This is entirely possible or probable. When the first large solar arrays were deployed on the ISS, they were balky and sticky, and they did not deploy smoothly. During deployment, there was some damage to the photo cells, because they had remained packed for longer than intended, due to delays. Several pieces of space equipment have a “shelf life,” for various reasons.

Lemuel Vargas wrote: “A delay would be a good idea because once the Webb Telescope launches, there is no possibility of it being repaired once in space”

This is true for almost everything that we have ever launched. The ability for repair or maintenance is rare, and rarer still for unmanned spacecraft. At some point, Webb has to launch in order to be useful, so as with every other piece of equipment ever launched, they have to do their best effort before launch, then take the chance that they did it right. If we, as a nation, aren’t willing to take that chance, after all this expense, then the project was not worth spending the resources on, and we could have done a whole lot of other science instead.

Webb’s delay is because they “underestimated the scale of the job.” This shows that the management of the project is poor. It may have been poor from the beginning.

Making mistakes while preparing the telescope also shows either poor understanding of the telescope’s requirements (the plan was followed but was incorrect for the task) or poor workmanship (someone didn’t follow the plan).

One of NASA’s problems is that they tend to make unique satellites and probes, so everything they do is development and test. Developing something new just takes time, and unexpected things can go wrong. Webb, however, is taking much longer and is farther over budget than we should expect.

I have worked on commercial communication satellites, which we could build, test, and fly fairly quickly (about 30 months from contract signature), because very little was unique and everything had already been developed. Very little went so wrong that it took longer.

I also have worked on spacecraft science instruments for NASA, and these tended to be entirely unique, taking several years to develop, build, and test before launch. Back then, however, NASA was better managed, was not set adrift nor had strategic confusion (as have been the case, this past decade), and was fairly able to keep close to the schedule.

That company will have to have good financial backing and experienced people working for it.

Space X as an example.

And that explains that.