4 ms·
Wild. But it's a pattern with these contracts. As a reminder, for SLS they decided to modify an exiting launch tower (ML-1). The original estimate to modify th
by glzone1 2y ago
Wild. But it's a pattern with these contracts.
As a reminder, for SLS they decided to modify an exiting launch tower (ML-1). The original estimate to modify the tower was $54 million. Final cost will likely be $1 billion. And delayed of course. It's only going to get a few launches.
You can see where this is going.
Then they decided to do a new launch tower, ML-2. This tower is only 7 feet taller. They planned to incorporate lessons learned from the mess of ML-1 (haha). Started at $400M. Now going to be $2.7 billion (and delayed of course badly).
These cost+ deals especially with multiple contractors are like rotting fruit that attracts maggots that glom on and provide negative value. Something that would take a day to a week elsewhere could be literally months. Every incentive is to move slowly. The contractor layers and paperwork needs on even basic changes are totally massive. The other thing that really jumps out is usually speed - these things will take FOREVER.
I once even saw something about 8 track data recording in a govt contract, It's wild what is stacked into these things. The overhead to do anything can be wild. I once worked a govt job, and we needed an ipad for whatever reason (think something like foreflight on an ipad - most normal people would just buy an ipad to run foreflight). For all sorts of dumb and dumber reason, an ipad could not be purchased. I'd estimate $25K - $50K maybe went into trying to buy this damn ipad and coming up with workarounds. Can only go through central IT which wasn't even selected for price performance, has no customer service, and doesn't have apple SKU's. That's just the beginning. By the time you've wasted attorney time, contracting teams time on this ipad purchase and your own time, your managers time, all the downline folks time... the mind boggles. I think the final solution was to do a contract with a third party for a service, who could then buy the ipad and install the app on it as long as that part of the contract was less than some capital item threshold, and then that third party could enter into another agreement to make it available for their use. But the time to do this, then the time to come up with the agreement to use the ipad owned by this third party... total joke! I understood why teachers buy their own pencils. I'm sure a school can provide them, but a teacher probably doesn't want to deal with the headaches!
- disillusioned 2y agoFire everyone at NASA involved in "project management" that allowed this to happen: >For the ML-2 project’s first 5 years, NASA lacked a reliable cost and schedule estimate, making it difficult for the Agency to accurately identify ML-2 budget requirements, be accountable to Congress and other stakeholders, and accurately measure project and contractor performance. Absolute dereliction of duty and complete incompetence. Bechtel has literally no _true_ incentive to deliver on time: the "awards" are folly and they've been awarded some of them even despite this abysmal performance. Instead, you can inflate the "cost" part of "cost plus" and just continue to suck on the teat of the taxpayer, while blaming supply chain and other challenges, all to not build what amounts to a several hundred foot tall elevator. (Obviously a gross simplification; I understand there are interconnected data, electrical, hydraulic, fluid, and other systems, along with being immediately adjacent an extremely high-thrust launch, but _still_.)
- dessimus 2y ago>Fire everyone at NASA involved in "project management" that allowed this to happen Do you think this is unique to NASA? The military itself has many such expenditures. If anything, this is a result of Senators and Reps putting their fingers in to extract taxpayer money at best "for their district," but more likely for their cronies/lobbyists.