(CNN) 鈥� Calls for the United States to return astronauts to the moon before the end of the decade have been increasingly loud and frequent, emanating from bipartisan lawmakers and science advocates alike. But underlying that drumbeat is a quagmire of epic proportions.
NASA plans to use SpaceX鈥檚 Starship 鈥� the largest rocket system ever constructed 鈥� for a key portion of the lunar journey, yet it鈥檚 still unclear whether the vehicle will work. And a fierce competitor is nipping at the agency鈥檚 heels.
鈥淭he China National Space Administration will almost certainly walk on the moon in the next five years,鈥� Bill Nye, the entertainer of 鈥淪cience Guy鈥� fame and CEO of the nonprofit exploration advocacy group The Planetary Society, during a recent demonstration against the Trump Administration鈥檚 plans to . 鈥淭his is a turning point. This is a key point in this history of space exploration.鈥�
Starship is still in the nascent stages of a long and laborious development process. So far, parts of the vehicle have failed in dramatic fashion during six of its 10 test flights. Another prototype recently . SpaceX is set to launch its next test, Flight 11, as soon as 7:15 p.m. ET Monday from the company鈥檚 South Texas launch facilities.
The megarocket has yet to hit several key testing milestones. These include figuring out how to top off Starship鈥檚 fuel as it sits parked in orbit around Earth. Such a step is necessary given the vehicle鈥檚 design and enormous size 鈥� but it鈥檚 never been attempted before with any spacecraft.
Adding to the uncertainty is that no one knows exactly how many tankers full of fuel SpaceX will need to launch to give Starship enough gas for a moon-landing mission, which NASA has planned for mid-2027.
One SpaceX executive in 2024 that number 鈥渨ill roughly be 10-ish.鈥�
But, more recently, engineers at NASA鈥檚 Johnson Space Center in Houston estimated that a single moon landing could require SpaceX to launch more than 40 tankers 鈥� which are Starship vehicles designed to carry fuel, according to one former NASA official who spoke on condition of anonymity.
That estimate may be specific to the current version of Starship, referred to as Version 2 or V2, that SpaceX is flying, the source noted. And the company is expected to debut an upgraded version of the vehicle after its next test mission on Monday that could change those predictions.
Still, even if the number of refueling flights is somewhere between 10 and 40, in general, the path NASA has chosen to return to the moon is 鈥渆xtraordinarily complex,鈥� Jim Bridenstine, who was NASA administrator during President Donald Trump鈥檚 first term, said at a Senate committee hearing in .
鈥淭his is an architecture that no NASA administrator that I鈥檓 aware of would have selected had they had the choice,鈥� Bridenstine said, referring to the decision to use Starship as the vehicle that will land astronauts on the moon. That choice was made in when the space agency was without a Senate-confirmed leader.
Acting NASA administrator Sean Duffy responded to the Senate hearing during a September 4 town hall with agency employees, saying the hearing amounted to 鈥渟hade thrown on all of us.鈥�
鈥淢aybe I am competitive. I was angry about it,鈥� Duffy said. 鈥淚鈥檒l be damned if that is the story that we write. We are going to beat the Chinese to the moon.鈥�
A spokesperson for current NASA leadership declined to provide comment for this story, citing the government .
Why NASA isn鈥檛 repeating Apollo
Given Starship鈥檚 gargantuan size and refueling needs, NASA鈥檚 road map for its planned moon-landing mission, called Artemis III, appears far more convoluted than the Apollo missions of the 20thcentury.
On those lunar treks decades ago, NASA launched a single rocket 鈥� the Saturn V 鈥� that had everything the astronauts needed already on board, including the Apollo crew capsule and the landers, such as the , they rode to the moon鈥檚 surface.
NASA is not repeating that streamlined approach for several reasons.
For one, spaceflight is not as simple as dragging out blueprints from old missions. The supply chains, construction methods and institutional capabilities that built the Apollo launch vehicles no longer exist.
Even if NASA could resurrect its retro rockets, the space agency has made it clear that path wouldn鈥檛 align with its goals.
NASA hopes the Artemis program will accomplish far more difficult missions than Apollo, including allowing humans to visit the moon鈥檚 largely unexplored south pole region, where researchers believe water is stored in ice form beneath the dusty surface. It鈥檚 trickier to land there due to the rough terrain and a flight path that requires far more energy. But water and other lunar resources could be harvested and used to sustain a moon base where astronauts would live and work.
The goal 鈥� as NASA leadership frequently says 鈥� is not to merely plant a flag on the moon but to pave the way for a permanent crewed operation.
Such a vision requires far larger and perhaps more versatile lunar landers, according to former NASA Administrator Bill Nelson, who helmed the agency under President Joe Biden.
鈥淔or the research that we鈥檙e going to do on the surface of the moon, particularly at a very difficult place to get 鈥� the south pole 鈥� it takes a larger lander,鈥� Nelson told CNN during a September phone call.
鈥淵ou just simply can鈥檛 take everything with you,鈥� like the Apollo astronauts did, he added, 鈥渂ecause of the law of physics.鈥�
Artemis III: A twisted path
Still, critics argue, it鈥檚 possible for NASA to carry out a moon mission that 鈥� while not as simple as Apollo 鈥� is at least less complicated than relying on Starship.
Under the current road map for Artemis III, the mission will begin with the launch of a single, bare-bones Starship vehicle that will serve as a refueling depot. That spacecraft will sit in orbit as it waits for additional Starships, also flying with nothing but propellant as cargo, to launch, dock with the depot and pass off more fuel.
Whether it requires 10 launches or 40, the process must be carried out quickly to counter the effects of fuel boiling off, noted Doug Loverro, a consultant who previously was NASA鈥檚 associate administrator for human exploration. Loverro from NASA, as CNN previously reported, because he improperly communicated with an Artemis contractor.
The cryogenic fuels Starship requires must be kept at super-cold temperatures or else they will evaporate. And it鈥檚 not clear just how much propellant may boil off as it is moved from one place to another in space.
鈥淣obody knows how efficient the transfer is going to be,鈥� Loverro said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 nearly an impossible question to answer.鈥�
Once the refueling depot is filled up, SpaceX would then launch a Starship vehicle that is equipped to carry humans 鈥� called the Starship HLS, or Human Landing System 鈥� which would be decked out with all the systems necessary to support life.
Only after the Starship HLS docks with the refueling depot and is topped off with propellant can it begin its trek to the moon.
Meanwhile, NASA astronauts will launch into orbit aboard a different vehicle: the Orion spacecraft, which rides to space atop NASA鈥檚 (SLS) rocket.
Following launch, Orion separates from SLS and begins its own journey to orbit around the moon. Once there, the Orion spacecraft will link up with the Starship lander, docking while orbiting above the moon鈥檚 surface. Two of the astronauts will then transfer to the Starship HLS, which will carry them down to the moon鈥檚 south pole, a treacherous area pockmarked with steep craters.
After about a week, the astronauts would then climb back aboard Starship HLS and launch into lunar orbit where they would once again dock with Orion. The Orion capsule would fly the astronauts back to Earth, making a splashdown landing in the Pacific Ocean.
If NASA achieves its hope of carrying out this mission in mid-2027, it would beat China鈥檚 goal of pulling off an astronaut landing by 2030.
The politics of Starship
NASA鈥檚 plan, however, is 鈥渋ncredibly hard, complex鈥� and likely a decade away from reality, Loverro said.
From his vantage point, Loverro said NASA鈥檚 decision to use Starship as the lunar lander for the Artemis III mission was made in error.
SpaceX made big promises on paper, he said, referring to the bid the company submitted to secure the contract for the job. And while Loverro said he believes the company will eventually deliver on its pledges to make Starship operational 鈥� he also thinks there is no way it will have the vehicle ready before China lands astronauts on the moon.
SpaceX did not respond to a request for comment for this story, nor does the company typically respond to requests for information.
One former NASA official close to the selection process told CNN that Starship beat out its competitors in a series of that a team of NASA experts conducted. The assessments evaluated Starship鈥檚 capabilities as well as costs to the government 鈥� an important consideration because NASA had limited funds to dole out.
鈥淚t was not like this was a controversial decision at that stage鈥� from the agency鈥檚 point of view, the source said, adding that NASA would have liked to have chosen two companies to compete to build lunar landers but simply did not have the money.
SpaceX鈥檚 competitor, Blue Origin, sued the federal government over the decision, alleging the space agency unfairly favored SpaceX. But a judge ultimately upheld NASA鈥檚 decision. (After Nelson lobbied Congress and secured additional funds, NASA brought Blue Origin on as a in 2023 to build lunar landers for use later in the Artemis program.)
SpaceX鈥檚 Starship promised not just to get the job done for the moon landing 鈥� but to be transformative for the space industry. The massive rocket could conduct missions NASA could previously only dream of.
Still, critics say, Starship was likely chosen for its future promise, not for its potential to perform under an ever-looming deadline.
鈥淚t 鈥� quite frankly 鈥� doesn鈥檛 make a lot of sense if you鈥檙e trying to go first to the moon, this time to beat China,鈥� Bridenstine said during his testimony in September.
However, Duffy, the acting NASA chief, indicated that the space agency remains confident in SpaceX.
鈥淚 think it鈥檚 important to be honest, and if I thought we were going to have concerns 鈥� I would tell you,鈥� Duffy told CBS 草莓传媒 in August. 鈥淎nd if there鈥檚 a point that I do have concerns, I鈥檒l make that public.鈥�
鈥楩iguring out we have a problem鈥�
Despite a growing chorus of voices expressing concern that pinning the outcome of a moon race on Starship may be a losing bet, not many stakeholders are ready to decry the plan publicly or recommend shifting course.
In fact, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, a key figure in US space policy, made it clear during a September hearing that he thinks it is too late to ditch Starship for an alternative plan: 鈥淎ny drastic changes in NASA鈥檚 architecture at this stage threaten United States leadership in space,鈥� Cruz said then.
Behind closed doors, however, some space industry leaders have voiced deep concerns.
When asked about the public discourse, Loverro said that it鈥檚 possible that the gravity of the issue may not have fully sunk in across space industry leadership.
鈥淚 think we鈥檙e really at step one of the 12-step process of figuring out we have a problem,鈥� he said.
Still, others remain optimistic, pointing to SpaceX鈥檚 remarkable success across other projects it has worked on with NASA, such as the International Space Station鈥檚 .
During a September 21 meeting of NASA鈥檚 , member Paul Hill, who had visited SpaceX鈥檚 Starship development facilities in August, said the timeline for this vehicle is 鈥渟ignificantly challenged.鈥�
The ASAP committee expects the vehicle will be 鈥測ears late鈥� to the 2027 deadline, Hill said.
In a September 23 statement responding to the meeting, NASA press secretary Bethany Stevens said the agency 鈥渁ppreciates the opportunity to hear from our advisory groups and stakeholders. 鈥hese discussions are important to helping NASA safely execute our missions.鈥�
However, Hill also complimented SpaceX, repeating sentiments frequently voiced by space industry leaders and stakeholders: Even if SpaceX is behind schedule, the company has a long track record of excellence and tends to get things done even when conventional wisdom suggests it will fail.
鈥淭here is a multifaceted, self-perpetuating genius, for lack of a better way of saying it, at SpaceX,鈥� Hill said, heaping praise on the company鈥檚 business model and development approach. 鈥淭here is no competitor, whether government or industry, that has this full combination of factors.鈥�
The-CNN-Wire
鈩� & 漏 2025 Cable 草莓传媒 Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
