NASA’s Artemis Program Faces Reassessment Amid Concerns Over Packed Mission Objectives

NASA is under renewed pressure to reconsider its ambitious plans for upcoming Artemis missions, with concerns mounting over the growing number of first-time objectives and the compounded risks associated with them.

At a public meeting held on January 30, the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) highlighted these concerns, particularly regarding Artemis 3, the first crewed lunar landing in the Artemis program, and subsequent missions.

A Warning on Compounding Risks

ASAP panel member Bill Bray emphasized that NASA may be attempting to accomplish too much within individual missions, heightening the potential for failure.

“Each first milestone carries its own individual risk, and as these risks are compounded and aggregated, it only increases the overall risk posture for any individual flight mission,...It really begs the question: Is it time for the agency to reassess the current mission objectives and its approach for Artemis 3 and beyond, with the goal to better balance the risks across all those flight tests?” - Bill Bray, ASAP

ASAP’s concerns are not new, having been outlined in its most recent annual report, released in early 2024. The report identified 13 critical first-time objectives for Artemis 3, many tied to the new technologies being developed, such as SpaceX’s Starship lunar lander and next-generation spacesuits provided by Axiom Space. The list of challenges has only grown since then.

A notable addition is NASA’s decision to reformulate the Avcoat heat shield material used on the Orion spacecraft after excessive erosion was observed during Artemis 1’s reentry. The reformulated heat shield will debut on Artemis 3, representing yet another key test objective added to an already-packed mission.

Broader Concerns for Artemis 3 and Beyond

The concerns aren’t limited to Artemis 3, future missions including Artemis 4 and 5, will face similar risks due to the integration of the lunar Gateway, Blue Origin’s Blue Moon lander, and a crewed lunar rover.

“Each of these elements under development and delivery requires a near-perfect program execution across a complex set of tests and milestones and, frankly, there’s very little room for failure...Problems with a single key element will result in continued launch delays and an irregular and erratic cadence of mission flights” - Bill Bray, ASAP

ASAP warned that even a single issue with any key component could cause cascading delays and disrupt the overall schedule of the Artemis program. This could lead to an elevated “risk posture” for subsequent missions, with NASA potentially facing longer gaps between launches and reduced flexibility in its timeline.

The Case for a More Incremental Approach

ASAP has raised these concerns in recent discussions with Amit Kshatriya, NASA’s deputy associate administrator for the Moon to Mars Program Office. The panel recommended that NASA adopt an approach similar to the Apollo program, where each mission is treated as a stepping stone with carefully defined test objectives distributed across multiple launches.

“Treat each launch as a test objective,...with clear milestones that can be spread across several missions to achieve a more balanced risk exposure and maintain a more regular launch cadence.” - Bill Bray, ASAP

However, he did not specify how NASA responded to these recommendations, noting that the panel will continue advocating for changes in the Artemis mission planning process.

Gateway and Starship Logistics Evolving

ASAP’s meeting coincided with new updates on the Artemis mission architecture, presented during the SpaceCom conference. Among the updates, NASA officials discussed ongoing developments related to the lunar Gateway and logistics plans.

Mark Wiese, manager of NASA’s Deep Space Logistics program, confirmed that NASA had authorized SpaceX to proceed with its first Gateway Logistics Services mission using Dragon XL, a modified version of its Dragon spacecraft, in late 2023. However, Wiese noted that evolving mission requirements had prompted changes in SpaceX’s approach.

Wiese hinted at modifications to the design of the Dragon XL spacecraft stating “They’re starting to retool their architecture,”.

While details remain under wraps, he said NASA and SpaceX are close to finalizing a contract modification. A system requirements review is expected later this year as NASA prepares for Artemis 4, the first crewed mission to the Gateway, currently scheduled for 2028.

Progress on Lunar Landers

Significant progress is also being made on the development of crewed lunar landers by both SpaceX and Blue Origin.

“SpaceX is not shy about advertising their success,” - Kent Chojnacki, Deputy Manager of NASA’s Human Landing System Program

SpaceX has also conducted tests of the Starship airlock and elevator, critical components for crewed lunar missions, using prototypes of Axiom’s new spacesuits.

Meanwhile, Blue Origin is moving forward with its Blue Moon lander, which recently achieved a major milestone with the successful first launch of the company’s New Glenn rocket. The company is also conducting landing leg tests to ensure Blue Moon’s readiness.

Looking ahead, Chojnacki highlighted two key milestones: SpaceX’s planned in-space propellant transfer demonstration, a critical technology for the long-duration Starship missions, and Blue Origin’s critical design review for Blue Moon. While SpaceX aims to demonstrate propellant transfer later this year, Chojnacki acknowledged that the timeline could be affected by the anomaly experienced during Starship’s January 16 test flight.

“Blue looks more like NASA in that we do a lot of design and development first, then we build and test...SpaceX is a little different. They test as they go and learn from each iteration.” - Kent Chojnacki, Deputy Manager of NASA’s Human Landing System Program

The Road Ahead

As NASA works to balance innovation with safety, the Artemis program stands at a crossroads. With multiple milestones and technologies converging, the agency faces mounting pressure to find the right balance between ambition and caution.