NASA’s Moon Space Station May Be A Mistake
A space station orbiting the Moon offers quite a few benefits. This being said, even with the cooperation of multiple space agencies, it will cost a lot of money and take a significant amount of time. For years now, NASA has been working on the Gateway Space Station meant to facilitate future human missions on the Moon.
However, this plan has not come without a lot of opposition from certain agency officials. Not to mention additional reports of the station being extremely small, and possibly not ready in time, just to name a few. The Artemis program is massive and features many different moving parts. Unfortunately, just one delay can have a ripple effect on the entire mission and returning humans to the surface of the Moon.
The goal of Gateway is to provide docking ports for a variety of visiting spacecraft, space for crew to live and work, and on-board science investigations to study heliophysics, human health, and life sciences, among other areas. Here I will go more in-depth into some of the station concerns, how it will affect future missions, what to expect in the coming months, and more.
Delays & Cost
Gateway’s initial elements, scheduled to launch together in late 2024, consist of the Power and Propulsion Element (PPE), which powers and propels the spacecraft in orbit, and the Habitation and Logistics Outpost (HALO), which provides a docking location for the Orion capsule and living and working spaces for crewmembers. To date, NASA has spent over half a billion dollars and around 5 years of design work on the PPE and HALO. To reduce the time needed to acquire these two Gateway elements, NASA modified its standard acquisition practices and instead used a fixed-price contract designed for commercial research and development and a sole-source award. Specifically, the Agency competitively awarded a contract to Maxar Technologies (Maxar) in May 2019 to develop the PPE and made a solesource award to Northrop Grumman (Northrop) in July 2019 for the HALO. The Agency awarded these contracts before requirements were firm and before it decided whether to use the Gateway to support the planned 2024 Moon landing.
All this being said, a thorough report done by the NASA Office of Inspector General brought up some serious concerns regarding the time frame and this future project. For one, the development schedules for both the PPE and HALO were negatively impacted by the Agency’s still-evolving Gateway requirements, including NASA’s decision to co-manifest and launch the two elements on the same commercial rocket rather than separately as initially intended. In a direct quote they said, “With both the PPE and HALO elements highly dependent on each other due to the decision to co-manifest the systems, coupled with an expected 10-month travel time to lunar orbit, the Gateway likely will not be in a position to support a 2024 lunar landing.”
The decision to launch the PPE and HALO together, while avoiding the cost of a second commercial launch vehicle, has contributed to cost increases due to the redesign of several components, an elevated launch risk, and a longer duration flight to lunar orbit. In addition, due to the decision, Maxar was forced to terminate its subcontract with SpaceX for PPE launch services, even though Maxar had already paid SpaceX approximately $27.5 million for this service, a portion of which was paid by NASA prior to the termination. Not to mention, a co-manifested launch increases risk because together the elements may be too heavy for commercially available rockets or too long for the rocket’s fairing, potentially impacting intended spacecraft mass, length, and other requirements. However, if they can address these risks, NASA may receive benefits from co-manifesting, such as avoiding a rendezvous in orbit by integrating both components on the ground before launch.
In addition, NASA selected Maxar in May 2019 to provide the PPE under a fixed-price contract because the Agency anticipated few design and development changes. Besides price changes, PPE has also experienced other contract management challenges, including the collapse of negotiations between Maxar and a subcontractor to provide its high-power electric propulsion system. For HALO, the Agency awarded Northrop a sole-source contract in order to meet the 2024 goal. Despite NASA’s standard requirement to complete a contract’s final terms, conditions, and costs within 6 months of issuance, the Agency did not finish the contract with Northrop for 10 months due to the lack of defined requirements. Moreover, NASA and Northrop had only agreed to contract costs on a cost-reimbursable basis for a 7-month design phase. Overall, communication errors and last minute changes have already caused quite a few complications to arise relating to Gateway and specifically its initial segments.
Size & Purpose
Now that we know more about the problems NASA is running into with Gateway, we can take a closer look at possible design concerns and whether or not the station is worth it. To start off, early last month reports came out about the size and interior space of Gateway. According to an architect involved in the station’s design, living quarters of NASA’s moon orbiting Gateway station will be so tiny that astronauts will not be able to stand upright inside. He was quoted saying, “In other words, that would be a room 2 by 2 by 2 meters [6.6 by 6.6 by 6.6 feet]. And you are locked in there. There are other rooms but they are not bigger and there are not many of them.” Due to various mass restrictions along with ensuring two of these modules can fit within the launch vehicle, the size of the station has become slightly smaller.
For comparison, the International Space Station features 7.2 by 7.2 feet-wide (2.2 by 2.2 m) interiors, where astronauts could even perform spins in the air, offering a luxury experience compared to what awaits moon explorers on Gateway. In another quote, the architect pointed out, “The I-Hab really is just a cylinder with a hatch on each end and two hatches at the sides and a corridor going through the length axis. Even if you want to pass one another, it’s already quite difficult, you have to interrupt whatever you are doing in the moment to let the other fellow pass by you.”
While by no means ideal, comfort is not necessarily the purpose of Gateway. Gateway is meant to be a critical part of NASA’s deep space exploration plans, along with the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket, Orion spacecraft and human landing system. As astronauts prepare for missions to the lunar surface, they will need deliveries of critical pressurized and unpressurized cargo, science experience and supplies, such as sample collection materials and other items. In March 2020, NASA awarded SpaceX as the first U.S. commercial provider under the Gateway Logistics Services contract to deliver cargo and other supplies to the lunar outpost.
Taking a closer look at the two main initial modules being launched can give us a better idea of the agency’s plan. The Power and Propulsion Element is a high-power, 60-kilowatt solar electric propulsion spacecraft that will provide power, high-rate communications, attitude control, and orbital transfer capabilities for the Gateway. The PPE will be three times more powerful than current satellite platforms while requiring less propellant, allowing the Gateway to move more mass around the Moon. HALO on the other hand, is where astronauts will live and conduct research while visiting Gateway. The pressurized living quarters will provide command and control systems for the lunar outpost, and docking ports for visiting spacecraft, such as NASA’s Orion spacecraft, lunar landers, and logistics resupply craft. The HALO module will serve as the backbone for command and control and power distribution across Gateway and will perform other core functions, including hosting science investigations via internal and external payload accommodations, and communicating with lunar surface expeditions.
HALO also will enable the aggregation of additional habitable elements to expand Gateway capabilities, leveraging contributions from Gateway’s international partners. Batteries provided by the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) will power HALO until PPE solar arrays can be deployed, and during eclipse periods. Robotic interfaces provided by the Canadian Space Agency will host payloads and provide base points for Canadarm3 robotic operations. ESA (European Space Agency) will provide a lunar communications system to enable high-data-rate communications between the lunar surface and Gateway.
To be specific, for the Artemis III mission in 2025, NASA is attempting to have the Gateway’s initial elements— PPE and HALO—available to potentially dock with a spacecraft as well as to serve as a resupply and communications platform. For Artemis missions IV and beyond, NASA plans to add additional capabilities, providing an orbiting home base for Moon expeditions and future Mars missions. This is part of the reason why delays for specific equipment and projects can have such a negative impact on the entire Artemis program. There are so many future missions planned and almost all of them rely on complex and unique equipment that needs to be completed and launched by an exact date.
Conclusion
NASA is trying to complete the initial Gateway modules in time and keep the entire Artemis program somewhat on schedule. In the past few years, multiple design changes and last minute plan alterations have caused extra unnecessary problems for the agency. We will have to wait and see how it progresses and the impact it has on the space industry.