Nasa: desperately seeking a lunar lander

The administrator of the American space agency has made it clear that SpaceX is behind schedule. Alternatives are urgently needed to beat China. Jeff Bezos might have the solution.

BY EMILIO COZZI

It wasn’t rhetoric, as many believed; it was fear, as everyone else had suspected.
The reference is to the need to “beat China in the new race to the Moon,” a mantra repeatedly voiced at conferences, hearings, and public events by the U.S. Secretary of Transportation and acting Nasa administrator, Sean Duffy.
Today it can be said more officially: the Artemis 3 mission will no longer launch and land a crew on the Moon (for the first time since 1972) “by mid-2027,” as the Nasa webpage dedicated to the third lunar mission still states. Duffy himself admitted it in two televised interviews, during which he announced a major overhaul of the plans for humanity’s return to the Moon: the new target date is 2028.

“SpaceX is behind”

But with which vehicle? The lightning bolt thrown by Duffy struck ground forcefully, though the thunder had long been rumbling in the sky. The only lander chosen by Nasa for Artemis 3 is SpaceX’s Starship, in a modified version called Moonship. At the moment, there are no alternatives. “I love SpaceX, it’s an extraordinary company,” said Nasa’s top official. “The problem is that they’re behind.”

For a company long and rightfully considered cutting-edge, the phrase “SpaceX is behind” sounds surprising, at least until you consider the multiple failed Starship tests: two and a half years after its first liftoff, the vehicle has still not reached orbit.

That’s why an alternative is needed. Blue Origin is the other company that has won a contract for a crewed lunar lander. However, the agreement stipulates that the lander will be delivered in 2030, to be used in Artemis missions later in the decade.

On closer inspection, Duffy’s remarks sounded above all like an appeal: “Whoever gets us there first, we’ll go with them.” The goal is to beat China and return to the Moon in 2028. “He wants to get there during his term,” Duffy added, referring to President Donald Trump. “So I’m working to reopen that contract. I think we’ll see companies like Blue Origin take part, and maybe others. We’ll have a sort of domestic space race, with American firms competing to lead us back to the Moon first.”

The problem is that, starting from scratch, no one considers it realistic to develop, build, test, and certify a vehicle in under three years. It would be unlikely even without opting for a revolutionary solution like the one chosen by SpaceX, with reusable boosters and spacecraft capable of vertical takeoff and landing, for example by relying instead on Blue Origin’s Blue Moon lander, which is more traditional in its design. So what now?

The ace up the sleeve, according to an interesting analysis by Eric Berger, senior space editor at Ars Technica, might still belong to Bezos.

Blue Origin vs SpaceX

Citing government sources, Berger reports that Blue Origin is quietly working behind the scenes on a modified version of the Mark 1 lander, originally designed as a cargo vehicle to transport materials and supplies.
With the right adjustments, the lander could become part of a plan to land humans on the Moon before the end of this decade. The idea would be to use multiple Mark 1 vehicles to carry the crew to the lunar surface and then ascend back into orbit for a rendezvous with Nasa’s Orion spacecraft. Designed in this way, the lander would not require any orbital refueling, another major advantage of this architecture. Both of the currently selected projects, Blue Moon Mark 2 and Starship, do require refueling beyond Earth, a complex operation that has never been attempted before.

Not to mention that after funding Starship with 2.9 billion dollars and Blue Moon with 3.4 billion, any further project could only be realized through variable cost contracts, an approach the United States is gradually moving away from.
Berger also considers a third option, which could involve Lockheed Martin, the American defense and aerospace giant, reportedly ready, according to an anonymous internal source, to deliver a functional lander within 18 months. It is difficult, however, to see this as realistic. According to a 2017 Nasa analysis, developing a new lander model would cost between 20 and 30 billion dollars and would rely on an outdated approach. The new space economy works differently now.

Musk takes it all

As expected, Elon Musk’s reaction was not long in coming. On X, the space billionaire did not hold back his insults toward Duffy, whom he mockingly renamed “Sean Dummy.” “SpaceX moves at the speed of light compared to the rest of the space industry,” Musk wrote, accusing Duffy of acting solely to secure his confirmation as NASA administrator. The interim chief is currently competing for the role with billionaire astronaut Jared Isaacman, long backed by Musk himself, at a time when Isaacman seems close to finally being appointed head of the agency following Trump’s surprising withdrawal in May. “Starship will end up running the entire lunar mission. Mark my words,” declared SpaceX’s founder and master.

If Musk were right, it would dismantle the original flight plan, conceived as a composite mission. As of today, Artemis 3 involves launching astronauts aboard the Orion capsule using NASA’s Space Launch System, launching a Starship that would be refueled in orbit by a twin ship, performing a lunar orbit rendezvous between Starship and Orion, transferring the astronauts from Orion to Starship, descending to the surface, ascending back to lunar orbit, transferring again, and finally Orion’s return to Earth.

None of this, Musk bets, will be necessary. According to him, everything should take place by launching with a single Starship and coming home with it, period. He may not be the only one who thinks so. In May, Trump tried to cut funding for the SLS and Orion programs, billions that influential Texas Republican senator Ted Cruz managed to have reinstated in the Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Chaos or comedy? Hard to tell. What is certain is that China is quietly watching from the audience, next to Jeff Bezos.