Recent Moon Landing Attempt by First US Spacecraft in Decades Ends in Failure with Incineration

After traversing extensive distances through space and grappling with a propulsion issue that thwarted its plans, it appears that the Peregrine lunar lander has met its fiery demise.

The spacecraft was anticipated to conclude its abbreviated 10-day journey around 4 p.m. ET on Thursday, colliding with Earth’s dense atmosphere over a secluded region of the South Pacific Ocean, east of Australia.

Astrobotic Technology, the Pittsburgh-based company responsible for developing the Peregrine lander under a NASA contract, confirmed the spacecraft’s demise. They reported a loss of contact with the vehicle just before the planned reentry time, suggesting that it completed its controlled re-entry over open water in the South Pacific. However, the company awaits independent confirmation from government entities.

Officials from NASA and Astrobotic are scheduled to discuss the mission during a news briefing at 1 p.m. ET on Friday.

This unsuccessful mission is a setback for both Astrobotic and NASA, aiming to establish a fleet of commercially developed, cost-effective lunar landers capable of executing robotic missions to the moon, in preparation for a crewed lunar landing later in the decade.

Key Setbacks Post-Launch:

Launched on January 8 atop a Vulcan Centaur rocket, the Peregrine lander encountered critical setbacks despite a smooth launch. The spacecraft experienced a severe issue with its onboard propulsion systems, resulting in fuel leakage and insufficient gas for a soft moon touchdown.

Astrobotic altered the course of the mission, directing the spacecraft to operate as a satellite, testing its scientific instruments and systems during its journey through space. Eventually, Astrobotic decided to dispose of the vehicle by crashing it into Earth’s atmosphere at high speeds.

Implications of Peregrine’s Failure:

The loss of the Peregrine lander is a setback for both Astrobotic and NASA, as a $108 million deal between the two organizations enabled this mission. The deal included financial support from NASA to aid Astrobotic’s development efforts and fly five payloads, marking a roughly 36% increase over the original contract value.

However, NASA has other options for conducting robotic lunar research, with partnerships with three other companies developing lunar landers through the Commercial Lunar Payload Services program. These agreements follow a “fixed price” model, providing a lump sum to the companies, and they maintain ownership of their vehicles.

A proving ground for commercial lunar landers:

The private lunar lander sector faces challenges, as demonstrated by the Peregrine’s failure. Previous attempts by other companies, including SpaceIL and Ispace, also faced difficulties during lunar landing attempts.

The financial sustainability of moon missions for these companies is a looming question. Apart from funding from NASA and other government space agencies, Astrobotic’s revenue for the Peregrine mission came from partnerships with space burial companies and sales of commemorative items sent to the moon.

Astrobotic’s Future Outlook:

Despite the financial setback from the Peregrine mission, Astrobotic remains resilient. While acknowledging the impact on relationships and the challenge of securing future missions, Astrobotic’s CEO, John Thornton, emphasized the inherent risks in the space venture. The company already holds a contract for another robotic lunar lander mission, named Griffin, set to launch later this year and featuring a larger model than Peregrine, aiming to deploy a rover near the moon’s south pole.