Mankind's Lunar Battle: SpaceX's Starship vs Blue Origin's Lander

Table of Contents

1. Introduction
2. Comparison of Luna Landers
   1. SpaceX's Starship
   2. Blue Origin and the National Team's Lander
3. Similarities between the Landers
4. Differences between the Landers
   1. Infrastructure
   2. Vehicle Readiness
   3. Engine Readiness
   4. Lander Readiness
5. Conclusion

Introduction

In the realm of space exploration, there has been a surge of excitement among space fans. Notably, there are currently two Luna Landers in development for the Artemis program. The first is the ambitious Starship built by SpaceX, Slated for the Artemis 3 and 4 missions. The Second is Blue Origin and the National Team's Lander, known as Orlando, designated for Artemis 5. The question arises: which Lander is superior? In this article, we will compare both Landers, Delve into their similarities and differences, and assess their readiness for their respective missions.

Comparison of Luna Landers

SpaceX's Starship

SpaceX, having won the bid for the Artemis program's Human Landing System contract, is under contract to perform the Landings for Artemis 3 and 4. The chosen Lander, Mark II, has the capacity to transport up to four astronauts to the lunar surface and support them for up to 30 days. In its fully reusable configuration, the Lander can carry 20 tons of Cargo, or up to 30 tons in a one-way configuration. The infrastructure for this Lander is Based on hydrogen and oxygen, which presents potential challenges in terms of fuel storage and insulation. While hydrogen provides a high specific impulse, its potential boil off during long missions needs to be addressed. Additionally, the refueling process for hydrogen can be complex and requires precise handling. Despite these potential challenges, SpaceX has demonstrated its ability to meet NASA's high standards in the past.

Blue Origin and the National Team's Lander

Initially competing against SpaceX, Blue Origin and the National Team is now partnering with Lockheed Martin for the Artemis program's Lander. Their Lander, named Orlando, is designed to be provided by Blue Origin, while Lockheed Martin is responsible for building a reusable tanker called the Assisted Lunar Transporter. This tanker will refuel the Lander in low Earth orbit before flying to the near rectilinear halo orbit to complete the refueling process. Similar to SpaceX's Lander, Orlando's propellant is based on hydrogen, and thus faces the same challenges associated with storage and insulation. However, Blue Origin already has experience with hydrogen through their New Shepard vehicle and can utilize that knowledge in the development of the Lander.

Similarities between the Landers

Despite the differences in infrastructure and partnership, there are some similarities between the SpaceX and Blue Origin Landers. Both are part of the Artemis program and aim to transport humans back to the Moon, marking a significant milestone in space exploration. Both Landers will require on-orbit propellant storage and transfer development, as well as the capability to transport astronauts and cargo to the lunar surface. The success of both Landers hinges on the reliability and readiness of their engines, which are still undergoing development and testing. Furthermore, both SpaceX and Blue Origin are committed to meeting the high standards set by NASA, ensuring the safety and success of their respective missions.

Differences between the Landers

Infrastructure

When it comes to infrastructure, SpaceX has a track Record of quickly building the necessary facilities. However, at this moment, Blue Origin seems to have the AdVantage as they have constructed an impressive campus for the New Glenn rocket at the Cape. Hardware for the New Glenn is already being spotted at the site, indicating progress in rocket development. Additionally, Blue Origin has a facility for testing first and second stages, further adding to their infrastructure advantage. On the other HAND, SpaceX's Starship infrastructure is still under development at the Cape, and plans for necessary facilities specific to the Lander have not yet been revealed. It remains to be seen if SpaceX can rapidly close the gap in terms of infrastructure.

Vehicle Readiness

In terms of vehicle readiness, SpaceX has an edge over Blue Origin. While the integrated flight test of the Starship did not fully succeed, SpaceX has an integrated hardware system ready for further testing. In comparison, the New Glenn's Current state is relatively unknown, and it is unclear how far along in readiness it truly is. This advantage for SpaceX bodes well for the development and testing of the Lander.

Engine Readiness

Both SpaceX and Blue Origin are working on the readiness of their respective engines. SpaceX's Raptor engine, which powers the Starship, is still undergoing development. However, they have a production facility and testing structure in place, indicating progress towards achieving engine readiness. Blue Origin's BE-4 engine, on the other hand, has been deemed suitable for ULA's Vulcan rocket, signifying a certain level of engine readiness. The lunar landing engines for both Landers are yet to be confirmed, and there is limited information available regarding their current status. Overall, engine readiness is a key factor in determining the success of the Landers.

Lander Readiness

The readiness of the actual Landers themselves remains a significant unknown. SpaceX's Starship faces stringent timelines, with the Artemis 3 mission planned for December 2025, and an anchored lunar demo scheduled for 2023. This leaves SpaceX with only three years to fully develop, test, and prove the Lander's capabilities. Blue Origin's Orlando also faces a similar challenge in terms of timeline, with Artemis 5 planned for the future. Development of critical systems and life support hardware for both Landers is crucial but has not yet been disclosed. While SpaceX has previous experience with critical infrastructure, such as the Dragon's life support systems, Blue Origin's sub-orbital New Shepard lacks the complexity of radiation shielding and advanced life support. Thus, SpaceX holds a slight advantage in terms of Lander readiness.

Conclusion

In the race to return humans to the Moon as part of the Artemis program, both SpaceX and Blue Origin have significant roles to play. While they compete against each other, their shared goal of advancing space exploration benefits all. The comparison of their Luna Landers reveals similarities and differences in infrastructure, vehicle readiness, engine readiness, and Lander readiness. SpaceX demonstrates its ability to rapidly build infrastructure and has an almost-ready vehicle in the form of Starship. Blue Origin, on the other hand, has made progress in infrastructure development with its New Glenn rocket. Engine readiness remains a challenge for both companies, and the readiness of their respective Landers is still an unknown. Ultimately, the success of these Landers will contribute to the grand achievement of witnessing a Moon landing, inspiring a new generation of space enthusiasts.