- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Congress destroys Northrop Grumman CEO over stupid mistakes on the James Webb Space Telesc
Posted on 7/28/18 at 4:20 pm
Posted on 7/28/18 at 4:20 pm
LINK
Good article from The Atlantic LINK
I can’t wait for it to be operational and start seeing the images, but Northrop Grumman has really fricked this up. Originally estimated to be $500 million and now the final cost is estimated to be $10 billion..? That’s absolutely ridiculous.
quote:
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher of California didn’t hold back when addressing the CEO stating, “This, of course, is very disturbing. This is about the biggest screw job I’ve ever seen, and the taxpayers are getting screwed here.” He wasn’t the only one who had harsh words for Bush.
When asked whether Northrop Grumman would be absorbing the costs for its latest round of mistakes, totaling around $800 million, Bush said that such a move would “significantly impede and impair the relationship between NASA and Northrop Grumman,” and that it “would be the wrong approach.”
Good article from The Atlantic LINK
I can’t wait for it to be operational and start seeing the images, but Northrop Grumman has really fricked this up. Originally estimated to be $500 million and now the final cost is estimated to be $10 billion..? That’s absolutely ridiculous.
15
Posted on 7/28/18 at 4:23 pm to DavidTheGnome
So, they're refusing to absorb the costs of their own mistakes.
Posted on 7/28/18 at 4:23 pm to DavidTheGnome
Weren’t they the lunar module builders? Glad they didn’t frick that up.
This post was edited on 7/28/18 at 4:24 pm
Posted on 7/28/18 at 4:25 pm to DavidTheGnome
11 years and counting behind schedule and $8.3 billion over budget. 
Posted on 7/28/18 at 4:27 pm to DavidTheGnome
Turns out, NG engineered the new EBR Parish library, too.
Posted on 7/28/18 at 4:29 pm to High C
Milk that government teat.
Posted on 7/28/18 at 4:31 pm to DavidTheGnome
quote:
significantly impede and impair the relationship between NASA and Northrop Grumman,”
Who gives a shite?
Posted on 7/28/18 at 4:35 pm to sec13rowBBseat28
quote:
11 years and counting behind schedule and $8.3 billion over budget.
How does that even happen? At some point does the government not say frick it and cut off the money and cut your losses? People should go to jail for shite like that.
Posted on 7/28/18 at 4:36 pm to IAmNERD
quote:
At some point does the government not say frick it and cut off the money and cut your losses?
No. See F-35 program for example.
Posted on 7/28/18 at 4:37 pm to IAmNERD
They are using that money on other offbooks projects (along with kickbacks).
Posted on 7/28/18 at 4:41 pm to shutterspeed
quote:And I-10 Eastbound in Baton Rouge.
Turns out, NG engineered the new EBR Parish library, too.
Posted on 7/28/18 at 4:43 pm to DavidTheGnome
quote:
When asked whether Northrop Grumman would be absorbing the costs for its latest round of mistakes, totaling around $800 million, Bush said that such a move would “significantly impede and impair the relationship between NASA and Northrop Grumman,” and that it “would be the wrong approach.”
It takes a big set of balls to say something like that
Posted on 7/28/18 at 4:47 pm to DavidTheGnome
I watched an episode of "Whistleblower" last night and it was about a guy who worked for Northrop. They don't seem to be the most ethical company..
About the episode
About the episode
Posted on 7/28/18 at 4:51 pm to DavidTheGnome
The Atlantic article noted a couple of things that should be kept in mind though:
1. The $10 billion figure includes the cost of launching and operating the thing for five years.
2. Mission scope was considerably expanded after the original estimate. Of course that increases the cost. That's NASA's fault, not Northrup's.
3. The original estimate was made in 1996. Twenty years of inflation will boost that figure all by itself.
I'm not saying Northrup is blameless here, just pointing out that there's quite a bit more to the story than just "$500 million turned into $10 billion due to contractor screwups".
1. The $10 billion figure includes the cost of launching and operating the thing for five years.
2. Mission scope was considerably expanded after the original estimate. Of course that increases the cost. That's NASA's fault, not Northrup's.
3. The original estimate was made in 1996. Twenty years of inflation will boost that figure all by itself.
I'm not saying Northrup is blameless here, just pointing out that there's quite a bit more to the story than just "$500 million turned into $10 billion due to contractor screwups".
Posted on 7/28/18 at 4:53 pm to DavidTheGnome
quote:
would “significantly impede and impair the relationship between NASA and Northrop Grumman,”
So what? NASA has a piggy bank, you fricks would be shuttered and taken over by a more competent company
Posted on 7/28/18 at 4:56 pm to foshizzle
quote:
I'm not saying Northrup is blameless here, just pointing out that there's quite a bit more to the story than just "$500 million turned into $10 billion due to contractor screwups".
All the reasons you stated, should have been accounted for in the bid.
These are literally rocket scientists, in 1996. Not some dumb frick.
This is job security for 20+ years. Of course, I'd underbid and act indignant while blaming everything but me.
That's a fricking career.
Posted on 7/28/18 at 5:00 pm to foshizzle
Yeah the NASA folks probably share a good bit of blame here as well.
I worked for NG and a new class of ship was coming out and the original estimate was $650 million and it ended up being 1.1 billion. Scope and design changes will do that.
Of course NG fcked up a lot too
I worked for NG and a new class of ship was coming out and the original estimate was $650 million and it ended up being 1.1 billion. Scope and design changes will do that.
Of course NG fcked up a lot too
Posted on 7/28/18 at 5:03 pm to DavidTheGnome
quote:
Originally estimated to be $500 million and now the final cost is estimated to be $10 billion..? That’s absolutely ridiculous.
Yes, you can get all pissed off at Northrop Grumman for the mistakes, but, DAMNIT, why can't the people in charge of OUR money ever say enough is enough?!?
$500 million to $10 billion is just maddening. I would have "frick it" after it hit $600 million - a 20% cost overrun is huge, especially at those numbers.
ETA - Above was posted prior to reading all above threads, but my point remains: no one associated with FedGov gives a warm crap about the tax money they waste.
This post was edited on 7/28/18 at 5:08 pm
Posted on 7/28/18 at 5:13 pm to High C
quote:
So, they're refusing to absorb the costs of their own mistakes.
If it wasn't part of the contract, I wouldn't either. The question should be how the government can execute a contract in which the vendor can overrun the projected cost 20 times over and tell the taxpayer to deal with it.
Posted on 7/28/18 at 5:17 pm to mtntiger
quote:
$500 million to $10 billion is just maddening. I would have "frick it" after it hit $600 million - a 20% cost overrun is huge, especially at those numbers
Not really.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News