Argonaut (European Large Logistics Lander)

[hektor]

Argonaut goes for decision this fall...

N° 30–2022: From the Earth to the Moon and on to Mars – ESA and NASA take decisions and plan for the future

[Phil Stooke]

To the Moon, perhaps.  But why?

[hektor]

Argonaut is launched by Ariane 64, so it is independent European access to the Lunar surface for cargoes.

It is a bargaining chip for a European astronaut on the Lunar surface. Like the JAXA rover.

We’ll see what the European member states decide about Argonaut this fall.

[Rik ISS-fan]

In my opinion the only logical exploration activity are radio telescopes at the earth opposing side and exploration rovers. To put rovers on the lunar surface a logistic lander is needed. EL3/Argonaut is this lander.
Don't involve humans in space exploration beyond LEO, because 10s of billions of funding are required for scientific results that could be achieved with a billion with (unmanned systems) rovers and a lander system. So EL3 is in my opinion the logical exploration enabler that needs to be developed. I think the facility to test it is nearly ready.
Propulsive landing will most likely also be required for Mars exploration, this could be a follow-on development on EL3.

[Tywin]

I hope this contract is awarded to Thales, it performs much better than Airbus-Ariane...

[hektor]

ESA contracts awards mostly depend from which member state invests the most in the project…

[baldusi]

ESA contracts awards mostly depend from which member state invests the most in the project…

Both Thales and Airbus have subsidiaries in the main ESA members.

[hektor]

Wrong, no Thales Alenia in Germany. If Germany has the majority stake in the program... you can imagine how it ends.

[hektor]

I made a thought experiment. ESA wants to use Argonaut as a bargaining chip with NASA to get a European astronaut on the surface.

For the argonaut to the Moon, with an Ariane 64 launch from Guiana, the operations and the spacecraft I assume we are talking maybe 500 Meuros. So they go to NASA and say, we spent half a billion to bring one ton of payload to the surface, grant us an astronaut on the surface !

Then NASA answers, sorry guys for that amount we can have xxx HLS to the Lunar surface which brings xxx times 100 t of payload. Even is xxx significantly lower than one, I do not see how ESA has bargaining power with Argonaut.

Do I miss something ? granularity ? there is a value to bring only a one ton payload increment ? access to areas where Starship cannot safely land ? anything ?

[Zed_Noir]

I made a thought experiment. ESA wants to use Argonaut as a bargaining chip with NASA to get a European astronaut on the surface.

For the argonaut to the Moon, with an Ariane 64 launch from Guiana, the operations and the spacecraft I assume we are talking maybe 500 Meuros. So they go to NASA and say, we spent half a billion to bring one ton of payload to the surface, grant us an astronaut on the surface !

Then NASA answers, sorry guys for that amount we can have xxx HLS to the Lunar surface which brings xxx times 100 t of payload. Even is xxx significantly lower than one, I do not see how ESA has bargaining power with Argonaut.

Do I miss something ? granularity ? there is a value to bring only a one ton payload increment ? access to areas where Starship cannot safely land ? anything ?

The work to be done in ESA member states to developed and build a handful of bespoked boutique Lunar landers with 1 tonne payload capacity. It is pork barreling with at least 500M Euros to be allocated, IMO.

[hektor]

The work to be done in ESA member states to developed and build a handful of bespoked boutique Lunar landers with 1 tonne payload capacity. It is pork barreling with at least 500M Euros to be allocated, IMO.

That part I understood. What is not clear to me is how ESA gets from NASA and the US Govt their "boots on the Moon" seat on an Artemis flight.

[Tywin]

The work to be done in ESA member states to developed and build a handful of bespoked boutique Lunar landers with 1 tonne payload capacity. It is pork barreling with at least 500M Euros to be allocated, IMO.

That part I understood. What is not clear to me is how ESA gets from NASA and the US Govt their "boots on the Moon" seat on an Artemis flight.

And the modules for the Gateway dont buy thats seats on the Moon for ESA?

[Zed_Noir]

The work to be done in ESA member states to developed and build a handful of bespoked boutique Lunar landers with 1 tonne payload capacity. It is pork barreling with at least 500M Euros to be allocated, IMO.

That part I understood. What is not clear to me is how ESA gets from NASA and the US Govt their "boots on the Moon" seat on an Artemis flight.

Me think some sort of backroom deal that ESA get their Artemis Moon seat by signing up to the Artemis program and contributed some lander hardware to protected the program from cuts and cancellation from the Congressional critters.

NASA can pointed out to the critters that an International partner has contributed budget, lander hardware and resources. So the Artemis program is harder to be interfere with.

The Argonaut lander is the just some lander hardware. Operationally it add not much for payload delivery capacity to the surface of the Moon. Especially using the Ariane 64 as launcher.

[hektor]

That part I understood. What is not clear to me is how ESA gets from NASA and the US Govt their "boots on the Moon" seat on an Artemis flight.

And the modules for the Gateway dont buy thats seats on the Moon for ESA?

My understanding is that the modules for the Gateway buy seats on board the Gateway.

[woods170]

The work to be done in ESA member states to developed and build a handful of bespoked boutique Lunar landers with 1 tonne payload capacity. It is pork barreling with at least 500M Euros to be allocated, IMO.

That part I understood. What is not clear to me is how ESA gets from NASA and the US Govt their "boots on the Moon" seat on an Artemis flight.

And the modules for the Gateway dont buy thats seats on the Moon for ESA?

No, they don't. They only buy seats to Lunar Gateway, but not beyond.
Argonaut is the next thing to use as leverage to get European boots on the Lunar surface. But it remains to be seen if such a deal is accepted by NASA and the US State Department.

Edit: ninja'd by Hektor

[hektor]

Ok so we are back to my original question.

My impression is that Starship with its low operating cost and huge payload to Lunar surface reduces considerably the bargaining power of the pair Ariane 64 / Argonaut.

So do I miss something which makes Ariane 64 / Argonaut against ESA astronaut on the surface a palatable deal for NASA much more than I think ?

[Phil Stooke]

    "And the modules for the Gateway don't buy seats on the Moon for ESA?"


"No, they don't. They only buy seats to Lunar Gateway, but not beyond."

So far.  But negotiations will obviously continue as plans evolve.  The current situation is not the end of the story.

[hektor]

The Modules will remain the same. They have already been negociated against Orion seats to Gateway.

Never seen a negotiation where you get more with the same bargaining chip.

[Tywin]

What about the future habitats for the Artemis Base?

Maybe that buy the future seats...

[hektor]

An interesting job opening 

Argonaut Propulsion Lead

In order to both define specific mission applications and inform the generic design of the LDE so that it can accommodate a range of missions, several ESA CDF studies and pre-Phase A industrial studies have been conducted. The Phase B2/C/D development of the LDE will be initiated by the end of 2023 with the launch of the first mission targeted in 2030.