Peregrine Lander’s Failed Moon Mission

The race to return America to the lunar surface faced a significant setback in early 2024. Astrobotic Technology, a Pittsburgh-based private company, launched its Peregrine lunar lander with high hopes of becoming the first commercial spacecraft to soft-land on the Moon. Instead, a critical propulsion failure forced the team to abort the landing attempt, resulting in the spacecraft burning up in Earth’s atmosphere ten days after launch.

The Launch and Immediate Crisis

On January 8, 2024, the Peregrine Mission One (PM1) lifted off from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida. It rode atop the maiden flight of the Vulcan Centaur rocket, manufactured by United Launch Alliance (ULA). The launch itself was a textbook success. The Vulcan Centaur performed flawed orbital insertion, sending the Peregrine lander on a precise trajectory toward the Moon.

Trouble struck shortly after the spacecraft separated from the rocket. Approximately seven hours into the flight, mission control at Astrobotic noticed an anomaly. The spacecraft struggled to point its solar panels toward the Sun, which is necessary to keep its batteries charged. While engineers managed to reorient the craft and regain power, they discovered a more severe underlying issue: a critical loss of propellant.

Images returned from the lander showed a disturbance in the Multi-Layer Insulation (MLI), essentially the foil wrapping the spacecraft. This visual evidence confirmed telemetry data suggesting that a fuel tank had ruptured. Without a sealed propulsion system, a controlled lunar landing became impossible.

The 10-Day Struggle in Space

Despite the mission-ending failure of the propulsion system, the Astrobotic team did not abandon the spacecraft. For over ten days, they fought to keep Peregrine alive to gather as much data as possible.

The leak was identified as an oxidizer leak. A valve had failed to reseal, causing high-pressure helium to rush into the oxidizer tank. The pressure rose beyond the tank’s limit, causing it to burst. Despite this, the spacecraft’s maneuvering thrusters worked overtime to fight the venting gas and keep the ship stable.

During this extended operational period, the lander traveled out to lunar distance, reaching the altitude of the Moon’s orbit before looping back toward Earth. Astrobotic successfully activated several payloads on board. NASA and other customers received data from their instruments, proving that the onboard electronics and communication systems functioned correctly in the harsh environment of deep space.

The Decision to Terminate

As the spacecraft looped back toward Earth, Astrobotic faced a difficult decision regarding the mission’s end. The propellant leak had slowed, but the trajectory was uncertain. There was a slight risk that the dead spacecraft could bounce off Earth’s atmosphere and end up in a chaotic orbit, potentially colliding with satellites or crashing into the Moon uncontrolled in the future.

To act responsibly and minimize the creation of orbital debris, Astrobotic, in consultation with NASA, decided to guide the spacecraft into a destructive re-entry. On January 18, 2024, Peregrine re-entered Earth’s atmosphere over the remote South Pacific Ocean. The friction of re-entry incinerated the lander and its payload, ending the mission safely but unsuccessfully.

What Was Lost: Payloads and Cargo

The Peregrine lander was not empty. It carried 20 payloads from seven nations and various private entities.

NASA’s CLPS Experiments

This mission was the first launch under NASA’s Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) initiative. NASA paid Astrobotic $108 million to deliver five science instruments. These included:

Laser Retroreflector Array: Designed to allow precise distance measurements from Earth.
Neutron Spectrometer System: Intended to hunt for signs of water ice near the lunar surface.
Linear Energy Transfer Spectrometer: A device for measuring radiation.

Private and Cultural Payloads

Beyond science, the lander carried cargo that sparked significant public interest and controversy.

Carnegie Mellon University: The university sent the Iris rover, a tiny 4.4-pound robot that would have been the first American university rover on the Moon.
Celestis and Elysium Space: These companies paid to send human remains (ashes) and DNA to the lunar surface as a memorial service. This included DNA from former U.S. Presidents George Washington, Dwight D. Eisenhower, and John F. Kennedy, as well as the creator of Star Trek, Gene Roddenberry.
The Controversy: The inclusion of human remains drew formal objections from the Navajo Nation. Navajo President Buu Nygren urged NASA and the Department of Transportation to delay the launch, citing that depositing human remains on the Moon would desecrate a celestial body considered sacred in Navajo culture. Because the mission ended in Earth’s atmosphere, these remains were never deposited on the Moon.

Impact on the Commercial Space Sector

The failure of Peregrine highlighted the immense difficulty of lunar landings. Only government agencies from the United States, the Soviet Union, China, India, and most recently Japan (SLIM mission) have successfully soft-landed on the Moon. No private company has yet achieved the feat.

However, the failure was not viewed as a total loss by the industry. The primary goal of NASA’s CLPS program is to lower the cost of lunar access by using private contractors. NASA officials, including administrator Bill Nelson, reiterated that “spaceflight is hard” and that the “shots on goal” model accepts higher risk for lower costs.

The successful performance of the ULA Vulcan Centaur rocket was a silver lining. Since the rocket performed perfectly, ULA can proceed with certifying the vehicle for national security missions for the US Space Force.

Astrobotic continues to work on its next mission, which involves the larger Griffin lander. This future mission aims to deliver NASA’s VIPER rover (Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover) to the lunar south pole, though the timeline and mission parameters remain under review following the Peregrine anomaly.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did the Peregrine lander fail? The failure was caused by a faulty valve in the propulsion system. The valve failed to close, allowing high-pressure helium to over-pressurize the oxidizer tank until it ruptured. This leak drained the fuel necessary for a soft landing.

Did Peregrine crash into the Moon? No. While it reached lunar distance, it did not enter lunar orbit or crash into the surface. It was directed back to Earth to burn up in the atmosphere to avoid creating space debris.

Who owns the Peregrine lander? The lander was owned and operated by Astrobotic Technology, a private American company. While NASA was a primary customer, it did not own the spacecraft.

How much did the mission cost? NASA paid Astrobotic approximately $108 million for the delivery of its payloads. This figure does not include the costs incurred by other private customers or the development costs absorbed by Astrobotic.

Are there other US companies trying to land on the Moon? Yes. Intuitive Machines, another private company based in Houston, launched their “Odysseus” lander shortly after Peregrine. Unlike Peregrine, Odysseus successfully landed on the Moon in February 2024, becoming the first private spacecraft to do so.