News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Oroville Dam: Cost to repair spillways nearly doubles in price to $500M. Parent comment

Re:Oroville Dam: Cost to repair spillways nearly doubles in ... by JumpCrisscross on Saturday October 21, 2017 @10:59PM (#15524930)
> Cost plus percentage gives a very clear incentive to raise costs; that's the only way you can get more profit

Case in point: SpaceX challenging the launch industry's cost-plus culture with publicly-posted fixed prices [1].

[1] http://www.spacex.com/about/capabilities

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Oroville Dam: Cost to repair spillways nearly doubles in ... by DrScump on Saturday October 21, 2017 @11:27PM (#15525027)
Case in point #2: the new Bay Bridge.

Case in point #0: the Space Shuttle (STS).

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Oroville Dam: Cost to repair spillways nearly doubles in ... by JumpCrisscross on Saturday October 21, 2017 @11:30PM (#15525030)
Sorry, you're citing the Space Shuttle [1] as a successful public procurement process?

[1] https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/382045main_19%20-%2020090730.11.STS...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Oroville Dam: Cost to repair spillways nearly doubles in ... by DrScump on Saturday October 21, 2017 @11:56PM (#15525092)
No, my cites relate to the parent comment:

  Cost plus percentage gives a very clear incentive to raise costs
Compare the original winning bid for the STS with the actual costs; I think they rose more than tenfold (and the per-flight cost rose more than that), IIRC.

And had the competing team won, the Challenger disaster never would have happened, because the solid-rocket boosters would have been manufactured as units and transported to the Cape by barge rather than having to be broken into small enough components to fit on rail cars.

[ Parent | on HN ]