\n Experts who spoke with CNN for this article said that reevaluating SpaceX\u2019s lunar lander contract could be wise. Spending years to develop an entirely new spacecraft could still potentially be faster, some argued, than waiting for Starship, which presents extremely difficult engineering challenges due to its sheer size and unprecedented design.\n <\/p>\n
\n Still, SpaceX has ticked a few boxes that might give it a significant leg up on the competition. Though in light of NASA\u2019s broader lunar ambitions, experts say the real contest is about much more than speed.\n <\/p>\n
\n Touted as the most powerful rocket system ever built, Starship has launched on 11 eye-popping suborbital test flights, relighting engines in space, reusing boosters and demonstrating the ability to deploy satellites along the way.\n <\/p>\n
![\"SpaceX's](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/ap25287002934663.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\n In a statement posted to its website on Thursday, SpaceX also said it has \u201ccompleted 49 milestones tied to developing the subsystems, infrastructure, and operations needed to land astronauts on the Moon.\u201d And the \u201cvast majority\u201d of its contractual testing milestones for NASA have happened on schedule, according to the company.\n <\/p>\n
\n NASA did not immediately respond to a request for comment on SpaceX\u2019s claims.\n <\/p>\n
\n Starship has also faced significant setbacks \u2014 particularly this year. In the first six months of 2025, three prototype vehicles exploded during test flights and another burst into flames during routine ground testing, causing damage to SpaceX\u2019s surrounding infrastructure in Texas. The hangups prompted national security hawks to voice worries that SpaceX won\u2019t deliver Starship in time to realize NASA\u2019s goals.\n <\/p>\n
\n Under the current plan, NASA would launch its astronauts aboard the Orion capsule atop the Space Launch System rocket, both of which NASA developed. After reaching lunar orbit, the astronauts would transfer to Starship, which would ferry two people down to the moon\u2019s surface and then back to lunar orbit.\n <\/p>\n
\n But Starship is likely still a long way from being capable of carrying out such an endeavor. So far, the company has only attempted to fly Starship on hour-long, suborbital test flights. It has not yet sent a vehicle to orbit on an operational mission, nor has it attempted to top off Starship\u2019s fuel during a flight \u2014 a step that will be necessary for lunar missions because of Starship\u2019s massive size and design.\n <\/p>\n
\n It\u2019s not clear how many refueling flights would need to be launched prior to Starship carrying out Artemis III. As CNN previously reported, the number could be anywhere from 10 to 40<\/a>. And transferring cryogenic propellants, of the kind Starship relies on, has never been attempted before with any spacecraft.\n <\/p>\n \n \u201cSpaceX is not going to be able to make this work before 2030,\u201d said Doug Loverro, a former chief of human spaceflight at NASA, expressing a sentiment recently echoed<\/a> by two prior NASA administrators.\n <\/p>\n \n The company did not provide details about its plan to expedite work on the NASA contract. SpaceX did not respond to a request for comment from CNN, nor does the company typically answer questions from reporters.\n <\/p>\n \n One alternative option that Duffy mentioned during a TV blitz last week is using a spacecraft built by Blue Origin. The Jeff Bezos-funded company already has a contract to provide lunar landers for use later in the Artemis program, including the Artemis V mission.\n <\/p>\n \n And because Blue Origin already has an Artemis contract, it could be simpler for NASA to switch up the order in which it relies on its contractors rather than bringing a new company into the mix.\n <\/p>\n \n Right now, Blue Origin is developing two models of its Blue Moon landers: Mark 1 for cargo, and Mark 2, the vehicle designed for humans and intended for use during Artemis V.\n <\/p>\n \n But to expedite the creation of a lunar lander that could be used for the Artemis III mission, Blue Origin plans to propose a new design that leverages elements of both Mark 1 and Mark 2, according to an industry source familiar with the plan that hasn\u2019t been made public.\n <\/p>\n \n Then, to get the vehicle to the moon, Blue Origin would make use of one or more Mark 1 landers that have been essentially converted into small rocket stages that could boost a scaled-down version of Mark 2 out of Earth orbit and to its destination.\n <\/p>\n \n The approach would require multiple launches, but likely fewer than the current plan with Starship, the source noted. Blue Origin\u2019s plan also does not require the launch of refueling tankers or transferring super-chilled propellants between spacecraft in orbit.\n <\/p>\n \n Lockheed Martin \u2014 which previously worked on Blue Origin\u2019s lander design but is not actively part of a partnership \u2014 also intends to throw its hat in the ring.\n <\/p>\n \n Notably, as a legacy NASA contractor, the company built the $20.4 billion Orion spacecraft<\/a> that astronauts will ride when they take off from Earth. Orion has already flown one successful mission around the moon \u2014 Artemis I \u2014 and is slated for a crewed test flight to lunar orbit as soon as February.\n <\/p>\n \n Now, Lockheed says it can piece together a two-stage lunar lander that uses spare parts harvested from Orion.\n <\/p>\n \n The company would make use of Space Shuttle-era OMS-E engines \u2014 which are also used on Orion<\/a> \u2014 to serve as the propulsion for an \u201cascent stage\u201d of the lunar lander, providing the thrust for the vehicle to lift off the moon after a mission is completed.\n <\/p>\n \n But the vehicle also needs a descent stage to get down to the lunar surface in the first place.\n <\/p>\n \n For that component, Lockheed plans to work with another commercial space outfit, though it has not yet decided which one, said Rob Chambers, Lockheed\u2019s director of human spaceflight strategy, and Tim Cichan, the company\u2019s chief architect of space exploration, during a video call last week.\n <\/p>\n \n There are two paths Lockheed could take for its descent stage that could determine which company it teams up with. It could use a cryogenically fueled lunar lander similar to Blue Origin\u2019s Mark 1. Or it could go with a vehicle that uses more stable propellants such as hypergolic fuels.\n <\/p>\n \n If Lockheed decides to go with cryogenic fuels, which must be kept at super-cold temperatures, it would need to launch its ascent stage and descent stage on separate rockets and dock them in orbit.\n <\/p>\n \n In that scenario, it may also need to launch additional \u201cboost stages\u201d to kick them out to the moon, Cichan said.\n <\/p>\n \n If Lockheed opts for a descent stage with more stable fuels, however, the whole lander could launch in one piece. But it would need to be topped off with fuel in orbit, Cichan added.\n <\/p>\n \n He noted that the refueling process in that case would not, however, be as complex as attempting to refuel cryogenically powered spacecraft, such as Blue Origin\u2019s lander or SpaceX\u2019s Starship, in orbit.\n <\/p>\n \n Transferring stable fuels between vehicles in orbit is a less risky proposition and has been taking place on the International Space Station since 2000, Cichan explained. \u201cThe Russians and Soviets have been doing it all the way back to the \u201870s,\u201d Cichan said. \u201cSo that\u2019s very known technology.\u201d\n <\/p>\n \n When asked what would make Lockheed\u2019s proposal competitive with Blue Origin or SpaceX, Chamers said the company\u2019s \u201capproach is quickest because it leverages existing hardware, minimizes the required cadence of launches, and does not rely on technologies like cryogenic refueling or long duration storage that have never been performed on orbit.\u201d\n <\/p>\n \n Other commercial space companies contacted by CNN \u2014 including Firefly Aerospace and Northrop Grumman \u2014 said simply that they were \u201cready to support\u201d NASA in its endeavor to find a faster way to complete the Artemis III mission.\n <\/p>\n \n They did not confirm whether they would formally respond to the space agency\u2019s anticipated request for companies to submit proposals.\n <\/p>\n \n Experts who spoke with CNN suggested that NASA should stretch its imagination when it comes to the spacecraft that will land astronauts on the moon.\n <\/p>\n \n \u201cNobody\u2019s put together a true concept of design,\u201d Loverro said.\n <\/p>\n \n \u201cAll of that\u2019s doable very quickly,\u201d he noted, adding that he believes a new lander could go from concept to reality within five years.\n <\/p>\n \n Loverro suggested that NASA should leverage in-house expertise by leaning on its own Jet Propulsion Laboratory, or JPL, which he said should be empowered to rapidly pursue a lunar lander development program.\n <\/p>\n \n While JPL couldn\u2019t do the job alone, because the center is focused on robotic exploration and does not have human spaceflight experience, Loverro noted, the laboratory has built a reputation over decades for its engineering precision and ability to pull off complex missions on unforgiving timelines.\n <\/p>\n \n \u201cYou really want that that kind of program management leadership that JPL embodies so well,\u201d Loverro said.\n <\/p>\n \n One huge consideration with any of these proposals is the price.\n <\/p>\n \n From NASA\u2019s vantage point, SpaceX\u2019s Starship is by far the cheapest proposal because the company is spending so much of its own money on the project. The company even estimates<\/a> it is funding 90% of Starship\u2019s production, test and launch facilities.\n <\/p>\n \n None of the other companies CNN spoke with about alternative proposals for NASA\u2019s lunar lander offered cost estimates for bringing their ideas to fruition.\n <\/p>\n \n But as with any spaceflight project, it\u2019s safe to assume they won\u2019t be cheap.\n <\/p>\n \n NASA\u2019s funds are already limited. While Congress has been on board with supporting the Artemis program \u2014 adding $10 billion to bolster lunar efforts in the \u201cOne Big Beautiful Bill Act\u201d \u2014 it\u2019s not clear whether lawmakers would throw even more money at the project in an attempt to speed things up.\n <\/p>\n \n The space agency also can\u2019t easily cancel existing contracts with either SpaceX or Blue Origin.\n <\/p>\n![\"The](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/gettyimages-2200281239.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"NASA's](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/gettyimages-1986208856.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
![\"This](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/lunar-south-pole.JPG\")
<\/p>\n