posted 04-27-2020 03:25 PM               

Please use this topic to discuss the human landing systems being developed for NASA's Artemis program and the return of astronauts to the moon's surface.

posted 04-30-2020 11:58 AM               

The following companies were selected to design and build human landing systems:

• Blue Origin of Kent, Washington, is developing the Integrated Lander Vehicle (ILV) – a three-stage lander to be launched on its own New Glenn Rocket System and ULA Vulcan launch system.

• Dynetics (a Leidos company) of Huntsville, Alabama, is developing the Dynetics Human Landing System (DHLS) – a single structure providing the ascent and descent capabilities that will launch on the ULA Vulcan launch system.

• SpaceX of Hawthorne, California, is developing the Starship – a fully integrated lander that will use the SpaceX Super Heavy rocket.

posted 04-30-2020 06:57 PM               

• Boeing and Vivace Corp. also submitted proposals but were not selected.

• From a technical rating of each proposal, Dynetics ranked the highest ("Very Good"). SpaceX and Blue Origin were deemed "Acceptable."

• From a management rating of each proposal, both Blue Origin and Dynetics ranked "Very Good," while SpaceX was found "Acceptable."

• Blue Origin was praised for its "highly-effective, human-centric approach for its rendezvous, proximity operations, docking and undocking system" and its HLS exceeded NASA's requirements for initial habitation capability and landing accuracy.

  Blue Origin's significant weakness was its power and propulsion system (namely, its use of the BE-7 engine) as it comes with "minimal historical experience and no flight history," but it has a "well thought-out design."

• Blue Origin proposed a descent stage demonstration in 2023 at the same landing site chosen for the 2024 crewed mission.

• Dynetics' HLS exceeds NASA's requirements for delivered payload mass, Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit (NRHO) quiescent operations duration and the number of EVAs it can support.

  Dynetics' crew module was also praised as it "greatly facilities ease of access for crew to the lunar surface with a relatively small distance between the crew EVA hatch and the lunar surface."

  Dynetics' significant weakness was its power and propulsion system for its "relatively low maturity levels or that yet have been developed... but would need to be developed at an unprecedented pace." (This is related to the vehicle's use of modular fuel tanks.)

• SpaceX's HLS exceeds NASA's requirements for mass delivery from lunar orbit, quiescent lunar orbit operations, EVA excursions per sortie and scientific payload return to lunar orbit.

  SpaceX was also praised for its design maturation methodology, leveraging its heritage hardware and software systems (i.e. Falcon and Dragon).

  SpaceX's weaknesses were found to be its complex propulsion system and for its overall architecture, which "requires numerous, highly complex launch, rendezvous and fueling operations which all must succeed in quick succession in order to successfully execute its approach."

• SpaceX proposed a low Earth orbit flight of Starship with a demonstration of the Super Heavy rocket, a re-flight of the Starship, a long duration orbital flight, a beyond low Earth orbit flight and a lunar landing demonstration by 2022.

posted 05-01-2020 01:04 PM               

Blue Origin says on its website:

Blue Moon can land multiple metric tons of payload on the lunar surface.

Dynetics states on its website:

The system's crew module is designed to accommodate two crew members for nominal missions from lunar orbit to the lunar surface and back, including surface habitation for about a week. Alternatively, it can ferry up to four suited crew members to or from the lunar surface.

Drawing on experience from the development of Dragon for the Commercial Crew Program, the Starship crew configuration can transport up to 100 people from Earth into LEO and on to the Moon and Mars.

Starship was designed from the onset to be able to carry more than 100 tons of cargo to Mars and the Moon.

posted 07-07-2020 10:28 AM               

NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine's response:

I want to thank the House Commerce-Justice-Science subcommittee for the bipartisan support they have shown for NASA's Artemis program. The $628.2 million in funding for the human landing system (HLS) is an important first step in this year's appropriations process. We still have more to do and I look forward to working with the Senate to ensure America has the resources to land the first woman and next man on the Moon in 2024.

posted 07-24-2020 10:05 AM               

It has been remarkable to see the National Team, including Blue Origin, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Draper, work closely together with NASA. Blending established entities and entrepreneurial space firms is a good prescription for success. The team is aptly named, as it represents our national heritage in lunar exploration, our national pride in science and technology innovation, and the national strength of our commercial space industry.

Apollo was remarkably successful in maturing the technology available in the 1960s. Since then, the U.S. space industry has come a long way, having advanced liquid and solid rocket propulsion, pioneered reusability and precision rocket stage recovery, refined life support technology and rendezvous and proximity operations, and gathered new data to assist landing on the Moon. Couple this with today's entrepreneurial spirit, I am confident we can return to the Moon to stay and can reap the national, commercial and societal benefits that will accrue.

posted 04-16-2021 12:56 PM               

NASA to Announce Selection of Human Lander for Artemis Moon Mission

NASA will host a media teleconference at 4 p.m. EDT today, Friday, April 16, to announce the company or companies selected to move forward in developing a modern human landing system (HLS) that will carry the next two American astronauts to the surface of the Moon and pave the way for sustainable lunar exploration under the Artemis program.

Tune in for a special announcement followed by a livestream of the teleconference.

Participating in the teleconference are:

• Acting NASA Administrator Steve Jurczyk
  
• Kathy Lueders, associate administrator for NASA’s Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate
  
• Mark Kirasich, deputy associate administrator for NASA’s Advanced Exploration Systems division
  
• Lisa Watson-Morgan, HLS program manager
  
• Tyler Cochran, HLS contracting officer

posted 04-26-2021 04:32 PM               

Statement from Blue Origin:

NASA has executed a flawed acquisition for the Human Landing System program and moved the goalposts at the last minute. In NASA's own words, it has made a 'high risk' selection.

Their decision eliminates opportunities for competition, significantly narrows the supply base, and not only delays, but also endangers America's return to the Moon. Because of that, we've filed a protest with the GAO.

Dynetics has filed a protest with USGAO as well, says NASA.

posted 04-27-2021 12:04 AM               

Where the competition falls behind in this case is that they don't have working prototypes demonstrating their capabilities.

Blue Origin do have their suborbital rocket flying, but need to demonstrate an ability to move sideways and show controllability during vehicle dynamic upset. Their vehicle may just be a fine balancing act.

SpaceX demonstrates this each time they launch and land a Falcon 9, and their giant grain silo acts as a proof of concept each flight.

posted 04-27-2021 08:41 AM               

SpaceX's and Blue Origin's proposals received the same technical rating, so the latter was not penalized for not having a prototype lander.

Rather, the selection primarily came down to a question of price. As Kathy Lueders wrote:

...my selection analysis must first consider the merits of making a contract award to the offeror that is most highly rated and has the lowest price — SpaceX — followed by the second most highly rated offeror, Blue Origin, and finally, Dynetics.

posted 04-27-2021 09:53 AM               

Dynetics, a wholly owned subsidiary of Leidos, filed a protest with the GAO regarding the HLS Option A award on April 26th. Dynetics firmly believes our HLS design offers great potential to contribute to toward NASA's HLS program goals and we believe NASA's initial plan for continued competition remains the best approach to ensure program success.

Dynetics has issues and concerns with several aspects of the acquisition process as well as elements of NASA's technical evaluation and filed a protest with the GAO to address them. We respect the process and look forward to a fair and informed resolution of the matter. Dynetics will not be making any further comments regarding the protest process.

posted 04-30-2021 04:40 PM               

NASA says that, because of the protests filed by both Blue Origin and Dynetics, "NASA instructed SpaceX that progress on the HLS contract has been suspended until GAO resolves all outstanding litigation related to this procurement."

posted 06-23-2021 02:14 PM               

One of the big questions before Congress is whether to fully fund the Human Landing System, the key remaining technology needed to return humans to the Moon. NASA asked for $3.3 billion in fiscal year 2021 to start development of two landers. Congress provided just $850 million for this year's budget.

As a result, NASA said it only had enough funds for one lander and chose what it deemed the lowest-cost, most technically ready option: SpaceX's Starship vehicle. Nelson said he very much would like to have competition in the lander program, but, he said, "That will depend on you all." In other words, if Congress appropriates substantially more funding for a lunar lander program for the 2022 budget, then NASA will be able to support development of two lunar landers.

Several members of Congress tried to object to this idea. Brian Babin (R-Texas) noted that the Biden administration had only asked for $1.2 billion in the recent 2022 President's Budget Request for a Human Landing System. This is only about one-third of the amount the White House requested in the 2021 budget. "Once you dig into the details, some concerning themes emerge," Babin said of the fiscal year 2022 NASA budget request, suggesting that it was really the White House that was not committed to Artemis.

But Nelson was having none of this. "The Congress appropriated $850 million," Nelson told Babin. "And so you can only get so many pounds of potatoes out of a five-pound sack. If you all are generous... then we're going to try to rev it up."

So until NASA receives more money — above and beyond the $1.2 billion budget request for the coming fiscal year — it will have to press ahead with its current plan.

posted 07-26-2021 09:41 AM               

Open Letter to Administrator Nelson

In an open letter to the NASA Administrator, Jeff Bezos offers to restore competition to the Human Landing System program by closing NASA's near-term budgetary shortfall and producing a safe and sustainable lander that will return Americans to the surface of the Moon – this time to stay.

Blue Origin is committed to building a future where millions of people live and work in space to benefit the Earth. We are convinced that, to advance America's future in space, NASA must now quickly and assuredly return to the Moon. NASA has the opportunity to again inspire a whole new generation of scientists, engineers, and explorers.

This is why Blue Origin answered NASA's urgent call to develop a Human Landing System. We built the National Team – with four major partners and more than 200 small and medium suppliers in 47 states – to focus on designing, building, and operating a flight system the nation could count on. NASA invested over half a billion dollars in the National Team in 2020-21, and we performed well. The team developed and risk-reduced a safe, mass-efficient design that could achieve a human landing in 2024.

Our approach is designed to be sustainable for repeated lunar missions and, above all, to keep our astronauts safe. We created a 21st-century lunar landing system inspired by the well-characterized Apollo architecture — an architecture with many benefits. One of its important benefits is that it prioritizes safety. As NASA recognized, the National Team's design offers a "comprehensive approach to aborts and contingencies [that] places a priority on crew safety throughout all mission phases."

Unlike Apollo, our approach is designed to be sustainable and to grow into permanent, affordable lunar operations. Our lander uses liquid hydrogen for fuel. Not only is hydrogen the highest-performing rocket fuel, but it can also be mined on the Moon. That feature will prove essential for sustained future operations on the Moon and beyond.

From the beginning, we designed our system to be capable of flying on multiple launch vehicles, including Falcon Heavy, SLS, Vulcan, and New Glenn. The value of being able to fly on many different launch vehicles cannot be over-stated. Launch vehicle flexibility is a massive overall risk reduction for both initial and sustaining operations. It decouples any risks associated with launch vehicle stand-downs and ensures competitive launch pricing in perpetuity. Again, NASA recognized this valuable feature when it stated that our design permitted "a launch approach that provides flexibility and minimizes risk. Blue Origin's initial HLS mission requires only three commercial launches. This very low number...lowers the risk of mission failure due to launch anomalies. This risk is further reduced by the fact that Blue's HLS elements are capable of interfacing with multiple commercial launch vehicles (CLVs), leaving Blue Origin with near-term options regarding choice of launch vehicle."

Yet, in spite of these benefits and at the last minute, the Source Selection Official veered from the Agency's oft-stated procurement strategy. Instead of investing in two competing lunar landers as originally intended, the Agency chose to confer a multi-year, multi-billion-dollar head start to SpaceX. That decision broke the mold of NASA's successful commercial space programs by putting an end to meaningful competition for years to come. It also eliminated the benefits of utilizing the broad and capable supply base of the National Team (as opposed to funding the vertically-integrated SpaceX approach) and locks every trip to the Moon into 10+ Super Heavy/Starship launches just to get a single lander to the surface. By the Agency's own admission, it bets our return to the Moon on a single solution of "immense complexity and heightened risk associated with the very high number of events necessary to execute the front end [with] risk of operational schedule delays."

Instead of this single source approach, NASA should embrace its original strategy of competition. Competition will prevent any single source from having insurmountable leverage over NASA. Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns. Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.

In the past few weeks, the shortfalls of this single source selection have been recognized, and NASA has begun to solicit new lunar lander proposals. But, unfortunately, this new approach won't create true competition because it is rushed, it is unfunded, and it provides a multi-year head-start to the one funded, single-source supplier. The Appendix N and LETS solicitations are just optical substitutes for the real competition that a second, simultaneous dissimilar lander development will provide. The Agency must act now to create the real competition it needs, and it should not repeat work already delivered and investments already made.

In April (prior to your confirmation as NASA administrator), only one HLS bidder, SpaceX, was offered the opportunity to revise their price and funding profile, leading to their selection. Blue Origin was not offered the same opportunity. That was a mistake, it was unusual, and it was a missed opportunity. But it is not too late to remedy. We stand ready to help NASA moderate its technical risks and solve its budgetary constraints and put the Artemis Program back on a more competitive, credible, and sustainable path. Our Appendix H HLS contract is still open and can be amended.

With that in mind and on behalf of the National Team, we formally offer the following for your consideration:

• Blue Origin will bridge the HLS budgetary funding shortfall by waiving all payments in the current and next two government fiscal years up to $2B to get the program back on track right now. This offer is not a deferral, but is an outright and permanent waiver of those payments. This offer provides time for government appropriation actions to catch up.

• Blue Origin will, at its own cost, contribute the development and launch of a pathfinder mission to low-Earth orbit of the lunar descent element to further retire development and schedule risks. This pathfinder mission is offered in addition to the baseline plan of performing a precursor uncrewed landing mission prior to risking any astronauts to the Moon. This contribution to the program is above and beyond the over $1B of corporate contribution cited in our Option A proposal that funds items such as our privately developed BE-7 lunar lander engine and indefinite storage of liquid hydrogen in space. All of these contributions are in addition to the $2B waiver of payments referenced above.

• Finally, Blue Origin will accept a firm, fixed-priced contract for this work, cover any system development cost overruns, and shield NASA from partner cost escalation concerns.

I believe this mission is important. I am honored to offer these contributions and am grateful to be in a financial position to be able to do so. NASA veered from its original dual-source acquisition strategy due to perceived near-term budgetary issues, and this offer removes that obstacle.

If NASA has different ideas about what would best facilitate getting back to true competition now, we are ready and willing to discuss them.

We have seen that there is strong, bi-partisan Congressional support for a second lander and for the Artemis Program in general. Along with that support, we believe this offer provides a strong foundation, both technically and fiscally, for the return of Americans to the Moon – this time to stay.

The National Team stands ready. All NASA needs to do is take advantage of this offer and amend the Appendix H contract we hold today.

posted 07-30-2021 12:04 PM               

Statement on Blue Origin-Dynetics Decision

The following is a statement from Kenneth E. Patton, Managing Associate General Counsel for Procurement Law at GAO, regarding today's decision resolving the protests filed by Blue Origin Federation, LLC, and Dynetics, Inc. – A Leidos Company, B-417839 et al., Friday, July 30, 2021.

On Friday, July 30, 2021, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) denied protests filed by Blue Origin Federation, LLC, of South Kent, Washington, and Dynetics, Inc.-A Leidos Company, of Huntsville, Alabama. The protesters challenged their non-selection for awards and the award of optional contract line item numbers to Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX), of Hawthorne, California, under Option A to Appendix H of Broad Agency Announcement (the announcement) No. NNH19ZCQ001K.

Broad Agency Announcements typically provide for the acquisition of basic and applied research for new and creative research or development solutions to scientific and engineering problems. The rules for these procurements are not the same as those for standard competitive federal procurements, as agencies generally enjoy broader discretion in selecting the proposals most suitable to meeting their research and development needs when utilizing broad agency announcement procedures. The announcement was issued by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), for a demonstration mission for a human landing system for lunar exploration.

NASA made award to SpaceX for a total evaluated price of $2,941,394,557. After noting that SpaceX submitted the lowest-priced proposal with the highest rating, and that the offers submitted by Blue Origin and Dynetics were significantly higher in price, NASA also concluded that the agency lacked the necessary funding to make more than one award.

In the challenge filed at GAO, the protesters argued that the agency was required to make multiple awards consistent with the announcement's stated preference for multiple awards. Alternatively, the protesters alleged that the agency was required to open discussions, amend, or cancel the announcement when NASA, after the receipt of proposals, determined that it had less funding than it needed to support multiple HLS awards. The protesters also argued that NASA unreasonably evaluated all three of the proposals. Finally, the protesters argued that NASA improperly waived a mandatory solicitation requirement for SpaceX.

In denying the protests, GAO first concluded that NASA did not violate procurement law or regulation when it decided to make only one award. NASA's announcement provided that the number of awards the agency would make was subject to the amount of funding available for the program. In addition, the announcement reserved the right to make multiple awards, a single award, or no award at all. In reaching its award decision, NASA concluded that it only had sufficient funding for one contract award. GAO further concluded there was no requirement for NASA to engage in discussions, amend, or cancel the announcement as a result of the amount of funding available for the program. As a result, GAO denied the protest arguments that NASA acted improperly in making a single award to SpaceX.

GAO next concluded that the evaluation of all three proposals was reasonable, and consistent with applicable procurement law, regulation, and the announcement's terms.

Finally, GAO agreed with the protesters that in one limited instance NASA waived a requirement of the announcement for SpaceX. Despite this finding, the decision also concludes that the protesters could not establish any reasonable possibility of competitive prejudice arising from this limited discrepancy in the evaluation.

GAO's decision expresses no view as to the merits of these proposals. Judgments about which offeror will most successfully meet the government's needs are reserved for the procuring agencies, subject only to statutory and regulatory requirements. GAO's bid protest process is handled by GAO's Office of General Counsel and examines whether procuring agencies have complied with procurement laws and regulations.

Today's decision was issued under a protective order because the decision may contain proprietary and source selection sensitive information. GAO has directed counsel for the parties to promptly identify information that cannot be publicly released so that GAO can expeditiously prepare and release a public version of the decision. When the public version of the decision is available, it will be posted to our website.

posted 07-30-2021 12:50 PM               

We stand firm in our belief that there were fundamental issues with NASA's decision, but the GAO wasn't able to address them due to their limited jurisdiction. We'll continue to advocate for two immediate providers as we believe it is the right solution.

We've been encouraged by actions in Congress to add a second provider and appropriate additional resource to NASA's pursuit to return Americans to the moon. We're also very encouraged by Administrator Nelson's comments over the past week that reaffirm NASA's original intent to provide simultaneous competition. The Human Landing System program needs to have competition now instead of later — that's the best solution for NASA and the best solution for the country.

Dynetics Statement Regarding the NASA Human Landing System Decision

Dynetics, a wholly owned subsidiary of Leidos, is appreciative of the GAO's review of NASA's Human Landing System Option A decision and while disappointed, we respect the GAO's determination announced today.

Our focus for the HLS program from the beginning has been the development of a sustainable capability that enables a long-term lunar presence and helps fuel a future Cislunar economy. To that end, we have continued to evolve our HLS design with a focus on sustainability. We are excited about the opportunity presented by NASA's HLS Next-STEP Appendix N competition that provides funding for continued design and risk reduction activities for a sustainable lander. We also plan to compete for NASA's announced Lunar Exploration Transportation Services opportunity.

We believe healthy competition is necessary to maintain the industrial base required to achieve the important strategic goals of space exploration and national security. We will continue to pursue these opportunities with a team that helps strengthen the broader industrial base that includes international partnerships.

Again, we appreciate the GAO's review of the decision and we look forward to working with NASA on the future HLS opportunities.

posted 07-30-2021 03:46 PM               

NASA Statement on GAO Ruling Regarding Human Landing System Protest

The following is the NASA statement in response to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) decision released Friday on the human landing system protest:

"NASA was notified Friday, July 30, that the U.S. Government Accountability Office has denied the protests filed by Blue Origin Federation and Dynetics and has upheld the agency's source selection of SpaceX to continue the development of its human landing system. The decision enables NASA to award the contract that will ultimately result in the first crewed demonstration landing on the surface of the Moon under NASA's Artemis plan. Importantly, the GAO's decision will allow NASA and SpaceX to establish a timeline for the first crewed landing on the Moon in more than 50 years.

"NASA recognizes that sending American astronauts back to the Moon for the first time since the Apollo program and establishing a long-term presence on the Moon is a priority for the Biden Administration and is imperative for maintaining American leadership in space. In the face of challenges during the last year, NASA and its partners have made significant achievements to advance Artemis, including a successful hot fire test for the Space Launch System rocket. An uncrewed flight of Artemis I is on track for this year and a crewed Artemis II mission is planned for 2023.

"NASA is moving forward with urgency, but astronaut safety is the priority and the agency will not sacrifice the safety of the crew in the steadfast pursuit of the goal to establish a long-term presence on the Moon.

"As soon as possible, NASA will provide an update on the way ahead for Artemis, the human landing system, and humanity's return to the Moon. We will continue to work with the Biden Administration and Congress to ensure funding for a robust and sustainable approach for the nation's return to the Moon in a collaborative effort with U.S. commercial partners."

posted 08-16-2021 11:03 AM               

Blue Origin filed suit in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims in an attempt to remedy the flaws of the acquisition process found in NASA's Human Landing System. We firmly believe that the issues identified in this procurement and its outcomes must be addressed to restore fairness, create competition and ensure a safe return to the moon for America.

posted 08-16-2021 03:15 PM               

Let's face it, Blue Origin promised ULA that the BE-4 engines would be ready in 2017, and they still are not ready. This isn't something like developing their own rocket. This is a simple contractual agreement.

Bezos clearly has the resources to build Blue Origin into a world class competitor. Instead of spending $1 billion a year on Blue Origin, maybe Jeff Bezos should kick in $3 billion a year. Given his net worth, in 25 years that would still leave him with around $100 billion in Amazon stock, even if it does not go up in value in the intervening timeframe. Needless to say, that $3 billion a year should supercharge Blue Origin.

posted 08-16-2021 04:30 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by SkyMan1958:
Am I the only one that thinks...

---

posted 08-19-2021 04:31 PM               

NASA has voluntarily paused work with SpaceX for the human landing system (HLS) Option A contract effective Aug. 19 through Nov. 1. In exchange for this temporary stay of work, all parties agreed to an expedited litigation schedule that concludes on Nov. 1. NASA officials are continuing to work with the Department of Justice to review the details of the case and look forward to a timely resolution of this matter.

posted 11-04-2021 10:41 AM               

Blue Origin statement:

Our lawsuit with the Court of Federal Claims highlighted the important safely issues with the Human Landing System procurement process that must still be addressed. Returning astronauts safely to the Moon through NASA's public-private partnership model requires an unprejudiced procurement process alongside sound policy that incorporates redundant systems and promotes competition.

Blue Origin remains deeply committed to the success of the Artemis program, and we have a broad case of activity on multiple contracts with NASA to achieve the United States' goal to return to the Moon to stay. We are fully engaged with NASA to mature sustainable lander designs, conduct a wide variety of technology risk reductions, and provide Commercial Lunar Payload Services. We are also under contract with NASA to develop in-situ resource utilization technology, lunar space robotics, and lunar landing sensor collaboration including testing on New Shepard.

We look forward to hearing from NASA on next steps in the HLS procurement process.

posted 11-04-2021 11:47 AM               

NASA Statement on Artemis Lunar Lander Court Decision

NASA was notified Thursday that the U.S. Court of Federal Claims denied Blue Origin's bid protest, upholding NASA's selection of SpaceX to develop and demonstrate a modern human lunar lander. NASA will resume work with SpaceX under the Option A contract as soon as possible.

In addition to this contract, NASA continues working with multiple American companies to bolster competition and commercial readiness for crewed transportation to the lunar surface. There will be forthcoming opportunities for companies to partner with NASA in establishing a long-term human presence at the Moon under the agency's Artemis program, including a call in 2022 to U.S. industry for recurring crewed lunar landing services.

Through Artemis missions, NASA will lead the world in landing the first woman and first person of color on the lunar surface, conduct extensive operations on and around the Moon, and get ready for human missions to Mars.