Slashdot Mirror


NASA To Pay More For Less Cargo Delivery To the Space Station (arstechnica.com)

A new report from NASA's inspector general, Paul Martin, finds that NASA will pay significantly more for commercial cargo delivery to the ISS in the 2020s rather than enjoying cost savings from maturing systems. "NASA will likely pay $400 million more for its second round of delivery contracts from 2020 to 2024 even though the agency will be moving six fewer tons of cargo," reports Ars Technica. "On a cost per kilogram basis, this represents a 14-percent increase." From the report: One of the main reasons for this increase, the report says, is a 50-percent increase in prices from SpaceX, which has thus far flown the bulk of missions for NASA's commercial cargo program with its Dragon spacecraft and Falcon 9 rocket. This is somewhat surprising because, during the first round of supply missions, which began in 2012, SpaceX had substantially lower costs than NASA's other partner, Orbital ATK. SpaceX and Orbital ATK are expected to fly 31 supply missions between 2012 and 2020, the first phase of the supply contract. Of those, the new report states, SpaceX is scheduled to complete 20 flights at an average cost of $152.1 million per mission. Orbital ATK is scheduled to complete 11 missions at an average cost of $262.6 million per mission.

But that cost differential will largely evaporate in the second round of cargo supply contracts. For flights from 2020 to 2024, SpaceX will increase its price while Orbital ATK cuts its own by 15 percent. The new report provides unprecedented public detail about the second phase of commercial resupply contracts, known as CRS-2, which NASA awarded in a competitively bid process in 2016. SpaceX and Orbital ATK again won contracts (for a minimum of six flights), along with a new provider, Sierra Nevada Corp. and its Dream Chaser vehicle. Bids by Boeing and Lockheed Martin were not accepted.

3 of 172 comments (clear)

  1. NASA did something right! by hyades1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    At least they rejected the bids from Lockheed Martin and Boeing. Dear lord, what a zillion-dollar clusterf^ck THAT would have been!

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  2. Re:Unexpected Costs by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You're mixing up Falcon launches with Dragon launches. With Falcon launches, you get a Falcon. With Dragon launches, you get a Falcon, a Dragon, and mission control until berthing at the ISS, and after unberthing from the ISS. Of course the latter costs more. Furthermore, the original cost of $133M per Dragon launch translates to something like $148M per flight or so when accounting for the inflation since 2008. So an argument could be made that the price hasn't actually changed at all.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  3. Re:comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Historically though they were far more involved in the design, development, construction and operations though. There was also the issue with cost plus contracts which effectively encouraged massive cost overruns. The "new" setup is to award fixed price contracts with fixed requirements which are almost entirely ran by the contractor with only a (comparatively) little assistance/monitoring from NASA.