NASA Plans Bigger SpaceX Moon-Mission Role in Blow to Boeing

[Elderberry]

Bloomberg By Loren Grush, Ed Ludlow, and Julie Johnsson 3/19/2026

NASA is revising its moon-landing plans, reducing Boeing Co.’s role while elevating SpaceX’s Starship rocket to do the job of propelling astronauts to lunar orbit, people familiar with the matter said.

Under the original plan set years ago, Boeing’s Space Launch System rocket would have launched a crew of four riding inside the Lockheed Martin Corp.-built Orion crew capsule to the moon, with the spacecraft then putting itself in the moon’s orbit. A Starship lander would then meet up and dock with the capsule around the moon, before taking astronauts down to the lunar surface.

With the new proposal, SLS would no longer be used to boost Orion close to the moon — previously a key task for the rocket. Instead, Starship and Orion would dock in Earth orbit, giving Starship the pivotal role of propelling the capsule to the moon’s orbit, before taking astronauts down to the surface.

NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman plans to meet on Tuesday with the companies working on Artemis and human landing system program (HLS), including Blue Origin LLC, Boeing and SpaceX, to discuss their progress and the latest plans at the agency. Any changes to the mission could face Congressional scrutiny, and the agency could reverse and alter its plans, said the people, who asked not to be identified as the matter is confidential.

More: https://archive.is/2026.03.19-182336/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-03-19/nasa-plans-bigger-spacex-moon-mission-role-in-blow-to-boeing#selection-1717.0-1721.273

[BobfromWB]

Bloomberg By Loren Grush, Ed Ludlow, and Julie Johnsson 3/19/2026

NASA is revising its moon-landing plans, reducing Boeing Co.’s role while elevating SpaceX’s Starship rocket to do the job of propelling astronauts to lunar orbit, people familiar with the matter said.

Under the original plan set years ago, Boeing’s Space Launch System rocket would have launched a crew of four riding inside the Lockheed Martin Corp.-built Orion crew capsule to the moon, with the spacecraft then putting itself in the moon’s orbit. A Starship lander would then meet up and dock with the capsule around the moon, before taking astronauts down to the lunar surface.

With the new proposal, SLS would no longer be used to boost Orion close to the moon — previously a key task for the rocket. Instead, Starship and Orion would dock in Earth orbit, giving Starship the pivotal role of propelling the capsule to the moon’s orbit, before taking astronauts down to the surface.

NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman plans to meet on Tuesday with the companies working on Artemis and human landing system program (HLS), including Blue Origin LLC, Boeing and SpaceX, to discuss their progress and the latest plans at the agency. Any changes to the mission could face Congressional scrutiny, and the agency could reverse and alter its plans, said the people, who asked not to be identified as the matter is confidential.

More: https://archive.is/2026.03.19-182336/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-03-19/nasa-plans-bigger-spacex-moon-mission-role-in-blow-to-boeing#selection-1717.0-1721.273

There is noway that any lander gets through the PDR, CDR and becomes man-rated in 2.5 years, without cutting many corners and forgoing crew safety.

For heaven's sake, Starship v3 has not even flown, as no version of Starship has reached orbit or proven orbital refueling can be done. The version that is currently slated to go to the Moon is Starship v4 ... the only version that can lift the plan's mass to LEO. Talk about putting the horse before the cart!

I think if the current plan above is enacted, NASA will be lucky to avoid a Challenger type disaster; and the more I think about a top-heavy, 4 legged Starship lander landing on the most rugged, uneven terrain on the Moon, without toppling over, and the crew having to use an elevator to descend 50 feet to the surface, the more preposterous the US venture becomes.

Every time Isaacman changes the lunar mission plan, it becomes even worse than the original. Musk must be throwing his money around and 47 must have put huge pressure on Isaacman to come up with this ill-conceived plan.

Either that or they know better and all these horrible changes are just for show - to say, they "tried, but the pieces just did not come together in time" - blame goes to Musk/Isaacman and 47 slashes NASA's budget to near zero, due to its "poor performance".

Of course with these plans, there is little doubt that China will set up the first lunar colony [ a lunar colony with a mass driver to boot ] and in doing so, become the world's true superpower and preeminent space country.

If only they had not had a failure of political will in 1964 when Project Orion was cancelled ...

[Elderberry]

Project Orion was a 1950s-1960s conceptual study for a spacecraft propelled by nuclear pulse propulsion—detonating small atomic bombs behind a heavily shielded "pusher plate". Designed for rapid, heavy-payload interplanetary travel, it was cancelled in 1964, largely due to the 1963 Nuclear Test Ban Treaty outlawing atmospheric nuclear tests.

Orion Spacecraft

NASA’s Orion spacecraft is carrying humanity to the Moon. Launching atop NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) rocket, Orion will carry and sustain the crew on Artemis missions to the Moon and return them safely to Earth.

[BobfromWB]

Project Orion was a 1950s-1960s conceptual study for a spacecraft propelled by nuclear pulse propulsion—detonating small atomic bombs behind a heavily shielded "pusher plate". Designed for rapid, heavy-payload interplanetary travel, it was cancelled in 1964, largely due to the 1963 Nuclear Test Ban Treaty outlawing atmospheric nuclear tests.

There were other factors which played a significant role in its cancellation besides the NTB treaty: Failure of Noxious Nixon's political will, Government inter-agency infighting, NASA Apollo conflict, perceived treaty obligations, lack of political leadership.

The model tests worked as planned - the more the ship weighed, the better it worked. Would have used water as shielding  [ the best known shielding ] with crew in the hundreds for inter-system exploration. The Interstellar version would have had crews in the thousands, measured at least 4,500 feet in length.

Motto: “Mars by 1965, Saturn by 1970.” Would cost same or less than Apollo.

“...the first time in modern history that a major expansion of human technology has been suppressed for political reasons.” - Freeman Dyson.

[BobfromWB]

Bloomberg By Loren Grush, Ed Ludlow, and Julie Johnsson 3/19/2026

NASA is revising its moon-landing plans, reducing Boeing Co.’s role while elevating SpaceX’s Starship rocket to do the job of propelling astronauts to lunar orbit, people familiar with the matter said.

Under the original plan set years ago, Boeing’s Space Launch System rocket would have launched a crew of four riding inside the Lockheed Martin Corp.-built Orion crew capsule to the moon, with the spacecraft then putting itself in the moon’s orbit. A Starship lander would then meet up and dock with the capsule around the moon, before taking astronauts down to the lunar surface.

With the new proposal, SLS would no longer be used to boost Orion close to the moon — previously a key task for the rocket. Instead, Starship and Orion would dock in Earth orbit, giving Starship the pivotal role of propelling the capsule to the moon’s orbit, before taking astronauts down to the surface.

NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman plans to meet on Tuesday with the companies working on Artemis and human landing system program (HLS), including Blue Origin LLC, Boeing and SpaceX, to discuss their progress and the latest plans at the agency. Any changes to the mission could face Congressional scrutiny, and the agency could reverse and alter its plans, said the people, who asked not to be identified as the matter is confidential.

More: https://archive.is/2026.03.19-182336/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-03-19/nasa-plans-bigger-spacex-moon-mission-role-in-blow-to-boeing#selection-1717.0-1721.273

That plan is now dust. The new plan will use the largest rocket ever built by NASA to ferry the Orion capsule to LEO. And that will be its last mission. The Lunar Gate way is also dust, as is the European Service Module (ESM). Sunk costs in the many billions now dust.

[   ]

Then Starship v4 lunar lander or Bezo's Cislunar Transporter to take the the Orion directly to the Moon.
Starship, if chosen, will have the Orion capsule 'bolted' to its nose faring.

None of these pieces are designed to work together. Crew safety no longer seems to be an issue, just get to the Moon before the Chinese, no matter the cost, it seems.

This is beyond dangerous, and there is a high possibility the entire crew will perish in the attempt. If that happens, 47 will have the excuse to cancel NASA with prejudice, something he has attempted this year, using the Agency's budget.