Throughout this segment, we’re diving into the probable cancellation of NASA’s much anticipated VIPER moon rover. This is an extremely complex topic and a full discussion just isn’t possible given the limited length of this segment or even of this show. To give this story the space it needs, I’m creating a series of articles over on Substack that examine the different economic and political factors that are at play when it comes to NASA budgets, contracts, and mission selections and cancellations.
In preparing this story, I sent requests for information to various NASA offices, including requests for specific guidelines and documentation that shaped NASA decisions. These emails were sent on or before July 26. As of August 8, when this segment was recording on EVSN, I haven’t received any answers.
NASA’s economic context is unforgiving
The past few months have been hard for anyone following NASA missions. Issues in the US congress led to significant delays in the FY24 budget allocations. While everyone was waiting, NASA – along with most of the US government – had to move forward and they assumed a budget that would meet or exceed that of the prior year. In Early March, five months into the fiscal year, the budget was finally allotted. Rather than a flat or increased budget, NASA actually saw a 2% cut. It was quickly realized that there was not going to be enough funding to keep everything going.
While some things, like Mars Sample Return, were in clear and spelled out danger, other issues would require further analysis. For instance, according to a review by the American Astronomical Society, the cuts proposed to the Chandra Space Telescope imply the mission will need to move into closeout operations as the budget doesn’t provide sufficient funding for science, operations, and other costs to all be covered. They also found no path forward for Hubble that didn’t require significant cuts to mission operations or science support.
NASA officials have stated in a variety of venues that they wish to protect in-progress missions over future missions and even, to a degree, new science. This has been reflected through delayed and canceled funding proposal deadlines, which means that new missions won’t be started on previously expected timelines, and new science projects won’t have the chance to compete for funding as would normally be expected.
It is within this context of budget cuts and desperate measures that NASA found itself with a long anticipated lunar rover – the VIPER rover – that was more than 40% over budget, in need of at least $100 million in funding, and slated to launch on an untested and ever delayed delivery system. Per policies, this degree of budget overrun triggered an automatic internal review of the mission. On July 17, NASA announced its intention, based on the review, to cancel VIPER and disassemble it so its pieces could potentially be used for other rovers. This would result in an estimated savings of $84 million.
As far as I’ve been able to discover, this is the first mission canceled so close to launch after such a review. Other missions in a similar position, such as the Psyche mission, have been allowed to proceed.
VIPER rose from canceled Resource Prospector
The loss of the VIPER mission was an echo of a prior mission cancellation for many. Early in the last decade researchers engineered a rover called Resource Prospector. It was developed to the point of prototyping a rover and testing it in the field in 2015. Instruments were developed and the engineering prototype even underwent thermal vacuum testing at Johnson Space Flight Center. It was reported the final version might fly to the moon on either what would become Artemis 2 or on a Falcon Heavy.
In 2018, however, NASA radically changed how it plans to explore the moon. In April 2018, Resource Prospector was canceled before construction of space hardware could begin. It was intended that the instruments developed for Resource Prospector would fly on a later mission as part of NASA’s planned Commercial Lunar Payload Services program, or CLPS program. Through this program, NASA would pay private companies to deliver instruments and other lunar hardware to the Moon on fixed price contracts. Out were the days of cost+fee missions that would fully fund companies for their construction of fully bespoke spacecraft. In were the days of companies being expected to deliver goods to the Moon however they wished with NASA paying for delivery just as they might pay for something to be delivered via FedEx. In September of 2018, NASA announced 14 companies it planned to work with, and in May 2019 NASA began awarding contracts.
In late 2019, NASA announced the funding of a new rover – VIPER – that would leverage what was developed for Resource Prospector as part of a future CLPS rideshare on what was to be Astobotic’s 2nd lander, Griffin, which was intended to land in 2022. This would be the most ambitious CLPS launch to date, with Astrobotics being tasked to provide safe delivery to the lunar surface of a half-billion dollar lander on what was scheduled to be only their second lunar landing.
And then came a pandemic alongside all the normal delays that impact missions.The launch date slipped to 2024.
And then Astrobotics first lander, Peregrine, failed to even make it to the Moon’s surface.
And then everyone involved realized that a 2024 launch was going to slip, likely to 2026.
And…on Jul 17, 2024, VIPER was canceled as NASA stated storing the mission for later use would not be an option.
At the NASA Space Exploration Forums at the end of July, multiple NASA officials made it clear the mission team had done everything they could to keep the mission on track and on budget, but this was a mission deeply impacted by factors beyond their control, such as COVID. Due to supply chain problems and other vendor issues, delays initially expected to be measured in days or weeks stretched into months. Costs rose both from the increased costs of goods, and also from the increased salary costs and time dragged on. Having finally made it past those hardware delays, the now complete rover was short one ready-to-go launch provider.
At the time of its cancellation, VIPER was completely constructed and undergoing final testing in preparation for the previously planned September launch. Ground systems were in place to run the mission, teams were trained, and all that was needed was a few more tests.
When congress plays ball with missions
Scientists don’t allow their missions to go quietly off into the night. Motivated to act, scientists have written letters and signed petitions as our networks engage both NASA and congressional officials. When NASA wants to cancel a mission, they have to notify congress and the mission isn’t totally dead until it is removed from the following year’s NASA budget. With Congress currently on recess, it is unclear what will happen, although – per CNN – some lawmakers have expressed concern. It remains possible that congress will step in and save VIPER from disassembly.
And even if Congress doesn’t step in, there may be a previously never-seen third option for VIPER: NASA is willing to see another company or agency take over the mission as long as such efforts come at no cost to NASA. According to both the Planetary Society and Space Policy Online, there have been order of a dozen serious expressions of interest. CNN is reporting one came from an Astobotics competitors, Intuitive Machines. Like Astrobotics, they are a NASA commercial vendor. In a mission earlier this year which we reported on, an Intuitive Machines lander arrived at the moon somewhat successfully, although they landed fast and their craft fell over. They have a second mission planned for later this year, and are reported to be considering a third, larger, lander for 2026 – a Lander that could carry VIPER.
The way the VIPER mission is evolving is one of the weirder dramas of modern Space Exploration. It is unclear what kind of fate is working behind the scenes. I don’t know if theta re more of a Shonda Rhimes or Aaron Sorkin force of nature. In my personal “What if” imagining, I’d like to believe that concern over Astrobotic’s lander led someone in power to say to someone else in power “We need a new landing vehicle” and they hatched a back room scheme to see VIPER to the moon another way that otherwise couldn’t be possible. Head canon and reality don’t often mirror one another, but I’m hoping maybe… maybe there will be a safe lunar landing in VIPER’s future.
What ever VIPERs future may be, this mission is a case study on how a researcher can dedicate 20 years of their life to proposing, designing, and building a scientific instrument only to have it canceled in the 11th hour. This is a warning to other mission teams that says clearly, no one is safe, any mission be canceled, and … horrifyingly, be disassembled for parts.
This isn’t a lesson any of us needed. But this is where we are. There is no happy ending to this story or this segment – There is just a lesson that nothing is guaranteed.
Space is hard.