NASA Seeks Backup Plan for Carrying Astronauts to the Moon (cnn.com)
- Reference: 0179930880
- News link: https://science.slashdot.org/story/25/11/01/1737240/nasa-seeks-backup-plan-for-carrying-astronauts-to-the-moon
- Source link: https://www.cnn.com/2025/11/01/science/nasa-moon-lunar-lander-options
> [C]iting delays in Starship's development and competitive pressure from China, NASA asked SpaceX and Blue Origin — which holds a separate lunar lander contract with the space agency — to submit plans to expedite development of their respective spacecraft by October 29. Both companies have responded. But the space agency is also asking the broader commercial space industry to detail how they might get the job done more quickly, hinting that NASA leadership is prepared to sideline its current partners. CNN spoke with half a dozen companies about how they plan to respond to NASA's call to action, which the agency will formally issue once the government shutdown ends, according to a source familiar with the matter.
One possibility is Lockheed Martin...
> Notably, as a legacy NASA contractor, the company built the [2]$20.4 billion Orion spacecraft that astronauts will ride when they take off from Earth... Now, Lockheed says it can piece together a two-stage lunar lander that uses spare parts harvested from Orion. The company would make use of Space Shuttle-era OMS-E engines — which are also [3]used on Orion — to serve as the propulsion for an "ascent stage" of the lunar lander, providing the thrust for the vehicle to lift off the moon after a mission is completed. But the vehicle also needs a descent stage to get down to the lunar surface in the first place...
>
> Other commercial space companies contacted by CNN — including Firefly Aerospace and Northrop Grumman — said simply that they were "ready to support" NASA in its endeavor to find a faster way to complete the Artemis III mission. They did not confirm whether they would formally respond to the space agency's anticipated request for companies to submit proposals.
The more important goal, argue some experts, is to pave the way for a permanent lunar base where astronauts can live and work...
> [P]erhaps the true winner will be the country that is able to build lasting infrastructure, experts say. "It makes great press fodder to frame this as competition," said one space policy source, who was among several that spoke to CNN on the condition of anonymity to discuss controversial issues. "But this is about the long game and the sustainability."
[1] https://www.cnn.com/2025/11/01/science/nasa-moon-lunar-lander-options
[2] https://www.planetary.org/space-policy/cost-of-sls-and-orion
[3] https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/news/features/2022/how-the-propulsion-system-of-orion-steers-us-to-the-moon.html
Blue Origin? (Score:3)
I'm still puzzled that Blue Origin is being selected for anything more than a carnival ride. They can't seem to much more than fly rich people 66 miles up and do a less than soft landing (looking at the videos).
I recognize that BE-4 had one flight with a payload but damn at this rate I can't see them doing much to impact actual space activities.
What am I missing here?
Re: (Score:3)
This is the effect of certain "present" a certain CEO gave to the king Taco.
Re: (Score:3)
We can joke about the 66 miles up (and should sometimes) but they have done it which is still something and also it means they have all the requisites behind that; a factory, safety and manufacturing procedures, ground equipment, life support, launch platform leases, already ITAR compliant, etc etc. They are in fact a real aerospace company. Now that doesn't mean they're a good aerospace company but that's on them to prove out.
At the very least between New Glenn and ULA Vulcan they're a real engine produc
This race was won in 1969 (Score:2)
The United States won the race to send humans to the moon 56 years ago. We stopped going because the program cost over 500 billion dollars in today's money and it was unclear what more we were going to get out of it. Sue, we all thought that once we made it to the Moon, Mars would be the next step. But the technology just wasn't there and what would we accomplish sending humans that robots could not? So I fail to see what the urgency is here, and it seems unlikely any company will produce spacecraft fas
Trump has overruled this directive (Score:2)
Trump says the CEO of any contractor who fails to deliver on time shall engage in gladiator combat in a new, beautiful, ornate coliseum - we're looking at replacing the West Wing. Did Y'know Musk already has a centurion outfit? he's all set to go.
Re: (Score:3)
> Trump says...
He says a LOT of things. Here he is in 2013 on [1]avoiding a government shutdown [youtube.com]:
> Interviewer: If you were president, what would you do?
> Trump: Very simple. You have to get everybody in a room. You have to be a leader. The president has to lead. ... I actually think the president would be blamed. If there is a shutdown, I think it would be a tremendously negative mark on the president of the United States. He's the one who has to get people together. ... So I really think the pressure is on the president.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbmNrht9QFE
And ... (Score:2)
> NASA Seeks Backup Plan for Carrying Astronauts to the Moon
Carrying them back? Eh, whatever. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
First mummies on the moon.
Guys we can't feed hungry children (Score:2)
We're not going to the moon. A few billion dollars will go into a slush fund for a couple of the billionaires out there. Nothing will come of it because that's what happens when you elect crooks with rap sheets a mile long and a history of pedophilia inside the Epstein files.
If you want to bring back actual space travel you're going to have to bring back competency and honesty.
That was kind of problem. Last election say what you love about Joe Biden and Kamala Harris but they never once lied to me.
Re: (Score:2)
> I'm guessing they don't think the right wing media will allow even the whitest of lies from a Democrat anymore.
Haha media won’t even allow democrats to tell the truth anymore. It’s surprising because democrats have been paid opposition for decades, Chuck Schumer won’t even acknowledge Mamdami because of the lack of bribes and billionaire money, so much for vote blue no matter who.
They's better (Score:2)
...make backup plans to bring astronauts BACK from the Moon, since Boeing can't even bring people back from a couple of hundred miles up.
Subcontract to the Chinese (Score:2)
They seem to be doing well. I'm sure they would give you a lift.
Fascetious (Score:2)
> Subcontract to China
I know this is facetious, but its really the right question. What do we have to gain from this pseudo-competition that we wouldn't get by partnering with China? And what is China going to learn by doing it ahead us that we don't already know.
I suspect the answer has more to do with these space companies balance sheet than any real benefits for the rest of us.
Why the hurry? (Score:3)
I get that NASA wants to beat China or whatever. But this isn't the Cold War. Plus, we have been there multiple times already. China is looking for try #1.
So why the hurry?
Increase risk. Probably increase cost. And for what? Specifically?
What tangible and specific reason, other than "beat China", is there to get there say, six months earlier than otherwise?
Why?
Re: (Score:2)
Because Trump said so.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because America's Mad King is interested in a moon-landing only insofar as it is done in his name, for his ego and gratification. If the moon-landing isn't by, for, and about him, he doesn't give a damn about it. And if SpaceX takes too long, he will have exited the stage (thanks to human mortality, if nothing else) before it happens. Thus the urgent need for an alternative.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed! Why hurry? The US was the first there, that is not going to be forgotten. Let the Chinese have their victory. It would be well deserved. Congratulate them! Took em long enoug.
OK, if you really want to give the magas their little victory... let the US landing take place in the same spot as the Chinese landing. Rip their flag out of the lunar soil. Replace it with a big beautiful American flag. (Twice as high!) Bring the Chinese flag back to earth and put it in a museum in Washington DC.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not necessarily reading this as they want to advance the timeline but perhaps facing reality that as Artemis III is set for sometimes in 2027 and that the SLS and Orion capsules for that mission are well underway (and the ESA already delivered it's service module) is that the landing systems may be what ends up holding the launch date back, which the idea that SLS is on schedule is kinda funny.