Unavoidable, for sure, but by no means necessary.

One who is aware of her own hypocrisy is not a hypocrite but a cynic.

Strongly disagree.

"at all times" smuggles absolutes that render the foundation of this premise pointless.

"Being a moral person is a struggle in which everyone repeatedly fails."

Nonsense!
This assertion stinks of theism. In the x-tain theism world, you are born broken (original sin) and are weak and flawed. "Moral in the x-tain world is to do things that please god so when Jephthah killed and sacrificed (burnt offering) his young daughter (book of judges), to please his x-tain god, this is moral.

I have scruples or at least I like to believe that I do, morals be damned, they spring from religion that is deficient in both morals and scruples.

I’ve always told people that the worst thing that humans ever came up with was having expectations.
If you have expectations that are too high for others and yourself then you’ll always be let down.
Have them too low and you’ll never more out of yourself and other people but you’ll be surprised a lot easier.

So with that said I believe that hypocrisy is a byproduct of our expectations and mainly for those who expect to receive more than they are willing to give.

Or those with biases and prejudices who use hypocrisy to deny others while not eliminating any form of expectation.
But it’s just what I think

I think to many try overthinking what usually happens naturally. All morality is subjective to individuals and groups thoughts or beliefs about what is or isn't moral. A natural understanding of pain and anguish is the basis of our morality. No beliefs of gods have ever been needed for true morality. As far as the living up to ideals, pick the correct ideals of yours or of your groups so your not being an asshole. Now what happens when groups or individuals are assholes, they get cleaned or removed somehow......we all can be hypocritical of ourselved and others, as in all things, there's the degree that it is done.
It is a part of life as we know it....

Hypocrisy is generally defined as acting in contradiction to what we preach and to principles we claim to respect and practice.

Is it wise to preach or to have principles that cannot be sustained?

My own position is that my first principle and probably the only one is that I would consider myself a principled person ( for whatever it is worth) only when I am actually in line with a specific principle . I suppose it can be deduced that most of the time I am not going around being principled .... or unprincipled

You say, "Being a moral person is a struggle in which everyone repeatedly fails, becoming a hypocrite in each of those moments."

If you were to understand moral and Morality better, you would understand why everyone could be in part considered immoral.

Morality in part (as explained below) is dependent upon rules/laws imposed upon someone and their ability or lack of ability to follow those rules/laws. The issue about this part of morality is that rules/laws can be arbitrary.
arbitrary
based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.
"his mealtimes were entirely arbitrary"
(of power or a ruling body) unrestrained and autocratic in the use of authority.
"arbitrary rule by King and bishops has been made impossible"
With rules/laws being arbitrary this means that the fact of non-sense laws can affect the apparent morality level that a person has. I could argue that the traffic laws of a stop sign requiring a complete and total stop is at times not so hard set necessary for a driver given some situations. However, in view of such a law, the law itself does not care if the stop sign is out in the country 20 miles from any other stop sign and only 5 cars a day drive down the road. A local farmer living near the stop sign and not coming to a total complete stop ever time makes for the farmer to have technically a lower level of morality because the farmer "rolls" thru the stop sign because he can see for miles either way to know that no cars are crossing the intersection.
You say, "Richard Dawkins says that some people believe that they draw their morality from Science and some say you cannot draw morality form science."
Morality is defined as principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.
Principle is defined as a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning. www.lexico.com
Moral comes from the Latin word mores, for habits. The moral of a story is supposed to teach you how to be a better person. If moral is used as an adjective, it means good, or ethical. If you have a strong moral character, you are a good member of society. If someone is a cheat and a liar, you might say, "She is not a moral person." [vocabulary.com]
"... draw their morality from Science" Science is the study of nature. People do learn things from observation of nature.
Moral/morality is viewing the actions, activity, habits, etc. of a person and then comparing those to 2 different things.

1. First, those things are compared to standards, rules, or laws that establishes 'RIGHTS AND WRONGS".
   Example: The rules says: no chewing bubble gum while walking. Sue was seen chewing bubble gum while walking. Sue violated the rule. Sue would have low morals in view of the rule of "no chewing bubble gum while walking".
   OR
2. Second, those things are compared to good and bad (evil).
   Example: Sue walked while chewing bubble gum. While walking works out leg muscles it does not specifically work out facial muscles. Chewing gum gave the added benifit (good) for Sue to get her facial muscles worked out while walking. No one was harmed(suffered an evil) by the fact that Sue chewed bubble gum while walking. Sue would have high morals( good health habit) for chewing bubble gum while walking.
   Sue was immoral for violation of the rule but was moral in view of a health benefit.
   etymology moral(adj):
   mid-14c., "associated with or characterized by right behavior," also "associated with or concerning conduct or moral principles" (good or bad), from Old French moral (14c.) and directly from Latin moralis "proper behavior of a person in society," literally "pertaining to manners," coined by Cicero ("De Fato," II.i) to translate Greek ethikos (see ethics) from Latin mos (genitive moris) "one's disposition," in plural, "mores, customs, manners, morals," a word of uncertain origin. Perhaps sharing a PIE root with English mood (n.1).
   From late 14c. as "of or pertaining to rules of right conduct" (opposed to non-moral, amoral) and "morally good, in accordance with rules of right conduct" (opposed to immoral). Of persons, "habitually conforming to moral rules," 1630s. From 1680s with reference to rights, duties, etc., "founded on morality" (opposed to legal).
   Applied to indirect effect in moral support (1823), moral victory (1888), where the notion is "pertaining to or affecting the character or conduct" (as distinguished from the intellectual or physical nature), a sense attested from 1590s; in this sense, compare morale. Related: Morally.
   moral(noun):
   "moral exposition of a story, the doctrine inculcated by a fable or fiction, the practical lesson which anything is designed to teach," c. 1500, from moral (adj.) and from French moral and Medieval Latin moralia. In this sense, morality was used from late 14c. The earlier noun use of moral was "a commandment pertaining to morals."
   [etymonline.com]

Is hypocrisy the same as hypocrite?
is that hypocrite is someone who practices hypocrisy, who pretends to hold beliefs, or whose actions are not consistent with their claimed beliefs while hypocrisy is the claim or pretense of holding beliefs, feelings, standards, qualities, opinions, virtues or motivations that one does not actually possess.