Investing in space:
Lunar surface captured by Odysseus' Terrain Relative Navigation Camera from lunar orbit on February 21, 2024.
Summary: Moon shot on target
We're six years after NASA announced that it would look to American companies to deliver cargo and research to the moon. Now we are only a few hours away from the first possible landing
Moving away from the superiority of history-making about intuitive machines
The IM-1 mission — we'll save that for the results of the effort later today — is worth exploring as a company on the eve of completing the first step in NASA's dream of making the Moon a regular and (relatively) affordable destination.
And, just as important, why it's not a disaster if the IM-1 landing doesn't go according to plan.
Thomas Zurbuchen led the creation of NASA's $2.6 billion CLPS program (colloquially pronounced "clips") to harness the broad ambitions of private companies and fly multiple if not dozens of, moon missions for the world's marquee space agency.
"Coming up with commercial lunar payload services, I basically felt that there wasn't enough focus on the Moon as a planetary body. The question was: Can we [land cargo missions on the Moon] at a rate that costs substantially less than the half billion to a billion dollars that If we do it inside the agency, "Zurbuchen told me.
He served as NASA's science chief for 6 years, overseeing nearly 100 science missions. Zurbuchen left the agency two years ago but is still firmly rooting for CLPS's success. Although NASA contracts for CLPS missions are typically $100 million to $200 million, no small sum, Zurbuchen said he knew from the start "there was a 50% chance that any one of these things would work."
We're down one on that count as Astrobotic's first mission went awry. The reality that Zurbuchen emphasizes is that landing on the moon is a difficult endeavor – and the mixed record of landing attempts since the 1960s, even by superpowers, reflects this.
The three leading CLPS lander companies – Astrobotic, Intuitive Machines, and Firefly Aerospace – are each expected to fly at least one mission this year, and possibly a second by 2025. So this NASA program is trying to help companies tolerate failure and do more. As much effort as possible, as often as possible, while the agency focuses its own efforts rather than on its crewed Artemis missions.
"We should give the target a few shots to make sure it works at the 50% level, or that it's very unlikely," Zurbuchen said.
As much as CLPS companies are bidding against each other for contracts, this is another example of what I call aerospace industry collaboration — simultaneous collaboration and competition. After all, the more successful companies are in landing on the moon, the more political capital the program will need to fund more missions. Already, Astrobotic represents that dynamic, holding a briefing with other CLPS companies to share learnings from the company's first efforts.
But how many CLPS mission failures will NASA tolerate? Zurbuchen emphasized that, even if the missions were not successful, "two is not the right number to stop," while "20 is too far."
“I hope we'll stick with it and we'll give it a chance to see if this program can be successful. After a year or two, I think they should take a hard look at it," Zurbuchen said.
