NASA swings budget axe, kills $400M+ VIPER lunar trundlebot
- Reference: 1721302094
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2024/07/18/viper_nasa_cancelled/
- Source link:
[1]
NASA [2]revealed last night that it would discontinue the development of the Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER) project. The trundlebot is pretty much complete, but rather than slog through testing before integration and launch, the US space agency has elected to cut its losses and cancel the project.
The plan is to strip the robot for parts, although NASA is open to offers from US industry or international partners to use the existing VIPER system "at no cost to the government." Interested parties had better move quickly, though – the agency "will consider expressions of interest" by August 1, and at some point after that, we assume, a sad-faced engineer will have a go at the rover with a screwdriver and pliers.
NASA [3]awarded the Astrobotic a Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) contract in 2020 to deposit VIPER on the Moon in 2023. The launch date then [4]slipped to 2024, and the most recent estimate for VIPER's readiness date was September 2025. The Astrobotic Griffin lander has also been delayed.
NASA said, "Continuation of VIPER would result in an increased cost that threatens cancellation or disruption to other CLPS missions." The Astrobotic Griffin Mission One will continue under the existing contract but will now only serve as a demonstration of the Griffin lander and its engines.
[5]
During a [6]briefing on July 17, Nicola Fox, associate administrator for NASA's Science Mission Directorate, described the move as "a really tough decision that we make in an uncertain budget environment."
[7]
[8]
Joel Kearns, deputy associate administrator for exploration in the Science Mission Directorate, noted that the budget for the rover was expected to exceed its baseline development costs by more than 30 percent, which automatically triggered a cancellation termination review in June.
[9]ESA starts work on planetary defence mission, because Bruce Willis is retired
[10]America's first private lunar lander suffers 'critical' fuel leak en route to Moon
[11]Crippled Peregrine lunar lander set for fiery return to Earth in matter of days
[12]NASA's VIPER is half-built, with launch plans for this year
The costs have risen over the years. When NASA forecast a landing at the end of 2023, US Congress was told the budget would be $433.5 million. When the landing slipped to the end of 2024, the budget rose to $505.4 million. The move to 2025 would have resulted in a budget of $609.6 million.
By canceling the rover at this point, NASA expects to save a minimum of $84 million. The figure would have risen if the late 2025 launch date was missed. This is because a nine- to 12-month wait would be needed for lighting conditions at the Moon's South Pole to be good enough for the mission.
As for the mortal remains of VIPER, NASA plans to use the trundlebot's instruments and components on future missions, in which many of the goals of VIPER are intended to be accomplished. NASA gave the example of the Polar Resources Ice Mining Experiment-1 (PRIME-1) as another that will search for water ice at the South Pole. ®
Get our [13]Tech Resources
[1] https://regmedia.co.uk/2022/07/20/nasa_viper_rover.jpg
[2] https://www.nasa.gov/news-release/nasa-ends-viper-project-continues-moon-exploration/
[3] https://www.theregister.com/2020/06/12/nasa_signs_up_astrobotic/
[4] https://www.theregister.com/2024/01/02/nasas_viper_is_halfbuilt/
[5] 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=2Zpk8HFhF5loWgU5MVhduygAAAJc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[6] https://www.youtube.com/live/Hd2ES2H6UQc?si=_D2gpO4rWcww98Y1
[7] 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=44Zpk8HFhF5loWgU5MVhduygAAAJc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[8] 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=33Zpk8HFhF5loWgU5MVhduygAAAJc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2024/07/17/esa_ramses_prelim_approval/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2024/01/08/astrobotic_lunar_lander_failure/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2024/01/15/peregrine_lunar_lander_return/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2024/01/02/nasas_viper_is_halfbuilt/
[13] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Custom components?
Reading some of the analysis by Scott Manley on twitter, he says NASA have already paid for the rocket launch and they're going to put a lump of concrete mass simulator in the rocket. Why not just throw the lander in there untested? If it works, great! If it doesn't, what have you lost? I bet a lot of the cost of the lander isn't the components but the paperwork.
Re: Custom components?
If they expect to find problems and to have to make changes from the testing then skipping the testing is likely to result in some embarrassing failure. Stuck at a 90 degree angle to the lunar surface or something. Saving the embarrassment is probably worth a lot to NASA and there's costs in running the mission besides the hardware too - staff running the mission, mostly.
Re: Custom components?
Because rockets vibrate during launch. If that breaks the rover, then that may destroy the rocket during launch. For example, debris hitting the rocket, or a rover battery explosion due to a short or mechanical damage. It may also destroy any other payloads, even if the rocket survives.
You can't launch without a successful vibration test.
You also have to test that the radios and other electronics on the rover won't interfere with the rocket or other payloads, possibly destroying or damaging them or stopping them from working at a critical time. Or accidentally jamming the communication of some other payloads with Earth. In particular, note that jamming the rockets self destruct system may mean that an out of control rocket can't be destroyed before it hits a populated area, causing deaths. And rockets being loaded contain explosives that could be set off by RF transmissions, causing deaths of launch team people.
So again, you can't launch without successful EMC compatibility testing and analysis.
You also have to know that the rover isn't going to start doing anything until you command it. If it suddenly starts doing something it shouldn't, then that may destroy or damage the rocket or other payloads. That requires testing of the electronics and software.
So that's more testing that you can't skip.
You might think that I am being over cautious. I can assure you that I have done this, and launch providers really ARE this cautious.
Re: Custom components?
I wondered whether the parts themselves might not be obsolete by the time they came to be used? Although I do appreciate analogies between NASA hardware and consumer electronics is - at best -imperfect.
Re: Custom components?
Depends what you mean by "obsolete". Will there be better components available? Without a doubt. Will that prevent the rover from doing what it was designed to do? Not in the slightest.
Curiosity (for example) is coming up to its 12th year of its 2 year mission.
"an uncertain budget environment"
Curious. I thought your budget environment was pretty certain : shrinking.
NASA wastes so much money
Hardly surprising as they waste so much money on non-reusable rockets and farcical Boeing.
The axe had to fall somewhere.
So you've paid for the thing, which has been constructed, and you've paid for the rocket to deliver it but you're cancelling it because testing would be too expensive?
How many millions of dollars of taxpayers' money have NASA already spent that they have now decided just to throw in the bin? If I were an American taxpayer I'd be pissed.
I know it would be considered 'dead weight' and never make it past the design committee, but a pair of huge googly eyes stuck on the front would be an amazing addition.
Call them, "Superfluous Autonomously Articulated Lunar Observation Augmentation Apparatus" Primary A and Backup B. No power required.
Blame It On The Boden
Yet they still haven't cancelled SLS.
Custom components?
I don't know how it works in the space industry, but I would not imagine they can use off the shelf parts, and usually when a custom fit one is made its very difficult to properly integrate it into a different design that wasn't made for it originally.
I'm glad its not a total waste... Mostly, but I dont think its as easy as they say.
Likely more akin to fitting Samsung parts into an iPhone. Might be made to work, but not as well as either original.