NASA‘s Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS)

Key Takeaways

• NASA employs a service-based acquisition model, purchasing delivery to the lunar surface from private vendors rather than owning the spacecraft.
• The initiative has successfully operationalized the lunar logistics market, with multiple commercial landings achieved by companies like Intuitive Machines and Firefly Aerospace between 2024 and 2025.
• Future missions scheduled for 2026 and beyond will target complex regions such as the lunar far side and the south pole to support the Artemis program .

Introduction to the Program

The Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) initiative represents a foundational shift in the methodology of American space exploration. Historically, the United States government, through NASA , acted as the sole architect, builder, and operator of deep space missions. In that traditional “cost-plus” model, the agency dictated every engineering specification and bore the entirety of the financial risk. The CLPS program dismantles this structure, replacing it with a commercial service model akin to freight logistics. In this new paradigm, the government is merely a customer – one of many potential clients – buying ticket space on a commercial vehicle.

This transition is driven by the urgent needs of the Artemis program . To return humans to the Moon sustainably, the agency requires a constant stream of data regarding the lunar environment. It needs to know the precise bearing strength of the regolith at the south pole, the radiation levels at the surface, and the exact distribution of water ice in permanently shadowed craters. Building a custom billion-dollar rover for every single one of these queries is fiscally impossible. Instead, the agency purchases “shots on goal” – frequent, lower-cost missions delivered by private industry. This high cadence of operations allows for rapid technology maturation; if a new navigation sensor fails on one mission, it can be tweaked and reflown within months rather than decades.

By January 2026, the program has graduated from an experimental concept to an operational reality. The early turbulence of 2024, characterized by both high-profile failures and tentative successes, gave way to a robust schedule of launches in 2025. The program has successfully stimulated the US industrial base, creating a competitive market where multiple vendors now possess flight-proven hardware. This ecosystem reduces the reliance on any single provider and ensures that the United States maintains a continuous presence on the lunar surface, a strategic necessity in an era of renewed geopolitical competition in cislunar space.

The CLPS Acquisition Strategy

The mechanism that powers this initiative is the Indefinite-Delivery/Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) contract. Unlike a standard procurement where a specific product is bought at a specific time, an IDIQ creates a pre-approved pool of vendors who are eligible to bid on future work. The total maximum value of these contracts is capped at $2.6 billion through 2028, but the value of individual task orders varies significantly based on mission complexity.

The Task Order Process

When the science directorate identifies a set of instruments ready for flight – perhaps a suite of spectrometers or a drill – it issues a Request for Task Plan (RTP) to the vendor pool. The companies then analyze the requirements: total mass, power availability, data transmission rates, and the specific landing coordinates. They submit competitive bids outlining their technical approach and price.

The agency evaluates these bids not just on cost, but on “best value.” A slightly more expensive bid might be selected if the provider offers a higher probability of success, better schedule assurance, or superior payload accommodation (such as more wattage for heaters during the lunar night). Once a Task Order is awarded, the company assumes the responsibility for the entire mission profile: procuring the launch vehicle (rocket), integrating the payloads, managing the flight trajectory, and executing the landing.

Risk Posture and Cost Savings

This model introduces a calculated acceptance of risk. In traditional “Flagship” class missions (like the Mars Curiosity Rover), failure is not an option, driving costs into the billions to ensure 99.9% reliability. In the commercial payload program, the agency explicitly accepts that some missions will fail. The logic is that flying ten missions at $100 million each is better than flying one mission at $1 billion, even if two or three of the cheaper missions are lost. This “shots on goal” approach allows for faster iteration.

The fixed-price nature of the contracts also shifts financial risk to the private sector. If a company bids $90 million to deliver a payload but encounters technical delays that push the cost to $150 million, the company must absorb the $60 million overrun. This prevents the “ballooning” budgets that have plagued aerospace projects in the past. However, it also creates a precarious business environment; a major failure can threaten the solvency of the vendor, as seen in the financial strains placed on early participants.

Comprehensive Mission Manifest and Status

As of January 2026, the program has executed several missions and has a crowded manifest for the remainder of the year. The following details the chronological progression of these commercial flights.

Completed and Past Missions

1. Peregrine Mission One (TO 2-AB)

• Provider: Astrobotic Technology
• Launch Date: January 8, 2024
• Vehicle: Peregrine Lander
• Outcome: Lunar Landing Failure
• Details: Launched aboard the maiden flight of the ULA Vulcan Centaur, the lander suffered a rupture in its oxidizer tank shortly after separation. The leak made a lunar landing impossible. The operations team managed to stabilize the spacecraft to operate payloads in cislunar space for several days, gathering radiation data before directing the vehicle to destructively re-enter Earth’s atmosphere to avoid creating orbital debris.

2. IM-1 “Odysseus” (TO 2-IM)

• Provider: Intuitive Machines
• Launch Date: February 15, 2024
• Vehicle: Nova-C
• Outcome: Successful Landing (Degraded Orientation)
• Details: This historic mission marked the first American soft landing on the Moon since 1972. A failure of the lander’s laser rangefinders required a software patch to utilize a NASA Doppler Lidar payload for descent data. The spacecraft landed at Malapert A but tipped over due to lateral velocity at touchdown, coming to rest on its side. Despite the orientation, it generated power and transmitted scientific data, validating the commercial model.

3. Blue Ghost Mission 1 (TO 19D)

• Provider: Firefly Aerospace
• Launch Date: January 15, 2025
• Vehicle: Blue Ghost
• Outcome: Successful Landing
• Details: Launching on a SpaceX Falcon 9, the Blue Ghost lander targeted Mare Crisium. It touched down successfully on March 2, 2025. This mission was significant as Firefly became the second commercial entity to land on the Moon, and the mission was characterized by a highly precise vertical touchdown that allowed for optimal deployment of all ten payloads. The lander operated through the lunar day, providing data on heat flow and regolith adherence.

4. IM-2 “Athena” (TO CP-11)

• Provider: Intuitive Machines
• Launch Date: February 27, 2025
• Vehicle: Nova-C
• Outcome: Launched (South Pole Operation)
• Details: This mission carried the PRIME-1 ice-drilling experiment. It targeted the Shackleton Connecting Ridge near the south pole. The mission involved a “hopper” drone capable of short flights. Operating in the polar region presented extreme lighting and thermal challenges. The mission launched in late February 2025, engaging in a close temporal race with Firefly’s Blue Ghost to the surface.

Upcoming and Scheduled Missions (2026 and Beyond)

5. IM-3 (TO CP-11 Extension/Separate)

• Provider: Intuitive Machines
• Scheduled: First Half 2026
• Target: Reiner Gamma
• Key Payload: Lunar Vertex
• Details: This mission targets a “lunar swirl,” a magnetic anomaly on the surface. The Lunar Vertex payload includes a rover and static lander instruments to measure the magnetic field and plasma environment. Scientists hope to understand the origin of these swirls and why they appear as bright markings on the regolith.

6. Griffin Mission One (TO 20A)

• Provider: Astrobotic Technology
• Scheduled: Mid-to-Late 2026
• Target: South Pole (Mons Mouton)
• Status Update: Originally slated to carry the VIPER rover. Following the cancellation of VIPER in July 2024 due to cost issues, the mission profile was reconfigured. The Griffin lander, a heavy-lift platform, will proceed with a mass simulator or alternative payloads to prove the vehicle’s capability to deliver large cargo to the polar regions.

7. Draper SERIES-2 (TO CP-12)

• Provider: Draper
• Scheduled: Late 2026
• Target: Schrödinger Basin (Far Side)
• Details: This is a commercially contracted mission to the lunar far side. Draper, leading a consortium that includes ispace-US, will deliver seismometers to the Schrödinger impact basin. This location is geologically rich and offers a radio-quiet environment. The mission requires a relay satellite to communicate with Earth, as the Moon blocks direct line-of-sight.

8. Blue Ghost Mission 2 (TO CP-21)

• Provider: Firefly Aerospace
• Scheduled: 2026
• Target: Far Side
• Details: Following their success in 2025, Firefly will attempt a far-side landing. This mission will also deploy a communications satellite into lunar orbit to facilitate data relay, marking a step toward Firefly providing end-to-end lunar infrastructure services.

## Commercial Partners and Industry Landscape

The strength of the program lies in the diversity of its provider pool. Each company brings a distinct engineering philosophy and business strategy to the lunar market.

Intuitive Machines

Based in Houston, Texas, Intuitive Machines has established itself as a frontrunner in the early phases of the program. Their Nova-C lander utilizes a cryogenic propulsion system (liquid methane and liquid oxygen). This choice is technically ambitious because cryogenic propellants can boil off during the transit to the Moon. However, it offers high performance and allows the engine to be restarted easily. The company has aggressively pursued vertical integration, building its own lunar communications network and developing surface mobility agents (hoppers). Their success with IM-1 validated the decision to use cryogenic engines in deep space, a technology path that aligns with future heavy-lift vehicles like Starship.

Firefly Aerospace

Operating out of Cedar Park, Texas, Firefly Aerospace focuses on end-to-end space transport. Their Blue Ghost lander is designed for robustness and payload flexibility. Unlike the Nova-C, Blue Ghost uses storable propellants, which simplifies thermal management during the cruise phase. Firefly’s approach emphasizes the ability to deliver payloads to difficult orbits and survive the harsh conditions of the lunar environment. Their successful landing in 2025 cemented their status as a reliable provider. The company leverages its own Alpha launch vehicle for smaller missions but utilizes the SpaceX Falcon 9 for the heavier lunar lander, demonstrating a pragmatic approach to launch procurement.

Astrobotic Technology

Headquartered in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Astrobotic Technology envisions itself as a lunar logistics company. Despite the failure of Peregrine, the company has continued to develop the larger Griffin lander. Astrobotic has also cultivated a niche in lunar mobility, developing the CubeRover, a small, modular rover designed to be affordable for universities and smaller commercial entities. Their strategy involves selling payload space to a wide international customer base, effectively acting as a “DHL for the Moon.” The company creates a distinct “mission patch” culture, rallying public interest around their flights.

Draper

Based in Cambridge, Massachusetts, Draper is not a “New Space” startup but a seasoned defense and aerospace contractor with a lineage tracing back to the Apollo Guidance Computer. For the CLPS program, they act as the prime contractor, managing a team that includes spacecraft designers and operations experts. Their SERIES-2 lander is designed for high-precision landings in rugged terrain. Draper’s involvement signals the maturity of the market, where established defense contractors see value in competing alongside agile startups. Their mission to the far side represents a significant leap in complexity due to the communications constraints.

Future Entrants and The Expanded Pool

The vendor pool also includes companies like Blue Origin , which brings its Blue Moon lander architecture. While initially focused on the Human Landing System, Blue Origin’s inclusion in the payload services pool allows for the delivery of multi-ton cargo, far exceeding the capacity of the current Nova-C or Blue Ghost vehicles. This heavy-lift capability will be essential as the Artemis program moves toward base construction, requiring the delivery of habitats, power stations, and pressurized rovers.

Scientific Payload Analysis

The scientific return from these missions is substantial. The instruments are not mere demonstrations; they are gathering the fundamental data required for planetary science and human survival.

The Hunt for Water: PRIME-1 and MSolo

The Polar Resources Ice Mining Experiment-1 (PRIME-1) is one of the most critical payloads. It consists of a drill (TRIDENT) and a mass spectrometer (MSolo). The drill is designed to penetrate up to one meter below the surface. As it brings up cuttings, the mass spectrometer analyzes the gas escaping from the soil. This “ground truth” is essential. Remote sensing from orbit suggests hydrogen is present, but it does not confirm if it is in the form of water ice, hydroxyls, or hydrated minerals. PRIME-1 provides the definitive chemical analysis.

Seismology: Farside Seismic Suite

The Farside Seismic Suite (FSS), flying on the Draper mission, will place a seismometer on the lunar far side. This is the most radio-quiet location in the solar system. The instrument will listen for moonquakes. Understanding the seismic activity is vital for two reasons: first, to model the Moon’s internal structure (does it have a liquid core?), and second, to assess the safety of building permanent structures. If the Moon is seismically active, habitats must be designed to withstand the tremors.

Electromagnetics: LuSEE-Night

The Lunar Surface Electromagnetics Experiment-Night (LuSEE-Night) is a pathfinder for radio astronomy. The Earth’s ionosphere blocks low-frequency radio waves from the cosmos, and human radio transmissions create massive interference. The lunar far side, shielded from Earth, allows astronomers to observe the “Dark Ages” of the universe – the period before the first stars formed. LuSEE-Night will test the feasibility of deploying large radio telescope arrays on the far side.

Retroreflectors and the Lunar Geodetic Network

Almost every lander carries a Laser Retroreflector Array (LRA). These simple, passive devices allow Earth-based lasers to measure the distance to the Moon with millimeter precision. As more landers arrive, they form a network of fiducial markers. This creates a “GPS-like” reference frame for the Moon. Future orbiters and landers can use these known points to calculate their positions instantly, removing the error bars that currently exist in lunar navigation.

Economic and Geopolitical Implications

The commercial payload program is a tool of soft power and economic strategy. By subsidizing the creation of a lunar logistics fleet, the United States secures a dominant position in the cislunar economy.

The Cislunar Economy

The vision is that these companies will eventually find customers outside of the government. This is already happening. Intuitive Machines and Astrobotic Technology have carried payloads for clothing brands, artists, and private archives. While these are currently novelties, the long-term market includes mining companies, tourism ventures, and international space agencies that cannot afford their own launch programs. For instance, a small nation could buy a $5 million slot on a US lander to send their national flag or a university experiment to the Moon, fostering global goodwill and dependence on US infrastructure.

Strategic Competition

The program operates against the backdrop of intense competition with China. The Chinese Chang’e program has executed a series of flawless robotic landings, including a sample return and the first-ever landing on the far side. The US commercial approach is a counter-strategy. Rather than matching China state-mission for state-mission, the US is flooding the zone with commercial actors. The sheer volume of US commercial activity is intended to establish “norms of behavior” and occupy key strategic sites, such as the “Peaks of Eternal Light” at the south pole, where solar power is continuously available.

The Artemis Accords

The commercial landers effectively extend the reach of the Artemis Accords . When a US commercial company lands, it operates under US supervision and authorization, as required by the Outer Space Treaty. The US interpretation of resource extraction – that you can own the resources you extract – is being operationalized by these missions. As companies like Intuitive Machines demonstrate the extraction of ice or regolith, they set the legal precedent for future space resource utilization.

Technical Challenges and Engineering Realities

The successes of 2025 should not mask the extreme difficulty of the engineering involved. The Moon remains a hostile environment for commercial electronics and propulsion.

Propulsion and Guidance

The descent phase is the most critical. The lander must kill its orbital velocity of 1.7 km/s to zero in just a few minutes. This requires a propulsion system that can deep-throttle. Most rocket engines are designed to be “on” or “off.” A lunar lander engine must vary its thrust dynamically to account for the burning off of fuel mass and the pull of gravity. The guidance software must process optical data in real-time to identify boulders and slopes. The “tipping” of IM-1 illustrated that even with good software, the physical interaction between the landing pads and the regolith is unpredictable.

Thermal Survival

The lunar day/night cycle is brutal. Most early CLPS missions are designed to survive only one lunar day (14 Earth days). Surviving the night requires keeping the battery and electronics warm when the outside temperature drops to -173°C. This typically requires radioisotope heater units (RHUs), which are regulated nuclear materials, or advanced high-density battery chemistries. Firefly Aerospace and others are working on “Night Survival” capabilities to allow for long-duration monitoring stations.

Communications

As missions move to the south pole, the Earth hangs low on the horizon. Terrain features like mountains can easily block the line of sight to Earth, cutting off communications. This necessitates the use of relay satellites. The complexity of managing a lander, a rover, and a relay satellite simultaneously adds layers of failure modes. The 2026 missions to the far side will be the first strict test of this relay architecture for commercial providers.

Summary

The Commercial Lunar Payload Services program has permanently altered the trajectory of space exploration. By stepping back from the role of manufacturer and assuming the role of customer, NASA has catalyzed a new industry. The failures of Peregrine and the partial success of Odysseus served as the necessary tuition for the successes that followed in 2025. Today, with a diverse fleet of landers from Firefly Aerospace , Intuitive Machines , and others traversing the cislunar void, the path to the Moon is no longer a government monopoly. These robotic precursors are currently mapping the terrain, characterizing the resources, and testing the infrastructure that will support the return of astronauts. As the program looks toward the far side and the complex terrain of the south pole in 2026, it stands as a testament to the viability of public-private partnerships in the conquest of the final frontier.

Appendix: Top 10 Questions Answered in This Article

What is the core purpose of the CLPS program?

It is a NASA initiative designed to purchase delivery services to the lunar surface from commercial companies. The goal is to reduce the cost of exploration, accelerate technology development, and support the Artemis program with robotic scouts.

How does the IDIQ contract model function?

The Indefinite-Delivery/Indefinite-Quantity contract creates a pool of pre-approved vendors. When the agency has payloads ready, it issues a task order, and these companies compete to win the specific delivery contract, shifting cost risks to the private sector.

Which mission achieved the first fully successful commercial landing?

While Intuitive Machines landed first in 2024, their vehicle tipped over. Firefly Aerospace achieved the first fully successful, upright soft landing with their Blue Ghost mission in March 2025.

What happened to the VIPER rover mission?

The VIPER rover was cancelled by the space agency in July 2024 due to budget escalations. The associated Griffin Mission One, operated by Astrobotic Technology , was reconfigured to fly without the rover and is scheduled for mid-2026.

What is the significance of the PRIME-1 payload?

PRIME-1 consists of a drill and mass spectrometer designed to hunt for water ice. It provides the ground truth needed to verify orbital data, confirming if accessible water exists for future astronaut use.

Why are missions targeting the Lunar South Pole?

The South Pole contains Permanently Shadowed Regions (PSRs) that are cold enough to trap water ice. It also has “Peaks of Eternal Light” that offer near-continuous solar power, making it the prime location for a future base.

What role does the Lunar Far Side play in the 2026 manifest?

The far side is the target for the Draper and Blue Ghost 2 missions. It offers a radio-quiet environment for astronomy and unique geological features like the Schrödinger basin, but requires relay satellites for communication.

How does the program impact the US-China space competition?

The program allows the US to maintain a high cadence of lunar activity, occupying key sites and setting precedents for commercial resource use. It counters China’s state-led Chang’e program by fostering a robust private industrial base.

What are the primary technical risks for these landers?

The main risks include the precision of the powered descent (soft landing) and thermal management. Surviving the extreme cold of the lunar night or the heat of the lunar day without failing is a significant engineering hurdle.

Who are the major companies currently operating in the program?

The primary active providers are Intuitive Machines , Firefly Aerospace , and Astrobotic Technology . Draperand others like Blue Origin are also part of the vendor pool for future heavy-lift or complex missions.

Appendix: Top 10 Frequently Searched Questions Answered in This Article

When is the next commercial moon landing?

Following the activity in 2025, the next major landings are scheduled for the first half of 2026. This includes the Intuitive Machines IM-3 mission targeting the Reiner Gamma swirl.

Did the Peregrine lander crash?

The Peregrine lander did not crash on the Moon; it burned up in Earth’s atmosphere. A fuel leak shortly after launch prevented it from attempting a lunar landing, so it was directed to re-enter Earth safely.

How much does a CLPS mission cost?

The cost varies by mission complexity, but contracts often range from $70 million to over $100 million. This is significantly cheaper than traditional government-owned missions which could cost upwards of $500 million to $1 billion.

Is SpaceX involved in these missions?

Yes, SpaceX serves as the launch provider for many of these missions. Companies like Intuitive Machines and Firefly Aerospace have used the Falcon 9 rocket to boost their landers toward the Moon.

What is the difference between Blue Ghost and Nova-C?

Nova-C uses cryogenic liquid methane and oxygen, offering high performance but difficult thermal management. Blue Ghost uses storable propellants, which are easier to handle over long durations but offer lower specific impulse.

Can these landers survive the lunar night?

Most early landers were designed for single-day operations (14 Earth days). However, newer missions like Blue Ghost 2 and future updates are incorporating technology to survive the two-week freezing lunar night.

Why was the VIPER rover cancelled?

The project was cancelled because of cost growth and delays in the supply chain. The agency decided that the funds would be better spent on other missions, though the Griffin lander contract was kept to demonstrate the landing capability.

What is the “Shackleton Connecting Ridge”?

It is a narrow ridge near the lunar south pole that connects the Shackleton crater to the de Gerlache crater. It is a high-priority landing site due to its proximity to shadowed regions that may hold ice.

How do these missions help astronauts?

They map the terrain to prevent astronauts from landing on boulders or unstable ground. They also measure radiation levels so engineers can build better spacesuits and habitats to protect the crew.

Are there international payloads on these US landers?

Yes, the commercial nature allows the companies to fly payloads from other nations. Past and future missions include rovers and instruments from countries like Mexico, Canada, and various European nations.