Keith’s note: according to a telecom today all teams polled said GO for Artemis II. They are aiming for a rollout to the launch pad next week on 19 March. A launch attempt is planned as early as 1 April at 6:24 pm EDT . Another opportunity is in place on 2 April and would be at 7:22 pm. There are 4 launch opportunities within the 6 day period in early April. Note from the media briefing:

• “Is there a probabilistic risk assessment for Artemis II?” asks Bill Harwood @cbs_spacenews. —
• John Honeycutt: “We grappled with this for a while. We understand the risk with individual components. We are looking at this qualitatively. There are a lot of variables and it depends how quickly you get into flying – there is a gap between Artemis I and II – we don’t have that cadence. So Lori and I talked about that. The numbers would say it is 1 in 50 if you really stayed at a good cadence. But with a gap it is probably not 1 in 50. and not 1 in 2 … but it is probably 1 in 2.”
• Lori Glaze: “I agree with John – this is not the first flight – but we are not in a regular cadence – so we have a higher risk – but I would not put a number on it.”
• John Honeycutt: “I do not want you walking out of here saying this is 1 out of 2 – it is successful 50% of the time at the end of the day it is going to be what it is going to be. Not trying to be flippant. The team is working hard.”
• John Honeycutt: – “WRT 1 in 2 – when you do not have a lot of data, you go look at rockets that flew in their first mission – its about 1 in 2. I do not want people thinking that we are scared to fly. We do a good job at understanding, buying down, managing risk. You get in trouble when you develop probabilistic assessment – that might scare you. You can work out things in detail. When you work that you can put yourself in a better place than if you simply rely upon probabilistic numbers. The numbers in Shuttle were 1 in 130 and then it improved. I feel like we’re being dangerous – I did not get this question on Artemis I – I understand why – we have people on it this time – oh sh*t (pardon my French). I know we have pursued loss of mission and loss of crew assessment but I am not sure what we mean. We can fool ourselves into what the biggest risk is. (sigh) This will result in some interesting reading on the next couple of days.”
• Question: “What is the status of the Gateway?” Lori Glaze: “The new direction that the NASA Administrator put forward is focused on transportation in the near term. There is nothing in there that talks about any other part of the program and we continue to execute on the other parts of the program.”
• When another question was asked about the 1 in 2 risk thing for Artemis II and if something comparable to the risk numbers provided for Artemis I flight could be provided, PAO’s Rachel Kraft did a diving catch to stop any further discussion of this topic at this media event.

Keith’s note: As humanity expands outward we need to make sure it is all of humanity. Moreover, we may find that living in space may be a more enabling – and empowering – experience for some people than living on Earth. Eric Ingram has some thoughts: “I just published something I’ve been carrying quietly for a long time. It’s the full story of my experience with lunar gravity across two research flights, including the first time reduced gravity allowed me to stand unassisted, and what that moment taught me about access, human limits, and the future. This is the first time I’ve told the story in full, and the first time I’m sharing the lunar gravity photos and videos from the second flight. If you’re curious, I’d love for you to read it.” Full story.

Keith’s note: The Houston Chronicle took a look at 2025 layoffs and the newly-announced NASA Force. “Accepting the buyout was a difficult decision for many NASA employees. Keith Cowing, a watchdog who previously worked at NASA and has edited NASAWatch.com since 1996, said employees would call him at 2 a.m. in tears. He said many people who took the buyout don’t want to return to NASA — they say they’re happy to be gone, they were going to retire soon anyway, they found private-sector work — but others have asked for more clarity surrounding NASA Force. Some early and mid-career employees took the buyout because they were afraid of being laid off. “The irony of letting a whole bunch of qualified people go and then saying, ‘Oh, we need people, new people, to hire back,’ it’s not lost on me,” Cowing said. “However, I think they seem to be going about this in a structured way.” More

Keith’s note: Space Twitter has a lot of noise. Mostly noise. Lots of snark. Some times an obvious question emerges. This was directed at Jared Isaacman:“What launch cadence do you have the budget to support? Once every 2.5 years? How about a little transparency? We all support what you want to achieve, yet we’re leery of the implementation”. Full conversation. — Unlike the usual NASA PAO response mechanism which takes hours or days, required meetings, approval cycles, and talking point insertion, this new guy just puts out commentary and direction – in near real time – in the actual fora where people converse – and many times in response to people who make clear points from an account with only a few followers. Small questions can yield important answers. Refreshing. See Isaacman’s response below.

Keith’s note: this procurement notice appeared today. Looks like Jared Isaacman is not wasting any time in his rebooting of the Artemis architecture: “NASA/MSFC has a requirement for next-generation upper stages for use in Space Launch System (SLS) Artemis IV and Artemis V. NASA/MSFC intends to issue a sole source contract to acquire next-generation upper stages for use in Space Launch System (SLS) Artemis IV and Artemis V from United Launch Alliance (ULA) in accordance with FAR 6.103-1(c), Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements due to the highly specialized nature of this requirement. A determination by the Government not to compete this acquisition on a full and open competition basis is solely within the discretion of the Government.”

Keith’s note: The Senate CS&T Committee held the confirmation hearing for Matthew Anderson to be Deputy Administrator of NASA. He sailed through with the usual questions from both sides of the aisle. As to when the full Senate will vote on his nomination – stay tuned. Probably soon. Update: according to Marcia Smith: “Following today’s nomination hearing for Matt Anderson to be NASA Deputy Admin, the Senate Commerce Cmte will vote on his nomination (and several others) next Thursday, Mar 12, at approx 11:30 am ET. It’s in the Capitol (S-216) so likely not livestreamed”. Opening statement below:

Keith’s note: Jared Isaacman spoke at the a16z event about the lack of core competencies and extensive outsourcing at NASA is “why we’re $100 billion deep into [Artemis]”and how OPM is working with NASA and the new NASA Force effort to reverse that. Of course NASA just lost a lot of its workforce – so this is an effort to bring back some of what may have been lost as well as attracting new skills to the agency. Comments and video below:

Keith’s note: A lawsuit was filed on 19 February in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia concerning the closure of the NASA Goddard library and the disposition of records and research materials housed there. The plaintiffs, including the Goddard Engineers, Scientists and Technicians Association (GESTA), filed the case to seek judicial review of NASA’s decision to close the library and disperse or dispose of portions of its collections. The complaint alleges that the agency’s actions violate federal records preservation requirements and were undertaken without the transparency and review required under federal law. Full complaint below.

Keith’s note: According to a tweet by @NASAAdmin: “Today, we’re launching NASA Force with @USOPM Returning to the Moon requires restoring core competencies in our civil servant workforce. This program will recruit top aerospace, software, systems, and other critical technical talent for approximately 2-year terms at NASA. This will strengthen in-house engineering excellence, close skill gaps, and deepen partnerships with industry. We’re investing in our people to deepen America’s leadership in space.”

Keith’s note: I was just on Deutsche Welle TV talking about today’s Artemis programmatic change s- and the impacts that may or may not have on Europe and other internationals pace efforts. [Audio] [video] – Youtube below.

Keith’s note: In an update today NASA Administrator Isaacman announced that Artemis III will not land on the Moon but will be a test mission in Earth orbit for docking with lander vehicles. The push is for moving to two lunar landing attempts in 2028 and will focus on achieving a launch cadence of 1 year or less. NASA will adopt a more or less identical SLS as a standard at the Block 1 configuration. Workforce additions will be needed to adjust NASA’s skill mix. No mention of what happens to Gateway. NASA press release.

Keith’s note: SOMD AA Ken Bowersox is retiring from NASA. According to a NASA press release: “Joel Montalbano will serve as the acting associate administrator for the Space Operations Mission Directorate (SOMD) at NASA Headquarters in Washington, and Dana Hutcherson will serve as the acting program manager of the Commercial Crew Program.”

Keith’s note: ASAP issued its 2025 Full report. There is not much new in this report that the ASAP et al have not said every year for decades. But this time the first recommendation strikes at the heart of why NASA often seems to be reactive and make things up one day at a time – with actions that are often inconsistent and contradictory: “Recommendation 2021-05-01: NASA should develop a strategic vision for the future of space exploration and operations that encompasses at least the next 20 years, including potential alternative scenarios, that is driven by how the Agency is going to understand and manage risk in the more complex environment in which it will be operating.

• The vision should describe the role that NASA intends to play during that period and how it plans to engage with both commercial and international partners.
• NASA should assess the workforce, including the number, types, skills, experience, and responsibilities that will be required, and the infrastructure facility requirements, with a plan for managing changes needed to meet those requirements.
• NASA should also propose general criteria for evaluating “make, manage, or buy” decisions on future programs or projects.
• All aspects of the strategic vision and its implementation should be clearly and unambiguously communicated throughout the Agency.”

Keith’s note: House Speaker Mike Johnson invited the Artemis II crew to be his guests at State of the Union tonight. Talk about Earned PR. Has NASA made any mention of this? No.

Keith’s note: One of the most awe inspiring things NASA does is Astrobiology – the search for life elsewhere in the universe. Yet despite this astonishing work, the NASA Astrobiology program is a scattered mess and stumbles upon itself to engage the public. And it can’t even link NASA’s few stories on this topic to their own program. Oh yes: the White House talks about this topic now and it is likely to get mentioned in the State of the Union speech tonight – one way or another. The trailer for Apple TV’s “For All Mankind” season 5 trailer just dropped – and they open with a prime task: “our mission is to find life”. Here’s a chance to expand NASA’s reach beyond the usual suspects – and maybe even make a few converts. Why not have weekly chats about this? What’s accurate and what is not – and why. The future of Mars Sample Return and the presidential mandate to go to Mars would seemingly be ample rationale for doing so. Just sayin’.

Keith’s note: OK. This is cool – the sort of thing NASA PAO ought to try to be doing – given the free earned PR they can get and the synergy that can emerge from real science and entertainment. But so far NASA has said nothing about this – and it happens tomorrow. Is this just an internal JPL thing or is the entire agency going to be watching – but only internally? Oh yes, since the whole idea is to try and cross leverage NASA and the movie – which is getting massive advance PR – one would think that this would be on NASA TV for the rest of us ~300 million taxpayer/potential ticket buyers. No mention is made at the official movie account at @projecthailmary (but the unofficial @HailMaryLogs does) nor is there any mention at the JPL website or NASA’s main website or the NASA Live schedule or the NASA YouTube channel or the NASA+ scheduled events page or @NASA on X etc. etc. Oh well.

Keith’s note: the other day NASA press Secretary Bethany Stevens @NASASpox said “We continue to embrace President Trump’s open science commitment as an agency. We have fostered open science since our inception so that the public can build upon our innovations. We continue to make all NASA data publicly available, and welcome public participation using our data.” Meanwhile NASA SMD is looking to exactly the opposite and cut funding for access to that very same data. According to an online petition “We are urging NASA’s Biological and Physical Sciences (BPS) Directorate to reverse the 2025 reductions to the NASA Open Science Data Repository (OSDR) and GeneLab, including the GeneLab Sample Processing Laboratory (SPL). OSDR is NASA’s primary source for understanding space biology, containing a shared library and lab system housing nearly 600 studies across 45 species. Over 1,000 researchers worldwide have produced more than 160 published papers using OSDR data, mostly through volunteer effort, multiplying the return on investment. The cuts also threaten the SPL, which provides the consistent methods needed to compare biological results across missions, and training programs for hundreds of students for careers in space science. Decades of NASA-funded work is at risk. Restoring funding is essential to protect that investment and keep future astronauts safe.” More below.

22 Feb Update: From NASA PAO: NASA to Rollback Artemis II Rocket, Spacecraft 21 Feb Update: I just talked to BBC World News TV about the recent issues with the Artemis II mission [audio]. Keith’s note: Things change fast in the Artemis II world. On Friday NASA posted an update: “NASA is targeting no earlier than Friday, March 6, for the launch of Artemis II, pending completion of required work at the launch pad, analysis of test data, and the outcome of a Flight Readiness Review in the coming days.” Then today (Saturday) according to this post: “NASA is taking steps to potentially roll back the Artemis II rocket and Orion spacecraft to the VAB … after overnight Feb. 21 observing interrupted flow of helium in the SLS rocket’s interim cryogenic propulsion stage. … This will almost assuredly impact the March launch window.“ Update: Detailed description from Jared Isaacman below:

Keith’s note: Yesterday President Trump tossed out his quasi-official proof of alien life – and visitations – directive on social media. NASA has not said anything about this. Oddly, they certainly had quite a lot to say about the exact same topic a few years ago in a formal report. As such I’m waiting for the formal Executive Order – maybe that will pry something out of NASA PAO. Meanwhile I did a lot of global TV today. (more below)

Keith’s note: Well … it would seem that NASA will be paying more attention to Astrobiology now. And other things.