The NASA Office of Inspector General has published a report on the agency's management of the lunar Human Landing System (HLS) contracts, highlighting the risks and arguments behind the scenes.

The [1]report commends NASA's handling of the contracts, which were awarded to Blue Origin and SpaceX for vehicles Artemis astronauts will use to reach the lunar surface. However, it also notes the risks accepted in the endeavor and points out the challenges posed by Starship's height.

Where the Apollo lunar module was 23 feet tall, SpaceX's Starship stands at 171 feet, "about the equivalent of a 14-story-tall commercial building," according to the report. On the Apollo 15 mission, the lander settled at an approximate 11° tilt. For Artemis, NASA has said the tilt must not exceed 8°, although navigating the terrain of the lunar South Pole will present a challenge.

[2]

"There is a risk," the report noted, "that [Starship's] momentum will continue after landing, causing it to tip over."

[3]

[4]

Then there is the issue of the crew compartment, which is approximately 115 feet off the ground and requires an elevator to get to and from the surface. If the elevator fails, there is no other way for the crew to get back into the vehicle.

At 53 feet tall, Blue Origin's Blue Moon lander is also taller than the Apollo vehicle, but unlike SpaceX, the crew compartment is considerably closer to the ground, allowing a ladder/stair arrangement.

[5]

For piloting the spacecraft, NASA's requirements call for the crew to be able to take manual control of the vehicle during all phases of flight. SpaceX's focus on automation, according to the report, might result in the company requesting a waiver of the manual control requirement to meet the schedule.

Such a waiver is not unheard of. SpaceX was granted a similar one under the Commercial Crew Program, but that was based on considerable experience with the Dragon freighter. Starship has yet to reach orbit, let alone venture anywhere near the lunar surface.

[6]Musk admits Starship V3 launch date has slipped as Super Heavy booster rolls into place

[7]China browses lunar landing spots in race to land on Moon

[8]NASA abandons delayed SLS upper stage for ULA's Centaur V instead

[9]Ex-NASA chief gives Isaacman's Moon reboot a thumbs up, stays schtum on the awkward bits

As for Blue Moon, "key decisions on Blue Origin's manual control design have yet to be made."

The report also highlighted NASA's departure from "Test Like You Fly" principles. At first glance, the requirement for uncrewed demonstrations of both the Starship-based HLS and Blue Origin's lander is a good way of ensuring the hardware performs as expected. However, the demonstration won't require life support systems to work, and won't check out the airlock, for example. Although NASA later added a requirement that demonstration landers be able to ascend from the lunar surface, it did not require docking with Orion or the Gateway in lunar orbit.

Indeed, SpaceX does not even plan to reach orbit, let alone demonstrate the elevator, which is deemed a "top risk" by the HLS program.

[10]

So, while successfully landing on the Moon will be an impressive technological feat, the demonstrations will not reduce the risk of subsequent missions as much as planners would like since the versions designed for humans will deviate significantly.

NASA agreed with the report's recommendations, including those around manual piloting (consult with the Commercial Crew Program) and crew survival analyses (include strategies for extended crew survival).

An addendum noted that the report did not cover the recent NASA announcement of in-space testing of the vehicles in Low Earth Orbit as part of a revised Artemis III mission in 2027. ®

Get our [11]Tech Resources



[1] https://oig.nasa.gov/office-of-inspector-general-oig/audit-reports/nasas-management-of-the-human-landing-system-contracts/

[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2abGftOBacxEB6H7RLVPsSwAAAMM&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/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44abGftOBacxEB6H7RLVPsSwAAAMM&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/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33abGftOBacxEB6H7RLVPsSwAAAMM&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/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44abGftOBacxEB6H7RLVPsSwAAAMM&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[6] https://www.theregister.com/2026/03/10/spacex_gets_a_starship_booster/

[7] https://www.theregister.com/2026/03/09/china_browses_lunar_landing_spots/

[8] https://www.theregister.com/2026/03/09/nasa_centaur_v_sls/

[9] https://www.theregister.com/2026/03/04/former_nasa_administrator_endorses_artemis/

[10] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33abGftOBacxEB6H7RLVPsSwAAAMM&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[11] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/