ago

akira2501 2y ago

For perspective 2.7B is 0.04% of the entire US budget for 2024. This is a rocket that goes to the moon. If your reaction is "lord help us" then perhaps space exploration just isn't in your blood.

ragebol 2y ago
It's not for the rocket. A moon rocket for 2.7B would be a steal. This is just for a mostly static steel tower (on a mobile carrier?) that holds the rocket up and provides some piping etc to the rocket before launch. The mobile carrier is not included in the price AFAIK, but not sure.
- bewaretheirs 2y ago
  It's tower on a large steel platform but it also includes significant GSE (ground support equipment) - cabling and cryogenic plumbing to connect to the rocket to let it be fueled and readied for launch, all connected via mechanical arms to pull the quick disconnects away from the rocket, in some cases into armored boxes to protect against the rocket exhaust. Plus a crew access arm to let astronauts board, elevators so they don't have to climb stairs in their space suits, etc., etc., It is carried around by one of the two existing crawler-transporters, which moves it between the VAB where the rocket is built and the launch pad.
  - Animats 2y ago
    What, this isn't even an new crawler/transporter? It's just the gantry and plumbing?
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - bewaretheirs 2y ago
      No need for a new one; the two they built for the Apollo program still work just fine. Note that the crawler-transporter doesn't hang around at the pad during the launch - after setting the mobile launcher down at the pad, it drives away back towards the VAB until it's needed next. During the Apollo era, it also transported the Mobile Service Structure - a tower with work platforms that allowed access to much of the spacecraft on top of the rocket.

imglorp 2y ago

OAG report on Launcher 2: https://www.oversight.gov/report/NASA/NASA%E2%80%99s-Management-Mobile-Launcher-2-Project https://www.oversight.gov/report/NASA/NASA%E2%80%99s-Managem... The contractor is Bechtel. Note, the Senate Launch System is already a huge success: money was transferred from the taxpayer to the contractors as a "jobs program". It doesn't matter if anything flies.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
rdtsc 2y ago
That't s a good link, thank you. > NASA intends to keep Bechtel accountable to the cost and schedule agreed to in December 2023. It's mind boggling how they heck is Bechtel qualified to handle this project? Bechtel is at the center of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochabamba_Water_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochabamba_Water_War / https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/bechtel-battles-against-dirt-poor-bolivia-2878502.php https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/bechtel-battles-against-.... Talk about an agency that supposedly cares to look progressive and caring for the environment. Then they pick Bechtel as their contractor for the SLS. > We also found that Bechtel’s performance drove the significant cost increases and schedule delays to the design and development of the ML-2. The current contract value of $1.1 billion includes $594 million of Bechtel overruns Shouldn't somebody there fire Bechtel. I guess that significantly reduces your chance of retiring at Bechtel after leaving your NASA job...
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > Shouldn't somebody there fire Bechtel This means cancelling Artemis II.
  - rdtsc 2y ago
    I was exaggerating. It's, of course, too late for that. The OIG recommended "learning a lesson" at least: > (1) ensure lessons learned from the ML-2’s acquisition, contract, and project management are codified to inform future development efforts a

nerdjon 2y ago

And it will be 3 years late! I honestly would love to know how much money is 'wasted' by NASA because of these companies that seem to, over promise and then need a lot more money. And I don't say wasted because I think that the money spent at NASA is not worthwhile. But how much else could be done if that money could be spent elsewhere or at the very least be properly estimated in the beginning so it could have been planned for. That money is (I assume) going to come at the cost of something else. I really don't love the idea of SpaceX not having a serious competition. But... they kinda don't right now anyways it seems. I really hope we have another company step up to be anywhere near what they are doing.

DennisP 2y ago
Stoke Space seems like it has potential. Same engineering philosophy as SpaceX, really innovative design, going for 100% reusability from the start. Everyday Astronaut visited them last year: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EY8nbSwjtEY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EY8nbSwjtEY https://www.stokespace.com https://www.stokespace.com
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  Bold design. Re-usable actively-cooled cryogenic second stage is wild.

mahopa 2y ago

von Tiesenhausen's Law of Program Management- To get an accurate estimate of final program requirements, multiply the initial time estimates by pi, and slide the decimal point on the cost estimates one place to the right.