The trouble is that NASA can't incentivize Boeing by giving them additional money to solve their problems. Because THAT would effectively turn a FFP contract into a sorta-kinda cost-plus contract, where the contractor offloads all its cost overruns on the customer.In essence, NASA would be "rewarding" Boeing for screwing up.Providing additional money to Boeing to fix Starliner would also undoubtly lead to SpaceX dragging NASA to court, eventually leading to NASA having to financially compensate SpaceX as well.The signal to everyone "that NASA won't stand beside them when they are struggling" was given not recently, but back in 2014 already, when NASA awarded FIRM FIXED PRICE contracts for CCP. Anyone with more than two functioning brain cells understood back then already that any cost overrun, not matter the reason, would be picked up by the contractor, not NASA. So, if NASA lets Boeing falter on Starliner, it's not NASA's responsibility. Boeing should have been smart enough to properly understand what Firm Fixed Price means. The fact that they screwed up on that AS WELL, is solely on Boeing, not NASA; the original RFP was clear enough on what Milestones-Based Firm Fixed Price means exactly.
. So, there was a "said" but mostly BS reason and an "unsaid" real reason for two companies to supply commercial space access. We all know the "said" reasonsredundancy as backup and the bootstrapping of commercial space activity; both nice to have. The unsaid reason was: Can someone, anyone besides the Russians, please...PLEASE fly our astronauts to the ISS because we are desperate. We will pick two potential providers to improve the odds that one will succeed.
Quote from: SoftwareDude on 08/21/2024 07:58 am. So, there was a "said" but mostly BS reason and an "unsaid" real reason for two companies to supply commercial space access. We all know the "said" reasons—redundancy as backup and the bootstrapping of commercial space activity; both nice to have. The unsaid reason was: Can someone, anyone besides the Russians, please...PLEASE fly our astronauts to the ISS because we are desperate. We will pick two potential providers to improve the odds that one will succeed.Wrong, there is never was a such a reason
. So, there was a "said" but mostly BS reason and an "unsaid" real reason for two companies to supply commercial space access. We all know the "said" reasons—redundancy as backup and the bootstrapping of commercial space activity; both nice to have. The unsaid reason was: Can someone, anyone besides the Russians, please...PLEASE fly our astronauts to the ISS because we are desperate. We will pick two potential providers to improve the odds that one will succeed.