Skip to content

DN-001 L: Sustained, site-specific sub-meter scale imaging of lunar south pole exploration zones and sites

Repeated optical imaging of South Pole landing regions, finer than 0.5 m/pixel and under changing light, at least weekly for a year. LRO's camera data is enough to land a nominal mission, so this gap is about better design margins, not about whether landing is possible. NASA uses this gap as its worked example in the ACR25 white paper. It is named in the Moon Base Users Guide (near-term), under two challenges (Data gaps spreadsheet, DN-001 L; ACR25 data-gaps white paper, p. 3; Users Guide, p. 12).

Quotations below are from row DN-001 L of the data gaps spreadsheet unless marked otherwise. ADD Rev C's Appendix E prints the same record as a table, and it matches the row field for field (ADD Rev C, p. 265). The white paper's Figure Three reproduces that ADD page: it carries the heading "Appendix E: Architecture-Driven Data Gaps" and the page number 265 (p. 3).

Description

"Produce optical maps or a set of optical images of the lunar south pole region that can be used to identify surface features, obstacles, and hazards across all Artemis landing regions. These maps and images should be capable of supporting landing site/ellipse design, element placement, and surface traverse planning. Multiple images of the same site should be captured at varying lighting conditions and be higher resolution than currently available."

Need driver and data type

  • Need driver: Lunar Exploration Surface Site Characterization
  • Data type: Orbit-to-Surface Imagery. The white paper says data gaps "are agnostic to how the data should be collected" (ACR25 data-gaps white paper, p. 1).

Target measurement parameters

"Ensure sustained availability of high spatial resolution ( <0.5 m/pixel preferred) optical imaging of lunar south pole exploration regions. Additionally, the system should have sufficiently high temporal resolution to collect imagery under varying lighting conditions enabling hazard avoidance, precision landing, and traverse planning. Images should be taken in at least 1-week intervals (every 48 hours preferred) over the course of an entire year."

Current state of data

"No additional orbital imagery is necessary to land and conduct a nominal Artemis surface mission. Data collected by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera (LROC) Narrow Angle Camera (NAC) over the last 15 years is the primary data set being used to plan missions in the HLR and initial FE segment. The highest resolution panchromatic imagery of Artemis landing regions from LROC NAC is ~.5 m/pixel. NASA has the ShadowCam instrument on board the Korean Pathfinder Lunar Orbiter (KPLO) which is designed to collect high resolution images of Permanently Shadow Regions (PSRs) poles, as high as 1.7 m/pixel. However, this is only in low light locations and thus would not provide optimal imagery of a lander or surface operations in illuminated lunar regions. Additionally, JAXA Kaguya orbiter has scanned the lunar surface ~8-10m/pixel. Currently in orbit, is the Indian Space Research Organization's (ISRO) Chandrayaan-2 Orbiter High Resolution Camera (OHRC) which images the lunar surface at ~.3 m/pixel at select areas of the lunar south pole region."

Impact if data is unavailable

"Additional orbital imagery is not required to land and conduct a nominal surface mission at the lunar south pole. High resolution data collected by LROC NAC over the last 15 years is the primary data set being used to plan missions in the HLR and initial FE segment. However, additional optical imagery is desirable to inform surface element design, such as power systems, energy storage and user operating power especially for winter hibernation. Lack of continued high-resolution data could lead to Element loss due to power failure in winter, unsafe landings, or mission-ending mobility hazards. Overcompensating for uncertainty adds prohibitive mass, while underestimating risks threatens survival and operational success."

Benefits if data is available

"Enables longer planning safer landings, optimized surface operations, and more accurate traverse planning. Improves situational awareness and hazard avoidance, increasing confidence in mission success."

Traceability

  • Objectives: LPS-01 LM, SE-05 LM, LI-03 L (codes as printed; the sheet gives no titles)
  • Segment: Human Lunar Return (HLR): "The M2M segment during which the data is needed, but not necessarily when it is collected" (Data gaps spreadsheet, Key sheet). A segment is not a Moon Base phase.

Priority

None. The spreadsheet has no priority field, and the Users Guide calls the data-gap list "not comprehensive or prioritized" (Users Guide, p. 11).

Moon Base relevance

The Users Guide names DN-001 L for two challenges (Users Guide, p. 12):

  • "Landing Safely and Accurately on the Lunar Surface" (headline challenge). Its knowledge challenge has two sentences: "Observe the lunar surface to identify surface blocks, such as rocks and craters; map surface topology; and characterize variance in gravitational fields to enable precise and safe landings." and "Characterize and predict the properties of a plume-surface interaction (PSI) event, including ejecta trajectory, particle size distribution, and resulting surface site alterations to evaluate impact risk to mission and nearby assets." The guide lists DN-001 L, DN-014 L, DN-002 L, DN-017 L and DN-018 L under both sentences together and does not say which sentence each serves. The challenge's technology half cites tech gap #1101.
  • "Securing sites": "Identifying, selecting, and landing at individual sites requires more data about the lunar surface, including regolith properties, high-resolution imagery, mapping, and resource locations." Also cited: DN-002 L to DN-010 L, DN-013 L and DN-014 L. No tech gap.

The guide ties its challenges to "near-term Moon Base development efforts": "Missions during phase one of Moon Base development offer opportunities to collect data and mature technologies to enable essential phase two and phase three capabilities" (p. 11). See Technology and knowledge challenges.

Note. The spreadsheet says more imagery is "not required to land and conduct a nominal surface mission", yet the Users Guide lists this gap under the landing challenge. The two are compatible: the spreadsheet calls the data "desirable" for element design and margins.

Sources

Data gaps spreadsheet, DN-001 L · ACR25 data-gaps white paper, pp. 1, 3 · Users Guide, pp. 11–12 · ADD Rev C, p. 265