Urgent.News

600+ sources. One page. See who else covered it.

Editions

Science

NASA boss balks at billion-dollar estimate for recycled Moon rover

Turning two Mars testbeds into one lunar explorer may prove anything but cheap

NASA boss balks at billion-dollar estimate for recycled Moon rover

NASA administration head Jared Isaacman has expressed skepticism towards a billion-dollar estimate for a repurposed rover designed to explore the Moon, named PROMISE. Isaacman was reacting to a cost analysis provided by Casey Dreier, the chief of space policy at the Planetary Society. Dreier's calculations, which range from $723 million to $1.33 billion, take into account various factors including launch, landing, and adaptation costs.

PROMISE aims to utilize engineering testbeds, such as OPTIMISM and MAGGIE, originally used for Mars rover Perseverance and Curiosity missions, to conduct lunar exploration. These engineering models, although similar to those sent to Mars, have not been 100% identical and would require additional modifications to function on the Moon.

The challenge lies in not only qualifying these components for lunar conditions but also adapting the power and communication systems to function under lunar environments. Furthermore, removing these engineering models from active missions could have implications, as stated by Dreier, suggesting that PROMISE is far from a "freebie."

While Isaacman did not dispute individual cost estimates, he firmly stated that if the mission were to cost even 20% of the low-end estimate, it would not be flown. Despite the high cost, Isaacman acknowledged that utilizing already invested hardware could be beneficial. However, he drew attention to the challenge of transforming these models into a mass-produced rover, implying that designing a new rover might be a more practical solution.

Written by urgent.news from The Register Science's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — it may contain errors, so check the original before relying on it.

Also reported by 1 other outlet

Read the original at theregister.com →

More in Science