The cost of NASA's replacement for the Hubble Space Telescope is giving new meaning to the word astronomical, growing another $1.5 billion, according to a new internal NASA study released Wednesday.
NASA's explanation: We're better rocket scientists than accountants. Management and others didn't notice that key costs for the James Webb Space Telescope weren't included during a major program review in July 2008, officials said.
NASA requires an economist and an accountant as the next administrator and deputy. Simply having the passion for space doesn't cut it.
O'Keefe was widely regarded as beancounter. Call him back, along with adm. Steidle, and revive CE&R perhaps as well.
How the hell is anyone able to advocate for NASA when things like this happen?
This is why I, and many others, have no confidence in NASA and would much rather see money funneled to emerging space companies.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20101110/sc_space/nasasnextbigspacetelescopetocostanextra15billionQuoteThe cost of NASA's replacement for the Hubble Space Telescope is giving new meaning to the word astronomical, growing another $1.5 billion, according to a new internal NASA study released Wednesday.QuoteNASA's explanation: We're better rocket scientists than accountants. Management and others didn't notice that key costs for the James Webb Space Telescope weren't included during a major program review in July 2008, officials said.NASA cannot do anything on time and on budget. This is gross negligence and simply unacceptable. How can taxpayers, senators, congressmen and women have ANY confidence in NASA leadership. It is time to reboot NASA. This is precisely what happens when you turn a government agency into a "jobs program".If a private citizen makes a 1,500 dollar error on their taxes they do not get a bail out but it is ok for NASA to get an extra 1 to 1.5 BILLION? Does NASA really expect a bail out for this? I really hope not. I'm actively advocating against it.These two quotes really say it all. The next administrator must have the flexibility to clean house. It is time to remove the scientists and astronauts who are running things and allow them to do what they do best: execute the mission. NASA requires an economist and an accountant as the next administrator and deputy. Simply having the passion for space doesn't cut it. Flying the shuttle doesn't cut it.This is why I, and many others, have no confidence in NASA and would much rather see money funneled to emerging space companies. There is absolutely no way this current iteration of NASA can execute the SLS on time and on budget. MSL, Shuttle, ISS, and JWST. All projects that suck the life out of NASA.How the hell is anyone able to advocate for NASA when things like this happen? You cannot.VRRE327
JWST will inspire the human spirit in the same way Hubble has, and is worth a substantial investment. Not being an insider as so many of you are, I can't begin to parse out what portion of its overruns are natural and inherent to such a complex, groundbreaking project, versus being attributable to waste.NASA, IMHO, needs a strong Leader, not an "administrator," with no tolerance for waste and abuse, and a passion for the cause. I don't know who that is.Why do so many of these threads descend into hyperbole and mean-spirited ranting?Finally, how seriously am I going to take the proposition of one who can't even spell "ridiculously"?
And people think that large science payloads for a HLV will be cheap. Oh yeah. No, it will require years of planning, and billions of dollars - for EACH payload.