Astrobotic's Peregrine Moon Lander suffered a propulsion anomaly just hours into its mission
Despite this setback, Astrobotic CEO John Thornton is proud of how Peregrine performed during its brief mission
The spacecraft eventually reentered the atmosphere and broke up over the Pacific Ocean on Thursday, January 18th
Astrobotic's Peregrine moon lander, the first private lunar lander contracted by NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services program (CLPS), suffered a propulsion anomaly just hours into its mission that created a significant propellant leak and caused it to fall back to Earth. The spacecraft eventually reentered the atmosphere and broke up over the Pacific Ocean on Thursday, January 18th. Despite this setback, Astrobotic CEO John Thornton is proud of how Peregrine performed during its brief mission.
Peregrine suffered a propulsion anomaly just hours into its mission that created a significant propellant leak and caused it to fall back to Earth.
The lander eventually reentered the atmosphere and broke up over the Pacific Ocean on Thursday (January 18).
Astrobotic CEO John Thornton is proud of how Peregrine performed, despite its premature conclusion.
Many of the payloads were unable to carry out their intended uses at all.
Peregrine was the first mission contracted by NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services program (CLPS).
The next mission contracted under CLPS will launch soon: The Nova-C lander built by Intuitive Machines is scheduled to launch toward the moon atop a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket in mid-February.
Accuracy
Peregrine suffered a propulsion anomaly just hours into its mission that created a significant propellant leak and caused it to fall back to Earth.
Many of the payloads were unable to carry out their intended uses at all.
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(80%)
The article contains an example of a false dilemma fallacy. The author presents the reader with two options: either Astrobotic is excited about its Peregrine lunar lander or it is not. However, this oversimplifies the complexity of human emotions and ignores other possible reactions that could be present.
Astrobotic remains upbeat about its Peregrine lunar lander
Despite the mission's premature conclusion, Astrobotic CEO John Thornton is proud of how Peregrine performed.
Bias
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a financial interest in the topic of lunar exploration as they are affiliated with Intuitive Machines. They also have personal relationships with individuals involved in the mission such as Joel Kearns.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of Astrobotic as they are mentioned in the article and have an upcoming mission. The Peregrine moon lander is also mentioned but there is no indication that it was developed by Astrobotic.
Peregrine was the first mission contracted by NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services program (CLPS).
Only government agencies from US, Soviet Union, China and India have managed controlled lunar landings before now.
Astrobotic is the first of three US companies to send a lander to the Moon this year under private-public partnership with Nasa.
Accuracy
The spacecraft suffered a propulsion anomaly just hours into its mission that created a significant propellant leak and caused it to fall back to Earth.
Astrobotic CEO John Thornton is proud of how Peregrine performed, despite its premature conclusion.
Peregrine was the first US spacecraft designed for lunar landing since 1972.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that Peregrine was designed to journey to the moon and settle on the lunar surface. However, this statement is false as Peregrine's mission was not successful due to a critical propellant leak that forced its operators to scrap the entire mission.
The article claims that Peregrine was designed for a lunar landing but it failed in space and burned up in Earth's atmosphere. This is false as Peregrine never reached the moon.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that NASA commended Astrobotic for their perseverance and that the Peregrine mission was closely watched because it was the first U.S. lunar lander to launch into space in more than 50 years.
The article contains several fallacies.
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards the Peregrine mission and its failure. The author uses language that dehumanizes the spacecraft by referring to it as a 'doomed moon lander' and describes its fate in fiery terms. Additionally, there are multiple instances where the author quotes NASA officials praising Astrobotic for their perseverance, which could be seen as an endorsement of the mission despite its failure.
The privately built spacecraft, named Peregrine,
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
Denise Chow has a conflict of interest on the topic of Peregrine as she is reporting for Yahoo News which is owned by Verizon. Verizon also owns AOL, which has a financial stake in Blue Origin, the company that developed Peregrine.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
Denise Chow has a conflict of interest on the topics of Peregrine and NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services program as she is an employee at Space News which covers these topics extensively.
Astrobotic's Peregrine spacecraft launched last week for a lunar landing.
The spacecraft was headed to the surface of the moon but ended up burning up in Earth's atmosphere on Thursday afternoon.
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the title implies that the Peregrine Moon Lander successfully landed on the moon when it actually failed to do so and burned up in Earth's atmosphere. Secondly, there are no quotes from any sources disclosed or quoted within the article which could have provided more context about what happened during this mission. Lastly, there is a lack of transparency regarding how Astrobotic will investigate the failure of their spacecraft.
The title implies that Peregrine successfully landed on the moon when it actually failed to do so and burned up in Earth's atmosphere.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the United States Space Command confirmed the destruction of Peregrine without providing any evidence or sources for this claim.
> Astrobotic Technology of Pittsburgh announced in a post on the social network X that it lost communication with its Peregrine moon lander at 3:50 p.m. Eastern time, which served as an indication that it entered the Earth's atmosphere over the South Pacific at around 4:04 p.m.
The United States Space Command confirmed the destruction of Peregrine.
Bias
(85%)
The article contains a statement that implies the Peregrine moon lander was intentionally sent back to Earth. This is an example of religious bias as it suggests that Astrobotic Technology has a specific belief about what should happen with their spacecraft.
> The spacecraft never got close to its landing destination on the near side of the moon.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Kenneth Chang has a conflict of interest on the topic of Astrobotic's Peregrine Moon Lander as he is an employee at NASA. He also has a personal relationship with NASA and may be hesitant to report negatively on their projects.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Kenneth Chang has a conflict of interest on the topics of Astrobotic and Peregrine Moon Lander as he is an employee at NASA. He also has a conflict of interest on the topic of propulsion malfunction as it relates to his work at NASA.
Peregrine One was launched to try to land on the Moon but ended its mission in flames over the Pacific due to a propulsion fault.
Astrobotic's goal was to deliver five Nasa instruments to the Moon's surface for study of local environment ahead of astronaut return later this decade.
Only government agencies from US, Soviet Union, China and India have managed controlled lunar landings before now.
Peregrine suffered a propulsion fault that scuppered any prospect of a lunar touch-down and was commanded to destroy itself instead.
Engineers were able to diagnose what went wrong with Peregrine and then eke out life in the lander far beyond what seemed possible at start.
The fault was traced to leaking propellant from a ruptured oxidiser tank, which generated thrust that turned the craft and prevented it from keeping solar panels pointed towards Sun.
Payloads onboard were activated, proving their space-worthiness and some even gathered data such as radiation environment between Earth and Moon.
One of Nasa instruments to be started up was Peregrine Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer (PITMS) which had its sensor developed in UK by Open University and RAL Space.
Astrobotic is the first of three US companies to send a lander to the Moon this year under private-public partnership with Nasa.
Intuitive Machines, another US company, will attempt soft landing on lunar south pole next month.
Japanese space agency will try put down safely close to near-equatorial impact crater called Shioli before Intuitive Machines' launch.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that Peregrine One suffered a propulsion fault that scuppered any prospect of a lunar touch-down and it was commanded to destroy itself instead. However, the article does not provide any evidence or quotes from Astrobotic stating this explicitly. It is also unclear what exactly constitutes 'propulsion fault' as no technical details are provided in the article.
The article states that Peregrine One suffered a propulsion fault but no technical details are provided in the article.
The statement that Peregrine One suffered a propulsion fault and was commanded to destroy itself is misleading because it does not provide any evidence or quotes from Astrobotic stating this explicitly.
Fallacies
(80%)
The article contains several logical fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that only government agencies from the US, the Soviet Union, China and India have managed controlled lunar landings to date. This statement is not supported by evidence and could be seen as a form of confirmation bias.
Only government agencies from the US, the Soviet Union, China and India have managed controlled lunar landings to date.
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards the private space company Astrobotic and their mission to land on the Moon. The author uses language that dehumanizes Peregrine One by referring to it as a 'spacecraft' rather than an object with human-made components. Additionally, there are multiple instances of praise for Astrobotic's engineering successes, which could be seen as promoting the company over others in the space industry.
Astrobotic is referred to as a private venture that has achieved what only government agencies have done before
The article repeatedly praises Astrobotic's engineers and scientists
The author refers to Peregrine One as a 'spacecraft'
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
The author of the article has multiple conflicts of interest on several topics related to NASA and its missions. The author is a reporter for BBC News Science & Environment, which may have financial ties with NASA or other space exploration companies. Additionally, the article mentions Intuitive Machines and Firefly as being involved in the mission, suggesting that they may also have conflicts of interest.
The article mentions that 'Nasa has been working closely with private firms such as SpaceX to develop new technologies for space travel.'
The article states that 'Intuitive Machines is a privately-funded company based in Houston, Texas, which aims to carry out the first crewed mission from US soil since 2011.'
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
The author has multiple conflicts of interest on the topics provided. The article discusses Peregrine lander and American Moon mission which are both projects by Intuitive Machines, a company that is also mentioned in the article as having been involved in NASA's Artemis program. Additionally, Firefly is another company that was involved with NASA's Artemis program.
Nasa instruments on board were designed by Intuitive Machines and Firefly, two companies also mentioned in the article as being involved with NASA's Artemis program.
The Peregrine lander mission to deliver samples from the Moon back to Earth has failed over the Pacific Ocean
