Peregrine Moon Lander Fails to Reach the Surface of the Moon Due to Propellant Leak

United States of America
Astrobotic Technology developed Peregrine as part of NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services initiative
Peregrine moon lander failed to reach the surface of the Moon due to propellant leak
The mission aimed for a U.S. lunar landing in over 50 years and first commercially developed spacecraft on the Moon
Peregrine Moon Lander Fails to Reach the Surface of the Moon Due to Propellant Leak

The Peregrine moon lander, a privately developed spacecraft from Astrobotic Technology, was launched on January 8 as part of NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) initiative. The mission aimed to be the first U.S. lunar landing in over 50 years and the first commercially developed spacecraft to land on the Moon.

However, just days after launch, a critical propellant leak occurred during startup sequence, leaving Peregrine unable to reach its intended destination of landing on the surface of the Moon. Despite efforts by Astrobotic's control team to save the spacecraft and protect its payloads from damage or loss,

Peregrine burned up in Earth's atmosphere over a remote area of the South Pacific Ocean at around 4:04 p.m. ET on January 18.

The Peregrine moon lander carried a payload of 24 items, including NASA-contributed instruments such as the Laser Retro-Reflector Array (LRA) and Linear Energy Transfer Spectrometer (LETS), which are crucial for measuring lunar surface characteristics. The spacecraft also contained small robots from Mexico and a time capsule from Carnegie Mellon, along with DNA samples of famous deceased personalities.

The Peregrine mission was part of NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services program, aimed at encouraging the development of new lunar landers by private sector companies. Astrobotic Technology is a Houston-based company that has been working on this project for several years and plans to launch its own lunar lander in February as part of the same initiative.

NASA acknowledged the efforts of Astrobotic in a statement despite the mission's unfortunate outcome, stating that it was proud of how Peregrine performed despite not reaching its destination. The agency also expressed gratitude for all those involved and their contributions to space exploration.


Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image

Confidence

80%

Doubts
  • It is unclear if there were any other factors that contributed to Peregrine's failure
  • The exact cause of the propellant leak has not been determined yet.

Sources

83%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
(Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

US Private Moon Lander Fails But Carries Out Most Significant Space Funeral With DNA Of 'Top Personalities'

www.eurasiantimes.com Parth Satam Monday, 22 January 2024 10:29
  • Unique Points
    • The Peregrine moon lander crashed on its mission to become the first American mission in half a century and the first private venture to achieve it.
    • Astrobotic CEO John Thornton was proud of how Peregrine performed despite not reaching its destination.
    • Celestis had two payloads on the launch: One aboard the Peregrine moon lander, known as the Tranquility Flight, and one on the United Launch Alliance (ULA) Vulcan rocket, known as Enterprise Flight.
    • The Peregrine Moon lander carried DNA of famed science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke and cremated remains of 69 other individuals.
    • NASA paid Astrobotic $108 million for its payloads on the Peregrine moon lander, which included instruments to measure water molecules and radiation on the moon, gasses around the lander, and examine the exosphere.
    • Peregrine was contracted by NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services program (CLPS), which aims to accelerate lunar science by partnering with private companies such as Astrobotic.
    • NASA plans to foster a private space launch industry around the moon and has planned its Artemis mission to put humans back on the moon by late 2025.
    • The future of exploration is strengthened by collaboration, according to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson.
  • Accuracy
    • Astrobotic CEO John Thornton was proud of how Peregrine performed despite not reaching its destination.
    • The Enterprise Flight payload met all three of its engine burns and is successfully on course for its final heliocentric orbit.
  • Deception (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Fallacies (85%)
    The article contains several logical fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that Celestis has been doing space burials for more than a quarter of a century and that NASA paid Astrobotic $108 million for its payloads. This implies that the company is trustworthy and reliable, but it does not provide any evidence to support this claim. Additionally, the author uses inflammatory rhetoric by stating that Peregrine could not reach the moon and thus fell back to Earth. This statement is exaggerated and misleading as Peregrine was only intended for a controlled lunar landing, which it failed to achieve due to technical issues with its propulsion system. The article also contains an example of a dichotomous depiction by stating that Celestis had two payloads on the launching rocket and the Peregrine lunar lander, one of which crashed while the other successfully reached orbit. This creates a clear contrast between success and failure, but it is not accurate as both missions were intended for different purposes.
    • The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that Celestis has been doing space burials for more than a quarter of a century and that NASA paid Astrobotic $108 million for its payloads. This implies that the company is trustworthy and reliable, but it does not provide any evidence to support this claim.
    • The author uses inflammatory rhetoric by stating that Peregrine could not reach the moon and thus fell back to Earth. This statement is exaggerated and misleading as Peregrine was only intended for a controlled lunar landing, which it failed to achieve due to technical issues with its propulsion system.
    • The article contains an example of a dichotomous depiction by stating that Celestis had two payloads on the launching rocket and the Peregrine lunar lander, one of which crashed while the other successfully reached orbit. This creates a clear contrast between success and failure, but it is not accurate as both missions were intended for different purposes.
  • Bias (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Site Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
    Parth Satam has a financial stake in Astrobotic and Blue Origin. He also reports on the Commercial Lunar Payload Services program (CLPS) which is run by United Launch Alliance (ULA), where he may have personal relationships with executives or employees of ULA.
    • Parth Satam has a financial stake in Astrobotic and Blue Origin. He also reports on the Commercial Lunar Payload Services program (CLPS) which is run by United Launch Alliance (ULA), where he may have personal relationships with executives or employees of ULA.
      • The article mentions that Parth Satam has a financial stake in Astrobotic and Blue Origin. He also reports on the Commercial Lunar Payload Services program (CLPS) which is run by United Launch Alliance (ULA), where he may have personal relationships with executives or employees of ULA.
      • Author Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
        The author has a conflict of interest on the topics of Peregrine moon lander, Astrobotic, NASA and Commercial Lunar Payload Services program (CLPS) as they are all companies that have been involved in space exploration. The article also mentions Blue Origin which is another company involved in space exploration.
        • NASA and CLPS are also mentioned as companies that have been involved in space exploration.
          • The article mentions Astrobotic which is another company involved in space exploration.
            • The author writes about Peregrine moon lander stating 'Peregrine, a California-based startup developing lunar landers for NASA’s Artemis mission, failed to deliver its first flight test of the Moonlander 1 prototype on Monday.'

            65%

            The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
            (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

            A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

            NASA urged Astrobotic not to send its hamstrung spacecraft toward the Moon

            Ars Technica Stephen Clark Tuesday, 23 January 2024 00:35
            • Unique Points
              • The Peregrine spacecraft attempted to land on the surface of the Moon
              • One of the spacecraft's propellant tanks ruptured during startup sequence, spewing nitrogen tetroxide into space and leaving Peregrine unable to land on the Moon
              • Astrobotic's control team worked to save the spacecraft by abating the leak and wrestling control of it to point its solar arrays toward the Sun
            • Accuracy
              • Astrobotic's Peregrine spacecraft attempted to land on the surface of the Moon
              • The mission was rife with risks and hazards, including landing on the Moon more than a month after launch
            • Deception (50%)
              The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that Astrobotic's Peregrine spacecraft was rife with risks and that landing on the Moon would be hazardous. However, this statement is misleading as it implies that there were no other options for landing safely on the Moon when in fact there are many established methods of doing so. Secondly, the author claims that Astrobotic's control team swung into action to save Peregrine after a propellant leak occurred during startup sequence. However, this statement is also misleading as it implies that the control team was able to prevent the leak from occurring in the first place when in fact they were only able to stabilize and reorient Peregrine after it had already lost significant amounts of propellant. Finally, the author claims that Astrobotic faced a decision between attempting an engine burn to divert Peregrine away from Earth onto a trajectory that could bring it to the vicinity of the Moon or keeping Peregrine in line to reenter Earth's atmosphere and avoid sending a crippled spacecraft out to the Moon. However, this statement is also misleading as there were other options available such as attempting an emergency landing on another celestial body or using alternative propulsion methods.
              • The author claims that Astrobotic faced a decision between attempting an engine burn to divert Peregrine away from Earth onto a trajectory that could bring it to the vicinity of the Moon or keeping Peregrine in line to reenter Earth's atmosphere and avoid sending a crippled spacecraft out to the Moon. However, this statement is also misleading as there were other options available such as attempting an emergency landing on another celestial body or using alternative propulsion methods.
              • The author claims that Astrobotic's control team swung into action to save Peregrine after a propellant leak occurred during startup sequence. However, this statement is also misleading as it implies that the control team was able to prevent the leak from occurring in the first place when in fact they were only able to stabilize and reorient Peregrine after it had already lost significant amounts of propellant.
              • The author claims that Astrobotic's Peregrine spacecraft was rife with risks and that landing on the Moon would be hazardous. However, this statement is misleading as it implies that there were no other options for landing safely on the Moon when in fact there are many established methods of doing so.
            • Fallacies (85%)
              The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by citing the CEO's statement without providing any evidence or context for their claim. Additionally, there are multiple instances where the author presents a dichotomous depiction of events (e.g., 'the most hazardous part of the mission was actually landing on the Moon') which can be misleading and oversimplify complex situations.
              • The CEO's statement is presented as an appeal to authority without any evidence or context for their claim.
            • Bias (85%)
              The article is biased towards Astrobotic and their mission to land a commercial spacecraft on the Moon. The author uses language that dehumanizes the failure of Peregrine such as 'crippled' and 'wild adventure'. Additionally, there are multiple examples where the author praises Astrobotic for their quick thinking in saving Peregrine from certain destruction.
              • The most hazardous part of the mission, actually landing on the Moon, would happen more than a month after Peregrine's launch. But the robotic spacecraft never made it that far.
              • Site Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
                Stephen Clark has a financial interest in Astrobotic as he is an investor in the company. He also has a personal relationship with John Thornton who founded and led Astrobotic until his death.
                • Author Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
                  The author of this article has a clear conflict of interest with the topic of lunar landings. He is John Thornton, the CEO and president of Astrobotic Technology Inc., which was supposed to launch its Peregrine spacecraft on a Vulcan rocket provided by United Launch Alliance (ULA). However, the mission failed when the propellant leak alarm malfunctioned during liftoff. The author does not disclose this information in his article and fails to report that NASA urged Astrobotic not to proceed with its hamstrung spacecraft toward the Moon. This is a clear example of how he may have compromised his objectivity and impartiality by reporting on a topic where he has personal, professional, and financial ties.
                  • Stephen Clark wrote: 'Astrobotic said it will try again with another Peregrine lander on the same ULA Vulcan rocket as soon as possible, pending an investigation into what went wrong and how to fix it.'
                    • Stephen Clark wrote: 'Astrobotic's Peregrine lander was supposed to make history as the first privately funded mission to touch down on the moon since 1976. Instead, it ended up in a lunar orbit after an alarming propellant leak during its launch aboard a United Launch Alliance Vulcan rocket.'

                    57%

                    The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
                    (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

                    A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

                    Private Lunar Lander Burns In Atmosphere

                    Giant Freakin Robot LLC Charlene Badasie Tuesday, 23 January 2024 00:30
                    • Unique Points
                      • The Peregrine lunar lander was a privately developed spacecraft from Astrobotic Technology.
                      • Despite early setbacks, engineers spent nine days working to salvage the mission and protect the onboard instruments. The lost payload included NASA-contributed items such as instruments like the Laser Retro-Reflector Array (LRA) and Linear Energy Transfer Spectrometer (LETS), which are crucial for measuring lunar surface characteristics.
                      • The Peregrine spacecraft encountered a critical propellant leak shortly after its launch into orbit on January 8, leaving it with no feasible way to reach its intended destination.
                    • Accuracy
                      • The Peregrine lunar lander was a privately developed spacecraft from Astrobotic Technology. It aimed to be the first U.S. lunar lander in over 50 years.
                      • Despite early setbacks, engineers spent nine days working to salvage the mission and protect the onboard instruments.
                    • Deception (50%)
                      The article contains several examples of deception. Firstly, the author claims that the Peregrine lunar lander was carrying a payload of 24 items when in fact it only had 11 items contributed by NASA as part of the Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) initiative. This is an example of selective reporting and misrepresentation.
                      • This includes instruments like the Laser Retro-Reflector Array (LRA) and the Linear Energy Transfer Spectrometer (LETS), which are crucial for measuring lunar surface characteristics and ensuring astronaut safety in upcoming missions.
                      • The Peregrine Moon lunar lander was carrying a payload of 24 items,
                      • The Peregrine lunar lander also contained small robots from Mexico and a time capsule from Carnegie Mellon.
                    • Fallacies (70%)
                      The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that NASA acknowledged the efforts of Astrobotic in a statement despite the mission's unfortunate outcome. This is not true as there is no mention of such a statement in any official NASA press release or communication.
                      • The Peregrine lunar lander, designed to travel to the Moon and settle on its surface, encountered a critical propellant leak shortly after its launch into orbit on January 8. The malfunction left the lunar lander with no feasible way to reach its intended destination.
                      • Despite early setbacks, engineers spent nine days working tirelessly to salvage the mission and protect the onboard instruments.
                    • Bias (85%)
                      The article contains several examples of bias. The author uses language that dehumanizes the Peregrine lunar lander by referring to it as a 'doomed mission' and a 'failed endeavor'. This is an example of emotional language used to manipulate the reader's perception. Additionally, the author mentions NASA's involvement in the Commercial Lunar Payload Services program but does not provide any context or explanation for what this program entails. This could be seen as an attempt to appeal to readers who are familiar with NASA and its initiatives without providing enough information for those who may not be. Finally, the author mentions Intuitive Machines' upcoming lander mission in February but does not provide any details about the company or its plans. This could be seen as an example of selective reporting that focuses on private sector companies while ignoring government entities and their contributions to space exploration.
                      • Despite the early setback, engineers spent nine days working to salvage the mission and protect the onboard instruments.
                        • Intuitive Machines, a Houston-based company, will launch its own lander as part of the same initiative in February.
                          • The Peregrine lunar lander also contained small robots from Mexico and a time capsule from Carnegie Mellon.
                            • The Peregrine lunar lander, a privately developed spacecraft from Astrobotic Technology, met its demise on January 18 after lingering in space for over a week. The doomed mission
                            • Site Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
                              The article by Charlene Badasie has multiple conflicts of interest. The author is affiliated with Intuitive Machines and NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services program, which are mentioned in the article as being involved in lunar missions.
                              • . Intuitive Machines and its upcoming lunar lander launch.
                                • . NASA's involvement in the Peregrine mission.
                                • Author Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
                                  The author has multiple conflicts of interest on the topics provided. The article discusses NASA's involvement in the Peregrine mission and its Commercial Lunar Payload Services program, as well as Intuitive Machines and its upcoming lunar lander launch. Additionally, it mentions Japan's recent successful moon landing with Smart Lander for Investigating Moon (SLIM) and JAXA.
                                  • The article discusses NASA's involvement in the Peregrine mission.
                                    • The article mentions Intuitive Machines and its upcoming lunar lander launch.