by Sign up for CNN’s Wonder Theory science newsletter. Explore the universe with news on exciting discoveries, scientific advances and more.
After soaring hundreds of thousands of miles through space and dealing with a propellant issue that derailed his plans, the lunar lander Hawk has probably met his end for good.
The spacecraft was expected to end its truncated 10-day journey around 4 pm ET Thursday as it burst into Earth’s thick atmosphere over a remote area in the South Pacific Ocean, just east of Australia.
Astrobotic Technology, the Pittsburgh-based company that developed the Peregrine Lander under contract to NASA, confirmed the spacecraft’s demise, saying it lost contact with the vehicle minutes before the planned re-entry time, which “indicates that the vehicle completed its controlled re-entry. open water in the South Pacific.”
However, the company said in a social media post, “we are awaiting independent confirmation from government entities.”
Officials from NASA and Astrobotic are expected to speak publicly about the mission during a news briefing at 1 pm ET on Friday.
The failed mission is a setback for Astrobotic and NASA, whose overall goal is to commercially develop a stable of relatively inexpensive lunar landers capable of completing robotic missions to the moon as the space agency works toward a lunar landing crews later this decade.
Critical disadvantages after launch
The Peregrine Lander launched on January 8 atop a Vulcan Centaur rocket, a new vehicle developed by United Launch Alliance, a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and Boeing.
The launch went off without a hitch, delivering the Falcon lander safely into Earth orbit on a path to the moon. If the spacecraft succeeds in reaching the lunar surface, it would be the first US mission to make a soft landing on the moon since the Apollo 17 mission in 1972.
But an hour into his solo flight, the Hawkman ran into critical difficulties. Astrobotic confirmed that the spacecraft had a major problem with its on-board propulsion systems and was leaking fuel, leaving the lander with insufficient gas to make a soft touch on the moon.
Astrobotic then changed course. The company ordered the spacecraft to operate more like a satellite, testing its onboard scientific instruments and other systems as it flies thousands of miles through the void.
Ultimately, Astrobotic decided to dispose of the vehicle by crashing it into the Earth’s atmosphere at high speeds.
What does Peregrine’s failure mean?
The loss of the Falcon landing is a blow to the constellation and NASA.
Cooperation between the two organizations has made this mission possible, with NASA donating more than $108 million to help Astrobotic with its development effort and fly five payloads. That price tag represents a roughly 36% increase over the original contract value, as the deal is being renegotiated amid pandemic-related supply chain issues, according to Joel Kearns, associate deputy administrator for exploration in the mission directorate. NASA science.
The US space agency does not consider the Peregrine spacecraft its only option for robotic research on the moon. NASA also has partnerships with three other companies developing robotic lunar landers — including Houston-based Intuitive Machines, which could launch its first mission in mid-February.
Through the Commercial Lunar Payload Services program, NASA designed those lunar landing contracts as “fixed-price” agreements, meaning the space agency offers one lump sum of money rather than continuing to pay a company throughout the development process as it progresses. problems arise.
“This is one of many relatively inexpensive missions that will be sent to the surface of the moon to try to break the paradigm to try to find a new price point,” Thornton told CNN earlier this month.
The deal is also structured so that the companies will retain full ownership of their own vehicles, and NASA will be just one of many customers flying cargo onto the landers.
A creative place for commercial lunar landers
A private lunar lander has never reached the surface of the moon – although other companies have tried. In 2019, a spacecraft built by the Israel-based company SpaceIL crashed into the moon during a landing attempt. And again in 2023, the Japanese-based company Ispace lost control of its lander while tending to the surface of the moon.
SpaceIL, Ispace and Astrobotic have their roots in the same competition: the Google Lunar X Prize, which ran from 2007 to 2018 and offered a $20 million grand prize to a company that could land on the moon. But X Prize ended without a winner as none of the teams had sent before the deadline.
Whether a commercially developed lunar lander can reach the lunar surface remains to be seen – and perhaps an even more interesting question is whether lunar missions offer a financially sustainable business model for these companies.
Besides money from NASA and other government space agencies, Astrobotic’s revenue for the Hawk mission was generated through partnerships that included space burial companies that send human remains to the moon as well as packaged trinkets, plaques, bitcoin, and other customer memorabilia. .
Thornton Astrobotic admitted to reporters that the Falconry mission cost his company more than it earned. However, failure would not mean the end for Astrobotic, he said in a statement to CNN.
“It will certainly have some impact on our relationships and our ability to accomplish additional missions in the future,” Thornton said on Jan. 2. “It wouldn’t be the end of the business, but it would certainly be challenging.
“We’re in a high-risk space venture, and this is just the nature of space businesses.”
Astrobotic already has a contract to fly another robotic lunar landing mission for NASA later this year. Called Griffin, that lander – a larger model than the Hawk – will aim to place a rover near the moon’s south pole.
For more CNN news and newsletters create an account at CNN.com
