NASA Announces Partnership Opportunities for U.S. Commercial Lunar Lander Capabi

[catdlr]

NASA Announces Partnership Opportunities for U.S. Commercial Lunar Lander Capabilities

Jan. 16, 2014
RELEASE 14-020

NASA Announces Partnership Opportunities for U.S. Commercial Lunar Lander Capabilities
Building on the progress of NASA's partnerships with the U.S. commercial space industry to develop new spacecraft and rockets capable of delivering cargo, and soon, astronauts to low Earth orbit, the agency is now looking for opportunities to spur commercial cargo transportation capabilities to the surface of the moon.

NASA has released an announcement seeking proposals to partner in the development of reliable and cost-effective commercial robotic lunar lander capabilities that will enable the delivery of payloads to the lunar surface. Such capabilities could support commercial activities on the moon while enabling new science and exploration missions of interest to NASA and the larger scientific and academic communities.

NASA's new Lunar Cargo Transportation and Landing by Soft Touchdown (Lunar CATALYST) initiative calls for proposals from the U.S. private sector that would lead to one or more no-funds exchanged Space Act Agreements (SAA). NASA’s contribution to a partnership would be on an unfunded basis and could include the technical expertise of NASA staff, access to NASA center test facilities, equipment loans, or software for lander development and testing.

"As NASA pursues an ambitious plan for humans to explore an asteroid and Mars, U.S. industry will create opportunities for NASA to advance new technologies on the moon," said Greg Williams, NASA's deputy associate administrator for the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate. "Our strategic investments in the innovations of our commercial partners have brought about successful commercial resupply of the International Space Station, to be followed in the coming years by commercial crew. Lunar CATALYST will help us advance our goals to reach farther destinations."
 
The moon has scientific value and the potential to yield resources, such as water and oxygen, in relatively close proximity to Earth to help sustain deep space exploration. Commercial lunar transportation capabilities could support science and exploration objectives, such as sample returns, geophysical network deployment, resource prospecting, and technology demonstrations. These services would require the ability to land small (66 to 220 pound, or 30 to 100 kilogram) and medium (551 to 1,102 pound, or 250 to 500 kg) class payloads at various lunar sites.

"In recent years, lunar orbiting missions, such as NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, have revealed evidence of water and other volatiles, but to understand the extent and accessibility of these resources, we need to reach the surface and explore up close," said Jason Crusan, director of Advanced Exploration Systems at NASA Headquarters in Washington. "Commercial lunar landing capabilities could help prospect for and utilize these resources."

Lunar CATALYST supports the internationally shared space exploration goals of the Global Exploration Roadmap (GER) NASA and 11 other space agencies around the world released in August. The GER acknowledges the value of public-private partnerships and commercial services to enable sustainable exploration of asteroids, the moon and Mars.

Commercial lunar cargo transportation systems developed through Lunar CATALYST could build on lessons learned throughout NASA's 50 years of spaceflight. New propulsion and autonomous landing technologies currently are being tested through NASA's Morpheus and Mighty Eagle projects.

NASA will host a pre-proposal teleconference on Monday, Jan. 27 during which proposers will have an opportunity to ask questions about the announcement. Proposals from industry are due by March 17. The announcement of selections is targeted for April with SAAs targeted to be in place by May.

The Advanced Exploration Systems Division in NASA's Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate manages Lunar CATALYST. Advanced Exploration Systems pioneers new approaches for rapidly developing prototype systems, demonstrating key capabilities and validating operational concepts for future human missions beyond Earth orbit.

As NASA works with U.S. industry to develop the next generation of U.S. spaceflight services, the agency also is developing the Orion spacecraft and the Space Launch System (SLS), a crew capsule and heavy-lift rocket to provide an entirely new capability for human exploration. Designed to be flexible for launching spacecraft for crew and cargo missions, SLS and Orion will expand human presence beyond low-Earth orbit and enable new missions of exploration across the solar system, including to a near-Earth asteroid and Mars.

For more information about the announcement and teleconference, visit:
http://www.nasa.gov/lunarcatalyst
-end-

[QuantumG]

Could be very interesting. I imagine Moon Express is gearing up to make a proposal.

[Rocket Science]

Now we're cookin'!

[ChrisWilson68]

I was really surprised and excited to read this, right up until I read the words "no-funds exchanged".  To me, that makes this announcement pretty meaningless.

They keep talking in the announcement about the success of COTS/CRS and commercial crew, and say this will be applying the same approach to lunar cargo.  But the money was critical to the successes of those other programs.  Very disappointing.

[R7]

Could be very interesting. I imagine Moon Express is gearing up to make a proposal.

Who are the other likely parties? Too little for Golden Spike?

[QuantumG]

Could be very interesting. I imagine Moon Express is gearing up to make a proposal.

Who are the other likely parties? Too little for Golden Spike?

Are they even interested in robotic Lunar Landers?

[Ronsmytheiii]

Could be very interesting. I imagine Moon Express is gearing up to make a proposal.

Who are the other likely parties? Too little for Golden Spike?

Are they even interested in robotic Lunar Landers?

Yup:

The commercial spaceflight company Golden Spike – which aims fly private missions to the moon by 2020 – has teamed up with the New York-based firm Honeybee Robotics to design robotic rovers for the planned lunar expeditions.

http://www.space.com/23946-golden-spike-private-moon-rover-designer.html

I was really surprised and excited to read this, right up until I read the words "no-funds exchanged".  To me, that makes this announcement pretty meaningless.

They keep talking in the announcement about the success of COTS/CRS and commercial crew, and say this will be applying the same approach to lunar cargo.  But the money was critical to the successes of those other programs.  Very disappointing.

Why?  NASA has other services that can help these companies. Blue Origin continued their CCDev development in unfunded agreements, Bigelow has done the same in the past and so did SNC.  NASA has intellectual property and infrastructure that while free to give away might be worth its weight in gold to these start-ups.

[QuantumG]

Yup:

The commercial spaceflight company Golden Spike – which aims fly private missions to the moon by 2020 – has teamed up with the New York-based firm Honeybee Robotics to design robotic rovers for the planned lunar expeditions.

http://www.space.com/23946-golden-spike-private-moon-rover-designer.html

Nope. Rover != Lander.

Edit: I stand corrected.

[Robotbeat]

Yup:

The commercial spaceflight company Golden Spike – which aims fly private missions to the moon by 2020 – has teamed up with the New York-based firm Honeybee Robotics to design robotic rovers for the planned lunar expeditions.

http://www.space.com/23946-golden-spike-private-moon-rover-designer.html

Nope. Rover != Lander.

I disagree. Any port in a storm. If this ever progresses to the point of funding, I'm sure Golden Spike would be interested in robotic landers as well. Same with other private Moon lander groups.

[Ronsmytheiii]

Yup:

The commercial spaceflight company Golden Spike – which aims fly private missions to the moon by 2020 – has teamed up with the New York-based firm Honeybee Robotics to design robotic rovers for the planned lunar expeditions.

http://www.space.com/23946-golden-spike-private-moon-rover-designer.html

Nope. Rover != Lander.

They (robots) need something to land on, from another part of the article:

To boost the scientific output of the expeditions, the company plans to send unmanned rovers to the moon ahead of the crew to collect samples from a wider area than the crew will be able to travel from their landing pad.The rovers will then meet up with the crew's spacecraft once it arrives, according to the mission plan.

[R7]

Yup:

The commercial spaceflight company Golden Spike – which aims fly private missions to the moon by 2020 – has teamed up with the New York-based firm Honeybee Robotics to design robotic rovers for the planned lunar expeditions.

http://www.space.com/23946-golden-spike-private-moon-rover-designer.html

Nope. Rover != Lander.

http://goldenspikecompany.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/GSC-Honeybee_NR-FINAL.pdf

Earlier this year, an international scientific workshop led by Golden Spike proposed new concepts for
lunar missions, including robotic-human expeditions. The proposal envisions sending robotic systems
to the Moon to collect sample
s ahead of a crewed Golden Spike expedition to retrieve the robot’s
cache.

That sort of implies a lander for robots.

[ChrisWilson68]

I was really surprised and excited to read this, right up until I read the words "no-funds exchanged".  To me, that makes this announcement pretty meaningless.

They keep talking in the announcement about the success of COTS/CRS and commercial crew, and say this will be applying the same approach to lunar cargo.  But the money was critical to the successes of those other programs.  Very disappointing.

Why?  NASA has other services that can help these companies. Blue Origin continued their CCDev development in unfunded agreements, Bigelow has done the same in the past and so did SNC.  NASA has intellectual property and infrastructure that while free to give away might be worth its weight in gold to these start-ups.

COTS/CRS and Commercial Crew, have resulted in operational capabilities that are in use, or that are on track to being operational if funding continues in the next two years.  Blue Origin's and Bigelow's operational capabilities are in the indefinite future.

NASA funding for commercial programs is a game changer.  Providing free advice and loaning equipment has some benefit, but it is not in the same class.

[jedsmd]

Could be very interesting. I imagine Moon Express is gearing up to make a proposal.

Who are the other likely parties? Too little for Golden Spike?

Astrobotic's planned lander just makes it into the medium payload class at 260Kg.

http://www.astrobotic.com/lander/

[yg1968]

Could SpaceX (with its next generation Dragon) and Bigelow (with its self landing habitat) be interested in this?

[ChrisWilson68]

Could SpaceX (with its next generation Dragon) and Bigelow (with its self landing habitat) be interested in this?

I doubt either company would be interested unless they see a market for services on the moon in the near or medium term, and I doubt they see that happening.

[butters]

This just makes me disappointed that NASA doesn't routinely provide technical assistance to U.S. companies unless they announce some sort of exceptional arrangement. Good on NASA for, in this particular instance, selectively agreeing to provide limited support to American companies that want pursue the commercial applications of space. And what with the lack of any money or stated intention of procuring any goods or services from their valued "partners", I don't see how this could get any more exciting.

[QuantumG]

This just makes me disappointed that NASA doesn't routinely provide technical assistance to U.S. companies unless they announce some sort of exceptional arrangement.

They do. For example, Moon Express has had a Reimbursable Space Act Agreement with NASA since 2010.

[wjbarnett]

Masten?

[JBF]

NASA is probably getting some political pressure to do something about going back to the moon.  This allows them to do that with no budget.

[newpylong]

This just makes me disappointed that NASA doesn't routinely provide technical assistance to U.S. companies unless they announce some sort of exceptional arrangement. Good on NASA for, in this particular instance, selectively agreeing to provide limited support to American companies that want pursue the commercial applications of space. And what with the lack of any money or stated intention of procuring any goods or services from their valued "partners", I don't see how this could get any more exciting.

Happens all the time. In this case, NASA is looking for proposals.