New Problem for NASA's 'Lunar Gateway': Corrosion in Two Modules Caused by Supplier
- Reference: 0182945672
- News link: https://science.slashdot.org/story/26/04/26/0815214/new-problem-for-nasas-lunar-gateway-corrosion-in-two-modules-caused-by-supplier
- Source link:
"But this week, we learned another reason that Gateway is going away, [2]and it's pretty shocking ."
> During testimony before the US House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, Isaacman faced questions about NASA's budget... He then publicly confirmed rumors ( [3]reported last month by Ars ) that there is corrosion in both the HALO [Habitation and Logistics Outpost] and I-HAB modules of the Gateway. "The only two habitable volumes that were delivered — both were corroded," Isaacman said. "And that's unfortunate because it would have delayed, probably beyond 2030, the application of Gateway...."
>
> In a statement, Northrop confirmed the issue as well. "Using NASA-approved processes, Northrop Grumman is completing repairs to HALO after a manufacturing irregularity," a company spokesperson told Ars . "We expect to complete repairs by the end of the third quarter. HALO can still be repurposed for any mission, and it's the most mature technology to support a deep space or lunar habitat." By referring to a "manufacturing irregularity," Northrop answered the central mystery here: how corrosion could appear in both modules. This is because a French-Italian space and defense company, Thales Alenia Space, built the primary structure of HALO for Northrop Grumman. The module was delivered from Italy to the United States [4]about a year ago
>
> Thales is a powerhouse of the European space industry. It built several pressurized modules of the International Space Station, and it's working with Axiom Space to build its commercial space station. The company also had a big piece of the Lunar Gateway in addition to HALO, developing the I-HAB module and a future communications and refueling module known as ESPRIT... After the issue was discovered, the European Space Agency established a "tiger team" to investigate. "Based on the investigation and available data, the corrosion issue was understood to be technically manageable and did not constitute a showstopper for I-HAB, which was, in any case, in better conditions than HALO from [a] corrosion point of view," the spokesperson said...
>
> After publication of this story on Friday, Axiom Space confirmed that it has also experienced corrosion issues. In a statement, the company said: "Axiom Space has experienced a similar phenomenon with the first module; we are leveraging the expertise of NASA and Thales Alenia Space to address the issue. [5]Module 1 is on track to launch in 2028."
[1] https://arstechnica.com/space/2026/03/nasa-kills-lunar-space-station-to-focus-on-ambitious-moon-base/
[2] https://arstechnica.com/space/2026/04/well-this-is-embarrassing-the-lunar-gateways-primary-modules-are-corroded/
[3] https://arstechnica.com/space/2026/03/what-happens-next-with-nasas-plan-to-replace-the-iss-source-it-could-get-ugly/
[4] https://www.nasa.gov/missions/artemis/nasa-welcomes-gateway-lunar-space-stations-halo-module-to-us/
[5] https://www.planetary.org/space-images/module-1-at-the-international
Be prepared (Score:2)
This is why NASA always packs a tin of Bondo with the mission supplies.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget the duct tape!!!
Re: (Score:2)
and bubble gum!
Alloy exposed to salty, humid sea air (Score:5, Informative)
ClippyAI: The alloy at the center of the Gateway controversy is Aluminum-Lithium 2195. The very chemical properties that make 2195 high-performing also make it vulnerable to Stress Corrosion Cracking (SCC). HALO was manufactured in Turin, Italy, and then shipped across the Atlantic to the United States. Exposure to salty, humid sea air is a worst-case scenario for this alloy.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for your research. I was in the process of looking up more info when I came across your comment. I'll criticize the Slashdot editors a bit here because TFS has ZERO technical details on the corrosion problem. But to be fair to them, even the Ars article is uncharacteristically light on technical detail.
is it just my perception, or is there a striking trend even in the tech press toward dumbing things down instead of giving readers an opportunity to learn more and to extend their grasp of technical an
Re: (Score:2)
> is it just my perception, or is there a striking trend even in the tech press toward dumbing things down instead of giving readers an opportunity to learn more and to extend their grasp of technical and scientific matters? Stretching our minds is good, and details are important, dammit!
it is not your imagination. I think it's that this article like many of its ilk are basically a summary of a press release or a few competing ones and a quick smattering of context from a web search, but without much independent further investigation.
Probably it's a throughput and tight turnaround. Definitely nothing like old school Scientific American or Nat Geo articles, but those were magazines on monthly scale and even economist, etc were weekly whereas even these secondary articles are just a few
Re: (Score:2)
Once upon a time a science journalist would have some background in science, a business journalist would have some background (or at least education) in business, a technology journalist etc. Those days are long gone, in the modern era having done any honest work for a living is seen as a 'resume stain' (the same is true of corporate executives).
Re: (Score:2)
One has to wonder why nobody saw this coming. Everywhere this thing is going to be before it's in space (Florida or South Texas) is humid and salty.
I'm going to call bullshit (Score:2)
Claim: "The alloy at the center of the Gateway controversy is Aluminum-Lithium 2195"
True: 2195 is sometimes used in space hardware.
WTF: A web search ("habitation and logistics outpost" "2195") turns up nothing.
Claim: "Exposure to salty, humid sea air is a worst-case scenario for this alloy."
True: Salt spray induces corrosion in many metals, aluminum alloys included. 2195 has poor corrosion resistance.
WTF:
* It's not like they left this thing sitting out on deck while crossing the ocean.
* [1]Here's a picture of [arstechnica.com]
[1] https://arstechnica.com/space/2026/04/well-this-is-embarrassing-the-lunar-gateways-primary-modules-are-corroded/
"Jobs Program" (Score:2)
"Don't worry about NASA spending," they say, "it's a jobs program and all the money goes back to Congressional districts."
> French-Italian space and defense company
What total horseshit this whole thing is. The only district getting paid is the place where the MIC C-suites have their McMansions.
They can't even seal their shipping containers as well as Chinese consumer goods manufacturers loading up container ships.
Next time get Walmart to handle shipping. I haven't seen corroded goods since I got a $9 to
Re: (Score:2)
The units in question are a little larger than a toaster. They were most likely shipped as deck cargo on a freighter. The usual procedure for something like this is to coat it with cosmoline, which is basically a petroleum wax and has been the standard for this sort of thing for over a century. Its only drawback is that it is not always easy to remove. Either the unit was apparently not properly protected from the environment or that was not sufficient for these super high-tech alloys. Reading the arti
Re: (Score:2)
Be interesting to see what some actual reporting finds out here because it just seems so silly if this is true. I would imagine considering the cost and time it takes to make these things that it would be shipped in atmosphere controlled environment.
If you can afford to build it you can afford to make a shipping enclosure for it, something that is not at all uncommon for high value goods. If you are relying on the shipper to maintain the condition of your goods then you've kinda already lost.
Re: (Score:2)
TFA has a paragraph buried in the middle that suggests it's more complicated than that..
> “Following the identification of corrosion on HALO, a comprehensive investigation was promptly initiated,” a European Space Agency spokesperson said. “Preliminary findings indicate that the issue likely results from a combination of factors, including aspects of the forging process, surface treatment, and material properties.”
Re: (Score:2)
Ahh ok thank you, that tracks a lot more. About what I would expect but not nearly as salacious.
Re: (Score:2)
Up front admission - I know nothing about manned spaceflight procedures. I do know a little about NASA's satellite procedures. Every component has to go through extensive review of how it's made, how it's stored and how it's shipped with estimates of the amount and type of contamination caused in each step. They wouldn't be smearing petroleum goo over the parts I've heard about. Of course those parts were much smaller and easier to ship with climate control.
aye-talian (Score:2)
I-talian fancy vehicles are known to spend most of their time in the shop.
Easy solution (Score:2)
> ... there is corrosion in both the HALO and I-HAB modules of the Gateway.
Corrosion resistant components are extra-cost option, but come standard on the HALO Pro and I-HAB Pro (and up) models, a NGC spokesperson noted. The Touring and Sport models also come with wood and leather interior trim.
The bigger problem was the Gateway idea itself (Score:2)
The Apollo program had no need for a moon-orbiting space station. The Saturn V launch vehicle, and the CSM and LM were properly designed and sized for the planned missions, and those planned missions were scoped to be what was possible with the tech of the day. Three people were going, so the CSM was sized for three. Two people were landing, so the LM was sized for two. The tech of the day could not withstand an approx 340 hour lunar night, so all landings would be etirely during lunar day. Fuel requirement
Northrop answered the central mystery here: (Score:2)
Not that I can see, seems like the subject just got changed!
"By referring to a "manufacturing irregularity," Northrop answered the central mystery here: how corrosion could appear in both modules. This is because a French-Italian space and defense company, Thales Alenia Space, built the primary structure of HALO for Northrop Grumman."
But then I am sure everyone has already been paid so who cares why defective products were delivered.
Sometimes the subcontracting is political (Score:1)
> Who knew cutting corners due to reduced budgets would have consequences? This is exactly why doors were falling out of Boeing planes. Sub contracting out to save a buck.
Sometimes the subcontracting is political. The project must be an International effort.
Re: Northrop answered the central mystery here: (Score:2)
Not just paid, paid time and a half. But don't worry they'll keep writing invoices since they need to work on it well into Q3.
Re:Northrop answered the central mystery here: (Score:5, Informative)
While you had to read further on and also between the lines, they did answer the question of how both modules had corrosion.
The structure element of both the HALO and I-HAB modules were built by one sub-contractor: Thales Alenia Space. And the source of the corrosion came from that one sub contractor.
Agreed that at first I thought the "central question" was how did it happen, but apparently the "central question" in this context was how more than one piece of hardware have corrosion. By identifying the single source for the corrosion on both modules, then can then figure out the how it came about and why it wasn't uncovered in the manufacturing process.
I have fairly low standards for journalism, and this one is, sadly, below what I'd expect. I wouldn't rule out this being written mostly by a LLM. I did watch the part of the hearing where Isaacman mentioned the corrosion, and it didn't seem to a big deal during the hearing, as in "stop the press!" type revelation. And the fact that its being repaired seems to indicate it didn't compromise the entire structure where it would need to be thrown onto the scrap heap. This could be just the tip of the iceberg of issues with Gateway that would have pushed it well past 2030.
I would say though that removing the Gateway element from the moon landing goal actually makes things simpler by removing the "rest stop" if you will from the picture. Apollo didn't need something like Gateway to land on the moon. Just skip the rest stop and go directly to your destination. And if you don't need to stop at the rest stop, don't build the rest stop at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok I kinda understand now! thxs I scanned the articles and didn't catch on.