John Anderson – Seminole Wind
An evening pause: Starts with a piano solo, like yesterday’s pause, but takes us to an entirely different kind of music.
Hat tip Sayomara.
Tag: commercial
ULA completes its 4th launch this year and last Atlas-5 launch for the Space Force
Though ULA’s Atlas-5 rocket still has a number of launches on its manifest before it is retired, early this morning the company successfully completed the last Atlas-5 launch for the Space Force, the rocket lifting off from Cape Canaveral in Florida.
This was ULA’s fourth launch in 2024, the most in a year for the company since 2022. The leader board for this year’s launch race remains unchanged:
74 SpaceX
31 China
8 Rocket Lab
8 Russia
American private enterprise however now leads the rest of the world combined in successful launches 87 to 47, while SpaceX by itself still leads the entire world combined, including American companies, 74 to 60.
Note: A Rocket Lab that had been scheduled for today has been delayed two days.
Though ULA’s Atlas-5 rocket still has a number of launches on its manifest before it is retired, early this morning the company successfully completed the last Atlas-5 launch for the Space Force, the rocket lifting off from Cape Canaveral in Florida.
This was ULA’s fourth launch in 2024, the most in a year for the company since 2022. The leader board for this year’s launch race remains unchanged:
74 SpaceX
31 China
8 Rocket Lab
8 Russia
American private enterprise however now leads the rest of the world combined in successful launches 87 to 47, while SpaceX by itself still leads the entire world combined, including American companies, 74 to 60.
Note: A Rocket Lab that had been scheduled for today has been delayed two days.
Emerson Lake & Palmer – Show Me the Way To Go Home
FAA releases proposed environmental assessment of Boca Chica permitting more Starship/Superheavy launches
Superheavy/Starship lifting off on March 14, 2024
In advance of several planned public meetings, the FAA today released [pdf] its proposed environmental assessment of SpaceX’s proposal to increase the number of orbital launches allowed per year from Boca Chica from 5 to 25.
The report makes for some fascinating reading. First and foremost it indicates the FAA’s general approval of this new launch cadence. That approval however must also be given by the public in comments at those meetings, as well as by the National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Expect serious objections from the NPS and USFSW, both of which have acted to slow or stop SpaceX in the past, when each was given the opportunity. Both have a new opportunity here.
» Read more
Boeing completes full series of static hot fire engine burns on Starliner while docked to ISS
Boeing announced today that engineers have successfully completed a full series of static hot fire engine burns testing all of Starliner’s attitude thrusters while still dockecd to ISS.
The one-pulse firings were designed to confirm the performance of each thruster. Aft-facing thrusters were fired for 1.2 seconds and all others for .40 seconds. Between each firing, the team reviewed real-time data and all thrusters performed at peak thrust rating values, ranging from 97-102%. The helium system also remained stable. Additionally, an RCS oxidizer isolation valve that was not fully seated previously, was cycled several times during today’s testing and is now operating normally.
This is the second time the spacecraft has been hot fired successfully while docked, an integrated operation the station and Starliner teams will also conduct during future long-duration missions.
This result is not a surprise, based on the information provided during the most recent briefing. It confirms the data obtained during previous hot fire tests both on a Starliner on the ground and the Starliner docked to ISS. Not only does it appear that Boeing has enough information to fix this problem so it does not occur again, it has proven unequivocally that these thrusters as well as the helium leaks inside the thruster systems pose no unusual risk for a return in the capsule.
NASA and Boeing have a planned review of these results this coming week, when we should expect them to name a return date, likely sometime in the first two weeks of August.
Boeing announced today that engineers have successfully completed a full series of static hot fire engine burns testing all of Starliner’s attitude thrusters while still dockecd to ISS.
The one-pulse firings were designed to confirm the performance of each thruster. Aft-facing thrusters were fired for 1.2 seconds and all others for .40 seconds. Between each firing, the team reviewed real-time data and all thrusters performed at peak thrust rating values, ranging from 97-102%. The helium system also remained stable. Additionally, an RCS oxidizer isolation valve that was not fully seated previously, was cycled several times during today’s testing and is now operating normally.
This is the second time the spacecraft has been hot fired successfully while docked, an integrated operation the station and Starliner teams will also conduct during future long-duration missions.
This result is not a surprise, based on the information provided during the most recent briefing. It confirms the data obtained during previous hot fire tests both on a Starliner on the ground and the Starliner docked to ISS. Not only does it appear that Boeing has enough information to fix this problem so it does not occur again, it has proven unequivocally that these thrusters as well as the helium leaks inside the thruster systems pose no unusual risk for a return in the capsule.
NASA and Boeing have a planned review of these results this coming week, when we should expect them to name a return date, likely sometime in the first two weeks of August.
SpaceX launches another 20 Starlink satellites
I had my days wrong last night. In the previous post I said that SpaceX had another launch scheduled for later tonight. In actuality that launch was today, but in the wee hours early this morning. Four hours after a Falcon 9 placed 23 Starlink satellites into orbit from Cape Canaveral, another Falcon 9 placed 20 Starlink satellites into orbit from Vandenberg in California. That’s three launches in just one day.
The first stage completed its seventeenth launch, landing on a drone ship in the Pacific.
The leaders in the 2024 launch race:
74 SpaceX
31 China
8 Rocket Lab
8 Russia
American private enterprise now leads the rest of the world combined in successful launches 86 to 47, while SpaceX by itself leads the entire world combined, including American companies, 74 to 59.
I had my days wrong last night. In the previous post I said that SpaceX had another launch scheduled for later tonight. In actuality that launch was today, but in the wee hours early this morning. Four hours after a Falcon 9 placed 23 Starlink satellites into orbit from Cape Canaveral, another Falcon 9 placed 20 Starlink satellites into orbit from Vandenberg in California. That’s three launches in just one day.
The first stage completed its seventeenth launch, landing on a drone ship in the Pacific.
The leaders in the 2024 launch race:
74 SpaceX
31 China
8 Rocket Lab
8 Russia
American private enterprise now leads the rest of the world combined in successful launches 86 to 47, while SpaceX by itself leads the entire world combined, including American companies, 74 to 59.
SpaceX launches another 23 Starlink satellites
SpaceX tonight completed its second launch in two nights since resuming launches after a two-week halt after the July 11th upper stage launch failure, its Falcon 9 rocket lifting off from Cape Canaveral and placing another 23 Starlink satellites in orbit.
The first stage completed its fourteenth launch, landing on a drone ship in the Atlantic.
The leaders in the 2024 launch race:
73 SpaceX
31 China
8 Rocket Lab
8 Russia
American private enterprise now leads the rest of the world combined in successful launches 85 to 47, while SpaceX by itself leads the entire world combined, including American companies, 73 to 59.
SpaceX has another launch scheduled for tomorrow night.
SpaceX tonight completed its second launch in two nights since resuming launches after a two-week halt after the July 11th upper stage launch failure, its Falcon 9 rocket lifting off from Cape Canaveral and placing another 23 Starlink satellites in orbit.
The first stage completed its fourteenth launch, landing on a drone ship in the Atlantic.
The leaders in the 2024 launch race:
73 SpaceX
31 China
8 Rocket Lab
8 Russia
American private enterprise now leads the rest of the world combined in successful launches 85 to 47, while SpaceX by itself leads the entire world combined, including American companies, 73 to 59.
SpaceX has another launch scheduled for tomorrow night.
Local billionaire landowner renews his oppposition to the Sutherland spaceport
Proposed spaceports surrounding Norwegian Sea.
An effort by the proposed Sutherland spaceport on the north coast of Scotland to place a tracking dish on a nearby peak — where other telecommunication dishes are already installed — is now being fought by local billionaire landowner Anders Holch Povlsen, who had previously tried and failed to stop construction of the spaceport entirely.
The spaceport’s main customer, the rocket startup Orbex, has already experienced endless red tape from the United Kingdom’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). It applied for a launch license in February 2022, and almost two-and-a-half years later still has not gotten an approval. It had previously announced a first launch that year, and has been stymied since, not only by the CAA but by local authorities who have demanded it make many changes to its construction plans.
Povlsen, who has himself invested in the competing Saxavord spaceport on the Shetland Islands, has repeatedly acted to block Sutherland, so far with no success. This new suit is especially absurd — claiming the new dish would harm the local landscape — which is why the local councils appear ready to reject it.
» Read more
Proposed spaceports surrounding Norwegian Sea.
An effort by the proposed Sutherland spaceport on the north coast of Scotland to place a tracking dish on a nearby peak — where other telecommunication dishes are already installed — is now being fought by local billionaire landowner Anders Holch Povlsen, who had previously tried and failed to stop construction of the spaceport entirely.
The spaceport’s main customer, the rocket startup Orbex, has already experienced endless red tape from the United Kingdom’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). It applied for a launch license in February 2022, and almost two-and-a-half years later still has not gotten an approval. It had previously announced a first launch that year, and has been stymied since, not only by the CAA but by local authorities who have demanded it make many changes to its construction plans.
Povlsen, who has himself invested in the competing Saxavord spaceport on the Shetland Islands, has repeatedly acted to block Sutherland, so far with no success. This new suit is especially absurd — claiming the new dish would harm the local landscape — which is why the local councils appear ready to reject it.
» Read more
To guarantee no capsule debris hits inhabited areas, SpaceX to move its manned splashdowns to Pacific
As part of the changes SpaceX is instituting to the de-orbit procedures of its Dragon capsules in order to end any chance parts of the service module will fall in inhabited areas (as has happened several times in the past few years) the company will be shifting all manned splashdowns to the Pacific Ocean.
Repeated issues with large chunks of debris from Dragon — “trunks” where the fuel and electrical supplies are held — have repeatedly crashed down in areas ranging from Australia to North Carolina. One measure to fix that will be tasking future spacecraft after Crew-9, perhaps as soon as Crew-10, to splash down on the U.S. Pacific coast, SpaceX said during a press conference today (July 26).
“What we’ll do is we’ll implement a software change to complete the deorbit burn before jettisoning the trunk, like we did with Dragon-1, and then the trunk will intentionally land […] in an unpopulated area of the ocean,” Sarah Walker, SpaceX’s director of Dragon mission management, said in the livestreamed briefing. “So to make this change possible, we’ll move a Dragon recovery vessel to the Pacific sometime next year.”
Crew-9 is now scheduled to launch to ISS on August 18th on a six month mission, landing sometime in February 2025. Crew-10 would launch about that time and land sometime in August, 2025.
Side note: The announcement yesterday of August 18th for the launch of the next Dragon manned mission suggests NASA is now confident it can determine a date prior to that for returning Starliner. This reinforces the fact that the astronauts and Starliner are not “stranded” on the station, and any news source that states or even implies such a thing indicates it is a place where you are likely getting junk news, on all its stories.
As part of the changes SpaceX is instituting to the de-orbit procedures of its Dragon capsules in order to end any chance parts of the service module will fall in inhabited areas (as has happened several times in the past few years) the company will be shifting all manned splashdowns to the Pacific Ocean.
Repeated issues with large chunks of debris from Dragon — “trunks” where the fuel and electrical supplies are held — have repeatedly crashed down in areas ranging from Australia to North Carolina. One measure to fix that will be tasking future spacecraft after Crew-9, perhaps as soon as Crew-10, to splash down on the U.S. Pacific coast, SpaceX said during a press conference today (July 26).
“What we’ll do is we’ll implement a software change to complete the deorbit burn before jettisoning the trunk, like we did with Dragon-1, and then the trunk will intentionally land […] in an unpopulated area of the ocean,” Sarah Walker, SpaceX’s director of Dragon mission management, said in the livestreamed briefing. “So to make this change possible, we’ll move a Dragon recovery vessel to the Pacific sometime next year.”
Crew-9 is now scheduled to launch to ISS on August 18th on a six month mission, landing sometime in February 2025. Crew-10 would launch about that time and land sometime in August, 2025.
Side note: The announcement yesterday of August 18th for the launch of the next Dragon manned mission suggests NASA is now confident it can determine a date prior to that for returning Starliner. This reinforces the fact that the astronauts and Starliner are not “stranded” on the station, and any news source that states or even implies such a thing indicates it is a place where you are likely getting junk news, on all its stories.
SpaceX’s Falcon 9 resumes launches, successfully launching 23 Starlink satellites
SpaceX tonight successfully resumed launches of its Falcon 9 rocket after a July 11, 2024 launch was a failure due to an engine leak in the upper stage. The rocket lifted off from the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, successfully placing 23 Starlink satellites into orbit.
The first stage completed its seventeenth flight, landing on a drone ship in the Atlantic.
The leaders in the 2024 launch race:
72 SpaceX
31 China
8 Rocket Lab
8 Russia
American private enterprise now leads the rest of the world combined in successful launches 84 to 47, while SpaceX by itself leads the entire world combined, including American companies, 72 to 59.
SpaceX has additional launches scheduled for tomorrow and the next day, so these numbers are only temporary.
SpaceX tonight successfully resumed launches of its Falcon 9 rocket after a July 11, 2024 launch was a failure due to an engine leak in the upper stage. The rocket lifted off from the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, successfully placing 23 Starlink satellites into orbit.
The first stage completed its seventeenth flight, landing on a drone ship in the Atlantic.
The leaders in the 2024 launch race:
72 SpaceX
31 China
8 Rocket Lab
8 Russia
American private enterprise now leads the rest of the world combined in successful launches 84 to 47, while SpaceX by itself leads the entire world combined, including American companies, 72 to 59.
SpaceX has additional launches scheduled for tomorrow and the next day, so these numbers are only temporary.
Avery “Drummer” Molek – Wipe Out
An evening pause: Something to start the weekend, brought to you by a six-year-old. Performed live 2013.
Hat tip Mike Nelson.
Tim Simek & Marl Edelman – Whiskey Before Breakfast
Sierra Space successfully completes 2nd test-to-failure of a full scale LIFE inflatable module
Sierra Space’s family of planned LIFE modules. Click for original
Sierra Space today announced it has completed a second successful test-to-failure of a full scale version of its LIFE inflatable module, intended for use not only on Blue Origin’s proposed Orbital Reef space station, but also available for purchase by other space station.
The latest test by the numbers:
- Company’s second Ultimate Burst Pressure test of a full-size, inflatable space station structure occurred on June 18
- Test unit stood over 20’ tall and was comparable in size to an average family home
- The article was 300 m³ in volume, or 1/3rd the volume of the International Space Station
- Test results exceeded NASA’s recommended x4 safety levels by 22%
- Two 4-ft x 4-ft steel blanking plates were integrated into the highest loaded cylinder section of the article; both were 50 lbs. lighter than the ones used in the first full-scale test and accommodate larger windows
The test article in the company’s historic first full-scale burst test last December peaked at 77 psi, which well exceeded (+27%) NASA’s recommended level of 60.8 psi (maximum operating pressure of 15.2 psi multiplied by a safety factor of four). This most recent test in June showed similar results – within five percent of the pressure loading of December’s test article – with this one reaching 74 psi, exceeding NASA’s 4x safety factor by 22 percent. These back-to-back test results accelerate Sierra Space’s path to flight certification, verifying scalability for 10 cubic-meter and up to 1,400 cubic-meter structures based on the company’s current softgoods inflatable architecture. Sierra Space is currently gearing up for a first test of its 500 cubic-meter space station technology next year.
Video of this test, dramatically edited with its own music soundtrack, can be seen at the link.
It is intriguing that the only developments related to Orbital Reef appear to come from Sierra Space. From Blue Origin — supposedly the lead company in that project — we hear almost nothing. Though Sierra Space has said the partnership is still solid, it has also made it clear it is building the LIFE module not just for Orbital Reef. I think it is hedging its bets, anticipating that Orbital Reef will be another Blue Origin dud, and wants to market itself to others.
Hat tip to stringer Jay for this story.
Sierra Space’s family of planned LIFE modules. Click for original
Sierra Space today announced it has completed a second successful test-to-failure of a full scale version of its LIFE inflatable module, intended for use not only on Blue Origin’s proposed Orbital Reef space station, but also available for purchase by other space station.
The latest test by the numbers:
- Company’s second Ultimate Burst Pressure test of a full-size, inflatable space station structure occurred on June 18
- Test unit stood over 20’ tall and was comparable in size to an average family home
- The article was 300 m³ in volume, or 1/3rd the volume of the International Space Station
- Test results exceeded NASA’s recommended x4 safety levels by 22%
- Two 4-ft x 4-ft steel blanking plates were integrated into the highest loaded cylinder section of the article; both were 50 lbs. lighter than the ones used in the first full-scale test and accommodate larger windows
The test article in the company’s historic first full-scale burst test last December peaked at 77 psi, which well exceeded (+27%) NASA’s recommended level of 60.8 psi (maximum operating pressure of 15.2 psi multiplied by a safety factor of four). This most recent test in June showed similar results – within five percent of the pressure loading of December’s test article – with this one reaching 74 psi, exceeding NASA’s 4x safety factor by 22 percent. These back-to-back test results accelerate Sierra Space’s path to flight certification, verifying scalability for 10 cubic-meter and up to 1,400 cubic-meter structures based on the company’s current softgoods inflatable architecture. Sierra Space is currently gearing up for a first test of its 500 cubic-meter space station technology next year.
Video of this test, dramatically edited with its own music soundtrack, can be seen at the link.
It is intriguing that the only developments related to Orbital Reef appear to come from Sierra Space. From Blue Origin — supposedly the lead company in that project — we hear almost nothing. Though Sierra Space has said the partnership is still solid, it has also made it clear it is building the LIFE module not just for Orbital Reef. I think it is hedging its bets, anticipating that Orbital Reef will be another Blue Origin dud, and wants to market itself to others.
Hat tip to stringer Jay for this story.
NASA/Boeing: Cause of Starliner thruster failure identified
According to NASA and Boeing officials, ground static fire engine tests have now identified the likely cause of the thruster failures on the Starliner capsule during its docking to ISS in early June, and puts them in a position next week to determine a return date for the capsule and its two astronauts.
It appears the problem is related to teflon seals in the thrusters, detected while engineers did a series of tests on the ground with another Starliner capsule. Based on this information, Boeing thinks it can fix the problem on future capsules, while also insuring there will be no problems returning the astronauts from ISS.
The thrusters in question are all attitude thrusters, where there is a lot of redundancy and the issue has been seen to be well controlled from the start. The larger thrusters used for the undocking and de-orbit burn have been tested as well, and have not shown any similar issues at all.
The ground tests have also identified the cause of the helium leaks within the capsule engine system. Boeing will use this data to fix later capsules as well. These leaks are not a concern for the return to Earth.
The plan now is to do in the next few days one more set of static fire tests with the capsule docked on ISS, doing short bursts with all the attitude thrusters to further confirm what has been learned on the ground. If that goes as expected, a final meeting next week will determine the return date for the capsule and crew.
According to NASA and Boeing officials, ground static fire engine tests have now identified the likely cause of the thruster failures on the Starliner capsule during its docking to ISS in early June, and puts them in a position next week to determine a return date for the capsule and its two astronauts.
It appears the problem is related to teflon seals in the thrusters, detected while engineers did a series of tests on the ground with another Starliner capsule. Based on this information, Boeing thinks it can fix the problem on future capsules, while also insuring there will be no problems returning the astronauts from ISS.
The thrusters in question are all attitude thrusters, where there is a lot of redundancy and the issue has been seen to be well controlled from the start. The larger thrusters used for the undocking and de-orbit burn have been tested as well, and have not shown any similar issues at all.
The ground tests have also identified the cause of the helium leaks within the capsule engine system. Boeing will use this data to fix later capsules as well. These leaks are not a concern for the return to Earth.
The plan now is to do in the next few days one more set of static fire tests with the capsule docked on ISS, doing short bursts with all the attitude thrusters to further confirm what has been learned on the ground. If that goes as expected, a final meeting next week will determine the return date for the capsule and crew.
Hungary/Axiom finalize deal to fly a passenger on its AX-4 commercial manned mission to ISS
Hungary and Axiom have finalized their agreement to fly 32-year-old mechanical engineer Tibor Kapu on Axiom’s AX-4 commercial manned mission to ISS, presently targeting an October 2024 launch date.
That flight will use a Dragon capsule and last 14 days. Kapu would be the second Hungarian to ever fly in space, following Bertalan Farkas’s eight day mission in 1980 in a Soyuz capsule during the Soviet era.
Hungary and Axiom had worked out an initial agreement in 2022, with the country to pay the company $100 million for the flight. At that time the flight was to last 30 days, not two weeks. It was also unclear if the mission would be free-flying or dock with ISS, or even whether it would fly on a Dragon or Starliner capsule. There is no word on how these changes have impacted the price.
Hungary and Axiom have finalized their agreement to fly 32-year-old mechanical engineer Tibor Kapu on Axiom’s AX-4 commercial manned mission to ISS, presently targeting an October 2024 launch date.
That flight will use a Dragon capsule and last 14 days. Kapu would be the second Hungarian to ever fly in space, following Bertalan Farkas’s eight day mission in 1980 in a Soyuz capsule during the Soviet era.
Hungary and Axiom had worked out an initial agreement in 2022, with the country to pay the company $100 million for the flight. At that time the flight was to last 30 days, not two weeks. It was also unclear if the mission would be free-flying or dock with ISS, or even whether it would fly on a Dragon or Starliner capsule. There is no word on how these changes have impacted the price.
Saxavord: We will get our last required spaceport license by September
Proposed spaceports surrounding Norwegian Sea.
My heart be still: According to one official of the Saxavord spaceport in the Shetland Islands, it expects to get its last required spaceport license from the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) of the United Kingdom sometime in September of this year.
In a presentation at the Farnborough International Airshow here July 23, Scott Hammond, deputy chief executive and operations director of SaxaVord Spaceport, said he expected the spaceport to receive the last of the licenses from U.K. regulators in September needed to host the inaugural launch of Rocket Factory Augsburg’s RFA ONE rocket there.
The red tape getting the first launch off at Saxavord has been odious and disheartening, to say the least. After almost two years of deliberations, the CAA awarded the spaceport its spaceport license in December 2023. This finally allowed it to be a spaceport, but apparently that was insufficient for it to be allowed to do any launches. The CAA then took three more months to issue what it called the range license.
Saxavord was still not allowed to do any launches. The CAA demanded one more license for what it calls “airspace access for launches.” I have no idea how this is different than the range license, unless the CAA has separated control of the surface from the air space, and thus requires two separate licenses for each. Either way, getting that approved has now dragged on for months. No one should be confident Saxavord’s September prediction for approval will turn out to be true.
All these licenses however will still not permit any launches to proceed. The CAA also requires each particular rocket company to get its own launch license. Though Saxavord as well as Rocket Factory are targeting a launch before the end of the year, soon after getting that last airspace license, they might be counting their chickens before they hatch, based on the CAA’s track record with Virgin Orbit.
After Cornwall got all its CAA licenses to allow Virgin Orbit to launch from that airport, Virgin thought it would be able to get is launch license quickly and launch within only a few months. Instead, the CAA took about a year to issue Virgin its launch license, with that long delay eventually becoming the main reason the company went bankrupt.
Rocket Factory unfortunately appears to have locked itself into Saxavord. It has already done a static fire test of its first stage there, and has delivered the rocket’s upper stage. If the CAA takes its time again giving its approval, the startup might find itself bleeding cash, as Virgin Orbit did.
Proposed spaceports surrounding Norwegian Sea.
My heart be still: According to one official of the Saxavord spaceport in the Shetland Islands, it expects to get its last required spaceport license from the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) of the United Kingdom sometime in September of this year.
In a presentation at the Farnborough International Airshow here July 23, Scott Hammond, deputy chief executive and operations director of SaxaVord Spaceport, said he expected the spaceport to receive the last of the licenses from U.K. regulators in September needed to host the inaugural launch of Rocket Factory Augsburg’s RFA ONE rocket there.
The red tape getting the first launch off at Saxavord has been odious and disheartening, to say the least. After almost two years of deliberations, the CAA awarded the spaceport its spaceport license in December 2023. This finally allowed it to be a spaceport, but apparently that was insufficient for it to be allowed to do any launches. The CAA then took three more months to issue what it called the range license.
Saxavord was still not allowed to do any launches. The CAA demanded one more license for what it calls “airspace access for launches.” I have no idea how this is different than the range license, unless the CAA has separated control of the surface from the air space, and thus requires two separate licenses for each. Either way, getting that approved has now dragged on for months. No one should be confident Saxavord’s September prediction for approval will turn out to be true.
All these licenses however will still not permit any launches to proceed. The CAA also requires each particular rocket company to get its own launch license. Though Saxavord as well as Rocket Factory are targeting a launch before the end of the year, soon after getting that last airspace license, they might be counting their chickens before they hatch, based on the CAA’s track record with Virgin Orbit.
After Cornwall got all its CAA licenses to allow Virgin Orbit to launch from that airport, Virgin thought it would be able to get is launch license quickly and launch within only a few months. Instead, the CAA took about a year to issue Virgin its launch license, with that long delay eventually becoming the main reason the company went bankrupt.
Rocket Factory unfortunately appears to have locked itself into Saxavord. It has already done a static fire test of its first stage there, and has delivered the rocket’s upper stage. If the CAA takes its time again giving its approval, the startup might find itself bleeding cash, as Virgin Orbit did.
Merle Haggard – If I Could Only Fly
SpaceX’s contract to de-orbit ISS reveals the inability of the older space companies to compete
Link here. The article goes into detail about the bidding process that led to SpaceX winning the contract $843 million fixed-price contract to build a specialized Dragon capsule to dock with ISS and de-orbit it. While its focus is on the refusal of the older companies (Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, and Boeing) to sign the fixed-price contracts that NASA now prefers and that SpaceX can handle with no problem, it was this section that struck me the most:
SpaceX’s bid price was $680 million. The source selection statement did not reveal a price for Northrop’s bid other than saying it was “significantly higher.” Based on NASA’s budget request, Northrop’s bid was likely approximately twice as high.
But SpaceX did not just win on price. Its “mission suitability” score, effectively its technical ability to design, develop, and fly a vehicle capable of deorbiting the space station, was 822, compared to Northrop’s score of 589. SpaceX’s approach had one weakness, compared to seven weaknesses in Northrop’s bid, according to NASA evaluators.
Finally, the selection was also based on past performance by the contractors. SpaceX’s performance was rated as “very high,” given how it has delivered with the Cargo and Crew Dragon spacecraft and its Falcon 9 rocket. Northrop’s performance on Cygnus and its various rockets was given a “moderate” rating. Overall, the NASA evaluators expressed a “very high level” of confidence in SpaceX being able to complete the mission, whereas a “moderate level” of confidence was expressed in Northrop.
In other words, Northrop not only couldn’t do the job as cheaply and wasn’t even willing to do it at a fixed price, its technical performance has not been that good either.
The article focuses rightly on the present lack of any viable competitors to SpaceX, and the problems this raises for the entire American aerospace industry. I want to point out how this situation reveals a much more fundamental problem with the industry itself. The established aerospace industry is not only doing poor work, it is overcharging for it.
Or to put it more bluntly, it is unwilling or unable to compete. Relying on businesses with such bankrupt attitudes is not a good way to get anything done.
The hope had been that the newer startups (Rocket Lab, Blue Origin, Relativity, Firefly, etc) would pick up this slack, but except for Blue Origin the rocket capabilities of these companies are just not big enough yet to do it. Blue Origin’s proposed New Glenn rocket and associated spacecraft could do the job, but the company has demonstrated for the past decade its desire to emulate the older and failing big space companies rather than a new fresh face.
The new companies, given time, could solve this problem, since they are all willing to innovate and compete, but the apparent increase in the regulations imposed by the FAA and other government agencies in the past two years suggests they will be squelched as well.
Unless something changes, the U.S. is not going to see the space renaissance that seemed so promising only two years ago.
Link here. The article goes into detail about the bidding process that led to SpaceX winning the contract $843 million fixed-price contract to build a specialized Dragon capsule to dock with ISS and de-orbit it. While its focus is on the refusal of the older companies (Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, and Boeing) to sign the fixed-price contracts that NASA now prefers and that SpaceX can handle with no problem, it was this section that struck me the most:
SpaceX’s bid price was $680 million. The source selection statement did not reveal a price for Northrop’s bid other than saying it was “significantly higher.” Based on NASA’s budget request, Northrop’s bid was likely approximately twice as high.
But SpaceX did not just win on price. Its “mission suitability” score, effectively its technical ability to design, develop, and fly a vehicle capable of deorbiting the space station, was 822, compared to Northrop’s score of 589. SpaceX’s approach had one weakness, compared to seven weaknesses in Northrop’s bid, according to NASA evaluators.
Finally, the selection was also based on past performance by the contractors. SpaceX’s performance was rated as “very high,” given how it has delivered with the Cargo and Crew Dragon spacecraft and its Falcon 9 rocket. Northrop’s performance on Cygnus and its various rockets was given a “moderate” rating. Overall, the NASA evaluators expressed a “very high level” of confidence in SpaceX being able to complete the mission, whereas a “moderate level” of confidence was expressed in Northrop.
In other words, Northrop not only couldn’t do the job as cheaply and wasn’t even willing to do it at a fixed price, its technical performance has not been that good either.
The article focuses rightly on the present lack of any viable competitors to SpaceX, and the problems this raises for the entire American aerospace industry. I want to point out how this situation reveals a much more fundamental problem with the industry itself. The established aerospace industry is not only doing poor work, it is overcharging for it.
Or to put it more bluntly, it is unwilling or unable to compete. Relying on businesses with such bankrupt attitudes is not a good way to get anything done.
The hope had been that the newer startups (Rocket Lab, Blue Origin, Relativity, Firefly, etc) would pick up this slack, but except for Blue Origin the rocket capabilities of these companies are just not big enough yet to do it. Blue Origin’s proposed New Glenn rocket and associated spacecraft could do the job, but the company has demonstrated for the past decade its desire to emulate the older and failing big space companies rather than a new fresh face.
The new companies, given time, could solve this problem, since they are all willing to innovate and compete, but the apparent increase in the regulations imposed by the FAA and other government agencies in the past two years suggests they will be squelched as well.
Unless something changes, the U.S. is not going to see the space renaissance that seemed so promising only two years ago.
Axiom hires British astronaut Tim Peake
Axiom has now added British astronaut Tim Peake to its staff, making him the fourth astronaut after Michael Lopez-Alegria, Peggy Whitson, and Koichi Wakata working for the commercial space station and space tourism company.
The decision appears to be in connection with Axiom’s agreement with the UK Space Agency to fly an all-British manned commercial mission in exchange for $19 million in government funding. NASA regulations require any commercial mission that docks with ISS to include as a company commander an experienced astronaut. By hiring Peake Axiom fulfills this requirement.
No date for this four-person two week mission to ISS has been announced. Nor have any other passengers been named. It is very possible this announcement today is a PR effort by Axiom to drum up interest from potential British customers because the earlier announcements have possibly failed to do so.
Axiom has now added British astronaut Tim Peake to its staff, making him the fourth astronaut after Michael Lopez-Alegria, Peggy Whitson, and Koichi Wakata working for the commercial space station and space tourism company.
The decision appears to be in connection with Axiom’s agreement with the UK Space Agency to fly an all-British manned commercial mission in exchange for $19 million in government funding. NASA regulations require any commercial mission that docks with ISS to include as a company commander an experienced astronaut. By hiring Peake Axiom fulfills this requirement.
No date for this four-person two week mission to ISS has been announced. Nor have any other passengers been named. It is very possible this announcement today is a PR effort by Axiom to drum up interest from potential British customers because the earlier announcements have possibly failed to do so.
Ann Miller – I’ve Gotta Hear That Beat
An evening pause: From the 1953 film Small Town Girl. Proves once again that America was not hostile to highlighting women in all things in the past. They simply had to have the talent, skill, and determination to earn that spotlight.
Hat tip Judd Clark.
Astroscale wins contract to deorbit OneWeb satellite
The orbital tug company Astroscale has won a $15 million contract from both the UK and European space agencies to launch a mission to rendezvous, grab and then deorbit a defunct OneWeb communications satellite.
The company, originally from Japan, has established operations in both the U.S. and Europe in order to win contracts from those regions, and had already signed contracts with OneWeb, several UK companies, the the European Space Agency (ESA), and the UK Space Agency for this project. This new contract apparently releases the money from both ESA and the UK.
The mission, dubbed ELSA-M, is will fly no later than April 2026, will be built by Astroscale’s UK division in Oxford, and is a follow-up of the ELSA-d mission that in 2021 demonstrated rendezvous and proximity operations but was unable to complete a docking using Astroscale’s magnetic capture system because of failed thrusters. I suspect the reason this new deal was finally approved is because of Astroscale’s more recent successes in another mission for Japan’s JAXA space agency, ADRAS-J, rendezvousing and flying in proximity to an old abandoned H2A rocket upper stage.
The new mission will attempt once again to prove the practicality of Astroscale’s magnetic capture system, which it is trying to convince all satellite companies to include on their satellites.
The orbital tug company Astroscale has won a $15 million contract from both the UK and European space agencies to launch a mission to rendezvous, grab and then deorbit a defunct OneWeb communications satellite.
The company, originally from Japan, has established operations in both the U.S. and Europe in order to win contracts from those regions, and had already signed contracts with OneWeb, several UK companies, the the European Space Agency (ESA), and the UK Space Agency for this project. This new contract apparently releases the money from both ESA and the UK.
The mission, dubbed ELSA-M, is will fly no later than April 2026, will be built by Astroscale’s UK division in Oxford, and is a follow-up of the ELSA-d mission that in 2021 demonstrated rendezvous and proximity operations but was unable to complete a docking using Astroscale’s magnetic capture system because of failed thrusters. I suspect the reason this new deal was finally approved is because of Astroscale’s more recent successes in another mission for Japan’s JAXA space agency, ADRAS-J, rendezvousing and flying in proximity to an old abandoned H2A rocket upper stage.
The new mission will attempt once again to prove the practicality of Astroscale’s magnetic capture system, which it is trying to convince all satellite companies to include on their satellites.
They Might Be Giants – Instanbul (Not Constantinople)
UK distributes cash to space sector to keep them in the UK
The United Kingdom government today announced five different grants totalling $14 million to various institutions and companies in an effort to promote aerospace operations within the UK.
The biggest grant, $6.45 million, went to the German rocket startup Hyimpulse to help pay the cost of a vertical launch of its SR75 test suborbital rocket from the Saxavord spaceport in the Shetland Islands.
Hyimpulse, which had originally planned to do its test launches from Saxavord, had been forced to do its first launch from the Southern Launch spaceport in Australia because of regulatory delays in the UK. Because of that red tape the company also signed a further agreement with that Australian spaceport for future test flights. It appears this grant is the UK government effort to get Hyimpulse launches back.
Nor is this the first such grant to Hyimpulse, or to a German rocket startup. Previously Hyimpulse had won two grants totaling almost $5 million. In addition, the UK has also awarded the German rocket startup Rocket Factory Augsburg just under $5 million.
Of the other four grants in this most recent award, the second biggest ($4.57 million) went to a Glasgow company, Spire Global, to develop better weather satellite forecasting technologies. The other three grants were all about a million dollars each, and went a variety of space sector institutions/companies in Scotland.
It is apparent that the red tape problems at Saxavord that has been driving rocket startups away from the UK has forced the UK government to reach into its wallet to try to keep them from leaving. For these companies, taking the money is a two-edge sword. The cash is nice, but if they can’t launch as planned it does them little good. I expect these deals require Hyimpulse and Rocket Factory to launch from Saxavord, but do not require them to do so first. This gives these companies the freedom to go elsewhere if necessary to meet their schedules.
The United Kingdom government today announced five different grants totalling $14 million to various institutions and companies in an effort to promote aerospace operations within the UK.
The biggest grant, $6.45 million, went to the German rocket startup Hyimpulse to help pay the cost of a vertical launch of its SR75 test suborbital rocket from the Saxavord spaceport in the Shetland Islands.
Hyimpulse, which had originally planned to do its test launches from Saxavord, had been forced to do its first launch from the Southern Launch spaceport in Australia because of regulatory delays in the UK. Because of that red tape the company also signed a further agreement with that Australian spaceport for future test flights. It appears this grant is the UK government effort to get Hyimpulse launches back.
Nor is this the first such grant to Hyimpulse, or to a German rocket startup. Previously Hyimpulse had won two grants totaling almost $5 million. In addition, the UK has also awarded the German rocket startup Rocket Factory Augsburg just under $5 million.
Of the other four grants in this most recent award, the second biggest ($4.57 million) went to a Glasgow company, Spire Global, to develop better weather satellite forecasting technologies. The other three grants were all about a million dollars each, and went a variety of space sector institutions/companies in Scotland.
It is apparent that the red tape problems at Saxavord that has been driving rocket startups away from the UK has forced the UK government to reach into its wallet to try to keep them from leaving. For these companies, taking the money is a two-edge sword. The cash is nice, but if they can’t launch as planned it does them little good. I expect these deals require Hyimpulse and Rocket Factory to launch from Saxavord, but do not require them to do so first. This gives these companies the freedom to go elsewhere if necessary to meet their schedules.
John Williams – Gilligan’s Island Original Theme Song
An evening pause: From the 1964 pilot, replaced by the much more familiar song when the series aired. And yes, the author was THAT John Williams. I hope your weekend adventures don’t end up like this one.
Hat tip Wayne DeVette.
An evening pause: From the 1964 pilot, replaced by the much more familiar song when the series aired. And yes, the author was THAT John Williams. I hope your weekend adventures don’t end up like this one.
Hat tip Wayne DeVette.
Astra goes private
The troubled rocket startup Astra has completed a purchase deal with its original two founders, with the company becoming a privately owned company entirely owned by those two individuals.
Under the terms of the definitive agreement for the transaction (the “Merger Agreement”) that was previously announced on March 7, 2024, Apogee Parent, Inc., (“Parent”), an entity formed by Chris Kemp, Astra’s co-founder, chief executive officer and chairman, and Dr. Adam London, Astra’s co-founder, chief technology officer and director, will acquire all of the outstanding shares of the Company’s Class A common stock, par value $0.0001 per share (the “Class A Shares”) not already owned by it for the right to receive $0.50 per share in cash, as more fully described in the Merger Agreement.
With the completion of the take-private acquisition, the Class A Shares ceased trading prior to the opening of trading on July 18, 2024 and will no longer be listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market (“Nasdaq”).
Whether this deal can save the company remains unknown. It ceased launching its Rocket-3 rocket due to technical problems and the rocket’s overall small capacity, and has been very short of cash, hindering development of its proposed larger Rocket-4.
The troubled rocket startup Astra has completed a purchase deal with its original two founders, with the company becoming a privately owned company entirely owned by those two individuals.
Under the terms of the definitive agreement for the transaction (the “Merger Agreement”) that was previously announced on March 7, 2024, Apogee Parent, Inc., (“Parent”), an entity formed by Chris Kemp, Astra’s co-founder, chief executive officer and chairman, and Dr. Adam London, Astra’s co-founder, chief technology officer and director, will acquire all of the outstanding shares of the Company’s Class A common stock, par value $0.0001 per share (the “Class A Shares”) not already owned by it for the right to receive $0.50 per share in cash, as more fully described in the Merger Agreement.
With the completion of the take-private acquisition, the Class A Shares ceased trading prior to the opening of trading on July 18, 2024 and will no longer be listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market (“Nasdaq”).
Whether this deal can save the company remains unknown. It ceased launching its Rocket-3 rocket due to technical problems and the rocket’s overall small capacity, and has been very short of cash, hindering development of its proposed larger Rocket-4.
NASA and Boeing complete ground static fire tests of Starliner
According to a press announcement tonight from NASA, the agency and Boeing have now completed the static fire tests using a Starliner ground capsule to duplicate the engine burns required to bring the in-space capsule back to Earth, carrying its two astronauts.
Teams completed ground hot fire testing at White Sands and are working to evaluate the test data and inspect the test engine. The ongoing ground analysis is expected to continue throughout the week. Working with a reaction control system thruster built for a future Starliner spacecraft, ground teams fired the engine through similar inflight conditions the spacecraft experienced on the way to the space station. The ground tests also included stress-case firings, and replicated conditions Starliner’s thrusters will experience from undocking to deorbit burn, where the thrusters will fire to slow Starliner’s speed to bring it out of orbit for landing in the southwestern United States.
Engineers now need to complete a review of those tests, followed by a full review leading to a decision as to when the astronauts will return on Starliner. No dates have yet been set, but expect these reviews to be completed within two weeks, and that Starliner will likely be scheduled for return in early August, prior to the scheduled launch of the next Dragon manned mission in mid-August.
All this assumes the FAA will clear SpaceX to resume launches before then. SpaceX is apparently ready to resume this week, but we have no indication the FAA will go along.
According to a press announcement tonight from NASA, the agency and Boeing have now completed the static fire tests using a Starliner ground capsule to duplicate the engine burns required to bring the in-space capsule back to Earth, carrying its two astronauts.
Teams completed ground hot fire testing at White Sands and are working to evaluate the test data and inspect the test engine. The ongoing ground analysis is expected to continue throughout the week. Working with a reaction control system thruster built for a future Starliner spacecraft, ground teams fired the engine through similar inflight conditions the spacecraft experienced on the way to the space station. The ground tests also included stress-case firings, and replicated conditions Starliner’s thrusters will experience from undocking to deorbit burn, where the thrusters will fire to slow Starliner’s speed to bring it out of orbit for landing in the southwestern United States.
Engineers now need to complete a review of those tests, followed by a full review leading to a decision as to when the astronauts will return on Starliner. No dates have yet been set, but expect these reviews to be completed within two weeks, and that Starliner will likely be scheduled for return in early August, prior to the scheduled launch of the next Dragon manned mission in mid-August.
All this assumes the FAA will clear SpaceX to resume launches before then. SpaceX is apparently ready to resume this week, but we have no indication the FAA will go along.
Leonid & Friends – Superstar
Update on Cape Canaveral work by multiple launch companies
Link here. The article provides a nice summary of the construction work by Blue Origin, Stoke Space, and SpaceX at the cape, all leading to future launches and greater capabilities.
Blue Origin is still pushing for a September 29, 2024 first launch of its New Glenn orbital rocket. SpaceX is continuing work on its new Starship/Superheavy facilities as well as installing upgrades to its Falcon launchpads. The most interesting tidbit however is was about Stoke Space and its proposed Nova rocket:
The first two flights of Nova are planned for 2025, while 10 flights are planned for both 2026 and 2027. Initial flights of Nova will be expendable, with full reusability of the first and second stages coming later.
Stoke’s primary goal has been to make this rocket entirely reusable. It apparently plans to begin launching and do recovery tests as it goes until it achieves that reusability later.
Link here. The article provides a nice summary of the construction work by Blue Origin, Stoke Space, and SpaceX at the cape, all leading to future launches and greater capabilities.
Blue Origin is still pushing for a September 29, 2024 first launch of its New Glenn orbital rocket. SpaceX is continuing work on its new Starship/Superheavy facilities as well as installing upgrades to its Falcon launchpads. The most interesting tidbit however is was about Stoke Space and its proposed Nova rocket:
The first two flights of Nova are planned for 2025, while 10 flights are planned for both 2026 and 2027. Initial flights of Nova will be expendable, with full reusability of the first and second stages coming later.
Stoke’s primary goal has been to make this rocket entirely reusable. It apparently plans to begin launching and do recovery tests as it goes until it achieves that reusability later.
CEO of Firefly removed
The board of directors of the rocket startup Firefly announced yesterday that the company’s CEO, Bill Weber, “will no longer serve” in that position and has been replaced by an interim CEO.
This change is likely related to a news story the day prior about allegations that Weber had had an “inappropriate relationship” with a female employee.
Firefly has an interesting history when it comes to its CEOs. The company’s first CEO, Tom Markusic, was first sued by Virgin Galactic (his former employer) for stealing proprietary information, and then by his first Firefly investors when he got the company out of bankruptcy by making a deal with a Ukrainian billionaire. That billionaire was later forced to divest from the company by the State Department. The new investors that Markusic found then forced him out in 2022.
Who will take over now remains unknown.
The board of directors of the rocket startup Firefly announced yesterday that the company’s CEO, Bill Weber, “will no longer serve” in that position and has been replaced by an interim CEO.
This change is likely related to a news story the day prior about allegations that Weber had had an “inappropriate relationship” with a female employee.
Firefly has an interesting history when it comes to its CEOs. The company’s first CEO, Tom Markusic, was first sued by Virgin Galactic (his former employer) for stealing proprietary information, and then by his first Firefly investors when he got the company out of bankruptcy by making a deal with a Ukrainian billionaire. That billionaire was later forced to divest from the company by the State Department. The new investors that Markusic found then forced him out in 2022.
Who will take over now remains unknown.
NASA cancels its VIPER payload on Astrobotic’s Griffin lunar lander
VIPER’s now canceled planned route at the Moon’s south pole
Late yesterday NASA announced it was canceling the VIPER rover that was the primary payload on Astrobotic’s Griffin lunar lander, scheduled for launch in the fall of 2025.
NASA stated cost increases, delays to the launch date, and the risks of future cost growth as the reasons to stand down on the mission. The rover was originally planned to launch in late 2023, but in 2022, NASA requested a launch delay to late 2024 to provide more time for preflight testing of the Astrobotic lander. Since that time, additional schedule and supply chain delays pushed VIPER’s readiness date to September 2025, and independently its CLPS (Commercial Lunar Payload Services) launch aboard Astrobotic’s Griffin lander also has been delayed to a similar time. Continuation of VIPER would result in an increased cost that threatens cancellation or disruption to other CLPS missions. NASA has notified Congress of the agency’s intent.
Knowing a bit of history is important to understand this decision. In the first half of the 2010s VIPER was called Resource Prospector, and was intended as an entirely NASA-built lunar lander and rover mission with a budget of about billion dollars. In 2018 however the Trump administration cancelled it as part of its decision to shift from missions designed, built, and owned by NASA to making NASA simply a customer buying products from private sector. Rather than spend a billion on one lunar lander/rover mission, NASA would use that money to buy multiple lunar landers from private companies, and put its instruments on those.
NASA then decided to repurpose the rover portion of Resource Prospector, turning it into VIPER to launch on Astrobotic’s Griffin lander. However, that project still carried with it all the problems that curse all government-designed, government-built, and government-owned projects. It had no fixed price contract but instead had the typical government unlimited checking account, and thus its costs kept rising with repeated delays in construction.
When then-NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine revealed the project at the 2019 International Astronautical Congress, the estimated cost was $250 million. By the time NASA was ready to make a cost commitment to Congress, that grew to $433.5 million with landing in 2023. That landing date slipped to 2024 with a cost of $505.4 million. Now it has slipped again to 2025 and with a cost of $609.6 million, more than 30 percent above the commitment. That triggered an automatic cancellation review, Kearns said, which took place last month.
Some of the cause of the 2023 delay was because Astrobotic’s Griffin lander wasn’t ready either. Now however it appears VIPER still won’t be ready for the 2025 launch, even though the lander will be ready.
NASA has therefore decided to stop throwing good money after bad, and kill the rover. It however has not killed its funding for Astrobotic’s Griffin, and the mission will go forward, with the company offering its now open payload space to others. It also may use this space to fly a demonstration mission of its own proposed LunarGrid solar power system.
VIPER’s now canceled planned route at the Moon’s south pole
Late yesterday NASA announced it was canceling the VIPER rover that was the primary payload on Astrobotic’s Griffin lunar lander, scheduled for launch in the fall of 2025.
NASA stated cost increases, delays to the launch date, and the risks of future cost growth as the reasons to stand down on the mission. The rover was originally planned to launch in late 2023, but in 2022, NASA requested a launch delay to late 2024 to provide more time for preflight testing of the Astrobotic lander. Since that time, additional schedule and supply chain delays pushed VIPER’s readiness date to September 2025, and independently its CLPS (Commercial Lunar Payload Services) launch aboard Astrobotic’s Griffin lander also has been delayed to a similar time. Continuation of VIPER would result in an increased cost that threatens cancellation or disruption to other CLPS missions. NASA has notified Congress of the agency’s intent.
Knowing a bit of history is important to understand this decision. In the first half of the 2010s VIPER was called Resource Prospector, and was intended as an entirely NASA-built lunar lander and rover mission with a budget of about billion dollars. In 2018 however the Trump administration cancelled it as part of its decision to shift from missions designed, built, and owned by NASA to making NASA simply a customer buying products from private sector. Rather than spend a billion on one lunar lander/rover mission, NASA would use that money to buy multiple lunar landers from private companies, and put its instruments on those.
NASA then decided to repurpose the rover portion of Resource Prospector, turning it into VIPER to launch on Astrobotic’s Griffin lander. However, that project still carried with it all the problems that curse all government-designed, government-built, and government-owned projects. It had no fixed price contract but instead had the typical government unlimited checking account, and thus its costs kept rising with repeated delays in construction.
When then-NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine revealed the project at the 2019 International Astronautical Congress, the estimated cost was $250 million. By the time NASA was ready to make a cost commitment to Congress, that grew to $433.5 million with landing in 2023. That landing date slipped to 2024 with a cost of $505.4 million. Now it has slipped again to 2025 and with a cost of $609.6 million, more than 30 percent above the commitment. That triggered an automatic cancellation review, Kearns said, which took place last month.
Some of the cause of the 2023 delay was because Astrobotic’s Griffin lander wasn’t ready either. Now however it appears VIPER still won’t be ready for the 2025 launch, even though the lander will be ready.
NASA has therefore decided to stop throwing good money after bad, and kill the rover. It however has not killed its funding for Astrobotic’s Griffin, and the mission will go forward, with the company offering its now open payload space to others. It also may use this space to fly a demonstration mission of its own proposed LunarGrid solar power system.