Jeremy Parsons<\/strong>: The mobile launcher is honestly in great shape after the launch, so the modifications we did between (Artemis) I and II were highly, highly successful. We rolled back a couple of weeks after launch, and two things are kind of going on in parallel right now.<\/p>\n The boosters have arrived at what we call the rotation processing surge facility, so they\u2019re being prepped and ready for stacking\u2014so rotation, all that kind of stuff. And then on the mobile launcher, there were a couple of areas of damage, and we\u2019ve got like 90-something percent of it done right now. There are a couple of areas in the flame hole that they\u2019re re-welding, and we want to get that work done before we start stacking boosters. As a general rule, we don\u2019t want to weld with the propellant there. So all of that\u2019s looking to finish up [in the] early July time frame. I expect us to be stacking in July.<\/p>\n Ars<\/strong>: What is the plan for testing the SLS rocket? Will you perform a wet dress rehearsal on the rocket before putting Orion on top?<\/em><\/p>\n Parsons<\/strong>: As you saw in Artemis I and II, we had issues with the cryogenic seals\u2014those go through what is called the tail service mast umbilicals. We\u2019re in the process of redesigning those and implementing new ones for this mission. Part of what we want to do is\u2026 what we call a short-stack tanking or wet dress rehearsal. Basically, you get the boosters and the core stage on, [and] you complete all the thermal protection systems. We then would put a cover on top of the core stage, and we\u2019d roll out in that configuration. Then we tank it up and make sure the seals are tight.<\/p>\n ,<\/p>\n Ars<\/strong>: You\u2019re flying Artemis III without an ICPS upper stage because you don\u2019t need the performance to reach low-Earth orbit. But you do need a second stage simulator. What\u2019s the status of that?<\/em><\/p>\n Parsons<\/strong>: That, to me, is really cool. It\u2019s called a spacer, and we already have the design done. Metal is already being bump-formed at United Launch Alliance, and then we\u2019re going to weld it in-house at Marshall Space Flight Center. We expect it to show up at Kennedy Space Center no later than December, and then we\u2019ll stack Orion on top of that. We\u2019re in really good shape with that, and I\u2019m pretty psyched with the progress.<\/p>\n Ars<\/strong>: So it sounds like the rocket and Orion should be good to go by mid-2027. Let\u2019s talk about the other parts, the two lunar landers and their launch vehicles. Starting with Blue Origin, you called the prototype lander they\u2019re flying for Artemis III a \u201clander test article\u201d during your remarks today. What does that mean, exactly?<\/em><\/p>\n Parsons<\/strong>: It\u2019s in between Mk 1 and Mk 2. It\u2019s the same lunar crew module, which is really the most important aspect\u2014same avionics, same flight software, so we\u2019re going to get all of that component testing done. This will be the first production article of the lunar crew module, so we\u2019re also going to have the ECLSS system (environmental control and life support).<\/p>\n The primary differences between this test article and the final lander will be the BE-7 engines, so you\u2019re not going to have cryogenics on this test. What we\u2019re going to use is storable propellants and a reaction control system because they don\u2019t need the big thrust that\u2019s needed to go to and from the Moon. That also gives us some time to really dial in what we call the dual-launch campaign. That\u2019s going to be something to really highly choreograph as we go into the Artemis IV missions and beyond.<\/p>\n Blue Origin\u2019s Blue Moon MK1 lander, seen in the center, is taller than NASA\u2019s Apollo lunar lander, currently the largest spacecraft to have landed on the Moon. Blue Moon MK2 is even larger, but all three landers are dwarfed in size by SpaceX\u2019s Starship.<\/p>\n Credit: Ars<\/strong>: Can the Blue Origin lander for Artemis III be launched on the existing 7\u00d72 variant of the New Glenn rocket?<\/em><\/p>\n Parsons<\/strong>: Yes.<\/p>\n Ars<\/strong>: You and other NASA officials expressed a lot of confidence in New Glenn being ready to launch this vehicle next year, even after the pad explosion a couple of weeks ago. Is there a decision point at which you have to make a go-or-no-go call on whether to fly the Artemis III test lander on New Glenn or to consider other rockets?<\/em><\/p>\n Parsons<\/strong>: So is there a decision point\u2026<\/p>\n Ars<\/strong>: Like if you get to October or November of this year, and Blue Origin\u2019s launch pads for New Glenn are nowhere near ready.<\/em><\/p>\n Parsons<\/strong>: I think you\u2019ve heard from Dave Limp, CEO of Blue Origin, and Jeff Bezos, and they are all in. The other thing to take into account is they had already started their second pad, so they\u2019re about a year into that development timeframe. It\u2019s going to be a dual path. They\u2019re really getting in and clearing out SLC-36 right now, and a lot of the key hardware is in really good shape.<\/p>\n ,<\/p>\n That being said, we\u2019re going to be working with them hand in hand every single day, and we are bringing every assessment to bear. Like, if I needed to fly on another vehicle, what would that look like? What are the technical changes? So I would say all of that is in parallel. I want to be careful, though, because the Blue team is confident and is moving forward. We\u2019re looking at this from a broader risk perspective. And how do we ensure both diversity of architecture, diversity of our capabilities, and keeping something flying in 2027?<\/p>\n Ars<\/strong>: Just to be clear, the Blue lander for Artemis III could fly on an alternative launch vehicle such as Vulcan or Falcon Heavy?<\/em><\/p>\n Parsons<\/strong>: Yes. The fairing size is part of what can drive that.<\/p>\n Ars<\/strong>: How important for the lunar landing missions is it for Blue Origin to fly the smaller Mk 1 lander to gain confidence in the BE-7 engines and propulsion system?<\/em><\/p>\n Parsons<\/strong>: They\u2019ve been putting the BE-7 engine through a ton of test time. And when you look at the broader test campaign, with what we will do with the Earth orbit rendezvous mission of the lander test article and the uncrewed demo [Blue Origin test landing on the Moon], you\u2019re buying down almost all of the reasonable risk you can for a lunar mission.<\/p>\n We actually mapped out every objective\u2014everything that needs to go right, what are your failure scenarios?\u2014and that Earth orbit rendezvous mission buys down a lot of the things we weren\u2019t getting with the uncrewed landing. I think between those two, you can have confidence in saying we can go land. That being said, the more performance, the more data points you get, the more witnesses, if you will, with the Mk 1 landers, will only give you confidence in the systems and help you refine it. But I would not consider it a prerequisite, let\u2019s put it that way.<\/p>\n Ars<\/strong>: As part of the Blue Origin architecture, there are some transfer stages used to push the lander out to the Moon. What are those, and are you going to be able to test them?<\/em><\/p>\n Parsons<\/strong>: They\u2019re leveraging a lot of similar designs from Mk 1 all the way to Mk 2. Ultimately, I would suggest talking to John Couluris [leader of Blue Origin\u2019s lunar program] about some of those details. [Editor\u2019s note<\/em>: Believe me, dear reader, we have tried.]<\/p>\n ,<\/p>\n In this case, you would have three transfer stages and then the mission article for the actual lunar landing. This is what we call the Boots Acceleration 2028 architecture, and really, they\u2019re optimizing it around hardware that\u2019s built, so they have a lot of common hardware between the transfer stages, the Mk 1, and the Mk2 vehicles. That allows us to really ramp up production more than anything.<\/p>\n Ars<\/strong>: It\u2019s clear that New Glenn and Blue Origin have really become essential to NASA and its plans not just for Artemis landings, but also the Moon Base initiative. How much of a gut punch was it for the pad to be destroyed a couple of weeks ago?<\/em><\/p>\n Parsons<\/strong>: If you look at the history of new development of launch vehicles, this isn\u2019t uncommon. So was it a gut punch? Absolutely. But we\u2019re moving forward. I know a lot of the Blue Origin team and how hard they\u2019re working. I think it is a good opportunity for them to emerge from this better.<\/p>\n What we\u2019re actually going to end up with is two pads capable of the 9\u00d74 [larger version of the New Glenn rocket] in a shorter period of time. For me, when I step back and talk to the team, it wasn\u2019t so much a gut punch. What we are doing is very much pushing the envelope of anything that\u2019s been done before. We have to be confident in our procedures and our engineering and what we\u2019re doing, and we have to test like you fly.<\/p>\n There was not a payload on that vehicle because this was a static fire test. That\u2019s why they implement some of these things. I was on the phone with Blue Origin leadership that night, all the next day, all through the weekend, and I didn\u2019t at any point see people step back and say, \u201cLet me just lick my wounds.\u201d It was like, what are we doing? How can we help? How do we move forward? I was actually really, really impressed by it.<\/p>\n Ars<\/strong>: And then there\u2019s Starship. Unlike the Blue Moon lander, you\u2019re not sending astronauts inside Starship. There won\u2019t be any life support. I have to admit I was surprised by that. Tell me about the decision-making process that led you to that outcome.<\/em><\/p>\n Parsons<\/strong>: Correct, so with Starship, we are going to dock. I will tell you a couple of things I\u2019m most worried about from a testing perspective, things that we\u2019re not going to get with the uncrewed demo [Starship test landing on the Moon].<\/p>\n ,<\/p>\n One is integrated stack control. You have a very large Starship vehicle, and [a] much smaller Orion. Also, your avionics flight software is always tricky to integrate. You can test on the ground, but until you\u2019re up there commanding, those are things that you really want to check out. So those two things are some of the biggest bangs for the buck that we can get with this test.<\/p>\n Blue will launch first. I think we\u2019re going to get even more of the test objectives we\u2019re really looking for there. Because if you look at your major risk for a lunar landing, there\u2019s the long-term ECLSS support\u2014how does it perform in this crew cabin with two crew? And there\u2019s software-integrated stack control. It is much better to do that in low-Earth orbit than it is four plus days away.<\/p>\n So we looked at what each provider could do in the time frame, what they were offering, what it would take in order to accomplish more. And then we said this set of objectives really buys down our risk for a 2028 landing, and it doesn\u2019t perturb their entire development flow as well.<\/p>\n Ars<\/strong>: Can you talk about the orbital parameters of the mission, like altitude and inclination?<\/em><\/p>\n Parsons<\/strong>: Artemis III will fly at a -33 degree inclination. We\u2019re flying a circular orbit, and we\u2019re still working through all of the final mission parameters. So right now\u2026 we\u2019re targeting below 250 nautical miles (287 miles, or 463 km). We\u2019re doing all the fine-tuning analysis on Orion with thermal, power, what your beta angle cutouts look like, all of those things.<\/p>\n You have a lot more launch opportunities than you do for a lunar mission based off all that. What we are trading against that is MMOD [orbital debris] bands. So you go above 242 nautical miles, and you run into certain constellations, potential MMOD. And then when we looked at other higher orbits, like similar to what we flew for the initial ICPS rendezvous operations with Artemis II, then you start running into different MMOD and radiation concerns. The sweet spot will be probably below 250 nautical miles, probably in the 230s range. Both Blue and Starship can reach that in a single launch.<\/p>\n Ars<\/strong>: Thank you very much for your time. I genuinely want to wish you good luck on all of this. None of it is easy, and we\u2019ll be watching with interest.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" On Tuesday, NASA announced the crew for the Artemis III mission, which is scheduled to be flown no earlier than summer 2027. As part of the announcement, space agency officials also discussed plans for the crew to dock with both a Blue Origin lander and a SpaceX Starship lander during the spaceflight in low-Earth orbit. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":43197,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-43193","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43193"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=43193"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43193\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/43197"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=43193"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=43193"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/starpath.global\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=43193"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"\"](\"https:\/\/cdn.arstechnica.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/bluelunar-landers-1024x586.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\n Blue Origin<\/p>\n<\/figure>\n