This is a huge success for NASA's Commercial Crew Program. Both the total development costs ($1.7B and $2.8B for Crew Dragon and Starliner, respectively) and the per-seat costs ($60-67M and $91-99M) have outperformed all other NASA crewed programs since the early days of the agency. For comparison, development costs for the Space Shuttle were $27.4B, while Orion is estimated at $23.7B.
But how much of that cost was initial R&D vs what SpaceX was doing?
It's hard to compare costs given that it feels like much of NASA space development was science research into how to actually do it, paving the way for future projects.
There are many examples of successful commercial programs that could only exist because of huge ("unprofitable") government R&D behind it. Google maps, the entire internet, commercial space flight, commercial aviation...
I'm not arguing against their success, it's remarkable. I just wonder if this is more nuanced.
That's not because of NASA's poor work though, much of the cost bloat there was due to the legislation that dictated how those programs had to operate, like sole-sourcing components, requiring use of Space Shuttle components furthering vendor lock in, etc. It's not a testament to NASA's failings, its a testament to politicians' self-serving legislation.
I would say it should lead to reform in the legislative process for these sorts of projects. This launch represents the triumph of private enterprise, yes, but there is a strategic need for the US to have such capabilities independently of the ups & downs of private industry. So I would say it points to the need to have a blended approach. I would love, for example, for NASA to license the technology from SpaceX with a massive knowledge-transfer initiative to provide NASA the capabilities to do these launches itself.
I would love, for example, for NASA to license the technology from SpaceX with a massive knowledge-transfer initiative to provide NASA the capabilities to do these launches itself.
NASA wants to do exactly the opposite: help create an economy in low earth orbit in which there are many suppliers and many buyers in a healthy market. A market that doesn't need a lot of government intervention, so NASA can buy rides the way they buy regular non-space commercial shipping of people and cargo between NASA centers. They want LEO flights to eventually be managed by FAA and some traffic control organization, like airliner flights.
This can only work if there truly are many competing sellers and buyers of the same service.
A market with a monopoly or monopsony doesn't work well, and the military industrial sector often has both: NASA, NRO and DoD are not competing as buyers while Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman basically take turns as contractors because DoD doesn't let one win or lose too many contracts in a row to prevent one of them needing rescue.
Isn't this exactly the case for private space companies like spacex? Government agencies will always be strapped down with bureaucracy, and so be less efficient than private companies.
I've never seen anyone claim that NASA is incompetent.
I would say it should lead to reform in the legislative process for these sorts of projects. This launch represents the triumph of private enterprise, yes, but there is a strategic need for the US to have such capabilities independently of the ups & downs of private industry.
Yes, there were likely other costs, but from NASA's perspective, their costs were way lower. For example, for their first investment of $396M in commercial cargo deliveries to the ISS with SpaceX, they got the development of the Cargo Dragon, the Falcon 9, and the KSC launch site.
While it's undeniable that technological progress has reduced costs for space technologies over the past decades, this has not translated into reduced prices available to NASA. Much of this has to do with cost-plus contracts offered to Boeing, Lockheed, etc. as well as defense-driven propping up of these old-space contractors with little progress to show for NASA programs. What SpaceX is bringing to the table is a significant step up in capabilities offered to NASA at a fraction of the prices offered by Boeing et al.
(From https://orbitalindex.com)