🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Dec28.172953.26161@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>Shuttle's costs were all accounted for too. The customer, the US
>taxpayer, wanted R&D done to develop a reusable spacecraft. NASA
>did it, and that public domain database of technologies is what
>the taxpayer got for his money, not bent metal. NASA's prime mission 
>is R&D. The customer wanted an operational vehicle, and NASA contracted 
>to have them built. NASA is not supposed to be in the fabrication business.
>The Orbiters only cost the bent metal cost, administrative overhead, 
>and contractor profit, Rockwell says that's $1.5 billion per each.



Unfortunately, gary the 30 billion spent on the shuttle developement program
wasnt R&D money,  it was mostly DDTE money, a lsightly different concept
from the accounting world.  

THe X-15  was an R&D program.  the X-24  was a R&D program.
a major percentage of the money spent on the shuttle was not on breaking
into new areas, (Science)  but on doing design studies (Engineering)
and building facilities (Manufacturing).  

Now while there were R&D portiions of the shuttle program,  tiles developement
engine developement,  the major costs were in paying rockwell toset up
a factory and build the damn things.   now if we had gone and built
30-50 of the things,  then that cost would be well amortized,  but as
a small program,  these production costs  dominated the vehicle costs.

Oh well.  just my 0.02.