Why the 1st private lunar lander failed

[Admin]

Astrobotic says the Peregrine lunar lander, aka the first private moon mission, failed because of a faulty valve.

Why the 1st private lunar lander failed : Read more

 

[BT2024]

The analysis shows that there was at least one known single point of failure. In IT you create training, redundancy, failovers and backups to deal with single point failures. In the early days NASA would fly twin probes and landers. Perversely neither failed when they flew twins that come to mind. These days the agency appears to still make a second spacecraft but it is a test article that doesn't fly. Another approach could be to try and design spacecraft so single point of failure mechanisms are accessible for testing and replacement. Valves could be cycled like when the propulsion systems are cycled in wet dress rehearsals, spin tests and hot fire tests before launch. Crewed spacecraft could be repaired in flight. Even robotic spacecraft someday. You'll say the contingencies will add to the cost of the mission, but do you want to complete the mission the first time out; or have an inexpensive test flight followed by a second inexpensive flight years later. Still building and flying two spacecraft. So how is the risk of mission failure calculated for either of those scenarios? And is even the possible delay of time until a mission success relevant in any exploration venture? You will say yes it is because economic inflation puffs up the cost, but it also puffs up the revenue. The mission is not more or less affordable. You might say yes because you want the results sooner than later. You want to know. Thats the point of exploring. But someday, we will start trying to build probes that won't breakdown for hundreds of years while slow boating to the nearest star systems or nebulae. The science and engineering teams for those missions will be generational. Examples, Voyagers and Pioneers. Fun to think about.