Ex-NASA chief: China likely to land humans on Moon before Uncle Sam does again
- Reference: 1756989912
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2025/09/04/jim_bridenstine_nasa_moon/
- Source link:
The problem, [1]according to Jim Bridenstine , is the architecture NASA selected to return to the Moon, and in particular the choice of SpaceX's Starship to land humans on the regolith.
Bridenstine waved away the issues with NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) – the massive rocket intended to launch humans to the Moon – noting that "it has been expensive, it had overruns, but it's behind us."
[2]
Of the Orion capsule, which will be used to transport the crew from Earth and back again, Bridenstine said: "The Orion crew capsule is not only usable today, but ultimately the cost is going down because more and more of it is reusable every time we use the Orion crew capsule. Those two elements are in good shape."
[3]
[4]
What isn't in good shape is the architecture, including the choice of SpaceX's Starship. The former administrator listed the issues. First, there was the task of getting the Human Landing System (HLS) variant of Starship to the Moon, which would require an unknown number of launches from Earth to refuel it. "By the way," said Bridenstine, "that whole in-space refueling thing has never been tested either."
Then there is human-rating the HLS variant, a process that Bridenstine noted "hasn't even started yet." He continued, noting more issues with NASA's lunar architecture. How long could the HLS variant of Starship loiter in orbit around the Moon before the crew arrived? Was putting a crew on the surface of the Moon with no means of returning to the Orion spacecraft for seven days acceptable?
[5]
"The biggest decision in the history of NASA – at least since I've been paying attention – happened in the absence of a NASA administrator, and that decision was instead of buying a moonlander, we're going to buy a big rocket."
[6]Space Command gets Trumped out of Colorado, voting conspiracy cited
[7]White House nixes NASA unions amid budget uncertainty
[8]Unlike most of Musk's other ventures, Starship keeps it together for Flight Test 10
[9]Two scrubs, one Starship: Third time lucky for SpaceX?
Biggest decision? Maybe. Maybe not. Sending Apollo 8 around the Moon on the first crewed launch of a Saturn V would have to be up there, but Bridenstine's passion is undeniable.
"This is an architecture that no NASA administrator that I'm aware of would have selected had they had the choice. But it was a decision that was made in the absence of a NASA administrator. It's a problem. It needs to be solved."
The [10]decision was taken in 2021 . As well as SpaceX, Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin threw its hat into the ring alongside US-based Dynetics. At the time, NASA believed that choosing a single partner would reduce costs. Blue Origin later [11]sued NASA over the contract award.
Neither SpaceX nor Blue Origin was present at the hearing. Bridenstine also did not offer a solution to the problem.
[12]
The Register contacted NASA and SpaceX to comment and will update this piece should either respond. ®
Get our [13]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.youtube.com/live/vAY4gvrOTXQ?si=5FfRj8zEyRxonFUX
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2aLm3lAwV9xTAIU8KkPOBdgAAANc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aLm3lAwV9xTAIU8KkPOBdgAAANc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aLm3lAwV9xTAIU8KkPOBdgAAANc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aLm3lAwV9xTAIU8KkPOBdgAAANc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2025/09/03/trump_announces_move_of_space/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2025/09/01/nasa_unions_nixed/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/27/spacex_starship_flight_10/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/26/starship_scrubs/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2021/04/16/nasa_spacex_moon/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2021/08/16/blue_origin_lawsuit
[12] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aLm3lAwV9xTAIU8KkPOBdgAAANc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[13] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
I love the idea ...... unfortunately the moon is waning on that date, and only 5 days from a New Moon.
So unless they were going for 'footprints & flags', and taking off a short time after landing, then it's not a viable phase of the moon I'm afraid.
.
.
[edit] Unless they land on the far side of the Moon!!!!!
Now that really would trump the Merkins! Not only to reuse the date, but to go a step further in landing on the far side!
.
.
[edit squared] Forget this. I was thinking you meant the same date as Apollo 11.
Hang on!
Don't you mean 20th July 2029? I thought you meant the 60th anniversary of Apollo 11!
Did you pick that date for another reason?
I was thinking of 40 years on from the Tiananmen Square massacre.
In retrospect 20th July would have been far more amusing and certainly a good deal less macabre.
And?
Is this a problem? The US spent vast resources trying to achieve something nobody had ever done before, landing someone on the moon. They have been there, done that and spent a fortune. Now the Chinese may be able to do it at some point. If the US landed someone on the moon again what would it be for? What is the purpose?
Re: And?
The purpose is to have a permananet presence on the moon and 'control' it for the purposes of further expansion in the Solar System.
I doubt that the US will be going up there for the good of humanity (well, not in the current climate), but I doubt even less that China would.
Re: And?
> and 'control' it for the purposes of further expansion in the Solar System.
And control it for strategic reasons . Fixed it for you.
Why would anybody pay to "expand" in the Solar system if there isn't a guaranteed (short-term) return attached? Nobody would, and the proof is that while everybody talks about bases on the Moon or on Mars, no human has ever even left our orbit since the Apollo program half a century ago. Even the ISS is about to get scrapped, too expensive, not enough profit.
Let them find some (really) valuable resource on the Moon or on Mars and spaceships will be leaving daily... In the meantime the only group who doesn't care about spending huge amounts of money are the military.
Re: And?
I thought the new race was to be first to put a [1]nuclear reactor there?
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/08/nasa_boss_calls_for_nuclear/
Re: And?
Sure, but to do that you first have to get there, don't you...
Imagine landing there with your shiny moon reactor and seeing signs like "Chinese Nuclear Facility - Chinese Government property, no trespassing" all around you... :-D
Re: And?
Probably to put weapons on there. WE OWN THE MOON, yelled America.
Re: And?
"What is the purpose?"
Some ask the same of your posts, Madam. Not myself. I do so enjoy them.
"They have been there, done that"
Have they? Perhaps not. According to some conspiratorially minded people. Like yourself?
But Leon?
I thought that Mr Musk was going to land on the Moon and Mars next year with the USD2Trillion saved by DOGE?
Delta-v
I thought the current "solution" was partially down to SLS not having enough delta-v to get Orion into a low, circular orbit around The Moon (hence the strange orbit for the habitation module)?
Sticking something on top of a Superheavy might be simpler*, but it's not even on the design board.
* and a lot cheaper
Thanks Trump !
But you've always had a soft spot for dictators, right ?
And Xi is one of your three best friends (next to Putin and Kim Jong Un).
No s**t Sherlock
With the huge political interference in Nasa, it's impossible for Nasa to make sensible decisions.
My money is on a PRC landing on 6th June 2029. That won't be at all controversial.