Author Topic: GAO Annual Assesment on NASA large scale programs (2023 released)  (Read 19665 times)

Offline rayleighscatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1098
  • Maryland
  • Liked: 565
  • Likes Given: 238
The GAO's report on NASA's major projects was recently released. It covers projects exceeding 250 million dollars in life cycle costs which is currently 12 existing projects and four in formulation. The only one missing is Commercial Crew which was left out of the report since it was written while the award challenge was going on.
The entire report can be seen on http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-15-320SP

edit/gongora: Attaching/linking other report years
2014 / 2015 / 2016 / 2017 / 2018 / 2019 / 2020
2021
2022
2023
« Last Edit: 05/31/2023 11:17 pm by gongora »

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15288
  • Liked: 7823
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: GAO Annual Assesment on NASA large scale programs.
« Reply #1 on: 03/28/2015 01:34 am »
The projects assessed are:

Project Assessments
Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment Follow-On
Ice, Cloud, and Land Elevation Satellite-2
Interior Exploration using Seismic Investigations, Geodesy, and Heat Transport (InSight)
James Webb Space Telescope   
Magnetospheric Multiscale   
Mars 2020   
NASA ISRO - Synthetic Aperture Radar   
Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2   
Origins-Spectral Interpretation-Resource Identification-Security-Regolith Explorer (OSIRIS-REx)
Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle   
Soil Moisture Active and Passive   
Solar Probe Plus   
Space Launch System   
Space Network Ground Segment Sustainment   
Surface Water and Ocean Topography   
Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
Re: GAO Annual Assesment on NASA large scale programs.
« Reply #2 on: 03/29/2015 12:41 pm »
Digging through the report, I cannot find the explanation that SLS is a $7.02B project.  That is at least sunk cost to date, but if so, adding in Orion and JWST would break the graph.  How are the bottom-line figures to be interpreted?
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline rayleighscatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1098
  • Maryland
  • Liked: 565
  • Likes Given: 238
Re: GAO Annual Assesment on NASA large scale programs.
« Reply #3 on: 03/29/2015 01:59 pm »
Those numbers are the current estimates for the lifetime costs of the program (development cycle costs in this case I think as it doesn't have a defined lifespan like a probe or satellite). The report doesn't get into individual line item costs, as that would make any individual project into a 100 page report. It just highlights major aspects of the projects and potential issues moving forward in schedules and cost.

It does tell us that SLS had 2.674 Billion in formulation costs (early program), estimates of 7.021 Billion in development costs, with the largest contract being Boeing's Cost Plus Awards Contract for the core currently valued at 4.185 Billion out of a possible 4.389 Billion (They also note that this contract was originally awarded under Constellation and was later modified). I believe these are the estimates from beginning of program to EM-1 when it would switch from development to operations.

Offline spacetraveler

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 687
  • Atlanta, GA
  • Liked: 165
  • Likes Given: 26
Re: GAO Annual Assesment on NASA large scale programs.
« Reply #4 on: 03/30/2015 04:58 am »
JWST total cost still $8.8 billion. Nice to see some stability there finally.

Offline vulture4

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1099
  • Liked: 431
  • Likes Given: 92
Re: GAO Annual Assesment on NASA large scale programs.
« Reply #5 on: 04/05/2015 05:56 pm »
I do not understand figure 10.It looks as though Commercial Crew is being eliminated in 2019.

Offline rayleighscatter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1098
  • Maryland
  • Liked: 565
  • Likes Given: 238
Re: GAO Annual Assesment on NASA large scale programs.
« Reply #6 on: 04/05/2015 06:37 pm »
I do not understand figure 10.It looks as though Commercial Crew is being eliminated in 2019.
From 2018-2020 it probably transitions from development to operations which is a different (likely ISS related) budget.

Online Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8860
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10199
  • Likes Given: 11929
Re: GAO Annual Assesment on NASA large scale programs.
« Reply #7 on: 04/06/2015 12:31 am »
I do not understand figure 10.It looks as though Commercial Crew is being eliminated in 2019.
From 2018-2020 it probably transitions from development to operations which is a different (likely ISS related) budget.

Yes, and you can see that in NASA's FY 2016 Budget Request, where Commercial Spaceflight (Commercial Crew) winds down to pretty much nothing in FY2020, and under the ISS budget the "ISS Crew and Cargo Transportation" line item increases starting in 2018.
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10205
  • US
  • Liked: 13885
  • Likes Given: 5933

Online Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8860
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10199
  • Likes Given: 11929
Re: GAO Annual Assesment on NASA large scale programs.
« Reply #9 on: 05/01/2018 08:32 pm »
2018 report is out:
https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-18-280SP

One of the indicators I looked at for how well Bolden was doing as NASA Administrator was this chart:

NASA’s Major Project Portfolio Cost and Schedule Performance Deteriorated in 2018



Last year was HORRIBLE for NASA major projects! It looks like the wheels are coming off.

Was it directly attributable to NASA not having a NASA Administrator? Will Bridenstine be able to solve the core issues driving launch delays and get them down to where Bolden had them?

Bridenstine did not own the results of this GAO report, but he will own the results of the next one. Let's hope he understands how to do basic management, because NASA apparently needs that skill in a NASA Administrator right now...
« Last Edit: 05/01/2018 08:35 pm by Coastal Ron »
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Offline AncientU

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6257
  • Liked: 4164
  • Likes Given: 6078
Re: GAO Annual Assesment on NASA large scale programs.
« Reply #10 on: 05/01/2018 08:38 pm »
How much of that 2018 overrun was known earlier and not reported?  SLS, Orion, and JWST were all known to be slipping but Bolden smiled and passed, instead of letting the truth be known.
« Last Edit: 05/01/2018 08:39 pm by AncientU »
"If we shared everything [we are working on] people would think we are insane!"
-- SpaceX friend of mlindner

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Re: GAO Annual Assesment on NASA large scale programs.
« Reply #11 on: 05/01/2018 08:40 pm »
SpaceX and Boeing spacecraft may not become operational until 2020

Quote
A new report provides some insight into the challenges that SpaceX and Boeing are facing when it comes to flying commercial crew missions, and it also suggests both companies may be nearly two years away from reaching operational status for NASA.

The assessment of large projects at NASA, published on Tuesday by the US Government Accountability Office, found that certification of the private spacecraft for flying astronauts to the International Space Station may be delayed to December 2019 for SpaceX and February 2020 for Boeing.

"Both of the Commercial Crew Program's contractors have made progress developing their crew transportation systems, but delays persist as the contractors have had difficulty executing aggressive schedules," the report states.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/05/new-report-suggests-commercial-crew-program-likely-faces-further-delays/
« Last Edit: 05/01/2018 08:50 pm by gongora »

Online Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8860
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10199
  • Likes Given: 11929
Re: GAO Annual Assesment on NASA large scale programs.
« Reply #12 on: 06/15/2018 01:28 am »
Today was the Subcommittee on Space Hearing - NASA Cost and Schedule Overruns: Acquisition and Program Management Challenges. This is in response to the 10th annual Quick Look at the status of NASA's major projects by the GAO (see earlier post).

https://www.youtube.com/embed/S-m48dGFJDE

An article about the hearing at Gizmodo:

Congressional Subcommittee Grills NASA on Skyrocketing Project Cost Overruns

From the article:

Quote
“Performance has worsened after years of following a general positive trend,” testified Cristina T. Chaplain, the director of Contracting and National Security Acquisitions at GAO, at the hearing. The reasons, she said, had to do with “risky management decisions, unforeseen technical challenges—some avoidable and some not—and workmanship errors.”
« Last Edit: 06/15/2018 01:33 am by Coastal Ron »
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Online zubenelgenubi

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11169
  • Arc to Arcturus, then Spike to Spica
  • Sometimes it feels like Trantor in the time of Hari Seldon
  • Liked: 7394
  • Likes Given: 72437
Re: GAO Annual Assesment on NASA large scale programs.
« Reply #13 on: 06/15/2018 01:52 am »
The hearing made C-SPAN3 today, too.
(Playing at the time of this post)
https://www.c-span.org/video/?447011-1/hearing-focuses-nasa-cost-overruns
« Last Edit: 06/15/2018 01:54 am by zubenelgenubi »
Support your local planetarium! (COVID-panic and forward: Now more than ever.) My current avatar is saying "i wants to go uppies!" Yes, there are God-given rights. Do you wish to gainsay the Declaration of Independence?

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: GAO Annual Assesment on NASA large scale programs.
« Reply #14 on: 06/16/2018 03:30 pm »

Was it directly attributable to NASA not having a NASA Administrator? Will Bridenstine be able to solve the core issues driving launch delays and get them down to where Bolden had them?


Has nothing to do with the Administrator.

Online Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8860
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10199
  • Likes Given: 11929
Re: GAO Annual Assesment on NASA large scale programs.
« Reply #15 on: 06/16/2018 10:43 pm »

Was it directly attributable to NASA not having a NASA Administrator? Will Bridenstine be able to solve the core issues driving launch delays and get them down to where Bolden had them?


Has nothing to do with the Administrator.

What is your guess as to the reason?
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10205
  • US
  • Liked: 13885
  • Likes Given: 5933

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 48164
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81652
  • Likes Given: 36933
Re: GAO Annual Assesment on NASA large scale programs.
« Reply #17 on: 04/29/2020 06:33 pm »
https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-20-405

https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1255564148097912838

Quote
Oof. New report from GAO on NASA's major programs finds: "We expect cost increases and schedule delays for major programs to get worse." This work does not consider COVID-19 effects, either.

From the report:

Quote
The cost performance of NASA’s portfolio of major projects has worsened for the third consecutive year, while the average schedule delay has decreased. Since we last reported in May 2019, cost growth has increased from 27.6 percent to approximately 31 percent. The average launch delay decreased from 13 months to approximately 12 months. Our analysis shows that NASA’s cost and schedule performance is expected to deteriorate as a result of several factors, including likely Artemis I delays and understated cost growth for the Orion and SLS programs. According to NASA officials, the partial government shutdown that occurred between December 2018 and January 2019 did not affect projects’ cost and schedule baselines, but these officials identified varying other effects including the use of cost and schedule reserves. Looking forward, programs that will be part of NASA’s plans to conduct a lunar landing in 2024 will begin to enter the portfolio and present additional cost and schedule risks as NASA works toward this aggressive target date.
« Last Edit: 04/29/2020 06:38 pm by FutureSpaceTourist »

Online Coastal Ron

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8860
  • I live... along the coast
  • Liked: 10199
  • Likes Given: 11929
Re: GAO Annual Assesment on NASA large scale programs.
« Reply #18 on: 04/29/2020 07:38 pm »
The trend lines don't look good for Bridenstine. Cost growth and schedule delays have both increased for major programs during the Trump administration.
« Last Edit: 04/29/2020 07:41 pm by Coastal Ron »
If we don't continuously lower the cost to access space, how are we ever going to afford to expand humanity out into space?

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 48164
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81652
  • Likes Given: 36933
Ouch

twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1255607941786451968

Quote
This seems like it isn't good. The new GAO report on NASA's big programs includes this nugget on the SLS rocket: "Program officials indicated that one of the top remaining technical risks to the green run test is that the core stage may develop leaks when it is filled with fuel."

https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1255608404644683776

Quote
Let's be honest, if you take nine years and ~$10 billion to design and build a large fuel tank, one of your very highest priorities should be that it ... not leak.

Offline jadebenn

  • Professional Lurker
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1147
  • Orbiting the Mun
  • Liked: 1219
  • Likes Given: 3534
« Last Edit: 04/30/2020 12:47 am by jadebenn »

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12095
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18198
  • Likes Given: 12158
Ouch

-snip-

This isn't an SLS problem, this is a hydrogen problem.

With Shuttle Back in Space, NASA Returns to Leak Problem
HYDROGEN LEAKS TORMENT NASA

Pretty much.

To make clear: no actual leak has been identified. The top risk identified by SLS program officials concerns the possibility of such a leak occuring when the CS is fueled during tanking tests or for the Green Run.
NASA has plenty of experience with Hydrogen leaks. Hydrogen leaks have pestered them ever since the Saturn days, with a near-constant vigilance required during the 30-year run of shuttle.

So yeah, NASA understands the trouble with hydrogen, which is exactly why a leak occuring during fueling is considered an open top risk. Not until the tanking tests and Green Run have taken place will we know if this risk has been sufficiently retired.

Online FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 48164
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 81652
  • Likes Given: 36933
I dug out the leak quote from the report (p82):

Quote
Program officials indicated that one of the top remaining technical risks to the green run test is that the core stage may develop leaks when it is filled with fuel. According to these officials, they have conducted extensive scaled testing of the gaskets and seals used in the core stage; however, it is difficult to precisely predict how this large volume of liquid hydrogen will affect the stage.

So, if I understand correctly, you can’t do a full scale test until you do a full scale test?!

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10205
  • US
  • Liked: 13885
  • Likes Given: 5933
« Last Edit: 06/23/2022 05:51 pm by gongora »

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10205
  • US
  • Liked: 13885
  • Likes Given: 5933
And 2021 since I forgot it last year.

https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-21-306

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10205
  • US
  • Liked: 13885
  • Likes Given: 5933
Just realized I never posted the excerpts I started putting together yesterday.

Quote
Gateway - Deep Space Logistics : SpaceX may be given authority to proceed on first mission in late 2023.  First Dragon XL flight currently planned for 2027, delivering Gateway External Robotic System (GERS).

HALO : "preliminary launch schedule from July 2025 to February 2026" "As of February 2022, the co-manifested vehicle is above the Falcon Heavy launch vehicle’s mass limit. If the mass is too high, it could affect the vehicle’s ability to reach the correct lunar orbit. The project is taking steps to reduce mass, including evaluating whether it needs to potentially off-load some components for initial launch."

HLS : "The program is reviewing initial schedules from SpaceX, and expects to establish cost and schedule baselines in August 2022."

Dragonfly : "NASA’s Launch Services Program provided the project with performance information on the candidate heavy-lift launch vehicles: Falcon Heavy, Vulcan 6s, and New Glenn."

CCP : Crewed Flight Test. CCP and Boeing have multiple items to complete to be ready for the crewed flight test. While launch vehicle components have been delivered and Boeing requested a launch window, the service module production will be a key schedule driver. Boeing will fly the service module originally slated for its first service mission on its crewed flight test. CCP and Boeing’s readiness for the crewed flight test will be determined by how quickly they complete the significant certification work that remains. The CCP program manager said the program approved 50 percent of Boeing’s certification products for the crewed flight test as of January 2022. However, because the program limited the scope of uncrewed flight test-2 to reduce the program’s certification workload, the program manager said the remaining certification work for the crewed flight test includes challenging items such as Boeing’s parachutes, landing loads, and abort systems.

In addition, the CCP and ISS programs are concerned that operational staff may not be able to safely operate Boeing’s crewed spacecraft if there are any issues with Boeing’s flight software. CCP reported that Boeing’s approach to software development and testing created a significant backlog of software problem reports. Program officials said the operations team is being trained on operational workarounds to complete functions manually that software would normally automate. Several teams reported little capacity to safely accommodate additional operational workload that may be needed if there are any problems with Boeing’s flight software. To mitigate this issue, CCP plans to provide operational teams 6 months of training time with released software and closely monitor workload.

One of CCP’s top risks for the crewed flight test is that quality issues with hardware may pose unknown risks to the mission or to crew safety. CCP had previously discovered deficiencies in Boeing’s quality management of its suppliers. Boeing made changes to its quality management processes, which NASA determined to be sufficient through multiple audits. However, CCP plans to conduct technical assessments of certain systems to better understand the risk level to the mission or crew safety.

Europa Clipper : Launching on a Falcon Heavy during the project’s target launch date of October 2024 will require that Europa Clipper fly first around Mars and Earth—leveraging the planets’ gravities to increase the spacecraft’s speed in a maneuver known as a gravity assist—before entering Jupiter’s orbit in April 2030. If the project does not meet the target launch date, the next launch opportunity begins in October 2025. This later date would require Europa Clipper to execute two Earth and one Mars gravity assists before entering Jupiter’s orbit in July 2031.
« Last Edit: 06/24/2022 08:42 pm by gongora »

Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6466
  • Liked: 4572
  • Likes Given: 5136
Another quote ftom the GAO report:
Quote
Psyche uses two specialized cameras, or imagers, for science imaging and spacecraft navigation. The imagers include parts such as a telescope and camera electronics. The imagers continue to face technical challenges, and one is further in development than the other. The fundamental problem is the sensitivity of the primary mirror within the telescope to distortions in the mirror’s surface caused by external stresses over temperature.  For example, the structure and bond materials that hold the mirror in place could distort the surface of the mirror, resulting in poor performance. In addition, one imager did not behave the way models predicted. Because of these issues, the telescopes had to be disassembled and reassembled several times. The project is working to mitigate these issues by replacing hardware and using different materials and bonding techniques.

This is a great example of why its to hard to control costs on NASA projects.
The problem of building an ultra-lightweight, athermal, Vis-NIR imager for extremely cold operations in deep space was solved two decades ago specifically by avoiding ”different materials and bonding techniques”.  But the NASA centers have to do it themselves. Ralph on OSIRIS-Rex and L’Ralph on Lucy were “brought in-house” instead of going back to the industrial partnership that built Ralph for New Horizons, but even those would have been better starting points than a blank sheet.
And while the programs want to constrain costs the Centers want to rack up the head counts in ways only a few companies can get away with.  You can fire a commercial vendor or hold them to a fixed price contract but what can you do with a NASA Center?

Also, check out how many programs are still having problems with momentum wheels. Shades of Kepler.
« Last Edit: 06/25/2022 06:50 pm by Comga »
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10205
  • US
  • Liked: 13885
  • Likes Given: 5933

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0