"Project Horizon, Vol I." (vollst. Titel: "Project Horizon Report. A U.S. Army Study for the establishment of a lunar outpost")
Zitat S.7
By the end of 1964, a total of 72 SATURN vehicles should have been launched in US programs, of which 40 are expected to contribute to the accomplishment of HORIZON. Cargo delivery to the moon begins in January 1965. The first manned landing by two men will be made in April 1965. The buildup and construction phase will be continued without interruption until the outpost is ready for beneficial occupancy and is manned by a task force 12 men in November 1966.
This buildup program requires 61 SATURN 1 and 88 SATURN II launchings through November 1966, the average launching rate being 5.3 per month. During this time period 490,000 pounds of useful cargo will be transported to the moon.
During the first operational year of the lunar outpost, December 1966 through 167, a total of 64 launchings have been scheduled. These will result in an additional 266,000 pounds of useful cargo on the moon.
The total cost of the eight-and-a-half year program presented in this study is estimated to be six billion dollars. This is an average of approximately $700 million per year. These figures are a valid appraisal and, while preliminary, they represent the best estimates of experienced, non-commercial agenices of the government. Substantial funding is undeniably required for the establishment of a U.S. lunar outpost; however, the implications of the fact that the average annual funding required for Project HORIZON would be les than two percent of the current annual defense budget.
Figure I-1 shows the HORIZON outpost as it would appear in late 1965, after about six months of construction effort. The basic building block for the outpost will be cylindrical metal tanks ten feet in diameter and 20 feet in length. (Details of typical tnaks are shown in Fig. I-2.) The buried cylindral tanks at the left-center of Fig. I-1 constitue the living quarters of the initial construction crew of nine men who will arrive in July 1965. (Details in Fig. I-3.) During the constructoin period, this force will be gradually augmented until a final complement of 12 men is reached. The construction camp is a minimum facility and will be made operational within 15 days after the beginning of active work at the poutpose site. Two nuclear reactors are located in holes as shown oin the left portion of Fig. I-1. These provide power for the operation of the preliminary quarters and for the equipment used in the construction in the construction of the permanent facility. The main quarters and supporting facilities are shown being assembled in the open excavation to the right-center of the figure. These cylinders will also ultimately be covered with lunar material.
Um den Bericht mal in Perspektive zu setzen: Als die AMBA-Gruppe am 20. März 1959 durch Generalleutnant Arthur G. Trudeau den Auftrag zur Erstellung dieser Planstudie erhalten hat, hatten die USA insgesamt 6 Satelliten gestartet, davon war die erste Mondsonde, Pioneer 4, gestartet am 3.3.59, nur ein Teilerfolg gewesen, weil der Vorbeiflug am Mond aufgrund der zu langen Brenndauer der 2. Stufe mit 60.000 km zu weit entfernt ausfiel, um Meßdaten oder Photos vom Mond zu erhalten. Die UdSSR hatte bis zu diesenm Zeitpunkt 3 Satelliten gestartet: Sputnik 1 und 2, und Luna 1 am 2.1.59. Luna/Lunik 3, die die ersten Bilder von der Mondrückseite aufnahm, startete erst im Oktober 1959. Dafür waren in den USA im gleichen Zeitraum 16 Starts als Fehlschläge geendet, darunter die beiden ersten Discoverer-Spionagesatelliten der "Keyhole"-Serie (die die aufgenommenen Teleskop-Photos mit einer Rückkehrkapsel abwerfen sollten) - dieses Programm kam natürlich nicht tagesaktuell in den Nachrichten vor.
Wenn man das als Folie hat, dann wirken die derzeitgen Planvorgaben für das Artemis-Programm nicht mehr ganz so größenwahnsinnig.
"Les hommes seront toujours fous; et ceux qui croient les guérir sont les plus fous de la bande." - Voltaire
Zitat NASA is building the first nuclear reactor-powered interplanetary spacecraft. How will it work?
The agency wants to fly it to Mars by the end of 2028. Experts say that’s … ambitious. By Robin George Andrews, April 14, 2026
Just before Artemis II began its historic slingshot around the moon, Jared Isaacman, the recently confirmed NASA administrator, made a flurry of announcements from the agency’s headquarters in Washington, DC. He said the US would soon undertake far more regular moon missions and establish the foundations for a base at the lunar south pole before the end of the decade. He also affirmed the space agency’s commitment to putting a nuclear reactor on the lunar surface.
These goals were largely expected—but there was still one surprise. Isaacman also said NASA would build the first-ever nuclear reactor-powered interplanetary spacecraft and fly it to Mars by the end of 2028. It’s called the Space Reactor-1 Freedom, or SR-1 for short. “After decades of study, and billions spent on concepts that have never left Earth, America will finally get underway on nuclear power in space,” he said at the event. “We will launch the first-of-its-kind interplanetary mission.”
Little detail on SR-1 is publicly available, and NASA’s own spaceflight researchers did not respond to requests for comment. But MIT Technology Review spoke to several nuclear power and propulsion experts to find out how the new nuclear-powered spacecraft might work.
Despite operational differences, the fundamentals of running a nuclear reactor in space are much the same as they are on Earth. First, get some uranium fuel; then bombard it with neutrons. This ruptures the uranium’s unstable atomic nuclei, which expel a torrent of extra neutrons—and that rapidly escalates into a self-sustaining, roasting-hot nuclear fission reaction. Its prodigious heat output can then be used to produce electricity.
Doing this in space may sound like an act of lunacy, but it’s not: The idea, and even a lot of the basic technology, has been around for decades. The Soviet Union sent dozens of nuclear reactors into orbit (often to power spy satellites), while the US deployed just one, known as SNAP-10A, back in 1965—a technological demonstration to see if it would operate normally in space. The aim was for the reactor to generate electricity for at least a year, but it ran for just over a month before a high-voltage failure in the spacecraft caused it to malfunction and shut down.
One version of this technology is known as nuclear thermal propulsion, or NTP. You start with a nuclear reactor, one that’s cooking at around 5,000°F. Then “you’ve got a cold gas, and you squirt cold gas over the hot reactor,” says Middleburgh. “The gas expands, you shoot it out the back of a nozzle, and you have an impulse. And that impulse drives you forward.”
Because the thrust depends on the speed of the gas being ejected, the propellant gas needs to be light, making hydrogen a popular choice. But hydrogen is a corrosive and explosive substance, so using it in NTP engines can make them precarious to operate. On top of this, NTP doesn’t necessarily have a very long operating life.
Alternatively, there’s nuclear electric propulsion, or NEP, which “is very low thrust, but very efficient, so you can use it for a long period of time,” says Sebastian Corbisiero, the US Department of Energy’s national technical director of space reactor programs. This method uses heat from a fission reactor to generate power. That power is used to electrify a gas and then blast it out of the spacecraft, generating thrust.
Both NTP and NEP have been investigated by US researchers, because both have the added benefit of making it easier and safer for human beings to explore the solar system. Astronauts in space are exposed to harmful cosmic radiation, but because nuclear propulsion makes spacecraft speedier and more agile, they’d spend less time in it. “It solves the radiation problem,” says Metzger. “That’s one of the main motivations for inventing better propulsion to and from Mars.”
What might the SR-1 look like? MIT Technology Review saw a presentation by Steve Sinacore, program executive of NASA’s Space Reactor Office, that offers some clues. So far, the concept art makes it look like a colossal fletched arrow. At the back will be the power-and-propulsion system, while its tip will hold a 20-kilowatt-or-greater uranium-filled nuclear reactor. (For context, a typical nuclear plant on Earth is 50,000 times more powerful, producing a gigawatt of power.)
he “fletches” on SR-1 are large fins that allow the reactor to cool down. “You have to have really large radiators,” says Holmes, since the nuclear fission process produces so much heat that much of it has to be vented into space—otherwise, the reactor and spacecraft will melt.
According to that presentation, the spacecraft’s hardware development is due to start this June. By January 2028, SR-1’s systems should be ready for assembly and testing. And by that October, the spacecraft will arrive at the launch site, ready for liftoff before the year’s end. Will the nuclear reactor manage to hold itself together? “Going through the launch safely is going to be a challenge,” says Middleburgh. “You are being shaken, rattled, and rolled.”
For safety reasons, the nuclear reactor will be switched on around two days post-launch, when it’s comfortably in space. Uranium isn’t tremendously dangerous by itself, but that can’t be said of the nuclear waste products that emerge when the reactor is activated, so you don’t want any of that to fall back to Earth.
If this schedule is adhered to, and SR-1 works as planned, it’s expected to reach Mars about a year after launch. “It’s an aggressive timeline,” says Holmes, something she suspects is being driven partly by China’s and Russia’s own deep-space nuclear ambitions. The two countries aim to place their own nuclear reactor on the moon’s surface to power the planned International Lunar Research Station—a jointly operated lunar base—by 2035.
Whether it flies or fails in space, SR-1’s operations should help NASA with putting a nuclear reactor on the moon soon after. “All of the things we’d be learning about how that system operates in space [are] very helpful for a surface application, because basically it’s the same,” says Corbisiero. “There’s still no air on the moon.”
And if SR-1 does triumph, it will be a game-changing victory for NASA.
Zitat Reid Wiseman@astro_reid Only one chance in this lifetime…
Like watching sunset at the beach from the most foreign seat in the cosmos, I couldn’t resist a cell phone video of Earthset. You can hear the shutter on the Nikon as @Astro_Christina is hammering away on 3-shot brackets and capturing those exceptional Earthset photos through the 400mm lens. @AstroVicGlover was in window 3 watching with @Astro_Jeremy next to him.
I could barely see the Moon through the docking hatch window but the iPhone was the perfect size to catch the view…this is uncropped, uncut with 8x zoom which is quite comparable to the view of the human eye. Enjoy. 1:32 AM · Apr 20, 2026
Zitat Aakash Gupta@aakashgupta That iPhone video is the farthest a consumer smartphone has ever been from Earth. Roughly 250,000 miles away, handheld through a docking hatch window, at 8x zoom with no modifications.
Apollo 8's Earthrise was shot on a Hasselblad 500EL that NASA had torn apart and rebuilt. Custom lubricants that wouldn't off-gas in vacuum. 70mm Ektachrome film. A 250mm Zeiss Sonnar lens on a bespoke camera body with motorized film advance. 1968 peak-of-engineering, purpose-built for one job.
Reid shot his version on an iPhone 17 Pro Max. 200mm equivalent focal length at 8x. f/2.8. The same phone shipping to Apple stores this week.
The 8x view looks close to the human eye because the tetraprism folds the optical path inside a sensor the size of a fingernail. Apple spent a decade compressing what used to require a 250mm Zeiss barrel into 4mm of stacked glass plus computational denoising.
The four astronauts went 252,756 miles from Earth. The device that documented the view sits on your nightstand. 4:43 AM · Apr 20, 2026
Anderswo fliegt man zum Mond & landet Raketen. In Deutschland gibt es dafür das Deutsche Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt. Und das erstellt:
Zitat 22. Januar 2026 | Projektabschluss „Ich entlaste Städte 2“ - DLR-Studie: So lohnen sich Lastenräder für Unternehmen
Das DLR hat im Projekt „Ich entlaste Städte 2“ den Einsatz von Lastenrädern und elektrischen Leichtfahrzeugen durch Unternehmen umfassend untersucht. Dazu werteten sie die Daten von über 100.000 gefahrenen Kilometern, die Unternehmen mit diesen Fahrzeugen zurückgelegt haben. Das Ergebnis: Diese Fahrzeuge rechnen sich für Geldbeutel und Klima – wenn sie von Unternehmen richtig eingesetzt werden. Die Forschenden identifizierten sechs Punkte, die in der Praxis ausschlaggebend für den Erfolg sind. Online stehen eine Checkliste für die Einführung und ein Tool bereit, um die Rentabilität zu berechnen. Schwerpunkte: Verkehr, Elektromobilität, Lastenräder, LEV
Zitat Eric Berger@SciGuySpace NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman just testified before Congress that both the Lunar Gateway habitable modules delivered to NASA (HALO and I-HAB) were corroded. 🚨 7:27 PM · Apr 22, 2026
Eric Berger@SciGuySpace Here are Isaacman's remarks on HAL and I-HAB in full: "I appreciate the contributions, and look forward to working with them on how we could potentially repurpose hardware to surface applications. I’ll tell you, at the Gateway program -- outside of the PPE hardware that we’re going use for the nuclear power and propulsion demonstration -- the only two habitable volumes that were delivered both were corroded. And that’s unfortunate because it would have delayed, probably beyond 2030, the application of Gateway." 8:06 PM · Apr 22, 2026
Zitat NASA and Axiom react to OIG Report on delays in Next-Generation Spacesuit Program
written by Chris Bergin April 21, 2026
NASA’s leadership and Axiom have reacted to a warning from the NASA Office of Inspector General (OIG) that the agency’s ambitious plan to field next-generation spacesuits for lunar landings and International Space Station (ISS) spacewalks is significantly behind schedule.
The report, titled “NASA’s Acquisition of Next-Generation Spacesuit Services”, details how developmental delays, a risky acquisition strategy, and the early exit of one key contractor have left NASA reliant on a single provider—potentially threatening the 2028 Artemis lunar landing and continued ISS operations ahead of the station’s planned 2030 decommissioning.
Spacesuits have been essential to human space exploration since the earliest crewed missions.
During Project Mercury in the early 1960s, NASA developed basic pressure suits for short orbital flights. The Gemini program advanced the technology, enabling the first U.S. spacewalks with improved mobility and life support systems.
The pinnacle came with the Apollo missions, where the iconic A7L suits—built by International Latex Corporation (ILC Dover)—allowed astronauts to walk on the lunar surface between 1969 and 1972, protecting them from the Moon’s extreme temperatures, vacuum, and abrasive regolith.
Now more than four decades old in its core design, the aging EMU has encountered recurring issues such as water intrusion in helmets and parts obsolescence.
For over a decade, NASA has worked toward next-generation suits capable of supporting longer lunar surface operations and more reliable ISS spacewalks.
The report opens with a stark summary of the stakes: “NASA faces challenges in ensuring next-generation spacesuits are available to meet the Agency’s current schedules for the Artemis lunar landing mission in 2028 and prior to the ISS’s decommissioning in 2030.”
NASA’s original timelines called for lunar suit demonstrations in November 2025 and microgravity suit demonstrations on the ISS by April 2026. Those dates have already slipped by more than a year and a half. As of January 2026, the sole remaining provider, Axiom Space, is targeting late-2027 demonstrations for both suit types.
Even that accelerated schedule leaves virtually no margin for the Artemis or the final years of ISS operations. The OIG’s analysis goes further, projecting even longer delays based on historical NASA program data.
“Specifically, we determined the initial development schedules for both spacesuits—spanning 3.4 years for lunar suits and 3.8 years for microgravity suits—were less than half of the 8.7 year-historical average of time it takes from contract award to test flight for recent space flight programs,” the report states.
“If Axiom experiences design and testing delays in line with this historical average, the lunar and microgravity spacesuit demonstrations would not occur until 2031.”
Such a timeline would leave almost no overlap with the ISS’s remaining life and push critical lunar capability three years past the current Artemis landing target. At the heart of the problem, according to the OIG, is NASA’s choice of acquisition strategy.
In May 2022, the agency awarded indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) Exploration Extravehicular Activity Services (xEVAS) contracts to Axiom Space and Collins Aerospace. The combined maximum value of the contracts is $3.1 billion.
Rather than purchasing and owning the suits outright, NASA opted for a firm-fixed-price, service-based model in which it would essentially “rent” spacewalking services from commercial providers after initial demonstrations.
The first task orders were substantial: Axiom received a $228 million order in September 2022 for lunar suit development, while Collins was awarded a $97 million sole-source task order in December 2022 for its microgravity suit. The OIG argues this approach was fundamentally mismatched to the task.
A fully operational spacesuit had not been designed, developed, and produced for NASA since the 1970s, the report notes, underscoring the novel technical challenges involved nearly half a century later. Compounding the issue was NASA’s requirement that bidders develop both lunar and microgravity suits. The agency believed commonalities in human-factors requirements justified dual-capable suits and would foster redundancy. In practice, the demand “constrained an already limited pool of potential offerors in an already constrained market.” Only two bids were received: one from Collins, the long-time maintainer of NASA’s existing Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) suits, and one from Axiom, which had no prior spacesuit development experience.
The report notes that Collins had documented management and performance problems on its EMU maintenance contract, yet NASA rated its past performance as “Excellent” during source selection. Once contracts were awarded, NASA took aggressive steps to preserve competition and redundancy. It issued a sole-source task order to Collins to meet guaranteed minimums, approved partial milestone payments to both companies when they fell short of full deliverables, and awarded $5 million “cross-over” task orders in mid-2023, allowing each firm to work on both suit types.
With Axiom as the sole path forward, NASA has ramped up risk-mitigation efforts. The agency is actively monitoring supply-chain vulnerabilities, increasing in-house testing at Johnson Space Center facilities (including a more than 100% increase in pressurized test time in recent months), and providing extensive technical collaboration.
Axiom has leveraged NASA’s earlier xEMU designs and formed partnerships with companies such as Prada, Nokia, and Oakley. Additional government funding has supported long-lead items like oxygen regulators ($13.1 million contract) and materials for pressure vessels.
Despite these steps, the OIG notes that significant testing and qualification work remain, and further technical challenges are likely. In response to the OIG report, NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman voiced appreciation and outlined the agency’s proactive stance.
“Very much appreciate the OIG work,” he posted on X. “As I posted months ago, NASA is not taking a passive role in any component of America’s return to the lunar surface and building a Moon base. We are reviewing where NASA can do better, how we can provide relief where appropriate to burdensome requirements, where we can expand capabilities over time (Apollo 11’s EVA profile was very different than Apollo 17), and where we can help industry by inserting NASA SMEs and driving the intended outcomes.
“I am confident that when NASA is ready to land on the Moon in 2028, our astronauts will be wearing Axiom suits.”
Zitat Following NASA’s Artemis II mission successfully splashing down on Earth, engineers started diving into detailed analysis of data to assess how key systems and subsystems on the Orion spacecraft, SLS (Space Launch System) rocket, and systems at the launch pad at the agency’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida performed. The Artemis II test flight successfully began a new era of exploration, laying the groundwork for the third Artemis mission next year, lunar surface missions, a Moon base, and future missions to Mars.
Orion spacecraft
After its 694,481-mile journey around the Moon and back, the agency’s Orion spacecraft successfully reentered Earth’s atmosphere and splashed down off the coast of San Diego on April 10. The crew and spacecraft were safeguarded by Orion’s thermal protection system as they traveled nearly 35 times the speed of sound during reentry. Initial inspections of the system found it performed as expected, with no unusual conditions identified. Diver imagery of the spacecraft’s heat shield initially taken after splashdown and further inspections on the recovery ship found the char loss behavior observed on Artemis I was significantly reduced, both in terms of quantity and size. Performance also was consistent with arc jet facility ground testing performed after Artemis I.
The crew module is expected to return to NASA Kennedy this month for additional examination of the heat shield during Orion de-servicing in the Multi-Payload Processing Facility. Teams will conduct detailed inspections, retrieve post-flight data, remove reusable components such as avionics, and eliminate remaining hazards such as excess fuel and coolant.
Over the summer, the heat shield will be transported to NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, for sample extraction and internal x-ray scans to provide further insight into the system and material behavior.
The ceramic tiles on the upper conical backshell of the crew module also performed as expected. Reflective thermal tape, which is expected to burn off upon re-entry, is still present in numerous locations. This reflective tape is used to help control vehicle temperatures while in space and serves no function for thermal protection upon re-entry.
The SLS rocket that launched the Artemis II mission also performed well, meeting its mission objectives for the test flight. While engineers continue studying the data, an early assessment indicates the rocket accurately placed Orion where it needed to be in space. At main engine cutoff, when the core stage’s RS-25 liquid engines shutdown, the spacecraft was traveling at over 18,000 miles per hour, achieving its insertion velocity for orbit, and executing a precise bullseye for its intended location.
Noch zum Thema. Der erste detailliert ausgearbeitete Plan für eine größere Mondexpedition ist im Rahmen der Artikelserie "Man Will Conquer Space Soon!" in Collier's Magazine, in 8 Folgen zwischen März 1952 und April 1954 publiziert, ausgearbeitet worden. Die Beiträge in der Zeitschrift basierten auf den Vorträgen in den drei Symposien zum Thema "bemannte Raumfahrt", die Willy Ley für das Hayden Planetarium organisiert hat (das erste fand am Columbus Day 1951 statt). Das Hayden Pnateraium erhoffte sich durch die Verfügungstellung der Räumlichkeiten dringend benötigte Publicity. Die Serie ist in Buchform in 3 Bänden bei Viking Press erschienen, herausgegeben vom Chefredateur des Magazins, Cornelius Ryan: Across the Space Frontier (Sept. 1952), The Conquest of the Moon (Okt. 1953) und The Exploration of Mars (Juni 1956). Sowohl die Illustriertenversion als auch die Buchnachdrucke sind legendär für die Illustrationen, mit denen Die Raumfahrzeuge dargestellt wurden (es war auch das erste Mal überhaupt, daß solche Projekte in solcher Detailfülle und technisch präzise vorgestellt wurden). Am bekanntesten ist Chesley Bonestells Darstellung der ringförmigen Raumstation mit 250 Metern Durchmesser (die drei mal pro Minute rotieren sollte, um künstliche Schwerkraft zu erzeugen). In The Conquest of the Moon* finde ich auf S. 122, Anhang B, diese technischen Daten. Ohne die jetzt auf die Schnelle ins metrische System umzurechnen:
Principal Data on Passenger Moonships: Total thrust: 407 tons Number of rocket motors (13.56 tons of thrust each): hinged 12, rigid 18 Total propellant supply: 4300 tons Rate of propellant consumption (at full thrust): 2860 lb./sec Specific impulse: 285 sec Overall length: 160 ft Maximum diameter: 110 ft
(* Der Hg. schreibt im Textvorsatz: "This volume, which has more than five times the length of the original symposium, includes much brand-new material.")
Von Brauns Mondschiffe waren zum Start aus der Umlaufbahn in 1075 km Höhe gedacht (die Station sollte als Montagebasis dienen).
Für das Starship lauten die entsprechenden Zahlen (für die Block-3-Version): 33 Triebwerke Gesamthöhe 403 Fuß, davon entfallen auf die Oberstufe, ebenfalls als Starship bezeichnet 171 Fuß. Durchmesser 30 Fuß. Treibstoffmenge 4500-5000 Tonnen, davon für das Starship 1700 t. Schub: bei Raptor-3-Antrieben 1700 Tonnen. Spezifischer Impuls: 327 Sekunden.
In der Magazinfassung befassen sich die Folgen 2 und 3, "Man on the Moon" & "More About Man on the Moon" (18. + 25. Oktober 1952) speziell mit dem Mondflug; den einzigen kurzen Überblick über die Mondbasis liefert Willy Ley in Teil 2: "Inside the Lunar Base" (S. 46-7). Im Buch ist das zum 6. Kapitel, "The Lunar Base" erweitert worden, auf S. 69-83.
"Les hommes seront toujours fous; et ceux qui croient les guérir sont les plus fous de la bande." - Voltaire
Zitat Last month, NASA chief Jared Isaacman ripped off the Band-Aid on the space agency's back-to-the-moon agenda, calling for a large overhaul of NASA's Artemis Program. One of his announcements was a speedy series of robotic missions to scout, conduct experiments and prepare for surface operations ahead of any "rebooting" of the lunar landscape by astronauts in 2028. As part of NASA's "Ignition" event on March 24, Isaacman called for clearing away needless obstacles that impede progress, said the agency would "unleash the workforce and industrial might of our nation" to return to the lunar landscape and build a moon base. One aspect of the NASA chief's Artemis makeover was use of hopper drones under what's called MoonFall. A Request for Proposals for moving MoonFall forward was issued the day of the NASA Ignition event. But what is the effort, why now, and what's next in getting this initiative underway?
Ray Baker is the project lead for the MoonFall project at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Pasadena, California. MoonFall involves the release of four camera and sensor-laden "drones" over a still-to-be-selected site at the lunar south pole, Baker told Space.com. "Our goal is that each drone can cover a range of roughly 30 miles [50 kilometers]," he said, "and get that done by the end of 2028." Baker said that the four drones will each carry a set of 10 cameras and science gear, so 40 in all dispatched over the rocy and rough lunar vista. Imagery produced by the drones will be stitched together to form an unprecedented view of the moonscape, he said, ideal for plotting out future landing sites for Artemis crews as well as the planting of lunar base hardware.
It's unclear how much the MoonFall project will cost. "NASA is still working out details of cost and budget, so we can't provide those details just yet. But we're confident that, in partnership with industry, JPL has the skills and the technology to deliver on schedule," Baker said.
Deploying the drones mid-descent above the moon is highly advantageous because the additional cost and risk of a full propulsive lander are avoided, said Baker.
Zitat Eric Berger@SciGuySpace NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman just testified before Congress that both the Lunar Gateway habitable modules delivered to NASA (HALO and I-HAB) were corroded. 🚨 7:27 PM · Apr 22, 2026
Was exakt unter dieser "Korrosion" zu verstehen ist, ist weiterhin unklar, aber immerhin hat die ESA bestätigt, daß sie aufgetreten ist.
Zitat How could both a module being provided by Northrop Grumman, a major US defense contractor, and I-HAB from Europe be corroded? It seems like a fantastic claim. However, half a dozen sources who worked on or near the Lunar Gateway program confirmed to Ars that the corrosion Isaacman mentioned was real and serious.
In a statement, Northrop confirmed the issue as well. “Using NASA-approved processes, Northrop Grumman is completing repairs to HALO after a manufacturing irregularity,” a company spokesperson told Ars. “We expect to complete repairs by the end of the third quarter. HALO can still be repurposed for any mission, and it’s the most mature technology to support a deep space or lunar habitat.”
By referring to a “manufacturing irregularity,” Northrop answered the central mystery here: how corrosion could appear in both modules. This is because a French-Italian space and defense company, Thales Alenia Space, built the primary structure of HALO for Northrop Grumman. The module was delivered from Italy to the United States about a year ago. ... Ars reached out to Thales on Wednesday evening for a comment about the corrosion issues. We received no reply until Friday morning, when a spokesperson said, “We are working on a statement. We will come back to you early next week.”
Northrop Grumman provided a comment within several hours of a request on Wednesday.
The European Space Agency, which was overseeing European contributions to the Gateway, finally offered a comment on Friday. The agency attributed the issue to a “combination of factors,” including materials.
“Following the identification of corrosion on HALO, a comprehensive investigation was promptly initiated,” a European Space Agency spokesperson said. “Preliminary findings indicate that the issue likely results from a combination of factors, including aspects of the forging process, surface treatment, and material properties.”
After the issue was discovered, the European Space Agency established a “tiger team” to investigate. “Based on the investigation and available data, the corrosion issue was understood to be technically manageable and did not constitute a showstopper for I‑HAB, which was, in any case, in better conditions than HALO from [a] corrosion point of view,” the spokesperson said.
After publication of this story on Friday, Axiom Space confirmed that it has also experienced corrosion issues. In a statement, the company said: “Axiom Space has experienced a similar phenomenon with the first module; we are leveraging the expertise of NASA and Thales Alenia Space to address the issue. Module 1 is on track to launch in 2028.”
Zitat NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman told lawmakers on Monday that SpaceX and Blue Origin, the agency’s two lunar lander contractors, say they could have their spacecraft ready for the next Artemis mission in Earth orbit in late 2027, somewhat later than NASA’s previous schedule.
This mission, Artemis III, will not fly to the Moon. Instead, NASA will launch an Orion capsule with a team of astronauts to rendezvous and potentially dock with one or both landers in Earth orbit. The details of the Artemis III flight plan remain under review, with key questions about the orbit’s altitude and the configuration of the Space Launch System rocket still unanswered.
All of the ambition wrapped up in NASA’s original plan for Artemis III also meant a long multiyear gap before the next launch of the SLS rocket and Orion spacecraft after the nearly flawless flight of the Artemis II mission earlier this month. The agency wants to fly Artemis missions at least once per year. When NASA revealed the revised Artemis III flight plan in February, officials suggested it might launch as soon as mid-2027, followed by up to two Artemis missions to the lunar surface in 2028, before China puts a crew on the Moon and before the end of President Donald Trump’s term in office.
Now, it’s looking more like late 2027, at the earliest, for Artemis III.
“I’ve received responses from both vendors, both SpaceX and Blue Origin, to meet our needs for a late 2027 rendezvous, docking, and test of the interoperability of both landers in advance of a landing attempt in 2028,” Isaacman said Monday.
...
There are steep challenges in getting Starship and Blue Moon ready for a human spaceflight mission. On Apollo 9, two astronauts took the lunar module for a test run, separating from the command module with the mission’s third crew member for more than six hours before reconnecting in low-Earth orbit. For a similar test on Artemis III, Starship or Blue Moon would require an advanced, independent life support system, human-rated engines, a cockpit and flight controls, and a docking mechanism. SpaceX and Blue Origin have released few details of where those systems are in development and production.
Technicians at Kennedy Space Center in Florida will soon install the heat shield onto the Orion spacecraft for Artemis III. This heat shield has a modified design after engineers discovered unexpected erosion of the Artemis I heat shield on a test flight in 2022. Then, sometime this summer, ground teams at Kennedy will connect the Orion crew module to the ship’s service module before preparing the spacecraft for fueling. NASA and its contractors will also study and resolve a handful of issues encountered on Artemis II, including a helium leak in the service module propulsion system and problems dumping urine overboard.
The core stage for the Artemis III mission’s SLS rocket arrived at Kennedy on Monday, pulling up to dock just a couple of hours before Isaacman’s testimony before Congress. It sailed aboard a NASA barge from the Michoud Assembly Facility in Louisiana, where teams manufactured and integrated the core stage’s propellant tanks. Once inside the Vehicle Assembly Building at Kennedy, the stage will be prepared to receive its engine section with four RS-25 main engines.
Zitat NASA just released 12,000 photos from Artemis 2. Here are our top picks
You can now browse through more than 12,000 photos taken by the Artemis 2 astronauts during their mission around the moon.
The images range from stunning views of Earth to shots of the astronauts inside their Orion capsule to breathtaking images of the moon and the crew's unique perspective from beyond its far side. They're the first pictures taken by astronauts traveling beyond low Earth orbit in more than 50 years, and they show our home planet and its celestial neighbor in brand new, incredible ways.
Many photos were released in the weeks following the mission's end, but now NASA has released a whopping 12,217. You can scroll through them yourself on the agency's public archive of astronaut photographs. Here are some of our top picks.
Zitat We just learned a little more about NASA's next Artemis mission. The agency dropped a few details on Wednesday (May 13) about Artemis 3, a crewed mission that will test rendezvous and docking operations with one or more lunar landers close to home.
We already knew the broad outlines of Artemis 3: It will use NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) rocket to send four astronauts to orbit aboard the Orion spacecraft. Orion will then rendezvous and dock with one or both of the Artemis program's privately developed lunar landers — SpaceX's Starship and Blue Origin's Blue Moon. This architecture was announced in late February. It's a big departure from the original Artemis 3 plan, which would have used one of the landers to put astronauts down near the moon's south pole. NASA is still working to define the details of Artemis 3, but the agency has made some progress, as Wednesday's announcement shows. For example, NASA revealed that the astronauts will spend more time aboard Orion on Artemis 3 than they did on Artemis 2, "further advancing the evaluation of life support systems." Artemis 2, which sent four astronauts on an epic journey around the moon, lasted about 10 days, launching this past April 1 and splashing down on April 10. Wednesday's statement does not give an estimate for how long Artemis 3 will last.
NASA also revealed on Wednesday that the Artemis 3 SLS will employ a dummy "spacer" rather than a functional upper stage. "The spacer will maintain the same overall dimensions and interface connection points as the upper stage between the Orion stage adapter and launch vehicle stage adapter," NASA officials wrote in the statement, noting that spacer "design and fabrication activities" are underway at Marshall Space Flight Center in Alabama. This development makes a certain amount of cost-saving sense. The SLS upper stage (known as the interim cryogenic propulsion stage, or ICPS), propels Orion out of Earth orbit and toward the moon. And Artemis 3 isn't going to the moon. After the rocket delivers Orion to orbit, the spacecraft's European-built service module will provide propulsion to circularize Orion's orbit around the planet in low Earth orbit," NASA officials wrote. "This orbit increases overall mission success by allowing more launch opportunities for each element as compared to a lunar mission — SLS carrying Orion and its crew, SpaceX's Starship human landing system pathfinder, and Blue Origin's Blue Moon Mark 2 human landing system pathfinder." There's also a bit of news here: Most of us had assumed that Artemis 3 will head to low Earth orbit (as opposed to more distant paths around our planet), but NASA had not explicitly confirmed that until now.
Wednesday's statement also noted that Artemis 3 will use a new, upgraded Orion heat shield (which we already knew) and said that mission astronauts "could potentially enter at least one lander test article." We still don't know which lander will fly on the mission, Starship or Blue Moon (or perhaps both). There are plenty of other specifics that still need to be worked out as well, including Artemis 3's duration, which astronauts will fly on it, what science experiments they might conduct and how the mission will test the new Artemis spacesuits, which are being built by the Houston-based company Axiom Space.
Zitat Sawyer Merritt@SawyerMerritt NASA has just launched a new website for its Moon Base missions, which aims to build a permanent $20 billion U.S. base on the Moon. @SpaceX's Starship rocket will play a big role in these missions.
"The Moon Base is a home away from Earth for Artemis astronauts who will live and work at humanity’s first lunar outpost. NASA is leading global teams of innovators across international space agencies, industry, and academia to build the Moon Base and establish an enduring human presence near the lunar South Pole for the benefit of all.
Phase One (Now–2029): Experiment and Learn NASA will begin with a rapid series of robotic missions to scout the lunar South Pole region, test technologies, and prepare for surface operations ahead of future astronaut missions.: • A major increase in lunar activity, with up to 25 missions, including 21 landings. • Crewed and autonomous rovers for mobility demonstrations and surface preparation, along with four drones known as MoonFall and communications relay and observation satellites. • Early demonstrations of power, navigation, communications, and nuclear radioisotope heater unit technologies designed to endure the long lunar night. • Scientific payload opportunities integrated across landers and rovers. • The first tangible footprint of Moon Base effort, with four tons of payload delivered to test what works on the lunar surface.
Phase Two (2029–2032): Early Habitation By 2029, NASA will transition to assembling semi-permanent infrastructure and initiating early habitation and logistics operations: • Deployment of expanded solar power systems and initial nuclear surface power capabilities, potentially including fission reactors and radioisotope power systems. • Upgraded rovers, potential advanced MoonFall drones, and early habitation elements. • Enhanced surface-to-orbit communications networks to provide reliable connectivity across the lunar South Pole region. • Delivery of up to 60 tons of cargo through as many as 24 landings using low-, medium-, and heavy-class cargo landers.
Phase Three (2032 and Beyond): Sustained Human Presence This phase will scale operations to achieve a true enduring presence, with routine crew rotations and continuous surface activity. This is when living and working on the Moon becomes a reality: • Semi-permanent habitation modules with spacious interior for crew living and operations. • Operational fission surface power systems capable of delivering steady, reliable energy through the long lunar nights, leveraging in situ resource manufacturing. • Advanced logistics networks supported by crewed and autonomous rovers to keep the base supplied and functioning year-round. • Delivery of up to 38 tons of cargo annually to sustain habitats, power systems, logistics operations, and major science outposts, enabled by low-cost reusable heavy-lift capabilities."
Moon base website: https:// nasa.gov/moonbase/ 8:24 PM · May 26, 2026
Zitat Phase One of Moon Base development includes: A major increase in lunar activity, with up to 25 missions, including 21 landings. Crewed and autonomous rovers for mobility demonstrations and surface preparation, along with four drones known as MoonFall and communications relay and observation satellites. Early demonstrations of power, navigation, communications, and nuclear radioisotope heater unit technologies designed to endure the long lunar night. Scientific payload opportunities integrated across landers and rovers. The first tangible footprint of the Moon Base effort, with four tons of payload delivered to test what works on the lunar surface.
Early Habitation
By 2029, NASA will transition to assembling semi-permanent infrastructure and initiating early habitation and logistics operations. Scroll below to learn more about some of the key assets, demonstrations, and activities planned for Phase Two of Moon Base development.
Phase Two of Moon Base development will include: Deployment of expanded solar power systems and initial nuclear surface power capabilities, potentially including fission reactors and radioisotope power systems. Upgraded rovers, potential advanced MoonFall drones, and early habitation elements. Enhanced surface-to-orbit communications networks to provide reliable connectivity across the lunar South Pole region. Delivery of up to 60 tons of cargo through as many as 24 landings using low-, medium-, and heavy-class cargo landers.
2032-Beyond- Phase Three Sustained Human Presence This phase will scale operations to achieve a sustained presence, with routine crew rotations and continuous surface activity. This is when living and working on the Moon becomes a reality. Scroll below to learn more about some of the key demonstrations and activities planned for Phase Three of Moon Base development.
Phase Three of Moon Base development will include: Semi-permanent habitation modules with more spacious interior for crew living and operations. Operational fission surface power systems capable of delivering steady, reliable energy through the long lunar nights, leveraging in-situ resource manufacturing. Pressurized rovers enabling long-distance travel, exploration, and science operations. Advanced logistics networks supported by crewed and autonomous rovers to keep the base supplied and functioning year-round. Delivery of up to 38 tons of cargo annually to sustain habitats, power systems, logistics operations, and major science outposts, enabled by low-cost reusable heavy-lift capabilities.
Building on ISRU testing conducted during Phases One and Two, Phase Three efforts are expected to focus on utilizing lunar resources and commodities that could help reduce launch mass, operational costs, and risks associated with long-duration lunar exploration.
ISRU demonstrations could include extracting oxygen, water, and hydrogen from lunar regolith while also exploring techniques for converting regolith into durable construction and infrastructure materials through approaches such as sintering, corbelling, and 3D printing.
Building on the initial logistics capabilities demonstrated during Phase Two, Phase Three efforts are expected to increase delivery capacity from approximately 0.5–1.5 metric tons to as much as eight metric tons per 28-day mission. These logistics systems are intended to support the transport and sustainment of essential supplies and infrastructure, including food, water, clothing, spare parts, science payloads, maintenance equipment, and other materials needed to support crews, habitats, and surface systems.
"Les hommes seront toujours fous; et ceux qui croient les guérir sont les plus fous de la bande." - Voltaire
Zitat NASA’s vision for a future, long-term sustained presence on the Moon gained more clarity on Tuesday as the agency announced a series of contract awards for future robotic missions.
The agency announced that two companies developing lunar terrain vehicles (LTVs), Astrolab and Lunar Outpost, would each be receiving contracts valued at about $220 million each to finish their designs and get them to the Moon’s surface.
Astrolab’s Crewed Lunar Vehicle (CLV-1) takes after its original design, called FLEX, and Lunar Outpost’s Pegasus vehicle takes heritage from its earlier Eagle design. NASA previously put out a call for LTVs that would be capable of surviving on the Moon for up to 10 years, but revised its requirements to have more readily available options to augment earlier astronaut missions.
Connected to that, NASA also awarded the LTV delivery contract to Blue Origin, using it’s Blue Moon Mark 1 lander in a contract that’s worth $234 million for each LTV delivered.
The announcement came during a news conference at NASA’s headquarters in Washington D.C.. NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman said these and other upcoming missions, scheduled to begin in the back half of 2026, that will lay the early ground work for an enduring presence on the Moon’s South Pole.
The first piece of the pie, dubbed Phase One, extends from now through 2029 and was the focus of Tuesday’s briefing. In addition to the lander and rover contracts announced, García-Galán also unveiled Firefly Aerospace as the recipient of a $75 million subcontract awarded by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory to deploy a series of lunar drones on the MoonFall mission.
During this technology demonstration, which will take place in 2028, one of Firefly’s Elytra Dark spacecraft will fly to the Moon over the course of 45 days before it enters lunar orbit. It will then de-orbit and deploy the drones about 50 km above the Moon’s South Pole.
These hopper drones are designed to last one lunar day (14 Earth days) and will test out the basic technology as well as performing imaging and scouting for future sites of interest.
The MoonFall drones can also have the capability of setting up what García-Galán called a “Moon Base perimeter” that would go on the corners of areas “where we think we have either key scientific objectives or we want to build up the Moon Base.”
Three missions that were formerly part of the original CLPS program were redesigned as Moon Base Missions 1-3: - Blue Origin’s Blue Moon Mk.1 – Fall 2026 - Astrobotic’s Griffin-1 – late 2026 - Intuitive Machines’ IM-3 – late 2026
Zitat NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman@NASAAdmin The near impossible is becoming possible.
We are building toward a sustained human presence at the lunar South Pole. It begins with Phase 1: CLPS landers and LTV rovers testing the “science of survival” on the lunar surface before heavy HLS cargo landers deliver the mass and infrastructure needed for an enduring presence.
We are building the Moon Base for all we will learn, the innovation that will improve life on Earth, the inspiration for the next generation of explorers, and to master the skills needed for where we will inevitably go next...Mars.
The Golden Age of lunar exploration has begun. 1:44 AM · May 27, 2026
Bitte beachten Sie diese Forumsregeln: Beiträge, die persönliche Angriffe gegen andere Poster, Unhöflichkeiten oder vulgäre Ausdrücke enthalten, sind nicht erlaubt; ebensowenig Beiträge mit rassistischem, fremdenfeindlichem oder obszönem Inhalt und Äußerungen gegen den demokratischen Rechtsstaat sowie Beiträge, die gegen gesetzliche Bestimmungen verstoßen. Hierzu gehört auch das Verbot von Vollzitaten, wie es durch die aktuelle Rechtsprechung festgelegt ist. Erlaubt ist lediglich das Zitieren weniger Sätze oder kurzer Absätze aus einem durch Copyright geschützten Dokument; und dies nur dann, wenn diese Zitate in einen argumentativen Kontext eingebunden sind. Bilder und Texte dürfen nur hochgeladen werden, wenn sie copyrightfrei sind oder das Copyright bei dem Mitglied liegt, das sie hochlädt. Bitte geben Sie das bei dem hochgeladenen Bild oder Text an. Links können zu einzelnen Artikeln, Abbildungen oder Beiträgen gesetzt werden, aber nicht zur Homepage von Foren, Zeitschriften usw. Bei einem Verstoß wird der betreffende Beitrag gelöscht oder redigiert. Bei einem massiven oder bei wiederholtem Verstoß endet die Mitgliedschaft. Eigene Beiträge dürfen nachträglich in Bezug auf Tippfehler oder stilistisch überarbeitet, aber nicht in ihrer Substanz verändert oder gelöscht werden. Nachträgliche Zusätze, die über derartige orthographische oder stilistische Korrekturen hinausgehen, müssen durch "Edit", "Nachtrag" o.ä. gekennzeichnet werden. Ferner gehört das Einverständnis mit der hier dargelegten Datenschutzerklärung zu den Forumsregeln.
Sie sind vermutlich noch nicht im Forum angemeldet - Klicken Sie hier um sich kostenlos anzumelden
Offline