A sharply-worded US government report says that NASA is on the verge of a major mistake that could make its plans for finishing the space station and going on the explore the Moon cost more, take longer and achieve less.
The report, by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), specifically criticises NASA鈥檚 stated plan to award a contract in September 2006 for the design, testing, fabrication and maintenance of the Crew Exploration Vehicle. The CEV is an all-purpose crew capsule designed to carry astronauts to the International Space Station and later, in a modified form, to the Moon and Mars.
The problem, says the report, is that fulfilling these goals could cost $230 billion over the next 20 years, yet NASA wants to award the single-source CEV contract, that could run to 2019, before it has developed 鈥渨ell-defined requirements, a preliminary design, mature technology, and firm cost estimates鈥�.
Advertisement
That increases the risk of 鈥渟ignificant cost overruns, schedule delays, and decreased capability鈥�, says the GAO. It recommends Congress put NASA on a short leash, restricting its budget appropriations to the bare year-by-year minimum needed to sustain the programme through a readiness review that would allow for firmer cost and schedule estimates.
鈥淟egitimate concerns鈥�
Science committee chairman Sherwood Boehlert says the new report 鈥渞aises legitimate concerns about NASA鈥檚 approach鈥� and underscores the need for Congress to 鈥渒eep a close eye on CEV costs to make sure they do not hamper the agency鈥檚 other activities鈥�. Already, the report says, the agency鈥檚 own estimates show it will fall short of the money needed to carry out its stated plans by more than $1 billion per year from 2008 to 2011.
However, NASA seems to be unfazed by the report, and intends to carry on as planned. Deputy Administrator Shana Dale wrote in typical NASA jargon that the agency 鈥渘onconcurs with the GAO鈥檚 recommendation鈥� that it modify its contract plans.
One private advocacy group has suggested an alternative solution to the problem. In a report issued on Tuesday, a day before the GAO鈥檚, the Space Frontier Foundation says NASA could achieve all its plans and more by letting the competitive marketplace come to the rescue.
Taxi or truck?
It is a similar message to that given by Presidential Commission in 2004 鈥� that NASA should leave private companies to design, own and operate the rockets needed to take people and cargo to low-Earth orbit. Instead, NASA should concentrate its resources on tasks such as lunar exploration 鈥� a task that really requires government programmes.
Keith Cowing, a former NASA engineer who edits the website NASA Watch, told New 杏吧原创 that the fact these two reports reached similar negative conclusions about NASA鈥檚 plans should be a wakeup call.
鈥淣ASA鈥檚 plans are not well thought out, and the funding is not in place,鈥� he said. 鈥淢aybe it鈥檚 time to step back and take a look at what鈥檚 going on.鈥�
And while the foundation鈥檚 suggestion that all work towards a new vehicle should go to untested companies may be extreme, Cowing says, the underlying criticism of a lack of flexibility is valid. NASA鈥檚 plan requires 鈥渢he little taxi to go to the space station to look like the truck that鈥檚 going to go to the Moon鈥�, he says, and that is not an efficient plan. 鈥淣ASA is being not just rigid but dictatorial鈥� in setting its designs, he adds.
