Boeing to propose SLS-launched lander for HLS bid

[jadebenn]

A friend of mine was speculating that defunding EUS (and WFIRST and STEM outreach) was merely a feint to reduce the "quotable" budget increase needed for Artemis in 2021, while "cutting" programs Congress was sure to retain. I don't know if I entirely buy that, but there is some convincing evidence for it.

Consider that if EUS was to be deferred, NASA would need to be entering talks with ULA about provision of future ICPSes. The fact that no moves to that end have occurred (not even preliminary talks as a contingency measure), and that procurement of multiple EUSes has been repeatedly emphasized in the upcoming SLS block buy do suggest this may be little more than a political ploy.

However, NASA's concern over Boeing's ability to deliver on-time and on a regular schedule is very much real, so that might not be the full picture. Still a possibility worth considering, nonetheless.

[HeartofGold2030]

https://www.intuitivemachines.com/post/moon-lander-engine-breaks-record-at-marshall-space-flight-center

[TrevorMonty]

I'd be surprised if Boeing could afford to build their lander. They were bleeding money before coronavirus killed airline industry. Airlines will now be cancelling orders for new aircraft, going be years before they recover enough to start buying new planes.

[brickmack]

Boeing probably expected NASA to pay for the lander. But NASAs since said they expect a lot more commercial investment (and that an SLS-launched lander would require additional investment from Boeing to get that high production capability, so double hit). The other bidders seem to already be spending their own money and/or have a lot more heritage in their designs than the Boeing option, so this expectation probably won't go well.

[su27k]

Boeing probably expected NASA to pay for the lander. But NASAs since said they expect a lot more commercial investment (and that an SLS-launched lander would require additional investment from Boeing to get that high production capability, so double hit). The other bidders seem to already be spending their own money and/or have a lot more heritage in their designs than the Boeing option, so this expectation probably won't go well.

In a rational world without political interference, this is true, but we all know politics plays a big part in this and NASA hasn't always been rational in its choices.

[TrevorMonty]

How does NASA stop money going to general running of Boeing given they are bleeding cash. SLS and Starliner will be in same boat.

Unfortunately can't ring fence project team as lots of other Boeing resources are used on part time basis to support these projects.

[DreamyPickle]

Getting Boeing to build an SLS for themselves is a very interesting way to adjust the incentives for that program. As far as I understand HLS is a fixed-price contract so Boeing will be encouraged to reduce the marginal cost of building another SLS as much as possible. This might help bring the SLS program on a saner footing.

I hope they get a award and we get to watch this unfold.

It would be great if NASA could find a way to effectively "privatize" SLS and Orion: just grant Boeing/LM all the IP rights and let them compete against commercial vehicles.

[Coastal Ron]

How does NASA stop money going to general running of Boeing given they are bleeding cash.

That is NOT the job of NASA. Political decisions like that are made by the politicians (i.e. President & Congress), not the departments and agencies.

SLS and Starliner will be in same boat.

The SLS program is pure profit for Boeing, since they are building it under a Cost Plus contract. The Starliner, while a financially questionable program, is a drop in the bucket compared to what the Boeing Commercial division is going through.

Unfortunately can't ring fence project team as lots of other Boeing resources are used on part time basis to support these projects.

The SLS and Starliner programs are in the Boeing Space division, and unlikely to share anything with any other divisions like Defense and Commercial.

[ncb1397]

How does NASA stop money going to general running of Boeing given they are bleeding cash.

That is NOT the job of NASA. Political decisions like that are made by the politicians (i.e. President & Congress), not the departments and agencies.

SLS and Starliner will be in same boat.

The SLS program is pure profit for Boeing, since they are building it under a Cost Plus contract. The Starliner, while a financially questionable program, is a drop in the bucket compared to what the Boeing Commercial division is going through.

Unfortunately can't ring fence project team as lots of other Boeing resources are used on part time basis to support these projects.

The SLS and Starliner programs are in the Boeing Space division, and unlikely to share anything with any other divisions like Defense and Commercial.

Technically, defense and space are one division: BDS. Boeing Commerial Airplanes and Boeing Global Services are the others.