“Having two distinct lunar lander designs, with different approaches to how they meet NASA’s mission needs, provides more robustness and ensures a regular cadence of Moon landings,” said Lisa Watson-Morgan, manager, Human Landing System Program at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. As a result of the contract with Blue Origin to demonstrate on Artemis V a lander that meets these same sustainable lander requirements, including capabilities for increased crew size, longer mission duration, and delivery of more mass to the Moon, multiple providers will be available to compete for future opportunities to fulfill NASA’s lunar surface access needs for Artemis missions.īy supporting industry’s development of innovative human landing system concepts and designs, NASA will help increase access to space for the benefit of all. Under that contract, the agency also directed SpaceX to evolve its design to meet the agency’s requirements for sustainable exploration and to demonstrate the lander on Artemis IV. The agency previously contracted SpaceX to demonstrate an initial human landing system for the Artemis III mission. Artemis V is at the intersection of demonstrating NASA’s initial lunar exploration capabilities and establishing the foundational systems to support recurring complex missions in lunar orbit and on the surface as part of the agency’s Moon to Mars exploration approach.Īdding another human landing system partner to NASA’s Artemis program will increase competition, reduce costs to taxpayers, support a regular cadence of lunar landings, further invest in the lunar economy, and help NASA achieve its goals on and around the Moon in preparation for future astronaut missions to Mars. Once Orion docks with Gateway, two astronauts will transfer to Blue Origin’s human landing system for about a weeklong trip to the Moon’s South Pole region where they will conduct science and exploration activities. Together, we are making an investment in the infrastructure that will pave the way to land the first astronauts on Mars.”įor the Artemis V mission, NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) rocket will launch four astronauts to lunar orbit aboard the Orion spacecraft. “We are in a golden age of human spaceflight, which is made possible by NASA’s commercial and international partnerships. “Today we are excited to announce Blue Origin will build a human landing system as NASA’s second provider to deliver Artemis astronauts to the lunar surface,” said NASA Administrator Bill Nelson. The total award value of the firm-fixed price contract is $3.4 billion. In addition to design and development work, the contract includes one uncrewed demonstration mission to the lunar surface before a crewed demo on the Artemis V mission in 2029. Through Artemis, NASA will explore more of the Moon than ever before, uncovering more scientific discoveries, and preparing for future astronaut missions to Mars.īlue Origin will design, develop, test, and verify its Blue Moon lander to meet NASA’s human landing system requirements for recurring astronaut expeditions to the lunar surface, including docking with Gateway, a space station where crew transfer in lunar orbit. It pays to ask pointed questions.To develop a human landing system for the agency’s Artemis V mission to the Moon, NASA has selected Blue Origin of Kent, Washington. In fact….since, as he mentioned, this lunar effort is dependent on their own New Glenn launcher- only the engines of which exist (and even those haven’t even flown-yet)- one wonders if any NG development cost hasn’t somehow been folded into that “we’re paying over 50%” as well. But listen closely to what was actually said, and he implied the >50% number likely folded in all of BO’s like Lunar efforts over all these years as well. Nelson- and then others- chose to interpret the BO’s exec remarks as “BO is paying over 50% of this PPP!”…and the BO exec simply hasn’t corrected anyone. One was done on SpaceX, AFTER the COTS Partnership- with SpaceX’s approval to look at internal data- to see how much NASA saved over ‘NASA business as usual’ but as part of these Selection Boards, NASA has no direct insight. (BTW, NASA has done no study- zero- on Blue’s internal cost studies vis a vis for this proposal. The Blue executive did NOT SAY that Blue was paying over 50% of the cost of the announced PPP with NASA starting now- even tho Nelson chose to think that way. Careful, Michael don’t you make the mistake others have made (including Nelson).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |