About the SA Blog Network



Opinion, arguments & analyses from the editors of Scientific American
Observations HomeAboutContact

Stellar deal: NASA awards $2 million to X PRIZE winners for helping develop a lunar lander

The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily those of Scientific American.

Email   PrintPrint

X Prize, Masten,lunar lander, Northrop GrummanLess than one month after NASA crashed its Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS) into the moon’s surface in order to analyze the resulting plume of debris for signs of water, the U.S. space agency is handing out nearly $2 million on Thursday to engineers developing technology for a much softer landing on the lunar surface as part of the Northrop Grumman Lunar Lander X PRIZE Challenge.

The competition consisted of two levels, the second of which was held last week in California’s Mojave Desert. Level two required each team’s rocket to simulate a full lunar lander mission, including a descent from lunar orbit to the lunar surface, refueling and returning to lunar orbit. Each lander needed to ascend to a height of 50 meters and land safely on a rocky lunar-replica surface after at least 180 seconds of flight time (the first level required only 90 seconds of flight time). This flight then needed to be repeated, with the rocket demonstrating repeat-use capability by returning to the original launch site.

Masten Space Systems, Inc., led by David Masten, takes home $1.15 million, having placed first in the competition’s second level and second in the competition’s easier first level. The team’s Xoie vehicle landed on average within 19 centimeters of its target on the simulated lunar surface. Masten beat out Armadillo Aerospace, which won the competition’s first level but placed second in the subsequent level, landing on average within 87 centimeters of its target. Armadillo’s overall prize is $650,000.

Four teams had been competing for the Lunar Lander X PRIZE since its announcement in May 2006. Northrop Grumman, the aerospace company that built the original Apollo Lunar Modules used in the 1960s and 1970s, backed this X PRIZE competition as a way of accelerating the commercial development of a new breed of technology for ferrying payloads or humans back and forth between lunar orbit and the lunar surface.

Commercial technology is seen as the best, and perhaps only, option for returning astronauts to the moon. A commission chaired by former Lockheed Martin Chief Executive Norman Augustine determined earlier this year that private-sector development is crucial to NASA’s goal of a launching a moon mission by 2020. On its current budget alone, NASA wouldn’t be able to get astronauts to the moon until the 2030s, if ever, the commission announced in September.

Image of Masten’s lunar lander courtesy of X PRIZE Foundation

Rights & Permissions

Comments 4 Comments

Add Comment
  1. 1. Unbeliever 4:25 am 11/4/2009

    So, increase NASA’s funding already. It never ceases to amaze me that a government agency such as NASA has to scrounge for money when it already receives a mere 3 percent of the budget. NASA’s contribution to technological progress is indisputable. Those who feel that space exploration is a waste of money make use of technology that would yet be in existence were it not for work done by or for NASA during the 1960′s. The money spent during those years spawned entire industries, and can truly be regarded as a sound investment in the future. Too bad we seem so oblivious to that.

    Link to this
  2. 2. Quasimodo 8:38 am 11/4/2009

    Well heck. Who were the four teams?? Phooey.

    Link to this
  3. 3. MrGneissGuy 2:08 pm 11/4/2009

    Unfortunately, Unbeliever, it’s a lot less than 3%. In 2009 NASA’s budget is 0.67% of the total federal budget. That includes every single thing NASA does from research around the world to satellite launches to actual space flight operations. Fortunately, in 2010, NASA’s budget is being increased by ~5% bringing the grand total to $18.686 billion. Still, at this rate, the I.S.S. will be deorbited by 2016.

    Link to this
  4. 4. Quinn the Eskimo 8:15 pm 11/4/2009

    Yeah, ok, it looks good but, it *also* looks like the Lunar Lander circa 1968.

    Invention or copy? Let’s go ask Neil Armstrong–he should know.

    Link to this

Add a Comment
You must sign in or register as a member to submit a comment.

More from Scientific American

Email this Article