Space News reports that NASA has stopped work on the Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER). The space agency has run out of money and, absent a last-minute salvation by Congress or either a commercial or international entity, the mission will not fly.
Laura Forczyk, founder and executive director of the space consulting firm Astralytical, has a good rundown of the history and the implications of the decision.
VIPER was envisioned as a prospector for lunar ice, which scientists believe exists at the lunar poles. It was to be delivered by an Astrobotic Griffin lander and would roll across the lunar surface looking for the ice with a variety of instruments and a drill.
NASA considers lunar ice essential for long-term exploration of the moon and exploitation of its abundant resources. If future lunar explorers can mine the ice, they have water for drinking and agriculture. The water can be split into hydrogen and oxygen and used as rocket fuel and the latter element for breathing. Maintaining a lunar settlement would be far more feasible.
NASA seeing a major project balloon over its initial projected cost estimate is nothing new. The International Space Station and the James Webb Space Telescope are prime examples. Despite the fact that both projects faced cancellation, the money was found to bring them to completion, and they are returning great science and value to NASA and the world.
Ars Technica notes some of the causes of VIPER’s cost increases, including supply chain problems, schedule slippages and a need to further test the Griffin lander to ensure that it will reach the lunar surface. NASA has spent $433 million on the project and has built the lander.
To get it on the lunar surface and operating, the space agency will need an additional $176 million, bringing the total cost to $609 million. Rather than try to find the additional money in its current budget, affecting other programs, the space agency has thrown in the towel.
Because ramping down the VIPER mission will cost money, NASA will only save $84 million by canceling it. The space agency is canceling a vital mission to prospect for water ice on the moon to save under $100 million. Ironically, VIPER recently passed initial environmental tests.
How can VIPER be saved? NASA has stated that if no way is found to come up with the $84 million by Aug. 1, the lunar rover will be broken up and its instruments distributed to other missions, as yet undefined.
Forczyk suggests that one way VIPER could be saved is that Congress could order NASA to reverse its decision to cancel it. Keith Cowing of NASA Watch is circulating an open letter to be sent to members of Congress urging that body to save VIPER.
The other solution would be if some other entity were to step in and put up the extra money. That entity could be a foreign space agency or a commercial company, such as SpaceX or Blue Origin.
On casual evaluation, SpaceX might be ideal for taking over VIPER. Part of the test regimen for the Starship Human Landing System will be to land an uncrewed version on the lunar surface and then return it to Earth. That test could easily take VIPER to the moon, release it, and leave it behind.
Congress could even sweeten the deal and give SpaceX title or partial title to the lunar ice it discovers with VIPER. The Space Launch Competitiveness Act of 2015 grants ownership of space resources that an American company exploits. The act might be amended to allow companies to own or partly own resources that they locate before mining them.
Clearly, something has to be done to save VIPER. The Artemis program returning humans to the moon and, eventually, sending them on to Mars, is a national priority. Both the Trump and Biden administrations have regarded it so. VIPER is an integral part of Artemis if we want humans living and working on the moon long term.
One way or another, either by Congress coming up with more money or through a partnership with another country’s space agency or a domestic commercial company, VIPER must be saved from cancellation. Then Congress and the incoming administration must decide whether a space program that includes Artemis and a variety of important science programs can be run on the cheap in an era of tight budgets.
Mark R. Whittington is the author of “Why is It So Hard to Go Back to the Moon?” “The Moon, Mars and Beyond” and, most recently, “Why is America Going Back to the Moon?” He blogs at Curmudgeons Corner.
