**The Future of NASA’s Artemis Program: A Call for Strategic Simplification**
As the United States gears up for a new presidential administration, scrutiny of space policy is anticipated. Although space exploration may not rank high on the list of priorities for most Americans, the Artemis Program—NASA’s bold mission to bring humans back to the Moon—merits consideration. Initiated five years ago, Artemis has received widespread backing from both Congress and the space community. Nevertheless, despite its potential, the program contends with substantial hurdles that could threaten its success.
The most urgent challenges include:
1. **Delays in Orion Spacecraft Development**: The inaugural crewed flight of the Orion spacecraft, which has been under development for more than 20 years, remains uncertain due to issues with its heat shield.
2. **Uncertain Lunar Landing Schedule**: NASA’s Artemis III mission, which plans to land astronauts on the Moon, is officially set for September 2026. Nonetheless, delays in the availability of crucial elements—like SpaceX’s Starship lunar lander and Axiom Space’s spacesuits—render 2028 a more plausible timeframe.
3. **Complicated Post-Artemis III Objectives**: The Artemis IV mission is anticipated to introduce a larger version of NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) rocket, include a new launch tower, and feature a stop at the Lunar Gateway, an orbital space station around the Moon.
4. **Rising Geopolitical Tensions**: China is swiftly progressing with its lunar ambitions, targeting a crewed Moon landing by 2030. This elevates the stakes for the U.S. in the ongoing space competition.
Exacerbating these issues is a stagnant or potentially declining NASA budget. The agency is striving to accomplish too much with insufficient resources, resulting in the sacrifice of other vital scientific initiatives, like reductions to the Chandra space telescope program and the termination of the VIPER mission. If NASA persists in this direction, the Artemis Program could face failure.
### A Streamlined Approach to Artemis
To guarantee the success of Artemis, tough yet essential choices need to be made. These choices might not be politically favored and will have considerable repercussions for key players, including Boeing, SpaceX, and NASA’s Marshall and Johnson Space Centers. However, for Artemis to thrive, the strategy must pivot towards a more sustainable and attainable lunar mission.
Here are three crucial policy suggestions to simplify the Artemis Program:
1. **Abolish the Lunar Gateway**: The Lunar Gateway, a small space station expected to orbit the Moon, injects unnecessary complexity and expenses into the Artemis Program. Initially proposed due to the SLS rocket and Orion spacecraft’s inability to achieve low lunar orbit, the Gateway is now superfluous with NASA’s current emphasis on landing on the Moon itself.
2. **Eliminate the Block 1B Upgrade of the SLS Rocket**: The Block 1B variant of the SLS rocket, which features a more potent upper stage, is mainly intended to support the Lunar Gateway. With the cancellation of the Gateway, this upgrade becomes unnecessary.
3. **Utilize the Centaur V Upper Stage for SLS**: Rather than investing in the expensive Exploration Upper Stage for the SLS, NASA should adopt United Launch Alliance’s Centaur V upper stage. This approach would cut costs and streamline the rocket’s development.
### The Rationale for Canceling the Lunar Gateway
The idea of the Lunar Gateway has been around for over a decade and was initially introduced to serve as a destination for the SLS and Orion spacecraft. However, with the Moon becoming the primary target, the Gateway is no longer needed. NASA Administrator Bill Nelson has pointed out the Gateway’s potential for scientific research and as a transit point for astronauts, but these reasons are not compelling. Astronauts do not require a transit point to access the Moon, and robotic orbiters could conduct lunar science more economically.
Additionally, the Gateway’s function as a staging area for Mars missions is dubious. The station is projected to have a lifespan of just 15 years, suggesting it will likely become obsolete before NASA is ready for crewed missions to Mars. Furthermore, SpaceX’s Starship, the sole vehicle currently designed for Mars travel, is intended to be refueled in low-Earth orbit, not on the Moon.
Abolishing the Gateway would save NASA billions and streamline lunar operations. It would also lessen the energy requirements for lunar landings, as both Orion and Starship would no longer need to dock with the Gateway. Moreover, the construction of the Gateway is estimated to cost $5.3 billion, with annual maintenance costs likely surpassing $1 billion. These resources could be allocated more effectively towards lunar surface endeavors.
### The Argument Against the Block 1B SLS Upgrade
The Block 1B variant of the SLS rocket, which incorporates the Exploration Upper Stage, has been in the works for a decade. However, both the upper stage and the new launch tower necessary for the rocket are
