Artemis’s Hunt for Lunar Permanence

In December of last year the Trump administration set a target for a crewed Lunar landing by the end of 2028 and outlining policy goals for a re-working of the Artemis program ^[1]. As the Artemis program has been a wild ride since its inception an overview of its history and evolution is warranted. 

At the close of 2017 the White House Space Policy Directive 1 was signed with the intent of a “... U.S.-led, integrated program with private sector partners for a human return to the Moon, followed by missions to Mars and beyond” ^[2]. This was a widely supported policy direction that was meant to refocus US space development efforts to a staged development program (Moon -> Mars -> Beyond). This led to the creation of the Artemis program in 2020. The Artemis program was a broad and ambitious roadmap to develop a new commercial and international space ecosystem, a focus on developing a permanent and sustainable Lunar presence, and a timeline for returning humans to the moon in 2024 ^[3]. The proposed plan would use legacy Space Shuttle hardware (most prominently the RS-25 engines) integrated into the Space Launch System (SLS), built by Boeing, for the initial Artemis missions. SpaceX was chosen to conduct the human landing in Artemis 3 with a joint system where the SLS would launch the crew in the Orion capsule to rendezvous with the SpaceX transporter and lander in orbit for transit and landing on the moon by 2024 ^[4].  Key to Artemis was the international push with the Artemis Accords. Signed by the founding nations in Oct 2020 and currently have 61 participating nations ^[5], the Artemis accords set out to create a base co-operative framework for in-space activity for the international community ^[6]. Artemis Accords signatories have the obligation to the following for in-space activity:

• Peaceful purpose for in-space activities
• Transparency of plans and policy
• Interoperability of systems with other signatories
• Providing emergency assistance
• Registration of space objects
• Release of scientific data
• The preservation of historically significant sites and artifacts
• Space recourse extraction is compliant with the 1967 Outer Space Treaty 
• Deconfliction of space activities through notification and schedule sharing. 
• Commitment to managing, reducing, and removing orbital debris

The Artemis Program set a high bar and tight timeline for lunar operations, and, as some commentators predicted ^[7], the complex roadmap began to experience heavy delays. 

Front and center to the public are the delays of Artemis is the SLS rocket and Orion capsule. The SLS rocket has been plagued with delays and increased costs. According to an Office of Inspector General report the program showed a $6 billion increase in development costs in 2023 and a $700 million increase alone for the rocket for the Artemis III flight ^[8]. Alongside the SLS itself the infrastructure used to assemble, transport, and launch SLS, the Mobile Launcher (ML-1), experienced damage from the Artemis I launch and required an upgrade to the heavier ML-2. An Office of Inspector General investigation showed the initial $383 million cost of the program would balloon to $1.8 billion by its delayed 2027 target date which they concluded as unsustainable ^[9]. Following the Artemis I mission the Orion space capsule suffered some key failures in its operation in its complex re-entry maneuver. The Orion capsule first conducts a “skip” off the atmosphere to slow down before recommitting to re-entry. The ablative coating meant to burn and carry away heat performed differently at the lower heating rates in the maneuver than ground testing showed, leading to cracking in the ablative layer ^[10]. This, alongside delays in SLS integration, pushed off Artemis II from an already delayed 2024 target to an 2026 target and has yet to launch. Delays and poor implementation do not only exist in the traditional “cost-plus” sphere as Artemis’s private partners are also experiencing issues.

SpaceX also has been massively delayed with their plan to use up to a dozen Starship Human Landing System (HLS) launches to refuel their Lunar Lander and transporter. The plan for Artemis III was to fill a “depot” tank in orbit that is filled with cryogenic propellants from tanker Starship launches. The Lunar lander would then rendezvous with the depot to fill its propellant tanks before docking with Orion and going to the moon (see Figure 3) ^[11]. Besides the orbital complexities, cryogenic propellant (in SpaceX’s case Liquid Oxygen [LOx] and Liquid Natural Gas [LNG]) transfer in space has not been done before, making it a key blocker to an already complex and resource intensive plan ^[12]. In 2023, to add redundancy to the landing program, Blue Origin was awarded a contract to develop a lander for Artemis V. Its lander uses a LOx and Liquid Hydrogen (LH2) engine and also needs to develop cryocooling capabilities to keep the hydrogen from boiling off in space ^[13]. Both SpaceX and Blue Origin are opting to use cryogenic propellants and while they have difficulties (particularly LH2 as it needs to be kept at or below 20 Kelvin to avoid boiling off in space) there are good reasons why they are using them. The two main reasons are permanence and efficiency. For lunar permanence to be a reality, propellant costs need to decrease, and one way to do that is making fuel from lunar ice by decomposing it to LOx and LH2. While it raises the difficulty in the short term, it is a vital technology for all long term goals, but, as of early 2026, these are still technologies that need to be demonstrated. 

The Artemis Rework 

In December of 2025 Jared Isaacman was confirmed as NASA administrator after almost a year of the role being vacant. His team would implement an overhaul of the Artemis program. Artemis II would continue as planned for a crewed test flight of the Orion capsule, but Artemis III would no longer target a lunar landing. Instead, it would focus on testing the Orion capsule docking with either or both SpaceX’s and Blue Origin's Lunar Lander in Earth's orbit to demonstrate and test the technologies before use on a landing ^[14]. The target would be mid-2027 and would require significantly less complexity than SpaceX’s original plan which would have necessitated all the untested technologies working right on their first try. Artemis IV would become the landing mission targeting early 2028 with a second landing mission (Artemis V) targeting the end of 2028. This new plan increases the reliance on SpaceX and Blue Origin while also canceling SLS, Orion, and Gateway (a lunar orbital station for crew transfers). The long delays and ballooning budgets for these programs are cited as the core reasons as well as their intent to leverage fixed contracts with private space as cheaper and faster solutions ^[15]]. This is a large pivot, and, while more incremental and clear, they are not without their challenges. First and foremost is time. There is less than a year and a half to meet Artremis III’s 2027 target and that is going to require some serious restructuring and pivoting by all parties involved. This is already being seen as Blue Origin recently shuttered its New Shepard program to transfer resources and over 500 of its personnel to its Blue Moon project ^[16]. And while ambitious the current roadmap is more clear, focused, realizable than the previous delay pile-up. 

This current pivot in Artemis feels like a breath of fresh air in an America that seems to be making the worst decisions at every step. In last year’s Redshift analysis we reported on last year, an American return to the moon is still generally approved of (67% in a YouGov poll) and 73% respond the Space program contributed either some or a lot of national pride and patriotism ^[17]. And while not ranked highest, opinion of NASA showed the lowest difference between Republicans and Democrats of all US Federal agencies ^[18]. The Artemis program is something we can all hope to succeed. Due to the scope, complexity, and timescales involved, major space programs like Artemis offer something that has the ability to outlast and transcend the political divisions that grip America currently. The current crisis gripping the United States can best be encapsulated as a lack of faith and trust in our leaders, institutions, and future outlook. There is a massive effort currently to get Artemis back on track and this program will far exceed this current administration’s tenure. In a time without many national wins, the success of Artemis is something we could all celebrate.