NASA’s plan to land on the Moon monthly: What must change in two years

NASA’s ambitious timeline to land on the Moon as often as 21 times between now and late 2028 demands sweeping changes to how the agency selects, funds, and monitors lunar landers. The push for frequent missions—including both crewed and robotic landings—comes as the agency accelerates its Artemis program while preparing for a future lunar base. Yet recent history shows clear roadblocks: three of the last four US attempts to land on the Moon have ended in failure, highlighting systemic challenges in lander development, supply chain reliability, and project management.

Why NASA’s lunar lander strategy needs a reset

At the heart of NASA’s plan is a shift from sporadic, high-stakes missions to a more frequent cadence of landings. This requires not only robust lander designs but also a streamlined procurement process that can adapt to rapid iteration and unforeseen technical hurdles. The agency’s current approach relies on separate contracts for crewed and cargo landers, with SpaceX and Blue Origin leading the human-rated systems under the Human Landing System program. However, the broader ecosystem—including small robotic landers—must also mature to support payloads for scouting, resource extraction, and technology demonstrations.

The stakes are high. NASA’s goal isn’t just to land but to establish a sustainable presence, which means delivering critical infrastructure ahead of crewed missions. This includes landing rovers, power systems, and habitats during the two-week lunar night, a period where temperatures plummet and solar power becomes unreliable. Achieving this requires landers that can operate reliably in extreme conditions, a challenge that has eluded recent attempts.

Fixing the supply chain and oversight gaps

One of the biggest obstacles to NASA’s lunar ambitions is the fragility of its supply chains. Delays in component deliveries have repeatedly derailed missions, forcing teams to adjust timelines or, in some cases, scrap launches altogether. NASA officials acknowledge that better oversight of industrial partners is essential to prevent bottlenecks. This includes stricter vendor management, real-time tracking of critical parts, and contingency plans for when suppliers fall behind.

The agency is also exploring ways to diversify its supplier base, reducing reliance on a handful of key manufacturers. By expanding the pool of qualified vendors, NASA hopes to create competition that drives innovation and resilience. However, this transition won’t happen overnight. It requires investment in smaller aerospace firms, standardized interfaces for payload integration, and transparent communication across the supply network.

Lessons from recent failures

The past year has underscored the risks of underestimating the challenges of lunar landings. Technical glitches, software errors, and propulsion system malfunctions have all contributed to mission setbacks. For example, a 2025 attempt by a US-based team failed due to a misfired thruster, while another commercial mission in 2024 suffered a guidance system failure during descent. These incidents reveal common vulnerabilities: inadequate testing, over-reliance on unproven technologies, and insufficient redundancy in critical systems.

NASA is responding by tightening requirements for lander developers. This includes mandatory end-to-end testing in lunar-like environments, independent verification of flight software, and rigorous failure mode analyses. The agency is also pushing for more data sharing among teams to identify patterns in recurring issues. These measures aim to prevent past mistakes from repeating, but they add complexity—and cost—to already strained budgets.

The path forward: balancing speed and safety

To meet its lunar landing goals, NASA must strike a delicate balance between accelerating timelines and maintaining safety standards. The agency’s leadership has emphasized that frequent landings are not just about speed but about learning and adapting. Each mission, whether successful or not, provides invaluable data to refine future attempts.

Yet the pressure is on. With Artemis missions already delayed by years, NASA cannot afford prolonged setbacks. The agency is reportedly evaluating hybrid approaches, such as combining crewed and cargo missions where possible, to maximize efficiency. Additionally, international partnerships—particularly with agencies like ESA and JAXA—are being leveraged to share resources and spread technical risks.

The next 30 months will determine whether NASA’s lunar ambitions are achievable or overly optimistic. Success will hinge on more than engineering breakthroughs; it will require systemic reforms in procurement, supply chain management, and project oversight. If these changes take hold, the agency could pave the way for a new era of sustained lunar exploration.