You know who else didn’t have a “Science Degree”? James Webb.

Lori Garver’s interest has always been politics, how such a creature obtained a position of power in the space program should be a study in Machivellian mischief.

Anybody taken in by Lori Garver’s prognostications on matters related to Aeronautics & Astrophysics should have their credentials to speak on such matters questioned.

SpaceX want 2.5 billion, Lockheed 6 billion and Boeing 6.5 billion.

We could have FULLY FUNDED all three of those and SIX MORE companies besides at those rates, for the cost of these porktrains.

“And what I was trying to do is to get you to define what you mean by “full up costs”.”

What is the full cost of developing the SLS and MPCV? They shouldn’t be entitlement programs with no end date and no budget cap.

When will they be fully developed, tested and ready for their intended use, and how much will it have cost the U.S. Taxpayer?

Is this a hard concept to understand?

If a Commercial Crew vehicle flies manned before the next President takes office, SLS/Orion is in trouble.

Hence the fury when certain parties found out that one of the Commercial Crew entrants (no, not Tony Starks lot) had plans for a CBM-to-NDS adapter which would allow their contender to turn up to the station before the “offical” adapter is ready. Just a CAD file apparently that got seen over someones shoulder…..

You’ll also notice that there are a large number of open items – Orion being too heavy for the parachutes for example.

There is a reason the friends of SLS are looking under the cushions for spare change….

or as David Frum once wrote “dead right”

Late here about to sign off. Robert G. Oler

Or not. Following a pointer DBN gave to the OIG MPCV report that came out in August, I spotted a figure (No. 7 on page 25) that shows the SLS PDR in July, 2013 — which actually happened — and KDP-C with an estimated completion date in September 2014(!). That’s a year after earlier schedules indicated, and, though I normally avoid exclamation points, one seems appropriate here.

http://oig.nasa.gov/audits/reports/FY13/IG-13-022.pdf

August 15, 2013
Office of Audits
Office of Inspector General
Report No. IG-13-022 (Assignment No. A-12-002-00)

Status of NASA’s Development of the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle

Efforts to Coordinate Programs.

Recognizing that the programs are at different stages of development, NASA management has taken action to synchronize the MPCV Program with the development schedules for the SLS and GSDO programs. For example, instead of proceeding to the implementation phase, officials directed the MPCV Program to coordinate its development with the SLS and GSDO programs and remain in the formulation phase until the rocket developm ent and ground system programs were more mature. In extending the formulation phase for the MPCV Program, managers revised the Program’s Key Decision Points and other developmental milestones to better align with the SLS and GSDO programs. Figure 7 illustrates the revised development schedule
for the CEV Project and the MPCV, SLS, and GSDO programs.

So it appears as if not only the MPCV KDPs were moved, but there was a more general rescheduling that took place sometime this summer.