Enlarge/ NASA’s SLS rocket core stage for Artemis II is moved to the VAB.
NASA/Ben Smegelsky
Welcome to Edition 7.04 of the Rocket Report! Probably the most striking news this week came from ABL, which said in a terse social media statement that it had lost its second RS1 rocket during pre-flight testing. This is unfortunate, since the company had been so careful and meticulous in working toward this second launch attempt. It’s a reminder of how demanding this industry remains.
As always, we welcome reader submissions, and if you don’t want to miss an issue, please subscribe using the box below (the form will not appear on AMP-enabled versions of the site). Each report will include information on small-, medium-, and heavy-lift rockets as well as a quick look ahead at the next three launches on the calendar.
ABL loses rocket after static fire test. ABL Space Systems said Monday that its next rocket had suffered “irrecoverable” damage during preparations for launch. “After a pre-flight static fire test on Friday, a residual pad fire caused irrecoverable damage to RS1,” the company said on the social media site X. “The team is investigating root cause and will provide updates as the investigation progresses.” As of the writing of this report three days later, the company has not posted any additional information.
Not particularly promising … This is a serious setback for the launch company, which attempted the debut flight of its RS1 vehicle 18 months ago and had been preparing for this second attempt for a long time. The California-based company had been keeping a low profile and had not made a social media posting since May. The RS1 vehicle is advertised as having a lift capacity of 1.35 metric tons at a price of $12 million. During ABL’s initial launch attempt in January 2023, an anomaly in the rocket caused all nine of the RS1’s first-stage engines to shut down. (submitted by Ken the Bin)
Point-to-point company test-fires engine. A space transportation startup with visions of high-speed point-to-point travel has started tests of the engine that will power their vehicle, Space News reports. Frontier Aerospace test-fired its Mjölnir engine on July 18, its chairman, Alex Tai, said during a panel discussion at the Farnborough International Airshow. Mjölnir is a full-flow staged combustion engine. The firing lasted less than a second but demonstrated the startup of the turbopumps and successful ignition.
Starting with a smaller version … The company plans to do longer engine burns as part of the testing program. The version of Mjölnir currently being tested produces less than 3,000 pounds-force of thrust. New Frontier plans to use a much more powerful version of the engine on a vehicle called the Intercontinental Rocketliner, a suborbital vehicle intended to carry 100 people on high-speed flights around the planet at hypersonic speeds. (submitted by Ken the Bin and EllPeaTea)
The easiest way to keep up with Eric Berger’s space reporting is to sign up for his newsletter, we’ll collect his stories in your inbox.
Ursa Major invests in Ohio. Ursa Major will buy several industrial 3D printers and hire 15 new employees for a research and development center in Youngstown, Ohio, focused on additive manufacturing, Payload reports. The Colorado-based rocket engine maker will contribute $10.5 million in capital investment alongside a $4 million grant from JobsOhio, a privately funded economic development nonprofit. The expansion of a small existing facility will enable the company to step up its development of solid rocket motors—a top priority for the Department of Defense.
The war needs what it needs … In April, Ursa won a contract of undisclosed value from the Navy to develop a lower-cost manufacturing approach for the standardized solid rocket motors used across a range of missiles. The US supply chains for those motors—mainly provided by Northrop Grumman and L3Harris—have been stressed by US support for Ukraine’s defense against Russian invaders.In November, Ursa raised $138 million to support its push into solid rocket motor manufacturing in a round that reportedly valued the company at $750 million.
The central piece of NASA’s second Space Launch System rocket arrived at Kennedy Space Center in Florida this week. Agency officials intend to start stacking the towering launcher in the next couple of months for a mission late next year carrying a team of four astronauts around the Moon.
The Artemis II mission, officially scheduled for September 2025, will be the first voyage by humans to the vicinity of the Moon since the last Apollo lunar landing mission in 1972. NASA astronauts Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, Christina Koch, and Canadian mission specialist Jeremy Hansen will ride the SLS rocket away from Earth, then fly around the far side of the Moon and return home inside NASA’s Orion spacecraft.
“The core is the backbone of SLS, and it’s the backbone of the Artemis mission,” said Matthew Ramsey, NASA’s mission manager for Artemis II. “We’ve been waiting for the core to get here because all the integrated tests and checkouts that we do have to have the core stage. It has the flight avionics that drive the whole system. The boosters are also important, but the core is really the backbone for Artemis. So it’s a big day.”
The core stage rolled off of NASA’s Pegasus barge at Kennedy early Wednesday, following a weeklong ocean voyage from New Orleans, where Boeing builds the rocket under contract to NASA.
Ramsey told Ars that ground teams hope to begin stacking the rocket’s two powerful solid rocket boosters on NASA’s mobile launcher platform in September. Each booster, supplied by Northrop Grumman, is made of five segments with pre-packed solid propellant and a nose cone. All the pieces for the SLS boosters are at Kennedy and ready for stacking, Ramsey said.
The SLS upper stage, built by United Launch Alliance, is also at the Florida launch site. Now, the core stage is at Kennedy. In August or September, NASA plans to deliver the two remaining elements of the SLS rocket to Florida. These are the adapter structures that will connect the core stage to the upper stage, and the upper stage to the Orion spacecraft.
A heavy-duty crane inside the cavernous Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) will hoist each segment of the SLS boosters into place on the launch platform. Once the boosters are fully stacked, ground teams will lift the 212-foot (65-meter) core stage vertical in the transfer aisle running through the center of the VAB. A crane will then lower the core stage between the boosters. That could happen as soon as December, according to Ramsey.
Then comes the launch vehicle stage adapter, the upper stage, the Orion stage adapter, and finally, the Orion spacecraft itself.
Moving toward operations
NASA’s inspector general reported in 2022 that NASA’s first four Artemis missions will each cost $4.1 billion. Subsequent documents, including a Government Accountability Office report last year, suggest the expendable SLS core stage is responsible for at least a quarter of the cost for each Artemis flight.
The core stage for Artemis II is powered by four hydrogen-fueled RS-25 engines produced by Aerojet Rocketdyne. Two of the reusable engines for Artemis II have flown on the space shuttle, and the other two RS-25s were built in the shuttle era but never flew. Each SLS launch will put the core stage and its engines in the Atlantic Ocean.
Steve Wofford, who manages the stages office for the SLS program at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, told Ars there are “no major configuration differences” between the core stages for Artemis I and Artemis II. The only minor differences involve instrumentation that NASA wanted on Artemis I to measure pressures, accelerations, vibrations, temperatures, and other parameters on the first flight of the Space Launch System.
“We are still working off some flight observations that we made on Artemis I, but no showstoppers,” Wofford said. “On the first article, the test flight, Artemis I, we really loaded it up. That’s a golden opportunity to learn as much as you can about the vehicle and the flight regime, and anchor all your models… As you progress, you need less and less of that. So Core Stage 2 will have less development flight instrumentation than Core Stage 1, and then Core Stage 3 will have less still.”
Enlarge/ Boeing’s Strainer spacecraft is seen docked at the International Space Station in this picture taken July 3.
The astronauts who rode Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft to the International Space Station last month still don’t know when they will return to Earth.
Astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams have been in space for 51 days, six weeks longer than originally planned, as engineers on the groundwork through problems with Starliner’s propulsion system.
The problems are twofold. The spacecraft’s reaction control thrusters overheated, and some of them shut off as Starliner approached the space station June 6. A separate, although perhaps related, problem involves helium leaks in the craft’s propulsion system.
On Thursday, NASA and Boeing managers said they still plan to bring Wilmore and Williams home on the Starliner spacecraft. In the last few weeks, ground teams completed testing of a thruster on a test stand at White Sands, New Mexico. This weekend, Boeing and NASA plan to fire the spacecraft’s thrusters in orbit to check their performance while docked at the space station.
“I think we’re starting to close in on those final pieces of flight rationale to make sure that we can come home safely, and that’s our primary focus right now,” Stich said.
The problems have led to speculation that NASA might decide to return Wilmore and Williams to Earth in a SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft. There’s one Crew Dragon currently docked at the station, and another one is slated to launch with a fresh crew next month. Steve Stich, manager of NASA’s commercial crew program, said the agency has looked at backup plans to bring the Starliner crew home on a SpaceX capsule, but the main focus is still to have the astronauts fly home aboard Starliner.
“Our prime option is to complete the mission,” Stich said. “There are a lot of good reasons to complete this mission and bring Butch and Suni home on Starliner. Starliner was designed, as a spacecraft, to have the crew in the cockpit.”
Starliner launched from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida on June 5. Wilmore and Williams are the first astronauts to fly into space on Boeing’s commercial crew capsule, and this test flight is intended to pave the way for future operational flights to rotate crews of four to and from the International Space Station.
Once NASA fully certifies Starliner for operational missions, the agency will have two human-rated spaceships for flights to the station. SpaceX’s Crew Dragon has been flying astronauts since 2020.
Tests, tests, and more tests
NASA has extended the duration of the Starliner test flight to conduct tests and analyze data in an effort to gain confidence in the spacecraft’s ability to safely bring its crew home and to better understand the root causes of the overheating thrusters and helium leaks. These problems are inside Starliner’s service module, which is jettisoned to burn up in the atmosphere during reentry, while the reusable crew module, with the astronauts inside, parachutes to an airbag-cushioned landing.
The most important of these tests was a series of test-firings of a Starliner thruster on the ground. This thruster was taken from a set of hardware slated to fly on a future Starlink mission, and engineers put it through a stress test, firing it numerous times to replicate the sequence of pulses it would see in flight. The testing simulated two sequences of flying up to the space station, and five sequences the thruster would execute during undocking and a deorbit burn for return to Earth.
“This thruster has seen quite a bit of pulses, maybe even more than what we would anticipate we would see during a flight, and more aggressive in terms of two uphills and five downhills,” Stich said. “What we did see in the thruster is the same kind of thrust degradation that we’re seeing on orbit. In a number of the thrusters (on Starliner), we’re seeing reduced thrust, which is important.”
Starliner’s flight computer shut off five of the spacecraft’s 28 reaction control system thrusters, produced by Aerojet Rocketdyne, during the rendezvous with the space station last month. Four of the five thrusters were recovered after overheating and losing thrust, but officials have declared one of the thrusters unusable.
The thruster tested on the ground showed similar behavior. Inspections of the thruster at White Sands showed bulging in a Teflon seal in an oxidizer valve, which could restrict the flow of nitrogen tetroxide propellant. The thrusters, each generating about 85 pounds of thrust, consume the nitrogen tetroxide, or NTO, oxidizer and mix it with hydrazine fuel for combustion.
A poppet valve, similar to an inflation valve on a tire, is designed to open and close to allow nitrogen tetroxide to flow into the thruster.
“That poppet has a Teflon seal at the end of it,” Nappi said. “Through the heating and natural vacuum that occurs with the thruster firing, that poppet seal was deformed and actually bulged out a little bit.”
Stich said engineers are evaluating the integrity of the Teflon seal to determine if it could remain intact through the undocking and deorbit burn of the Starliner spacecraft. The thrusters aren’t needed while Starliner is attached to the space station.
“Could that particular seal survive the rest of the flight? That’s the important part,” Stich said.
Enlarge/ NASA’s Perseverance rover discovered “leopard spots” on a reddish rock nicknamed “Cheyava Falls” in Mars’ Jezero Crater in July 2024.
NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS
NASA’s Perseverance rover has found a very intriguing rock on the surface of Mars.
An arrowhead-shaped rock observed by the rover has chemical signatures and structures that could have been formed by ancient microbial life. To be absolutely clear, this is not irrefutable evidence of past life on Mars, when the red planet was more amenable to water-based life billions of years ago. But discovering these colored spots on this rock is darn intriguing and has Mars scientists bubbling with excitement.
“These spots are a big surprise,” said David Flannery, an astrobiologist and member of the Perseverance science team from the Queensland University of Technology in Australia, in a NASA news release. “On Earth, these types of features in rocks are often associated with the fossilized record of microbes living in the subsurface.”
What the rover found
This is a very recent discovery, and the science has not yet been peer-reviewed. The sample was collected on July 21—a mere four days ago—as the rover explored the Neretva Vallis riverbed. This valley was formed long ago when water rushed into Jezero Crater.
The science team operating Perseverance has nicknamed the rock Chevaya Falls and subjected it to multiple scans by the rover’s SHERLOC (Scanning Habitable Environments with Raman & Luminescence for Organics & Chemicals) instrument. The distinctive colorful spots, containing both iron and phosphate, are a smoking gun for certain chemical reactions—rather than microbial life itself.
On Earth, microbial life can derive energy from these kinds of chemical reactions. So, what we have here is a plausible source of energy for microbes on Mars. In addition, there are organic chemicals present on the same rock, which is consistent with something living there. From this, it is tempting to jump to the idea of microbes living on a rock, eons ago, in a Martian river. But this is not direct evidence of life.
NASA has a seven-step process for determining whether something can be confirmed as extraterrestrial life. This is known as the CoLD scale, for Confidence of Life Detection. In this case, the detection of these spots on a Martian rock represents just the first of seven steps—for example, scientists must still rule out non-biological possibility and identify other signals to have confidence in off-world life.
Bring them home
According to NASA, Perseverance has used all of its available instrumentation to study Chevaya Falls. “We have zapped that rock with lasers and X-rays and imaged it literally day and night from just about every angle imaginable,” said Ken Farley, Perseverance project scientist. “Scientifically, Perseverance has nothing more to give.”
The discovery provides some wind in the sails for NASA’s flagging efforts to devise and fly a Mars Sample Return mission. The agency’s most recent plan, costing $11 billion, was determined to be too expensive. Now, the space agency is asking the industry for help. In June it commissioned 10 studies on alternative means of returning rocks from Mars sooner, and presumably for a lower cost.
Now, scientists can point to rocks like Chevaya Falls and say this is precisely why they must be studied in ultra-capable labs back on Earth.
Enlarge/ With Dragon and Falcon, SpaceX has become an essential contractor for NASA.
SpaceX
There is an emerging truth about NASA’s push toward commercial contracts that is increasingly difficult to escape: Companies not named SpaceX are struggling with NASA’s approach of awarding firm, fixed-price contracts for space services.
This belief is underscored by the recent award of an $843 million contract to SpaceX for a heavily modified Dragon spacecraft that will be used to deorbit the International Space Station by 2030.
The recently released source selection statement for the “US Deorbit Vehicle” contract, a process led by NASA head of space operations Ken Bowersox, reveals that the competition was a total stomp. SpaceX faced just a single serious competitor in this process, Northrop Grumman. And in all three categories—price, mission suitability, and past performance—SpaceX significantly outclassed Northrop.
Although it’s wonderful that NASA has an excellent contractor in SpaceX, it’s not healthy in the long term that there are so few credible competitors. Moreover, a careful reading of the source selection statement reveals that NASA had to really work to get a competition at all.
“I was really happy that we got proposals from the companies that we did,” Bowersox said during a media teleconference last week. “The companies that sent us proposals are both great companies, and it was awesome to see that interest. I would have expected a few more [proposals], honestly, but I was very happy to get the ones that we got.”
Commercial initiatives struggling
NASA’s push into “commercial” space began nearly two decades ago with a program to deliver cargo to the International Space Station. The space agency initially selected SpaceX and Rocketplane Kistler to develop rockets and spacecraft to accomplish this, but after Kistler missed milestones, the company was subsequently replaced by Orbital Sciences Corporation. The cargo delivery program was largely successful, resulting in the Cargo Dragon (SpaceX) and Cygnus (Orbital Sciences) spacecraft. It continues to this day.
A commercial approach generally means that NASA pays a “fixed” price for a service rather than paying a contractor’s costs plus a fee. It also means that NASA hopes to become one of many customers. The idea is that, as the first mover, NASA is helping to stimulate a market by which its fixed-priced contractors can also sell their services to other entities—both private companies and other space agencies.
NASA has since extended this commercial approach to crew, with SpaceX and Boeing winning large contracts in 2014. However, only SpaceX has flown operational astronaut missions, while Boeing remains in the development and test phase, with its ongoing Crew Flight Test. Whereas SpaceX has sold half a dozen private crewed missions on Dragon, Boeing has yet to announce any.
Such a commercial approach has also been tried with lunar cargo delivery through the “Commercial Lunar Payload Services” program, as well as larger lunar landers (Human Landing System), next-generation spacesuits, and commercial space stations. Each of these programs has a mixed record at best. For example, NASA’s inspector general was highly critical of the lunar cargo program in a recent report, and one of the two spacesuit contractors, Collins Aerospace, recently dropped out because it could not execute on its fixed-price contract.
Some of NASA’s most important traditional space contractors, including Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Northrop Grumman, have all said they are reconsidering whether to participate in fixed-price contract competitions in the future. For example, Northrop CEO Kathy Warden said last August, “We are being even more disciplined moving forward in ensuring that we work with the government to have the appropriate use of fixed-price contracts.”
So the large traditional space contractors don’t like fixed-price contracts, and many new space companies are struggling to survive in this environment.
Enlarge/ File photo of a Falcon 9 launch on May 6 from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida.
SpaceX
It was only about 10 days ago that the Falcon 9 rocket’s upper stage failed in flight, preventing the rocket from delivering its 20 Starlink satellites into a proper orbit. Because they were released lower than expected—about 135 km above the Earth’s surface and subject to atmospheric drag—these satellites ultimately reentered the planet’s atmosphere and burnt up.
Typically, after a launch failure, a rocket will be sidelined for months while engineers and technicians comb over the available data and debris to identify a cause, perform tests, and institute a fix.
However, according to multiple sources, SpaceX was ready to launch the Falcon 9 rocket as soon as late last week. Currently, the company has a launch opportunity for no earlier than 12: 14 am ET (04: 14 UTC) on Wednesday for its Starlink 10-4 mission.
A quick fix?
In a summary of the anomaly posted shortly afterward, SpaceX did not identify the cause of the failure beyond saying, “The Merlin Vacuum engine experienced an anomaly and was unable to complete its second burn.”
Officially, the company has provided no additional information since then. However, the company’s engineers were able to identify the cause of the failure almost immediately and, according to sources, the fix was straightforward.
SpaceX was confident enough in this determination to resume launches of the Falcon 9 rocket one week after the failure. However, it is precluded from doing so while the US Federal Aviation Administration conducts a mishap investigation.
To that end, a week ago on July 15, SpaceX submitted a request to the FAA to resume launching its Falcon 9 rocket while this investigation into the anomaly continues. “The FAA is reviewing the request and will be guided by data and safety at every step of the process,” the FAA said in a statement at the time.
Crewed missions on deck
So, as of today, SpaceX is waiting for a determination from the FAA as to whether it will be allowed to resume Falcon 9 launches less than two weeks after the failure occurred.
The company plans to launch at least three Starlink missions in rapid succession from its two launch pads in Florida and one in California to determine the effectiveness of the fix. It would like to demonstrate the reliability of the Falcon 9 rocket, which had recorded more than 300 successful missions since its last failure during a pad accident in September 2016, before two upcoming crewed missions.
There is still a slight possibility that the Polaris Dawn mission, led by commercial astronaut Jared Isaacman, could launch in early August. This would be followed by the Crew-9 mission for NASA, which will carry four astronauts to the International Space Station.
Notably, neither of these crewed missions requires a second burn of the Merlin engine, which is where the failure occurred earlier this month during the Starlink mission.
Enlarge/ This artist’s concept shows the possible appearance of ESA’s RAMSES spacecraft, which will release two small CubeSats for additional observations at Apophis.
For nearly 20 years, scientists have known an asteroid named Apophis will pass unusually close to Earth on Friday, April 13, 2029. But most officials at the world’s space agencies stopped paying much attention when updated measurements ruled out the chance Apophis will impact Earth anytime soon.
Now, Apophis is again on the agenda, but this time as a science opportunity, not as a threat. The problem is there’s not much time to design, build and launch a spacecraft to get into position near Apophis in less than five years. The good news is there are designs, and in some cases, existing spacecraft, that governments can repurpose for missions to Apophis, a rocky asteroid about the size of three football fields.
Scientists discovered Apophis in 2004, and the first measurements of its orbit indicated there was a small chance it could strike Earth in 2029 or in 2036. Using more detailed radar observations of Apophis, scientists in 2021 ruled out any danger to Earth for at least the next 100 years.
“The three most important things about Apophis are: It will miss the Earth. It will miss the Earth. It will miss the Earth,” said Richard Binzel, a professor of planetary science at MIT. Binzel has co-chaired several conferences since 2020 aimed at drumming up support for space missions to take advantage of the Apophis opportunity in 2029.
“An asteroid this large comes this close only once per 1,000 years, or less frequently,” Binzel told Ars. “This is an experiment that nature is doing for us, bringing a large asteroid this close, such that Earth’s gravitational forces and tidal forces are going to tug and possibly shake this asteroid. The asteroid’s response is insightful to its interior.”
It’s important, Binzel argues, to get a glimpse of Apophis before and after its closest approach in 2029, when it will pass less than 20,000 miles (32,000 kilometers) from Earth’s surface, closer than the orbits of geostationary satellites.
“This is a natural experiment that will reveal how hazardous asteroids are put together, and there is no other way to get this information without vastly complicated spacecraft experiments,” Binzel said. “So this is a once-per-many-thousands-of-years experiment that nature is doing for us. We have to figure out how to watch.”
This week, the European Space Agency announced preliminary approval for a mission named RAMSES, which would launch in April 2028, a year ahead of the Apophis flyby, to rendezvous with the asteroid in early 2029. If ESA member states grant full approval for development next year, the RAMSES spacecraft will accompany Apophis throughout its flyby with Earth, collecting imagery and other scientific measurements before, during, and after closest approach.
The challenge of building and launching RAMSES in less than four years will serve as good practice for a potential future real-world scenario. If astronomers find an asteroid that’s really on a collision course with Earth, it might be necessary to respond quickly. Given enough time, space agencies could mount a reconnaissance mission, and if necessary, a mission to deflect or redirect the asteroid, likely using a technique similar to the one demonstrated by NASA’s DART mission in 2022.
“RAMSES will demonstrate that humankind can deploy a reconnaissance mission to rendezvous with an incoming asteroid in just a few years,” said Richard Moissl, head of ESA’s planetary defense office. “This type of mission is a cornerstone of humankind’s response to a hazardous asteroid. A reconnaissance mission would be launched first to analyze the incoming asteroid’s orbit and structure. The results would be used to determine how best to redirect the asteroid or to rule out non-impacts before an expensive deflector mission is developed.”
Shaking off the cobwebs
In order to make a 2028 launch feasible for RAMSES, ESA will reuse the design of a roughly half-ton spacecraft named Hera, which is scheduled for launch in October on a mission to survey the binary asteroid system targeted by the DART impact experiment in 2022. Copying the design of Hera will reduce the time needed to get RAMSES to the launch pad, ESA officials said.
“Hera demonstrated how ESA and European industry can meet strict deadlines and RAMSES will follow its example,” said Paolo Martino, who leads ESA’s development of Ramses, which stands for the Rapid Apophis Mission for Space Safety.
ESA’s space safety board recently authorized preparatory work on the RAMSES mission using funds already in the agency’s budget. OHB, the German spacecraft manufacturer that is building Hera, will also lead the industrial team working on RAMSES. The cost of RAMSES will be “significantly lower” than the 300-million-euro ($380 million) cost of the Hera mission, Martino wrote in an email to Ars.
“There is still so much we have yet to learn about asteroids but, until now, we have had to travel deep into the Solar System to study them and perform experiments ourselves to interact with their surface,” said Patrick Michel, a planetary scientist at the French National Center for Scientific Research, and principal investigator on the Hera mission.
“For the first time ever, nature is bringing one to us and conducting the experiment itself,” Michel said in a press release. “All we need to do is watch as Apophis is stretched and squeezed by strong tidal forces that may trigger landslides and other disturbances and reveal new material from beneath the surface.”
Assuming it gets the final go-ahead next year, RAMSES will join NASA’s OSIRIS-APEX mission in exploring Apophis. NASA is steering the spacecraft, already in space after its use on the OSIRIS-REx asteroid sample return mission, toward a rendezvous with Apophis in 2029, but it won’t arrive at its new target until a few weeks after its close flyby of Earth. The intricacies of orbital mechanics prevent a rendezvous with Apophis any earlier.
Observations from OSIRIS-APEX, a larger spacecraft than RAMSES with a sophisticated suite of instruments, “will deliver a detailed look of what Apophis is like after the Earth encounter,” Binzel said. “But until we establish the state of Apophis before the Earth encounter, we have only one side of the picture.”
Enlarge/ At its closest approach, asteroid Apophis will closer to Earth than the ring of geostationary satellites over the equator.
Scientists are also urging NASA to consider launching a pair of mothballed science probes on a trajectory to fly by Apophis some time before its April 2029 encounter with Earth. These two spacecraft were built for NASA’s Janus mission, which the agency canceled last year after the mission fell victim to launch delays with NASA’s larger Psyche asteroid explorer. The Janus probes were supposed to launch on the same rocket as Psyche, but problems with the Psyche mission forced a delay in the launch of more than one year.
Despite the delay, Psyche could still reach its destination in the asteroid belt, but the new launch trajectory meant Janus would be unable to visit the two binary asteroids scientists originally wanted to explore with the probes. After spending nearly $50 million on the mission, NASA put the twin Janus spacecraft, each about the size of a suitcase, into long-term storage.
At the most recent workshop on Apophis missions in April, scientists heard presentations on more than 20 concepts for spacecraft and instrument measurements at Apophis.
They included an idea from Blue Origin, Jeff Bezos’s space company, to use its Blue Ring space tug as a host platform for multiple instruments and landers that could descend to the surface of Apophis, assuming research institutions have enough time and money to develop their payloads. A startup named Exploration Laboratories has proposed partnering with NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory on a small spacecraft mission to Apophis.
“At the conclusion of the workshop, it was my job to try to bring forward some consensus, because if we don’t have some consensus on our top priority, we may end up with nothing,” Binzel said. “The consensus recommendation for ESA was to more forward with RAMSES.”
Workshop participants also gently nudged NASA to use the Janus probes for a mission to Apophis. “Apophis is a mission in search of a spacecraft, and Janus is a spacecraft in search of a mission,” Binzel said. “As a matter of efficiency and basic logic, Janus to Apophis is the highest priority.”
A matter of money
But NASA’s science budget, and especially funding for its planetary science vision, is under stress. Earlier this week, NASA canceled an already-built lunar rover named VIPER after spending $450 million on the mission. The mission had exceeded its original development cost by greater than 30 percent, prompting an automatic cancellation review.
The funding level for NASA’s science mission directorate this year is nearly $500 million less than last year’s budget, and $900 million below the White House’s budget request for fiscal year 2024. Because of the tight budget, NASA officials have said, for now, they are not starting development of any new planetary science missions as they focus on finishing projects already in the pipeline, like the Europa Clipper mission, the Dragonfly quadcopter to visit Saturn’s moon Titan, and the Near-Earth Object (NEO) Surveyor telescope to search for potentially hazardous asteroids.
Enlarge/ These grainy radar views of asteroid Apophis were captured using radars at NASA’s Goldstone Deep Space Communications Complex in California and Green Bank Telescope in West Virginia.
NASA has asked the Janus team to look at the feasibility of launching on the same rocket as NEO Surveyor in 2027, according to Dan Scheeres, the Janus principal investigator at the University of Colorado. With such a launch in 2027, Janus could capture the first up-close images of Apophis before RAMSES and OSIRIS-APEX get there.
“This is something that we’re currently presenting in some discussions with NASA, just to make sure that they understand what the possibilities are there,” Scheeres said in a meeting last week of the Small Bodies Advisory Group, which represents the asteroid science community.
“These spacecraft are capable of performing future scientific flyby missions to near-Earth asteroids,” Scheeres said. “Each spacecraft has a high-quality Malin visible imager and a thermal infrared imager. Each spacecraft has the ability to track and image an asteroid system through a close, fast flyby.”
“The scientific return from an Apophis flyby by Janus could be one of the best opportunities out there,” said Daniella DellaGiustina, lead scientist on the OSIRIS-APEX mission from the University of Arizona.
Binzel, who has led the charge for Apophis missions, said there is also some symbolic value to having a spacecraft escort the asteroid by Earth. Apophis will be visible in the skies over Europe and Africa when it is closest to our planet.
“When 2 billion people are watching this, they are going to ask, ‘What are our space agencies doing?’ And if the answer is, ‘Oh, we’ll be there. We’re getting there,’ which is OSIRIS-APEX, I don’t think that’s a very satisfying answer,” Binzel said.
“As the international space community, we want to demonstrate on April 13, 2029, that we are there and we are watching, and we are watching because we want to gain the most knowledge and the most understanding about these objects that is possible, because someday it could matter,” Binzel said. “Someday, our detailed knowledge of hazardous asteroids would be among the most important knowledge bases for the future of humanity.”
Enlarge/ The core stage for NASA’s second Space Launch System rocket rolls aboard a barge that will take it from New Orleans to Kennedy Space Center in Florida.
Welcome to Edition 7.03 of the Rocket Report! One week ago, SpaceX suffered a rare failure of its workhorse Falcon 9 rocket. In fact, it was the first time the latest version of the Falcon 9, known as the Block 5, has ever failed on its prime mission after nearly 300 launches. The world’s launch pads have been silent since the grounding of the Falcon 9 fleet after last week’s failure. This isn’t surprising, but it’s noteworthy. After all, the Falcon 9 has flown more this year than all of the world’s other rockets combined and is fundamental to much of what the world does in space.
As always, we welcome reader submissions. If you don’t want to miss an issue, please subscribe using the box below (the form will not appear on AMP-enabled versions of the site). Each report will include information on small-, medium-, and heavy-lift rockets as well as a quick look ahead at the next three launches on the calendar.
Astra finally goes private, again. A long-simmering deal for Astra’s founders to take the company private has been finalized, the company announced Thursday, capping the rocket launch company’s descent from blank-check darling to delisting in three years, Bloomberg reports. The launch company’s valuation peaked at $3.9 billion in 2021, the year it went public, and was worth about $12.2 million at the end of March, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Astra’s chief executive officer, Chris Kemp, and chief technology officer, Adam London, founded the company in 2016 with the goal of essentially commoditizing launch services for small satellites. But Astra’s rockets failed to deliver and fell short of orbit five times in seven tries.
Spiraling … Astra’s stock price tanked after the spate of launch failures, drying up its funding spigot as Kemp tried to pivot toward a slightly larger, more reliable rocket. Astra acquired a company named Apollo Fusion in 2021, entering a new business segment to produce electric thrusters for small satellites. But Astra’s launch business faltered, and last November Kemp and London submitted an offer to retake ownership of the company. Astra announced the closure of the take-private deal Thursday, with Kemp and London acquiring the company’s outstanding shares for 50 cents per share in cash, below the stock’s final listing price of 53 cents. “We will now focus all of our attention on a successful launch of Rocket 4, delivering satellite engines to our customers, and building a company of consequence,” Kemp said. (submitted by EllPeaTea and Ken the Bin)
Firefly chief leaves company. Launch startup Firefly Aerospace parted ways with CEO Bill Weber, Payload reports. The announcement of Weber’s departure late Wednesday came two days after Payload reported Firefly was investigating claims of an alleged inappropriate relationship between him and a female employee. “Firefly Aerospace’s Board of Directors announced that Bill Weber is no longer serving as CEO of the company, effective immediately,” the company said in a statement Wednesday night. Peter Schumacher takes over as interim CEO while Firefly searches for a new permanent chief executive. Schumacher was an interim CEO at Firefly before Weber’s hiring in 2022.
Two days and gone … Payload published the first report of Weber’s alleged improper relationship with a female employee Monday. Two days later, Weber was gone. Payload reported an executive brought his concerns about the alleged relationship to Firefly’s board and resigned because he lost confidence in leadership at the company. Citing four current and former employees, Payload reported Firefly’s culture became “chaotic” since Weber took the helm in 2022 after its acquisition by AE Industrial Partners. The Texas-based company achieved some success during Weber’s tenure, with four orbital launches of its Alpha rocket, although two of the flights ended up in lower-than-planned orbits. (submitted by Ken the Bin)
The easiest way to keep up with Eric Berger’s space reporting is to sign up for his newsletter, we’ll collect his stories in your inbox.
Themis hop tests delayed to next year. The initial hop tests of the European Themis reusable booster, developed by ArianeGroup and funded by ESA, won’t start until next year, European Spaceflight reports. The Swedish Space Corporation, which operates the space center in Sweden where Themis will initially fly, confirmed the schedule change. Once ArianeGroup moves on to higher altitude flights, the testing will be moved to the Guiana Space Center. ESA awarded the first development contract for the Themis booster in 2019, and the first hop tests were then scheduled for 2022. Themis’ hops will be similar to SpaceX’s Grasshopper rocket, which performed a series of up-and-down atmospheric test flights before SpaceX started recovering and reusing Falcon 9 boosters.
Fate of Themis … The Themis booster is powered by the methane-fueled Prometheus engine, also funded by ESA. A large European reusable rocket is unlikely to fly until the 2030s, but a subsidiary of ArianeGroup named MaiaSpace is developing a smaller partially reusable two-stage rocket slated to debut as soon as next year. The Maia rocket will use a modified Themis booster as its first stage. “As a result, for MaiaSpace, the continued and rapid development of the Themis program is essential to ensure it can hit its projected target of an inaugural flight of Maia in 2025,” European Spaceflight reports. (submitted by Ken the Bin)
Enlarge/ NASA completed assembling the VIPER rover last month at the Johnson Space Center in Houston.
NASA has spent $450 million designing and building a first-of-its-kind robot to drive into eternally dark craters at the Moon’s south pole, but the agency announced Wednesday it will cancel the rover due to delays and cost overruns.
“NASA intends to discontinue the VIPER mission,” said Nicky Fox, head of the agency’s science mission directorate. “Decisions like this are never easy, and we haven’t made this one, in any way, lightly. In this case, the projected remaining expenses for VIPER would have resulted in either having to cancel or disrupt many other missions in our Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) line.”
NASA has terminated science missions after development delays and cost overruns before, but it’s rare to cancel a mission with a spacecraft that is already built.
The Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER) mission was supposed to be a robotic scout for NASA’s Artemis program, which aims to return astronauts to the lunar surface in the next few years. VIPER was originally planned to launch in late 2023 and was slated to fly to the Moon aboard a commercial lander provided by Pittsburgh-based Astrobotic, which won a contract from NASA in 2020 to deliver the VIPER rover to the lunar surface. Astrobotic is one of 14 companies in the pool of contractors for NASA’s CLPS program, with the goal of transporting government-sponsored science payloads to the Moon.
But VIPER has been delayed at least two years—the most recent schedule projected a launch in September 2025—causing its cost to grow from $433 million to more than $609 million. The ballooning costs automatically triggered a NASA review to determine whether to proceed with the mission or cancel it. Ultimately, officials said they determined NASA couldn’t pay the extra costs for VIPER without affecting other Moon missions.
“Therefore, we’ve made the decision to forego this particular mission, the VIPER mission, in order to be able to sustain the entire program,” Fox said.
“We’re disappointed,” said John Thornton, CEO of Astrobotic. “It’s certainly difficult news… VIPER has been a great team to work with, and we’re disappointed we won’t get the chance to fly them to the Moon.”
NASA said it will consider “expressions of interest” submitted by US industry and international partners by August 1 for use of the existing VIPER rover at no cost to the government. If NASA can’t find anyone to take over VIPER who can pay to get it to the Moon, the agency plans to disassemble the rover and harvest instruments and components for future lunar missions.
Scientists were dismayed by VIPER’s cancellation.
“It’s absurd, to be honest with you,” said Clive Neal, a planetary geologist at the University of Notre Dame. “It made no sense to me in terms of the economics. You’re canceling a mission that is complete, built, ready to go. It’s in the middle of testing.”
“This is a bad mistake,” wrote Phil Metzger, a planetary physicist at the University of Central Florida, in a post on X. “This was the premier mission to measure lateral and vertical variations of lunar ice in the soil. It would have been revolutionary. Other missions don’t replace what is lost here.”
Built with nowhere to go
Engineers at NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston finished assembling the VIPER rover last month, and managers gave approval to put the craft through environmental testing to make sure VIPER could withstand the acoustics and vibrations of launch and the extreme temperature swings it would encounter in space.
Instead, NASA has canceled the mission after spending $450 million to get it to this point. “This is a very tough decision, but it is a decision based on budgetary concerns in a very constrained budget environment,” Fox told reporters Wednesday.
VIPER is about the size of a golf cart, with four wheels, headlights, a drill, and three science instruments to search for water ice in depressions near the Moon’s south pole that have been shaded from sunlight for billions of years. This has allowed these so-called permanently shadowed regions to become cold traps, allowing water ice to accumulate at or near the surface, where it could be accessible for future astronauts to use as drinking water or an oxygen source or to convert into electricity and rocket fuel.
But first, scientists need to know exactly where the water is located and how easy it is to reach. VIPER was supposed to be the next step in mapping resources on the Moon, providing ground truth measurements to corroborate remote sensing data from satellites in lunar orbit.
But late parts deliveries delayed construction of the VIPER rover, and in 2022, NASA ordered additional testing of Astrobotic’s Griffin lunar lander to improve the chances of a successful landing with VIPER. This delayed VIPER’s launch from late 2023 until late 2024, and at the beginning of this year, more supply chain issues with the VIPER rover and the Griffin lander pushed back the launch until September 2025.
This most recent delay raised the projected cost of VIPER more than 30 percent over the original cost of the mission, prompting a NASA termination review. While the rover is now fully assembled, NASA still needed to put it through a lengthy series of tests, complete development of the ground systems to control VIPER on the Moon, and deliver the craft to Astrobotic for integration onto the Griffin lander.
The remaining work to complete VIPER and operate it for 100 days on the lunar surface would have cost around $84 million, according to Kearns.
Enlarge/ A pedestrian walks past a flown Falcon 9 booster at SpaceX headquarters in Hawthorne, California, on Tuesday, the same day Elon Musk said he will relocate the headquarters to Texas.
Elon Musk said Tuesday that he will move the headquarters of SpaceX and his social media company X from California to Texas in response to a new gender identity law signed by California Governor Gavin Newsom.
Musk’s announcement, made via a post on X, follows his decision in 2021 to move the headquarters of the electric car company Tesla from Palo Alto, California, to Austin, Texas, in the wake of coronavirus lockdowns in the Bay Area the year before. Now, two of Musk’s other major holdings are making symbolic moves out of California: SpaceX to the company’s Starbase launch facility near Brownsville, Texas, and X to Austin.
The new gender identity law, signed by Governor Newsom, a Democrat, on Monday, bars school districts in California from requiring teachers to disclose a change in a student’s gender identification or sexual orientation to their parents without the child’s permission. Musk wrote on X that the law was the “final straw” prompting the relocation to Texas, where the billionaire executive and his companies could take advantage of lower taxes and light-touch regulations.
“Because of this law and the many others that preceded it, attacking both families and companies, SpaceX will now move its HQ from Hawthorne, California, to Starbase, Texas,” Musk wrote Tuesday on X.
The first-in-the-nation law in California is a flashpoint in the struggle between conservative school boards concerned about parental rights and proponents for the privacy rights of LGBTQ people.
“I did make it clear to Governor Newsom about a year ago that laws of this nature would force families and companies to leave California to protect their children,” wrote Musk, who on Saturday endorsed former President Donald Trump, the Republican nominee in this year’s presidential election.
In a statement, Newsom’s office said the law “does not allow a student’s name or gender identity to be changed on an official school record without parental consent” and “does not take away or undermine parents’ rights.”
What does this mean for SpaceX?
Musk’s comments on X didn’t mention details about the implications of his companies’ moves to Texas. However, while Tesla’s corporate headquarters relocated to Texas in 2021, the company still produces cars in California and announced a new engineering hub in Palo Alto last year. The situation with SpaceX is likely to be similar.
Since Musk bought Twitter in 2022, he renamed it X, rewrote the network’s policies on content moderation, and laid off most of the company’s staff, reducing its workforce to around 1,500 employees. With vast manufacturing capacities, SpaceX currently has more than 13,000 employees, so a relocation for Musk’s space company would affect more people and potentially be more disruptive than one at X.
SpaceX’s current headquarters in Hawthorne, California, serves as a factory, engineering design center, and mission control for the company’s rockets and spacecraft. Relocating these facilities wouldn’t be easy, but SpaceX may not need to.
Enlarge/ Heads of state pose for a group photo at an event Tuesday celebrating the 75th anniversary of NATO.
During their summit in Washington, DC, this week, NATO member states committed more than $1 billion to improve the sharing of intelligence from national and commercial reconnaissance satellites.
The agreement is a further step toward integrating space assets into NATO military commands. It follows the bloc’s adoption of an official space policy in 2019, which recognized space as a fifth war-fighting domain alongside air, land, maritime, and cyberspace. The next step was the formation of the NATO Space Operations Center in 2020 to oversee space support for NATO military operations.
On June 25, NATO announced the establishment of a “space branch” in its Allied Command Transformation, which identifies trends and incorporates emerging capabilities into the alliance’s security strategy.
Breaking down barriers
The new intelligence-sharing agreement was signed on July 9 by representatives from 17 NATO nations, including the United States, to support the Alliance Persistent Surveillance from Space (APSS) program. In a statement, NATO called the agreement “the largest multinational investment in space-based capabilities in NATO’s history.”
The agreement for open sharing of intelligence data comes against the backdrop of NATO’s response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Space-based capabilities, including battlefield surveillance and communications, have proven crucial to both sides in the war.
“The ongoing war in Ukraine has further underscored intelligence’s growing dependence on space-based data and assets,” NATO said.
The program will improve NATO’s ability to monitor activities on the ground and at sea with unprecedented accuracy and timeliness, the alliance said in a statement. The 17 parties to the agreement pledged more than $1 billion transition the program into an implementation phase over the next five years. Six of the 17 signatories currently operate or plan to launch their own national reconnaissance satellites, while several more nations are home to companies operating commercial space-based surveillance satellites.
The APSS program won’t involve the development and launch of any NATO spy satellites. Instead, each nation will make efforts to share observations from their own government and commercial satellites.
Luxembourg, one of the smallest NATO member states, set up the APSS program with an initial investment of roughly $18 million (16.5 million euros) in 2023. At the time, NATO called the program a “data-centric initiative” aimed at bringing together intelligence information for easier dissemination among allies and breaking down barriers of secrecy and bureaucracy.
“APSS is not about creating NATO-owned and operated space assets,” officials wrote in the program’s fact sheet. “It will make use of existing and future space assets in allied countries, and connect them together in a NATO virtual constellation called ‘Aquila.'”
Another element of the program involves processing and sharing intelligence information through cloud solutions and technologies. NATO said AI analytical tools will also better manage growing amounts of surveillance data from space, and ensure decision-makers get faster access to time-sensitive observations.
“The APSS initiative may be regarded as a game changer for NATO’s intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. It will largely contribute to build NATO’s readiness and reduce its dependency on other intelligence and surveillance capabilities,” said Ludwig Decamps, general manager of the NATO Communications and Information Agency.
Enlarge/ The Ariane 6 rocket takes flight for the first time on July 9, 2024.
ESA – S. Corvaja
Welcome to Edition 7.02 of the Rocket Report! The highlight of this week was the hugely successful debut of Europe’s Ariane 6 rocket. They will address the upper stage issue, I am sure. Given Europe’s commitment to zero debris, stranding the second stage is not great. But for a debut launch of a large new vehicle, this was really promising.
As always, we welcome reader submissions, and if you don’t want to miss an issue, please subscribe using the box below (the form will not appear on AMP-enabled versions of the site). Each report will include information on small-, medium-, and heavy-lift rockets as well as a quick look ahead at the next three launches on the calendar.
Chinese launch company suffers another setback. Chinese commercial rocket firm iSpace suffered a launch failure late Wednesday in a fresh setback for the company, Space News reports. The four-stage Hyperbola-1 solid rocket lifted off from Jiuquan spaceport in the Gobi Desert at 7: 40 pm ET (23: 40 UTC) on Wednesday. Beijing-based iSpace later issued a release stating that the rocket’s fourth stage suffered an anomaly. The statement did not reveal the name nor nature of the payloads lost on the flight.
Early troubles are perhaps to be expected … Beijing Interstellar Glory Space Technology Ltd., or iSpace, made history in 2019 as the first privately funded Chinese company to reach orbit, with the solid-fueled Hyperbola-1. However the rocket suffered three consecutive failures following that feat. The company recovered with two successful flights in 2023 before the latest failure. The loss could add to reliability concerns over China’s commercial launch industry as it follows Space Pioneer’s recent catastrophic static-fire explosion. (submitted by EllPeaTea)
Feds backtrack on former Firefly investor. A long, messy affair between US regulators and a Ukrainian businessman named Max Polyakov seems to have finally been resolved, Ars reports. On Tuesday, Polyakov’s venture capital firm Noosphere Venture Partners announced that the US government has released him and his related companies from all conditions imposed upon them in the run-up to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. This decision comes more than two years after the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States and the US Air Force forced Polyakov to sell his majority stake in the Texas-based launch company Firefly.
Not a spy … This rocket company was founded in 2014 by an engineer named Tom Markusic, who ran into financial difficulty as he sought to develop the Alpha rocket. Markusic had to briefly halt Firefly’s operations before Polyakov, a colorful and controversial Ukrainian businessman, swooped in and provided a substantial infusion of cash into the company. “The US government quite happily allowed Polyakov to pump $200 million into Firefly only to decide he was a potential spy just as the company’s first rocket was ready to launch,” Ashlee Vance, a US journalist who chronicled Polyakov’s rise, told Ars. It turns out, Polyakov wasn’t a spy.
The easiest way to keep up with Eric Berger’s space reporting is to sign up for his newsletter, we’ll collect his stories in your inbox.
Pentagon ICBM costs soar. The price tag for the Pentagon’s next-generation nuclear-tipped Sentinel ICBMs has ballooned by 81 percent in less than four years, The Register reports. This triggered a mandatory congressional review. On Monday, the Department of Defense released the results of this review, with Under-secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment William LaPlante saying the Sentinel missile program met established criteria for being allowed to continue after his “comprehensive, unbiased review of the program.”
Trust us, the military says … The Sentinel project is the DoD’s attempt to replace its aging fleet of ground-based nuclear-armed Minuteman III missiles (first deployed in 1970) with new hardware. When it passed its Milestone B decision (authorization to enter the engineering and manufacturing phase) in September 2020, the cost was a fraction of the $141 billion the Pentagon now estimates Sentinel will cost, LaPlante said. To give that some perspective, the proposed annual budget for the Department of Defense for its fiscal 2025 is nearly $850 billion. (submitted by EllPeaTea)
