NASA is falling behind in the Race to the Moon
NASA is on track to lose the race to the moon, allowing China and India to take prime territory
NASA’s cost and schedule headwinds on Artemis—centered on SLS and Orion—are now strategic risks, not mere programmatics. Even NASA’s leadership has flagged affordability, noting that “at $4 billion a launch, it becomes very challenging to have a moon program,” a tension between politics and economics that keeps widening.
Low flight rates compound risk. NASA’s independent safety advisors have repeatedly warned that programs with infrequent launches—explicitly including SLS and Orion—carry elevated safety and schedule exposure, while commercial systems learn faster through high cadence.
Former administrator Jim Bridenstine told Congress it is “highly unlikely that we will land on the Moon before China,” pointing at Artemis complexity and timelines. Current leadership has pushed back, but the underlying economics and tempo remain unresolved.
Meanwhile, China is executing a tight, purpose-built lunar stack. The Long March 10 has completed a seven-engine static fire toward crewed lunar missions, alongside pad abort tests for the Mengzhou spacecraft and takeoff/landing trials for the Lanyue lander—hardware steps aligned to a landing before 2030.
This methodical, cost-focused approach—building lunar capability incrementally and designing a lunar rocket for the mission—contrasts with America’s politically constrained architecture choices. If the U.S. optimizes for “first,” China may still win by optimizing for “sustainable and affordable.”
Unless NASA pivots to lower-cost, higher-cadence pathways that leverage commercial innovation, Beijing’s patient, economically rational plan could put taikonauts on the surface first—and keep them there longer.