In order to &#34;ensure that the United States leads in the new round of lunar competition,&#34; NASA Acting Administrator Bill Nelson suddenly announced on the 20th that due to serious delays by SpaceX in developing the lunar lander, NASA will reopen the bidding for the lunar lander development and seek new solutions from other companies. This move has caused a stir in the United States: What is happening with the U.S. &#34;Artemis&#34; manned lunar landing program? Is it still possible to change the &#34;main developer&#34; of the lunar lander at the last minute? Can the U.S. manned lunar landing plan for 2027 be realized?
<h2>Why is the lunar lander &#34;difficult to produce&#34;?</h2>
CNN reported on the 21st that Nelson believes that the development progress of SpaceX's lunar lander, under Elon Musk, is lagging behind, directly threatening whether the repeatedly delayed &#34;Artemis 3&#34; manned lunar mission can be completed by 2027. With China planning to achieve a manned lunar landing by 2030, NASA's goal of maintaining a leading position in human return to the moon missions is being challenged.
It is reported that the &#34;Artemis&#34; manned lunar landing program is the core of the U.S. &#34;return to the moon&#34; project. Unlike the &#34;direct launch&#34; mode of the U.S. &#34;Apollo&#34; manned lunar landing program in the 1960s, where the &#34;Saturn V&#34; rocket directly sent the &#34;Apollo&#34; spacecraft into a trans-lunar trajectory, the &#34;Artemis&#34; program's lunar mission plan is quite complex: the new generation &#34;Orion&#34; manned spacecraft carrying four astronauts and the lunar lander are launched separately, each heading to lunar orbit. After completing in-orbit docking, two astronauts carrying out the lunar landing mission enter the lunar lander, while the other two astronauts remain in the &#34;Orion&#34; spacecraft, continuing to orbit the moon; after the lunar lander soft lands on the lunar surface, the two astronauts who landed begin about a week of lunar surface exploration, and then take the lander's ascent stage back to lunar orbit to dock with the &#34;Orion&#34; spacecraft; finally, after all astronauts transfer to the spacecraft, the spacecraft discards the lander's ascent stage and executes the mission to return to Earth.
According to the &#34;USA Today&#34; website, the reason the &#34;Artemis&#34; manned lunar landing program adopts such a complex &#34;moon mission&#34; mode is due to the ambitious planning of the United States for the program: NASA not only wants to send American astronauts to the moon through the &#34;Artemis&#34; program but also plans to establish a &#34;Gateway&#34; space station in lunar orbit to provide transfer services for subsequent lunar and Mars exploration missions. Considering that future U.S. deep-space manned spacecraft will all go to the &#34;Gateway&#34; space station in lunar orbit for transfer and resupply, the &#34;Artemis&#34; program abandoned the &#34;direct launch&#34; mode of the &#34;Apollo&#34; program and chose the &#34;separate launch&#34; and &#34;in-orbit docking&#34; mode from the very beginning, which is a logical &#34;one-step completion.&#34;
<img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://img.huanqiucdn.cn/dp/api/files/imageDir/5e79b722a4295eee3749d5b3773fdbb0u5.jpg/query-aW1hZ2VWaWV3Mi8yL3cvMTI2MA?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/interlace,1/resize,w_1440,h_1440/quality,q_95/format,jpg" alt="" original-src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://img.huanqiucdn.cn/dp/api/files/imageDir/5e79b722a4295eee3749d5b3773fdbb0u5.jpg/query-aW1hZ2VWaWV3Mi8yL3cvMTI2MA"/> Rendering of the &#34;Blue Moon&#34; MK2 crewed lunar lander (Source: Blue Origin)
From an overall perspective, the &#34;Artemis&#34; manned lunar landing program involves three core components: the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket responsible for the launch mission, the Orion crewed spacecraft carrying astronauts, and the lunar lander executing the moon landing mission. However, all three components are currently experiencing varying degrees of technical failures and cost overruns, leading to repeated delays in the &#34;Artemis&#34; manned lunar landing program. Nevertheless, the SLS rocket and the Orion spacecraft completed reliability verification and technical integration during the uncrewed &#34;Artemis 1&#34; mission in November 2022, and they are scheduled to carry astronauts for a lunar flyby in the &#34;Artemis 2&#34; mission in 2026, while the lunar lander, which is the responsibility of SpaceX, remains &#34;out of reach.&#34;
According to the U.S. website &#34;Space,&#34; despite numerous criticisms, the overall design of the &#34;Artemis&#34; program can no longer be modified due to time and budget constraints. To ensure that the U.S. manned lunar landing timeline is not further delayed, the progress of the lunar lander is particularly critical.
According to SpaceX's plan, the lunar lander will be modified from the Starship spacecraft, which will first be launched into low Earth orbit and then several fully fueled Starship spacecraft will be launched to dock with it. After complex in-orbit refueling, it will then proceed to lunar orbit.
Reports from several U.S. media emphasize that currently, there is no successful experience of in-orbit refueling with cryogenic fuel, and considering that these fuels are prone to evaporation, it is also unknown how many Starship spacecraft will be needed for in-orbit refueling. SpaceX optimistically estimates that &#34;only a little over ten&#34; will be needed. However, a former NASA official told CNN that it may require as many as 20-40 in-orbit refuelings.
Adding to the complications, the current development of the Starship is also far behind schedule. According to the agreement signed between SpaceX and NASA, the lunar lander was supposed to complete verification tests by April 2025. However, the prototype Starship spacecraft is still in its early stages, and since 2025, the second-generation Starship has encountered three test flight failures, having only completed a few successful suborbital test flights. The third-generation Starship, which will perform the in-orbit refueling mission, has not yet had its maiden flight, let alone orbital test flights and the more critical in-orbit refueling fuel tests.
Moreover, the lunar lander, modified from the third-generation Starship, is not only responsible for delivering astronauts to the lunar surface but also needs to ignite and take off in a moon environment without a launch pad and filled with lunar dust, which is also a significant engineering challenge. Therefore, it is widely believed that SpaceX is almost unlikely to complete the development of the lunar lander and be ready by 2027.
Reuters reported that NASA's advisory team estimates that the project undertaken by SpaceX may be &#34;years behind schedule&#34; compared to the original plan.
<h2>Can &#34;Blue Moon&#34; Take on the Heavy Responsibility?</h2>
CNN reported that Duffy recently stated that Blue Origin could take over the development of the lunar lander from SpaceX. The high hopes placed on Blue Origin by NASA are not without reason. It was noted that in the lunar lander project bidding initiated by NASA in 2021, three teams participated: Blue Origin led the &#34;national team,&#34; which included traditional aerospace companies such as Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Draper
Dynetics, leading a &#34;small business team&#34; composed of 25 subcontractors, and SpaceX participating independently.
At that time, it was widely believed that the powerful &#34;national team&#34; had the highest chance of winning. The lunar lander proposed by the &#34;national team&#34; was named &#34;Integrated Lander Vehicle&#34; (ILV), consisting of three parts: the transfer stage (developed by Northrop Grumman), the descent stage (developed by Blue Origin), and the ascent stage (developed by Lockheed Martin). They were to be launched by the &#34;New Glenn&#34; or &#34;Vulcan&#34; rockets and assembled in lunar orbit or at the &#34;Gateway&#34; space station. NASA recognized the overall technical plan of the lunar lander proposed by the &#34;national team,&#34; but questioned its &#34;immature propulsion and communication systems, as well as the capabilities of third-party suppliers,&#34; ultimately leading to the project's failure in the bidding process. The lunar lander proposal from the &#34;small business team&#34; was similar to that of the &#34;national team,&#34; using a two-launch, in-orbit assembly model that met and exceeded all technical specifications set by NASA, but was ultimately eliminated.
The most complex and aggressive technical proposal for the lunar lander came from SpaceX, which unexpectedly won the bid, causing significant controversy in the U.S. aerospace community. Most U.S. analysts believed that SpaceX's ability to win the contract was not due to a more advanced or mature technical proposal, but rather because its bid (USD 2.9 billion) was far lower than that of its competitors: SpaceX's bid was only half that of the &#34;national team&#34; (USD 6 billion).
The outcome of the lunar lander project, which resulted in SpaceX being the sole winner, sparked strong dissatisfaction from Blue Origin. In response, Blue Origin filed a complaint with the U.S. Government Accountability Office, which was later dismissed. Blue Origin did not give up. In 2023, NASA proposed a revised lunar lander plan for the &#34;Artemis 5&#34; mission, with Blue Origin's crewed lunar lander, called &#34;Blue Moon&#34; MK2, ultimately winning the bid.
CNN reported that in response to Duffy's recent proposal, Blue Origin stated it was &#34;ready to provide support.&#34; Although the &#34;Blue Moon&#34; MK2 lander technically meets the requirements for the U.S. crewed lunar landing mission, U.S. Space News reported on the 20th that the lander is currently aimed at the &#34;Artemis 5&#34; mission scheduled for launch in the early 2030s, and its development progress is unlikely to surpass that of SpaceX. It was noted that another option for Blue Origin is to modify the uncrewed &#34;Blue Moon&#34; MK1 lunar lander. According to current plans, Blue Origin is expected to launch the &#34;Blue Moon&#34; MK1 lander for the first time this year, with an anticipated landing in the lunar south pole region. Additionally, Blue Origin is constructing a second &#34;Blue Moon&#34; MK1 lander, planning to send NASA's &#34;Viper&#34; lunar rover to the lunar surface in 2027. Although the production facilities for the &#34;Blue Moon&#34; MK1 lander are mostly complete, Blue Origin needs to achieve the modification from an uncrewed lander to a crewed lander and complete related reliability tests within the next two years, which is a very tight timeline.
<h2>Musk: &#34;SpaceX's progress is like lightning&#34;</h2>
In response to NASA's actions, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk stated, &#34;Compared to other companies, SpaceX's progress is like lightning. The 'Starship' will ultimately complete the entire lunar mission.&#34;
Musk's remarks are not without basis. American media noted that, apart from Blue Origin, almost no other American aerospace companies can immediately present a lunar lander plan, let alone complete its development before SpaceX.
Duffy indicated that, besides SpaceX and Blue Origin, NASA may also choose to open competitive opportunities to American aerospace companies that have not yet signed contracts. However, currently, only Lockheed Martin has responded in a statement, saying that the company is conducting &#34;significant technical and program analysis on the crewed lunar lander&#34; and is collaborating with cross-industry teams to respond to NASA's needs. CNN reported that Dynetics, which bid for the lunar lander project alongside Blue Origin and SpaceX in 2021, has not yet responded.
In fact, both Lockheed Martin and Dynetics are unable to independently undertake the development of a heavyweight aerospace project like the lunar lander, not to mention facing clear time and budget constraints. Even if they wanted to collaborate with other companies, just organizing and coordinating would take a considerable amount of time, making it difficult to meet NASA's requirements.
Some analysts believe that the current &#34;lunar program delay crisis&#34; in the U.S. is essentially a result of the overall decline in American aerospace development capabilities and the continuous reduction of NASA's investments in related fields. For example, the fundamental reason NASA abandoned the backup plan for the lunar lander project was that the U.S. Congress cut the project budget from $3.2 billion to $850 million in early 2021. NASA could not afford to fund two companies for development simultaneously, and even supporting the &#34;national team&#34; with a higher bid was impossible, forcing them to &#34;go all in&#34; on the lowest bid from SpaceX.
Additionally, apart from the troublesome lunar lander, the current extravehicular suits associated with the &#34;Artemis&#34; crewed lunar landing program are also facing delays, leading many American media outlets to believe that the &#34;Artemis 3&#34; mission is unlikely to be completed on schedule in 2027.
However, some analysts argue that this dire situation may actually be beneficial for SpaceX or other American aerospace companies, as it could provide additional development and testing time for the &#34;Artemis&#34; lunar lander.
Author of this article: Chen Yang, Source: Global Times, Original title: &#34;NASA Urgently Kicks SpaceX, Who Can 'Take Over' the U.S. Lunar Program?&#34;
Risk Warning and Disclaimer
The market has risks, and investment requires caution. This article does not constitute personal investment advice and does not consider individual users' specific investment goals, financial conditions, or needs. Users should consider whether any opinions, views, or conclusions in this article align with their specific circumstances. Investing based on this is at one's own risk

DXYZ

TSLA

NASA Acting Administrator Duffy announced that due to serious delays by SpaceX in the development of the lunar lander, NASA will reopen the bidding for the lunar lander development and seek new solutions from other companies. This decision has raised concerns about the United States' Artemis crewed lunar landing program, especially in the context of China's plan to achieve a crewed lunar landing by 2030. Duffy pointed out that SpaceX's lagging progress could threaten the completion of the Artemis 3 mission in 2027

NASA urgently kicks SpaceX, who can "take over" the U.S. moon landing plan?