Lesson 2 of 4 · Milestones, money and evidence
Milestones, money and evidence
6 minute lesson · 3 checks along the way
Your goal for this lessonEvaluate technical and financial milestones without treating either as a substitute for the other.
In this lesson 3 sections · 3 checks
Read & understand
Agreements connect payment to evidence
COTS used funded Space Act Agreements with agreed milestones. NASA and its partners shared development responsibilities and costs. A milestone gives reviewers something specific to accept: the relevant design review, test or financing achievement. It is more informative than simply counting months since an announcement.
For an original classroom example, suppose a partner earns 10 units after a design review and 20 after an engine test. Completing the review supports the first payment. It does not prove the engine test passed, even if both activities appear on the same schedule. The evidence should match the milestone being claimed.
Check 1 of 3
10 pointsUse the reading above. You can try again without losing points.
Read & understand
Rocketplane Kistler shows the financing boundary
SpaceX and Rocketplane Kistler were the initial funded selections in 2006. Rocketplane Kistler’s financing difficulties ultimately led NASA to terminate its agreement in October 2007. Orbital Sciences was selected in the second competition in 2008. The sequence matters: this was a changed set of development partners, not three completed delivery systems.
A design can be technically plausible and still lack the resources needed to build and test it. Conversely, a well-funded project can fail a technical requirement. These are connected risks, but they require different evidence. A bank commitment does not measure engine performance; a successful engine firing does not establish the next year’s payroll.
Keep three risks visible
Original teaching diagram: technical success, financing and schedule exposure need separate evidence.
Open full-size diagram in a new tab: Keep three risks visibleCheck 2 of 3
10 pointsUse the reading above. You can try again without losing points.
Read & understand
Schedule overlap creates exposure
NASA’s Inspector General examined the overlap between development and preparations for operational cargo flights in its June 2013 audit. Paying for work on later vehicles before demonstrations finish can reduce waiting time if development succeeds. It also exposes that work to changes revealed by testing.
Imagine two unfinished follow-on vehicles using a valve that a demonstration later shows must be redesigned. Starting them early may save schedule time, but rework can erase part of that gain. The review question is not simply “early or late?” It is which uncertainties remain, how expensive they are to reverse and what continued station supply requires.
Check 3 of 3
10 pointsUse the reading above. You can try again without losing points.
Put it together
Your lesson progress
Each check connects to a part of the story. Complete all 3 to earn your 25-point lesson bonus.
Explore further · Optional
Go to the source
Explore the evidence behind this lesson. These optional readings and videos open in a new tab.