Remember VIPER, NASA's Off-Again, On-Again Lunar Rover? It's Still in Limbo
The only consistent thing about NASA's VIPER lunar rover is that the road to the moon has been a rocky one. And now the space agency has nixed its attempt to find a commercial partner to launch VIPER moonward, leaving the nearly complete little space vehicle in a continued state of limbo.
VIPER (Volatiles Investigating Polar Explorer Rover) was intended to launch this year to explore the lunar south pole in search of buried ice and other chemical compounds. But NASA canceled it in July 2024 after delays led to cost overruns. This is the second time NASA has nixed a lunar rover mission in recent years, says Philip Metzger, a planetary physicist at the University of Central Florida (UCF). In 2018 NASA axed the Resource Prospector rover, which would have done similar exploration.
In January NASA raised hopes that VIPER might somehow still see space when it put out a call for proposals for private aerospace companies to launch and operate the rover. On May 7, however, NASA canceled that call for proposals.
On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
The agency says it is exploring new strategies for VIPER in the future.
'We look forward to accomplishing future volatiles science with VIPER as we continue NASA's Moon to Mars exploration efforts,' said Nicky Fox, associate administrator of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, in a recent statement.
Why can't VIPER get off the ground?
The rover's budget problems started with supply chain disruptions during the COVID pandemic, says Casey Dreier, chief of space policy at the Planetary Society. It was also slated to launch on a platform built by aerospace company Astrobotic, which failed its first landing of a scaled-down version of that platform
The mission was unusually far along when NASA pulled the plug: the rover was fully assembled and was in the final stages of testing for a launch. By that point, NASA had sunk nearly $800 million into its construction and the contract with Astrobotic.
It's not clear why NASA has been unable to find a private partner to launch the rover, but such a company would have assumed the costs of the mission and agreed to share the data freely with the space agency. That made for a tough business case for private companies, SpaceNews reported earlier this month.
What kind of science was VIPER supposed to do?
The 2.5-meter-tall rover was designed to search for resources such as water ice, carbon dioxide and helium in the lunar subsurface. The goal, says Clive Neal, a lunar expert at the University of Notre Dame, is to find resources that humans could use to establish a permanent research base on the moon. The data on where such volatiles might be and whether they're accessible and extractable are crucial for the Artemis program's plans for long-term human presence on the moon.
The rover carries four instruments: a neutron spectrometer to detect water as deep as a meter below the surface, a near-infrared spectrometer to determine the makeup of samples, a mass spectrometer to analyze gases in the environment at touchdown and a drill called TRIDENT (The Regolith and Ice Drill for Exploring New Terrains). The drill is one of VIPER's blockbuster features, designed to pull samples from up to a meter deep.
The cancelation of VIPER, after 2018's loss of Resource Prospector, is short-sighted, given NASA's goals, Neal says. 'Is NASA actually serious about getting humans back to the moon?' he says. 'Are they actually serious about enacting our current space policy? Have they actually read it?'
VIPER could also answer basic science questions about the origin of the water on the moon, says UCF's Metzger. It may have been part of the lunar core from the moment of its formation, or the water could have arrived with planetary dust or large impactors over time, among other possibilities. 'Understanding those processes is crucial for understanding our solar system,' Metzger says. The answers could reveal more about how common water-rich bodies are in the galaxy and how many planets or moons might host life.
What's next for VIPER?
That's the big question. Until NASA releases more details on potential future partnership structures, the project remains in a state of suspended animation.
'I don't know what to make of it because there is so little information,' Dreier says.
It's possible NASA could reopen negotiations with Astrobotic, the company that was originally going to launch the rover, Neal says. Or, Metzger suggests, the agency might be seeking international partners that could take on some of the operational costs.
There are no other U.S. missions on the horizon with the drilling capabilities of VIPER. If the rover doesn't find a way to the moon, Neal says, two other lunar explorers from China could pick up the banner of volatiles science: Chang'e 7 and 8.
As uncertain as things are looking for VIPER, though, it's an optimistic sign that NASA hasn't dropped the rover outright, Dreier says, given that the White House has proposed a 50 percent cut to NASA's science programs and a more than 20 percent cut to the agency overall in 2026. 'If it's not openly identified as being canceled,' Dreier says, 'you are winning as a NASA science mission right now.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
38 minutes ago
- CNN
America's skies may soon open up to supersonic travel. But there's still a big problem
The skies over the United States could be wide open for much faster air travel in the near future. Not just because passenger planes capable of breaking the sound barrier are in development — for the first time ever, they could be allowed to do it over American soil. Even during the days of Concorde, the supersonic plane that retired in 2003, commercial flying at speeds above Mach 1 over mainland US was strictly forbidden, largely due to concerns over noise pollution from sonic booms. Now moves are afoot to lift that restriction with a bill recently introduced in the Senate, and a similar measure in the House of Representatives. That means if the long-awaited 'Son of Concorde' ever gets here, it will have more potential supersonic routes than its predecessor. Currently, there are several supersonic passenger jets in development that aim to reach speeds beyond Mach 1 without crashing loudly through the sound barrier. NASA's experimental X-59, expected to begin flight testing in 2025, aims to reduce noise to a 'sonic thump.' And then there's Colorado-based Boom Supersonic, which is developing the Overture, the first actual supersonic passenger plane since Concorde flew into the sunset. Opening up US skies could be a step toward removing some of the hurdles it faces in becoming a reality. 'It's a super exciting year for us,' Blake Scholl, founder and CEO of Boom told CNN. Much of that excitement comes from the company's XB-1 demonstrator aircraft breaking the sound barrier in January and again in February. It did so without creating a detectable sonic boom by flying at what it calls 'boomless cruise' — also known as 'Mach cutoff' — where sound refracts away from the ground at speeds close to the sound barrier in certain atmospheric conditions. Boom aims to build the first prototype Overture engine by the end of the year and, if all goes according to the company's very ambitious timeline, American Airlines, Japan Airlines (JAL) and United Airlines could all take delivery of their very first Overtures by the end of the decade. Scholl's sales pitch is very appealing. Who doesn't want to be able to work a full day on the West Coast, jump on a supersonic flight east that evening, and either be home or in a hotel in New York or D.C. before midnight? The Overture would make those trips possible with a cruise speed of Mach 1.7 that could slash the duration of a transcontinental flight by up to half. Overture's 80 passengers could make those speedy flights in relative comfort. Renderings show luxurious seats comparable to the contemporary business class offering on any subsonic plane. Whether airlines are keen is another matter. The range of the Overture is one challenge. At about 4,888 miles, it's enough for a transcontinental flight over the US or a transatlantic hop to Europe but not enough to traverse the Pacific without a stop. And the much-touted commitments from American, JAL and United are all non-binding and, at least in the eyes of the industry, viewed as more fluff than substance. Critically, none of the airlines list the deals among their firm capital commitments in stock exchange filings. 'Boom is working in opposition to the most durable single trend in all of flying since the jet age began,' Jon Ostrower, editor-in-chief of trade publication The Air Current, said on The Air Show podcast in February. 'Airlines, fundamentally, since (the dawn of the jet age) have wanted more efficient aircraft.' By Boom's own estimates, the Overture would burn two to three times more fuel per premium seat — first or business class — than a subsonic plane, such as the Airbus A350 or Boeing 787, on an intercontinental flight. Another estimate from the nonprofit International Council on Clean Transportation puts the Overture's fuel burn at five- to- seven-times that of a subsonic long-haul jet. Airlines would recoup those added fuel costs through higher airfares. Researchers at Worms University of Applied Sciences in Germany described those fares as a 'supersonic premium' in a paper published in the Journal of Air Transport Management last year. They estimated that airfares on the Overture would need to be roughly 38% higher than the current business class fares on a New York-London flight to turn a profit. Put another way, supersonic flyers would pay roughly $4,830 one-way from New York to London in June based on current average one-way airfares of around $3,500 on Google Flights. The researchers at Worms were confident that when flying westward travelers would pay a premium for supersonic flights because they 'fly back in time,' as one of the report's authors Jan Belke told CNN. That time gain could translate into real monetary benefits. Eastbound, however, the financial case was weaker due to hours lost across time zones. While Boom's Scholl acknowledged that Overture seats will likely be priced out of budget for most passengers, he said there's still a solid business case. 'If you hit a mainstream price point — and business class is a mainstream price point — I think of it as the [Tesla] Model S of supersonic flight, it's not yet for everybody but it is a pretty big market segment,' he said. The question is how many will pay that supersonic premium? Digital communications have vastly improved from the days of the Concorde. Video calls have reduced the need for in-person meetings, and with flyers now able to answer emails or even join a virtual meeting in mid-air, in-air downtime is rapidly shrinking on subsonic flight. Richard Aboulafia, a managing director at AeroDynamic Advisory and a long-time skeptic of Boom's business case for the Overture, estimated that Boom needs $12-15 billion to bring the Overture to market, but has only raised around $800 million to date. Boom had about $700 million, according to its last public funding disclosure in 2023. Asked how much Boom needs to develop Overture, Scholl put the number at 'under $2 billion.' He cited numerous cost savings the company has found eliminating 'inefficiencies' in the existing aerospace supply chain by, for the most part, integrating production under its own roof. This integration, Scholl added, also speeds up the development and production process. That gives him confidence in achieving its aggressive timeline of flying the Overture by 2028 and handing the first planes over to airlines a year later. Ostrower called the timeline unrealistic. Of the many challenges ahead of Boom, one is regulatory approval. The Federal Aviation Administration's certification process has slowed dramatically since the Boeing 737 MAX grounding in 2019 and 2020. Boom's timeline allows for just a year of flight tests; Airbus took about 18 months to certify the A350 from first flight in June 2013 to the first delivery in December 2014. Scholl seems unfazed by this, expressing confidence in Boom's ability to meet its targets and produce planes that, in his words, 'delete the friction of travel' by going a whole lot faster than today's jets. 'There's no guarantee of success here — statistically failure is the most likely outcome — but it's definitely possible,' Scholl said. 'The technology is there, the market is there, the passengers and airlines are there, the regulations for overland, I believe, will be there in relative short order. We just have to execute.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Starliner launched 1 year ago on ill-fated voyage: Look back at mission's biggest moments
One year ago, two experienced NASA astronauts boarded an experimental Boeing spacecraft known as the Starliner for a short voyage to orbit and back. If you followed the Starliner saga as a few days stretched into months, you likely remember how this story ends. Boeing's vehicle, which it is developing for NASA to make trips to and from the International Space Station, attained a certain degree of notoriety. And the astronauts who crewed the spacecraft for its maiden human flight test are now as close to being household names as astronauts can get. For 286 days, Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams made their home among the stars as unexpected extended crew members of the space station. Meanwhile, back on Earth, their predicament involved intricate planning and ‒ when President Donald Trump and the world's richest man Elon Musk chimed in ‒ no small amount of finger-pointing. The astronauts, who have long since returned to Earth, have regularly spoke about relishing the extra time in the cosmos, including in an exclusive interview in January with USA TODAY. Wilmore and Williams have also downplayed their extended mission as just part of the job. On the one-year anniversary of the Starliner's doomed launch, here's a look back at the biggest moments of a now-infamous spaceflight mission that captured the world's attention. As the two astronauts selected for the Starliner's first crewed flight test, Wilmore and Williams launched June 5, 2024, on a mission to test a vehicle intended to one day join the SpaceX Dragon in transporting NASA astronauts to orbit. The Starliner capsule rode to orbit atop a United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket from NASA's Kennedy Space Center near Cape Canaveral, Florida. The highly anticipated liftoff came after several delays over the course of about a month due to troubles detected with the spacecraft, including issues with a valve in the rocket's upper stage. Wilmore and Williams reached the International Space Station the next day, June 6, 2024, where they were expected to remain for about 10 days before returning home. But when they made it to the orbital outpost, engineers discovered a slew of helium leaks and problems with the craft's propulsion system that for months hampered Starliner's return to Earth. Williams and Wimore's fate remained uncertain for months as NASA and Boeing deliberated on how best to get them home. That decision came Aug. 24, 2024 when NASA officials announced that the Starliner wasn't safe enough to crew, and would instead undock empty and return to Earth. The move, which dealt a blow to Boeing's hopes of getting the vehicle certified for regular space travel, would also free up a docking port at the station for the spacecraft now tasked with bringing Wilmore and Williams back. Under NASA's plan, the space agency selected a SpaceX Dragon bound the following month for the space station to transport Williams and Wilmore home. And to avoid having the station be understaffed, NASA opted to keep Williams and Wilmore at the station a few extra months rather than launch an emergency mission to return them to Earth. The empty Boeing Starliner then undocked Sept. 6 and made its way back to Earth for a parachute-assisted landing in the New Mexico desert. At the time, Boeing had plenty of work ahead to prepare the vehicle for routine spaceflight – including more ground tests and potential modifications to remedy its propulsion system woes. Starliner's future as a second operational vehicle for NASA to transport crews and cargo to the space station remains unclear, though the space agency appears to still be working with Boeing to make the vehicle operational. On Sept. 28, 2024, NASA launched the SpaceX Crew-9 mission as planned, but with one crucial change: Just two astronauts, Nick Hague of NASA and Russian cosmonaut Aleksandr Gorbunov, headed to the space station instead of four to leave two empty seats on their vehicle reserved for Wilmore and Williams. The pair arrived a day after getting off the ground on a spacecraft. But Wilmore and Williams didn't return with them right away. Instead, the Starliner astronauts were folded into the Crew-9 mission, and Williams even became commander of Expedition 72 – overseeing all of the spacefarers living and working at the space station. The plan then became Williams and Wilmore to return with Crew-9 in 2025 once Hague and Gorbunov completed their mission. If it weren't for the extended mission, Williams would not have been able to set a record Jan. 30 during her ninth-ever spacewalk. After she and Wilmore spent more than six hours venturing outside the space station, Williams has now spent a cumulative 62 hours and 6 minutes in the vacuum of space – more than any other woman in the world. Only three other people in the world have spent more cumulative time on spacewalks than Williams. After taking office in January, President Donald Trump weighed in several times on the Starliner mission, the delay of which he blamed on the Biden administration. He and billionaire ally Elon Musk, the founder of SpaceX, began characterizing the vehicle's crew as being "abandoned" or "stuck" in space – an assertion Wilmore and Williams have oft refuted. Trump also claimed that it was he who "authorized" Musk to retrieve the astronauts, despite the return plan being in place before he was elected. However, Trump did appear to have had an influence over NASA's decision to accelerate by about two weeks the launch of a mission that replaced Crew-9. That mission, unsurprisingly known as Crew-10, launched March 14 from NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Crew-10 included a full contingent of four spacefarers, including mission commander Anne McClain of NASA, NASA pilot Nichole Ayers and two mission specialists from other space agencies: Japanese astronaut Takuya Onishi of the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (Jaxa) and Roscosmos cosmonaut Kirill Peskov. After more than 28 hours traveling through orbit, Crew-10 reached the space station late March 15 – a critical step in setting the stage for Wilmore and Williams to embark on their long-awaited return trip. Before the outgoing astronauts departed the station, they spent a few days helping the new arrivals familiarize themselves with the orbital laboratory and station operations during a handover period. Wilmore and Williams then boarded the Dragon with Hague and Gorbunov and undocked March 18 from the ISS's Harmony module, a port and passageway onto the station. About 17 hours later, the SpaceX Dragon vehicle – charred from its journey through Earth's atmosphere – deployed parachutes for a dramatic water landing March 19 off the coast of Florida. SpaceX teams then raced to retrieve the floating spacecraft and its crew of four, helping secure the Dragon and hoist it onto a recovery vessel. Once the Dragon was firmly in place on the ship's main deck, teams cut into the vehicle's side hatch to help Williams, Wilmore, Hague and Gorbunov exit. As commentators explained during NASA's livestream, the astronauts were placed onto stretchers – standard protocol after long-duration spaceflights – and taken to receive medical examinations. Once cleared, the four astronauts were taken on a short helicopter ride to board an airplane for a flight to NASA's headquarters in Houston, where they began their recovery. Eric Lagatta is the Space Connect reporter for the USA TODAY Network. Reach him at elagatta@ This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Remembering the infamous Boeing Starliner mission 1 year since launch
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
A private company wants to build a city on the moon. But it has to land a probe first
A private space exploration company based in Japan, ispace, wants to see people living on the moon by 2040. They have plans to eventually build a city on the lunar surface that would house a thousand people and welcome thousands more for tourist visits. But first, they need to land a probe on the Moon's surface successfully. In April 2023, their first attempt fell short of that goal after they lost communication with their first lander during the mission's final moments. On Thursday at 3:17 p.m. ET, ispace will make its second attempt at an uncrewed moon landing with its lunar lander called Resilience. MORE: NASA releases high-definition images of a sunset on the moon After a nearly five-month journey from the Earth to the moon that began with a January 15 launch aboard a SpaceX Falcon 9, the lander is scheduled to touch down in an area of the moon known as the "Sea of Cold," part of the Mare Frigoris region. The company said there are three alternative landing sites should conditions change, which would postpone the landing to another date and time. The Resilience is part of ispace's Hakuto-R Mission 2 and is currently orbiting the Moon in preparation for Thursday's landing. If all goes as planned, the spacecraft will fire its main engine and slow itself down in the moon's thin gravity before touching down softly at its landing site. Powered by solar panels, the spacecraft is carrying a mix of commercial and scientific payloads, including a water electrolyzer to test the ability to generate hydrogen and oxygen from lunar water, a food production module for growing algae as a potential food source and a deep-space radiation probe. The mission is expected to last about two weeks. If ispace is going to establish a colony on the moon, it will need to identify an ample supply of ice or water, which it will convert into fuel for a future lunar fueling station. The ability to produce fuel on the moon will enable the company to transport people back and forth between the Earth and the moon. MORE: NASA catches a glimpse of 'city-killer' asteroid before it disappears until 2028 After landing, a small rover called Tenacious will deploy to explore the lunar surface, collect soil samples and transmit HD video and telemetry back to Earth. The rover is also carrying a tiny art installation: a red-painted "Moonhouse" sculpture by Swedish artist Mikael Genberg is mounted to the front of the vehicle. "Our goal is to build the cislunar economy, one in which the Moon and Earth are economically and socially connected. We view the success of the lunar landing as merely a stepping stone toward that goal. We strongly believe that this endeavor and its long-term success will contribute to making life on Earth sustainable for all humanity," ispace CEO Takeshi Hakamada said in a statement. A private company wants to build a city on the moon. But it has to land a probe first originally appeared on
