Eric Berger in ArsTechnica: Weirdly, a NASA official says fixed-price contracts do the agency “no good”
Eric Berger in ArsTechnica: Weirdly, a NASA official says fixed-price contracts do the agency “no good”
"What really makes me worried is that I think it shows where the heart of the agency is."
NASA official Jim Free testifying to Congress about Artemis.
But it was his assignation of blame for the delay that raised some eyebrows. Free pinned the schedule slip on SpaceX, ... Oddly, Free also questioned the value of the contract mechanism that NASA used to hire SpaceX and its Starship lander. "The fact is, if they’re not flying on the time they’ve said, it does us no good to have a firm, fixed-price contract other than we’re not paying more," he said.
Eric worries that this is the resurgence of old thinking in NASA. I love the first half of this quote from unnamed source:
"I can't give him a pass on the fixed-price comment," one of these officials said of Free. "On cost-plus contracts, the hardware is always late, and you pay more. On fixed-price contracts, it's only late. So yeah, his comment was technically accurate but totally tone-deaf. What really makes me worried is that I think it shows where the heart of the agency is."
You're viewing a single thread.
The comparison of cost, seeing just the overruns on the engines alone (older, extensively used tech no less) dwarfing the SpaceX contract really puts it into perspective.
I get having more control on a project can be comforting, but these contracts underpin an enhanced fiscal viability to NASA, which can counteract the ebbs and flows of a socially and politically derived budget. It's also laying foundation towards a more privatized space, which I think would make great inroads for NASA in the long run.
Very short sighted comment by Free.
Free is paid handsomely by Boeing and the sort..money talks baby