Beresheet, SpaceIL Israeli Moon mission

[whitelancer64]

They did receive money from the Israeli government, and said government was very present during the livestream event. Which is quite normal I think. I did notice boredom on the politicians' faces from time to time.

It was my first reaction as well. Demeaning the previous goal even though it wasn't even reached and calling a failed mission a success, does not bode confidence that they will be doing anything else than chasing the next high. If the goal of glxp was to inspire commercial lunar exploration activities, this is quite a setback

It just makes them look silly in my view and lose credibility.

Who is the "them" that is losing credibility?

[meberbs]

SpaceIL was always set up as a one-off mission, and I always hoped that the first commercial landing would be from one of the GLXP competitors that actually had plans to act as an on-going commercial service. As such, I wasn't too disappointed in the landing failure, since now it should be one of the CLPS companies that gets first "commercial" lunar landing.

The fact that SpaceIL has any future plans in space at all, and has not just disbanded, is better than I expected, but I don't have high hopes for the new mission being something that will actually progress space exploration.

[Star One]

They did receive money from the Israeli government, and said government was very present during the livestream event. Which is quite normal I think. I did notice boredom on the politicians' faces from time to time.

It was my first reaction as well. Demeaning the previous goal even though it wasn't even reached and calling a failed mission a success, does not bode confidence that they will be doing anything else than chasing the next high. If the goal of glxp was to inspire commercial lunar exploration activities, this is quite a setback

It just makes them look silly in my view and lose credibility.

Who is the "them" that is losing credibility?

SpaceIL. I thought that would be blindingly obvious who I was referring to.

[whitelancer64]

They did receive money from the Israeli government, and said government was very present during the livestream event. Which is quite normal I think. I did notice boredom on the politicians' faces from time to time.

It was my first reaction as well. Demeaning the previous goal even though it wasn't even reached and calling a failed mission a success, does not bode confidence that they will be doing anything else than chasing the next high. If the goal of glxp was to inspire commercial lunar exploration activities, this is quite a setback

It just makes them look silly in my view and lose credibility.

Who is the "them" that is losing credibility?

SpaceIL. I thought that would be blindingly obvious who I was referring to.

No, as there are 3 different entities you could have been referring to, the Israeli government, SpaceIL, and / or the GLXP.

Anyway, I don't see how it causes SpaceIL to lose credibility - while they were established to compete in the GLXP, if they want to move on to something else now that that competition is over, why shouldn't they? Changing focus / goals is not exactly uncommon in aerospace / technology companies, right? 

As a secondary mission, they have also been generally promoting interest and education in STEM fields in Israel, so to accomplish that they really don't need to limit themselves only to landing on the Moon.

[TrevorMonty]

They may have paying customer for alternative destination.

[Phil Stooke]

That is a very good point.

[Star One]

They may have paying customer for alternative destination.

Haven’t they previously said they were going for crowd funding.

[GWH]

I can see the appeal of landing on the moon being somewhat lost now. If they did it this year it would have been a monumental achievement as the first commercial lunar lander. Building Beresheet 2 is likely to take a few years, by 2021 some of these CLPS landers just might have beet them to the punch.

[Phil Stooke]

" They may have paying customer for alternative destination."


"Haven’t they previously said they were going for crowd funding."

Yes, but is that likely to raise $100 million?  I'm sure they would be seeking paying customers as well.  It will be interesting to learn more about this story in due course.

[lonestriker]

I can see the appeal of landing on the moon being somewhat lost now. If they did it this year it would have been a monumental achievement as the first commercial lunar lander. Building Beresheet 2 is likely to take a few years, by 2021 some of these CLPS landers just might have beet them to the punch.

I suspect you're right here. It would still be an accomplishment to soft-land on the moon, but the "first" would likely be taken by others by then.  I've also wondered what others in the aerospace industry and academia think of SpaceX's ambitious plans.  If you're planning on building something like Beresheet 2, which will take years to fund and build, it takes a massive amount of dedication to do so. If SpaceX is even remotely successful in the plans and timelines, they could obviate many such projects on the drawing board.  Does SS/SH dampen smaller, private efforts like this?  If SpaceX is successful, then no harm as they would bring a lot more to the table for everyone by providing a platform for much easier access to orbit and the moon.  If they are extremely late or wildly off the mark, then they may slow funding and innovation.

[TrevorMonty]

I can see the appeal of landing on the moon being somewhat lost now. If they did it this year it would have been a monumental achievement as the first commercial lunar lander. Building Beresheet 2 is likely to take a few years, by 2021 some of these CLPS landers just might have beet them to the punch.

I suspect you're right here. It would still be an accomplishment to soft-land on the moon, but the "first" would likely be taken by others by then.  I've also wondered what others in the aerospace industry and academia think of SpaceX's ambitious plans.  If you're planning on building something like Beresheet 2, which will take years to fund and build, it takes a massive amount of dedication to do so. If SpaceX is even remotely successful in the plans and timelines, they could obviate many such projects on the drawing board.  Does SS/SH dampen smaller, private efforts like this?  If SpaceX is successful, then no harm as they would bring a lot more to the table for everyone by providing a platform for much easier access to orbit and the moon.  If they are extremely late or wildly off the mark, then they may slow funding and innovation.

SpaceX SS won't be competiting with small landers, if anything it will be an asset, giving them low cost ride to lunar orbit. When deployed in lunar orbit these small robotic landers can carry greater payload or do multiple hops.

SS would be used for establishing and supplying a lunar base. Smallers will be needed for robotic exploration missions.

[lonestriker]

SpaceX SS won't be competiting with small landers, if anything it will be an asset, giving them low cost ride to lunar orbit. When deployed in lunar orbit these small robotic landers can carry greater payload or do multiple hops.

SS would be used for establishing and supplying a lunar base. Smallers will be needed for robotic exploration missions.

My point is that the accomplishment of transiting, orbiting, and landing on the moon would no longer be great technical challenges to overcome to claim the "first" title.  If SpaceX gives you a lift all the way to the lunar surface, Beeresheet 2 could be changed from a spacecraft that is mostly propulsion and transiting vehicle and fuel to a "simple" rover that's part of SS's cargo.  But that assumes SS is successful and lives up to its promises.

So, if you are designing a lunar lander today, do you design a full-up vehicle that is like Beresheet 1?  Or do you pause and wait for SS/NG to materialize before making your decision?  That's mostly what I meant about possibly slowing innovation.  What's the point of designing a lunar mission today (NASA CLPS included) when in a few years, much of the hard work of getting to the moon might be handled by something else?  And possibly with a gigantic mass budget vs. the tiny one that's available with today's launchers?

If I were in their shoes, I'm not sure which approach I would take.  Continue on assuming only existing technology? Or wait and see what the next gen (reasonably priced) heavy lift vehicles look like?  For the CLPS folks, they can plow ahead now since NASA will help foot the bill.  If you're trying to drum up funding for Beresheet 2 though? Maybe start planning with existing technology and scrap it if a better ride becomes available?

[TrevorMonty]

SpaceX SS won't be competiting with small landers, if anything it will be an asset, giving them low cost ride to lunar orbit. When deployed in lunar orbit these small robotic landers can carry greater payload or do multiple hops.

SS would be used for establishing and supplying a lunar base. Smallers will be needed for robotic exploration missions.

My point is that the accomplishment of transiting, orbiting, and landing on the moon would no longer be great technical challenges to overcome to claim the "first" title.  If SpaceX gives you a lift all the way to the lunar surface, Beeresheet 2 could be changed from a spacecraft that is mostly propulsion and transiting vehicle and fuel to a "simple" rover that's part of SS's cargo.  But that assumes SS is successful and lives up to its promises.

So, if you are designing a lunar lander today, do you design a full-up vehicle that is like Beresheet 1?  Or do you pause and wait for SS/NG to materialize before making your decision?  That's mostly what I meant about possibly slowing innovation.  What's the point of designing a lunar mission today (NASA CLPS included) when in a few years, much of the hard work of getting to the moon might be handled by something else?  And possibly with a gigantic mass budget vs. the tiny one that's available with today's launchers?

If I were in their shoes, I'm not sure which approach I would take.  Continue on assuming only existing technology? Or wait and see what the next gen (reasonably priced) heavy lift vehicles look like?  For the CLPS folks, they can plow ahead now since NASA will help foot the bill.  If you're trying to drum up funding for Beresheet 2 though? Maybe start planning with existing technology and scrap it if a better ride becomes available?

If we establish lunar base the demand for small robotic landers will be even greater, as there will be lot more exploration missions to various parts of moon.
Especially if the costs come down due to cheap rides to lunar orbit

[dbush]

Firefly Aerospace, a Texas-based company already developing a smallsat launcher, announces agreement with Israel Aerospace Industries for a US-built lunar lander based on the Beresheet mission, which attempted a moon landing in April. FULL STORY:

https://spaceflightnow.com/2019/07/10/firefly-to-build-u-s-version-of-israeli-beresheet-lunar-lander/

https://twitter.com/SpaceflightNow/status/1149005470579023876/photo/1

From this Tweet: https://twitter.com/SpaceflightNow/status/1149005470579023876

[Star One]

There could be thousands of tiny, almost indestructible creatures living on the Moon right now.

When Israel's private lunar lander Beresheet crashed onto the lunar surface, it was carrying a box full of tardigrades—microscopic creatures that are the only known living thing capable of surviving the extreme vacuum of outer space.

And Nova Spivack, founder of the Arch Mission Foundation, who paid to have the tardigrades on the spacecraft, has now told Wired magazine that he believes they survived.

https://www.newsweek.com/tardigrade-living-moon-israel-spaceship-crash-1452728

[russianhalo117]

There could be thousands of tiny, almost indestructible creatures living on the Moon right now.

When Israel's private lunar lander Beresheet crashed onto the lunar surface, it was carrying a box full of tardigrades—microscopic creatures that are the only known living thing capable of surviving the extreme vacuum of outer space.

And Nova Spivack, founder of the Arch Mission Foundation, who paid to have the tardigrades on the spacecraft, has now told Wired magazine that he believes they survived.

https://www.newsweek.com/tardigrade-living-moon-israel-spaceship-crash-1452728

Wouldn't this be a violation of international planetary protection protocols or are they benign to humans.

[hop]

Wouldn't this be a violation of international planetary protection protocols or are they benign to humans.

The moon, for obvious reasons, isn't a sensitive location: https://planetaryprotection.nasa.gov/categories

And for all the hype tardigrades get, they aren't going to colonize the moon. At best, some fraction might remain viable for a long time, meaning if they were re-introduced into an earth-like habitat they would start reproducing again. So the only contamination would be if someone deliberately sampled the Beresheet crash site.

[penguin44]

Hmm. Maybe someone is going to build a spore drive with em.

[catdlr]

Wouldn't this be a violation of international planetary protection protocols or are they benign to humans.

The moon, for obvious reasons, isn't a sensitive location: https://planetaryprotection.nasa.gov/categories

And for all the hype tardigrades get, they aren't going to colonize the moon. At best, some fraction might remain viable for a long time, meaning if they were re-introduced into an earth-like habitat they would start reproducing again. So the only contamination would be if someone deliberately sampled the Beresheet crash site.

Just remember that the Apollo Astronauts left their fecal waste on the moon before they left.

[su27k]

Predictably, someone is freaking out on twitter over tardigrades:

https://twitter.com/AstroTraviesa/status/1160318429322199046

BTW, didn't China send silkworms to the Moon, where is "planetary protection" folks when China was doing it?