Mar 19 1998
From The Space Library
NASA's Office of Earth Science Enterprise selected the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, DC, and the University of Colorado's Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics to conduct "parallel six-month definition studies of a new small satellite to monitor variations in the amount of radiant solar energy that reaches Earth," as part of the preparations for the Total Solar Irradiance Mission.
NASA officials appeared before a hearing of the U.S. House Committee on Science and Technology to explain the increasing price tag of the ISS. The anticipated cost of the ISS had increased to US$4 billion more than originally projected, drawing ire from supporters and opponents alike. NASA's new Associate Administrator for Space Flight Joseph H. Rothenberg led the lawmakers through the reasons for the increasing budget, explaining the series of revised out-year estimates. He attributed part of the problem to cost overruns related to "recurring schedule and budget problems with the Russian space [A]gency," and part to the fact that NASA's primary contractor, the Boeing Company, was already US$600 million to US$817 million over budget. However, Rothenberg stated, "only a fraction of these revised out-year estimates are tied to actual overruns."
At a NASA Advisory Council meeting at Marshall Space Flight Center, Jay Chabrow, an aerospace industry consultant, presented findings of a study conducted to determine the true costs of assembling and maintaining the future ISS. U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) and other concerned lawmakers had tasked Chabrow and his seven-member team of private and government analysts with undertaking this investigation, conducted over five months. The analysts' findings showed that the ISS could cost as much as US$6 billion more than NASA officials had estimated, reaching a total of US$24 billion, and that the outpost likely would not be ready to house a full crew until 2006. The report also provided estimates regarding the total cost of the space station over its entire lifetime. The analysts projected that Space Shuttle missions to assemble the station, resupply flights, and staff operating the Shuttle from the ground, would cost NASA US$94 billion. The study also found that planned caps on congressional spending were unrealistic, and that NASA and Boeing officials had been overly optimistic in their cost and schedule estimates. Factors driving costs higher included Russian nonperformance, software development and integration, construction of a crew return vehicle, and Boeing cost overruns. The report did not account for further cost increases in the event of a total Russian pullout.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
