February 2025 workshop: Foundational Exploration gaps (industry and academia deck)¶
Document: 2025-ia-workshop-foundational-exploration-gaps.pdf, 15 slides, 1,978,522 bytes, from
https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/, fetched 2026-10-01T18:28:05Z (sources/manifest.csv).
Every slide's footer reads "February 2025" and "Moon to Mars Architecture Workshops". Slides 4 and 5 carry
an "INDUSTRY AND ACADEMIA WORKSHOP" tab (image). It is the industry and academia workshop's "Foundational
Exploration Gaps" set, which NASA's Architecture Workshops page
describes as "Highlights technology and capability gaps for the Foundational Exploration segment".
Text: sources/text/docs/2025-02-2025-ia-workshop-foundational-exploration-gaps.txt; images in
sources/raw/slides/2025-02-2025-ia-workshop-foundational-exploration-gaps/.
The copy. The international partners' deck is a near-copy with 11 slides (71% of its text in this one, per
sources/workshops-screening.md). It adds a column, "Expressed Partner Interest", to the two gap tables, and it
drops the STMD talk. Those dots are shown in the tables below, marked as the international deck's; everything
else that differs is on its own page:
Foundational Exploration gaps, international deck.
Rank and method. A briefing, not the architecture of record (SCHEMA, "Workshop slides"). It is older than ADD Rev C: two months after Revision B (12/13/2024) and ten months before Rev C (ADD Rev C, p. 3). Its content goes in "In the February 2025 workshop briefing" sections on topic pages, not under "Changes since Rev C". All 15 slides were read in the text layer. The images of all four text-poor slides (1, 6, 8, 12) were viewed, and so were slides 2, 3, 4, 5, 11 and 15, whose tables, chart and panel the text layer scrambles. The text has no "Moon Base", "CUI", "Pre-Decisional" or "export" (searched); the deck predates the Moon Base.
Summary. A panel's slides on what the Foundational Exploration segment still lacks, from four NASA offices. ESDMD's Strategy and Architecture Office defines an architecture gap two ways and lists 11 high-priority and 16 secondary "integrated gaps" for the segment, by sub-architecture, with the elements each would need. Its worked example is "Power Sharing at Lunar South Pole": seven functions, ">10 kW", and "Estimate 2-4 ton relocatable systems". SMD lists six high-priority gaps for science and five coming studies. STMD presents its 2024 ranking of 187 civil space technology shortfalls, with "Survive and operate through the lunar night" ranked first, and its top 30. SOMD points to NASA's LEO Microgravity Strategy. The "integrated gaps" are a list in no other source: they are neither the 56 technology gaps of Rev B nor the data gaps.
Slides¶
| Slide | Title (as printed) | Content |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | "Gaps and Needs: Opportunities for Partnership" | Title; "Nujoud Merancy, Deputy Associate Administrator, Strategy and Architecture Office, NASA – ESDMD – SAO" (image) |
| 2 | "Architecture Gap Definition" | Two kinds of gap, with a chart and four example functions |
| 3 | "Foundational Exploration Gap Example" | Power Sharing at Lunar South Pole |
| 4 | "High Priority Gaps" / "Foundational Exploration Segment" | Eleven integrated gaps |
| 5 | "Secondary Gaps" / "Foundational Exploration Segment" | Sixteen integrated gaps |
| 6 | "Foundational Exploration Capability Gaps for Science" | Section title; "Joel Kearns, Deputy Associate Administrator for Exploration, Science Mission Directorate, NASA - SMD" (image) |
| 7 | "Key Gaps Existing for Science" / "Foundational Exploration Segment" | SMD's gaps and studies |
| 8 | "Foundational Exploration Capability Gaps, Partnership Opportunities" | Section title; "Walt Engelund, Deputy Associate Administrator for Programs, Science Mission Directorate, NASA - STMD" (image; see oddities) |
| 9 | "2024 STMD Technology Shortfall Rankings" | The ranking |
| 10 | "Top Lessons Learned" | STMD's lessons |
| 11 | "Integrated Top 30 Shortfalls Compared to Stakeholder Rank" | The top 30 |
| 12 | "Connections to LEO Microgravity Strategy" | Section title; "Steve Bowen, Director, Cross-Directorate Technical Integration Office, Science Mission Directorate, NASA - SOMD" (image) |
| 13 | "LEO Microgravity Strategy" | The strategy |
| 14 | "LEO Exploration Goals" | Three goals |
| 15 | "Foundational Exploration: Capability Gaps, Partnership Opportunities" | "PANEL", "Moon to Mars Architecture Workshop", "Room Name"; moderator "Clark Esty, Executive Officer to the Associate Administrator, ESDMD"; panelists Merancy (ESDMD, SAO), Kearns (SMD), Engelund ("Deputy Associate Administrator for Programs, STMD") and Bowen ("Director, Cross-Directorate Integration Office, SOMD") (image) |
Architecture gap definition (slide 2)¶
"NASA continues to assess needs to achieve the Moon to Mars Objectives". "Gaps can be identified two ways:"
- "Unfilled Use Cases/Functions"
- "Performance gap with only partially addressed capability"
A chart, read from the image, plots "MOPs/MOEs (Level of Capabilities)" up to a "Target State" against "Objective Satisfaction (# of UCs) (Types of Capabilities)" up to "All UCs". A blue block labeled "Value" fills part of it; the rest is labeled "Gaps". One red ring marks the space above the block (missing level of capability), one the space to its right (missing use cases). Two tables are tied to them by arrows:
| "Example Performance Gap" | "Example Capability Gap from ADD" |
|---|---|
| FN-H-102 L "Enable a pressurized, habitable environment on the lunar surface for moderate duration (month+) use" | FN-P-101 L "Generate power in the south pole region on the lunar surface" |
| FN-X-103 L "Provide crew countermeasure system(s) to support the crew for moderate durations (month+) on the lunar surface" | FN-P-202 L "Store energy in the south pole region on the lunar surface" |
The slide doesn't say why the two habitation functions count as partly met. "Moderate duration" is the 2024 wording; the December 2025 lists say "mid-duration" (Lunar function allocation).
Against the allocation (the wiki's comparison). All four example functions are in ADD Rev C's list of unallocated functions, B.5 (pp. 170, 174, 183), including the two the slide calls performance gaps (Lunar function allocation). They were also "Unallocated" in NASA's 2024 table, which is as old as the slide. The wiki works that out: 75 of the 2025 table's 76 Unallocated functions were Unallocated in 2024 as well, and the one that wasn't is FN-M-402 L (Lunar function allocation). So the slide's two kinds don't line up with "in the unallocated list" and "allocated but short". This bears on open question 65. The slide's two kinds read like the Users Guide's two halves of a functional gap, "unallocated … or … need additional performance" (p. 9), but the deck predates the guide and doesn't mention it.
Another use of "architecture gap". Here the phrase covers unfilled use cases and functions and shortfalls in performance. In the same workshops it also meant the technology gaps (Architecture Updates, slide 14). See RT-1 and open question 48.
The worked example: Power Sharing at Lunar South Pole (slide 3)¶
Read from the image. "Key Functions", the first three rows in a darker orange than the other four (the slide gives no key):
| Function | Title (as printed) |
|---|---|
| FN-P-101 L | "Generate power in the south pole region on the lunar surface" |
| FN-P-202 L | "Store energy in the south pole region on the lunar surface" |
| FN-P-301 L | "Distribute power in the south pole region on the lunar surface" |
| FN-P-401 L | "Provide power for deployed surface utilization payloads(s) and/or equipment" |
| FN-P-402 L | "Provide power for deployed external surface utilization payloads(s) and/or equipment for long durations (months to years+)" |
| FN-U-414 L | "Provide resources to condition refrigerated sample containers on the lunar surface" |
| FN-U-415 L | "Provide resources to condition frozen sample containers on the lunar surface" |
"Key Performance Targets": "Dist. Power on Lunar Surface", ">10 kW estimated distributable power in South Pole region". The box beside it:
- "Power generation, storage, and distribution to exploration assets at the lunar South Pole sites, supporting sunlight and eclipse periods."
- "Minimum closure 2 major elements:" "Power generation and/or storage of 10kW"; "Power distribution/interface/cabling system"
- "Stretch and/ or alternate capabilities:" "Redundant power systems at multiple locations"; "Power system ranges from 3 to 10 kW or greater"
- "Estimate 2-4 ton relocatable systems"
Banner: "Multiple ways to address this gap are possible, characterizing the need and constraints enable collaboration".
What Rev C did with these functions (the wiki's comparison). Rev C added the Lunar Nuclear Fission System ten months later and mapped three functions to it: FN-P-101 L, FN-P-301 L and FN-P-401 L, all three on this slide. FN-P-202 L, FN-P-402 L, FN-U-414 L and FN-U-415 L are not on it (Lunar Nuclear Fission System; ADD Rev C, p. 158). The slide names no element or technology, and Rev C doesn't cite the slide. The topic page is Foundational Exploration.
High-priority and secondary gaps (slides 4–5)¶
Transcribed from the images, in printed order (the text layer splits the rows from their element needs). The last column is from the international deck only: a heading "Expressed Partner Interest" and black dots, as printed. Neither deck gives a key, so the wiki doesn't read the dots as a count of partners or agencies. An empty cell means no dots.
"High Priority Gaps" (slide 4):
| Sub-Architecture | Integrated Gap | Summary Element Need | Expressed Partner Interest (international deck) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Power | Power Sharing at Lunar South Pole | 2 Major (power + interface/cabling), stretch 2-3 more elements | ●●●● |
| Mobility | High-Capacity Mobility at Lunar South Pole | 2-3 Major Elements | ●●●●●●● |
| Logistics | Logistics Delivery and Mgmt Systems | 1 major/1 minor both with repeat production | |
| Logistics | Water and Gas Transfer on Lunar Surface | multiple sub-elements with repeat production | |
| Transportation | Large Cargo Delivery to the Lunar Surface | 2-3 major elements | ●●● |
| Transportation | Large Cargo Return from NRHO to Earth or from Lunar Surface to Earth | 2 major elements, return vehicle & Gateway docking mitigation | ● |
| Habitation | Extended Crew Habitation at Lunar South Pole | 1 -2 major elements, multiple sub-elements/systems | ●● |
| Habitation | Extended Crew Habitation in NRHO | 1 major element | ● |
| Utilization | Resource Identification on Lunar Surface | Pending Utilization Analysis | |
| Utilization | Deep Subsurface Sampling on Lunar Surface | Pending Utilization Analysis | |
| Utilization | Storage of Cryogenic Samples | Pending Utilization Analysis |
Banner: "Priority defined by the significance of closure to objective satisfaction and overall mission capability achieved".
"Secondary Gaps" (slide 5; two columns of eight in this deck, read left column first; one column in the international deck, in the same order):
| Sub-Arch | Integrated Gap | Expressed Partner Interest (international deck) |
|---|---|---|
| Mobility | Crew Mobility at Distributed Locations on the Lunar Surface | |
| Power | Power Sharing at Distributed Locations on the Lunar Surface | |
| Mobility | Extra Vehicular Activity Capability on Lunar Far Side | |
| Utilization | Lunar Surface Observation | ● |
| C&PNT | PNT Capabilities at non-South Pole Sites on the Lunar Surface | ●●●● |
| Data | In-Space Processing of Data | |
| Transportation | Delivery of Payloads and Equipment to Deep Space | |
| Utilization | Hosting of Utilization Payloads in Deep Space | |
| Auto/Robotics | Robotic Assistance of Crew on Lunar Surface | ●●● |
| Habitation | Management of Waste Streams on Lunar Surface | ● |
| ISRU | Demonstration of Oxygen and Water ISRU on Lunar Surface | ● |
| ISRU | Demonstration of Regolith-Based ISRU on Lunar Surface | |
| Auto/Robotics | Demonstration of Autonomous Construction on Lunar Surface | ● |
| Transportation | Long-Term Storage of Propellants | |
| Transportation | Access Tank Residuals from Transportation Elements | ● |
| Habitation | Demonstration of Advanced ECLSS Capabilities |
Banner: "Targeted needs and gaps to enhance FE and/or enable technology and capabilities for Humans to Mars Segment" (the international deck spells out "the Foundational Exploration segment").
These are a third kind of list, beside the technology gaps and the data gaps: named by capability and place, sized in "major elements", and ranked by "significance of closure to objective satisfaction", where the technology gaps are ranked on criticality, urgency, breadth and depth (Gaps index). The deck doesn't relate them to the 56 technology gaps of Rev B, and no other source uses "integrated gap" (search of all sources). How they compare with Rev C's ten areas of future work for the segment is on Foundational Exploration.
SMD's gaps for science (slide 7)¶
"Current High Priority Gaps for Science":
- "Payload delivery, transport, and survive/operate the night"
- "Far Side Sample Return"
- "Large Cargo Return"
- "Communications (EVA, deployed instruments, far side/global)"
- "Power (long lived instruments, recharge, storage, StN/operate through night)"
- "Cold conditioned sampling and curation (sampling/PSR conops, technologies, curation, analytical facilities)"
"Upcoming Academy / SDT Studies That Will Inform Architecture":
- "High Priority Science Campaigns for Human Explorers on the Surface of Mars"
- "SPA Return & Exploration (SPARX) Science Definition Team"
- "Key Destinations Across the Moon to Address Decadal-level Science Objectives with Human Explorers"
- "Science Accomplished during Human Mars Transit (planned)"
- "Science Addressed from a Sustained Lunar Basecamp (planned)"
"StN" is not expanded (the wiki reads it as survive the night, from the first bullet). None of the studies is among the wiki's sources. The topic page is Utilization Systems.
STMD's shortfall ranking (slides 9–11)¶
The ranking (slide 9). "Shortfall: Identified, problem-focused technology area requiring further development to meet future exploration, science, and other mission needs".
- "Documented 187 shortfalls within 20 capability areas"
- "Collected stakeholder feedback (1,231 responses) on the importance of each shortfall"
- "Processed the data to assemble an integrated, ranked civil space problem list"
- "Survive and operate through the lunar night ranked #1 on the integrated list and in the top 10 across all stakeholder groups"
- "Agreement across stakeholder groups that the top 5 shortfalls are very important"
- "Relatively broad consensus and support for the top 30 shortfalls"
- "Diverse representation of capability areas in the top 20 (advanced habitation systems, autonomous systems and robotics, communication and navigation, power, avionics, nuclear propulsion)"
- "Integrated list is one of several factors guiding STMD projects and investments"; "Results informing the development of technology roadmaps"; "Using lessons learned to refine the approach"; "View the results: nasa.gov/civilspaceshortfalls" (link not followed)
Lessons learned (slide 10), as printed:
- "Level set shortfall construct and provide context": "Limit shortfall definition to problem space only; Lower levels can capture the possible solution space which should be detailed in the roadmaps"; "Restructure/combine shortfalls to portray more holistic definition of the problem space"; "Assign a single person the responsibility of coordinating the definitions of shortfalls from a holistic perspective, with significant input from relevant PTs/SCLs"; "Work with ESDMD and SMD counterparts to ensure 1-to-1 mapping for consistency and clarity"
- "Use a shortfall Identifier to allow for easy capability area reference": "Use category names in the gap numbers, e.g. ISAM-708 not just '708'"
- "Standardize survey construct": "Have one survey for internal and external stakeholders"; "Research and evaluate best practice methodologies for large surveys"
- "Revise data analysis methodology to be applied consistently across stakeholders": "Reconsider collecting consolidated responses"; "Communicate stakeholder weightings with survey release"
The 2024 technology gaps paper explains how gaps and shortfalls differ and says all the gaps are in the shortfall list (Gaps index). The slides don't say which shortfalls are architecture gaps.
The top 30 (slide 11)¶
"Integrated Top 30 Shortfalls Compared to Stakeholder Rank", transcribed from the image. The slide also gives each shortfall's rank by nine stakeholder groups (Academia, Small Industry, Large Industry, OGA, Other, NASA Centers, NASA ESDMD, NASA SMD, NASA Other MDs; "NR" for not ranked), on a colour scale from 1 to 180. Those columns are not transcribed here; see the image.
| Rank | Average score | Shortfall | Category |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 8.103 | 1618: Survive and operate through the lunar night | Thermal Management Systems |
| 2 | 7.612 | 1596: High Power Energy Generation on Moon and Mars Surfaces | Power |
| 3 | 7.435 | 1554: High Performance Onboard Computing to Enable Increasingly Complex Operations | Avionics |
| 4 | 7.383 | 1557: Position, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) for In-Orbit and Surface Applications | Communication and Navigation |
| 5 | 7.247 | 1545: Robotic Actuation, Subsystem Components, and System Architectures for Long-Duration and Extreme Environment Operation | Autonomous Systems and Robotics |
| 6 | 7.208 | 1552: Extreme Environment Avionics | Avionics |
| 7 | 7.196 | 1519: Environmental Monitoring for Habitation | Advanced Habitation Systems |
| 8 | 7.168 | 709: Nuclear Electric Propulsion for Human Exploration | Propulsion: Nuclear |
| 9 | 7.114 | 1304: Robust, High-Progress-Rate, and Long-Distance Autonomous Surface Mobility | Autonomous Systems & Robotics |
| 10 | 7.095 | 1520: Fire Safety for Habitation | Advanced Habitation Systems |
| 11 | 7.052 | 1531: Autonomous Guidance and Navigation for Deep Space Missions | Autonomous Systems & Robotics |
| 12 | 7.045 | 1591: Power Management Systems for Long Duration Lunar and Martian Missions | Power |
| 13 | 7.034 | 702: Nuclear Thermal Propulsion for Human Exploration | Propulsion: Nuclear |
| 14 | 7.031 | 1559: Deep Space Autonomous Navigation | Communication and Navigation |
| 15 | 6.968 | 1527: Radiation Countermeasures (Crew and Habitat) | Advanced Habitation Systems |
| 16 | 6.948 | 1526: Radiation Monitoring and Modeling (Crew and Habitat) | Advanced Habitation Systems |
| 17 | 6.946 | 879: In-space and On-surface, Long-duration Storage of Cryogenic Propellant | Cryogenic Fluid Management |
| 18 | 6.843 | 1548: Sensing for Autonomous Robotic Operations in Challenging Environmental Conditions | Autonomous Systems & Robotics |
| 19 | 6.804 | 1558: High-Rate Communications Across The Lunar Surface | Communication and Navigation |
| 20 | 6.792 | 1626: Advanced Sensor Components: Imaging | Sensors and Instruments |
| 21 | 6.784 | 792: In-space and On-surface Transfer of Cryogenic Fluids | Cryogenic Fluid Management |
| 22 | 6.720 | 1569: High-Mass Mars Entry and Descent Systems | Entry Descent and Landing |
| 23 | 6.711 | 1525: Food and Nutrition for Mars and Sustained Lunar | Advanced Habitation Systems |
| 24 | 6.695 | 1571: Navigation Sensors for Precision Landing | Entry Descent and Landing |
| 25 | 6.689 | 1573: Terrain Mapping Capabilities for Precision Landing and Hazard Avoidance | Entry Descent and Landing |
| 26 | 6.662 | 1562: Advanced Algorithms and Computing for Precision Landing | Entry Descent and Landing |
| 27 | 6.593 | 1597: Power for Non-Solar-Illuminated Small Systems | Power |
| 28 | 6.592 | 1568: Entry Modeling and Simulation for EDL Missions | Entry Descent and Landing |
| 29 | 6.584 | 1516: Water and Dormancy Management for Habitation | Advanced Habitation Systems |
| 30 | 6.569 | 1524: Crew Medical Care for Mars and Sustained Lunar | Advanced Habitation Systems |
Many titles are close to technology-gap titles (for example 1552 and #0201 Extreme Environment Avionics). The slides make no such pairing, and the wiki hasn't made one: whether to is open question 87.
LEO Microgravity Strategy (slides 13–14)¶
"NASA's Low Earth Orbit Microgravity Strategy document outlines what NASA intends to achieve by continuing human activities in low Earth orbit after the retirement of the International Space Station. By maintaining a robust presence in low Earth orbit, NASA will continue to drive scientific discovery, technological innovation, commercial growth, and international cooperation, all while positioning the United States to remain at the forefront of space in the coming decades." "Read the Strategy" (a short link, not followed; the strategy is not among the wiki's sources). "LEO Exploration Goals" (slide 14):
- "Exploration Technology": "Leverage the unique environment of low Earth orbit to advance technologies that enable future human exploration on and around the Moon and Mars."
- "Human Health and Performance Research in Exploration Analog Environments": "Advance understanding of how to sustain human health and performance using relevant exploration analog environments in low Earth orbit to reduce risks and inform Moon, Mars, and deep space missions."
- "Using Low Earth Orbit Operations to Prepare for Deep Space Exploration": "Validate crewed mission operations in low Earth orbit as part of a timely and effective methodology to test the agency's evolutionary approach to living and working in environments relevant to Moon and Mars exploration."
The topic page is RT-8.
What changed by Rev C¶
These comparisons are the wiki's.
- The integrated gaps are not in Rev C. Rev C's Foundational Exploration section lists ten "areas of future work" and points to B.5 (p. 32); it has no list of high-priority or secondary gaps and no element sizing.
- Power. Rev C added the Lunar Nuclear Fission System, with three of slide 3's seven functions (above).
- "Moderate" became "mid". FN-H-102 L and FN-X-103 L say "mid-duration" in Rev C's lists.
- Shortfalls. Neither ADD Rev C nor the 2025 Update mentions STMD's shortfalls (Gaps index).
Oddities¶
As printed, images checked:
- Slide 8 labels the STMD presenter's directorate "Science Mission Directorate" above "NASA - STMD"; slide 12 does the same for SOMD. Slide 15 has "STMD" and "SOMD" only.
- Two names for one office: "Cross-Directorate Technical Integration Office" (slide 12) and "Cross-Directorate Integration Office" (slide 15).
- "Room Name" left as a placeholder on the panel slide (slide 15).
- "payloads(s)" in two function titles (slide 3), and "1 -2 major elements" (slide 4).
- "Decadallevel" in the text layer for "Decadal-level" (slide 7, a line break).
- Slide 3's function rows are in two shades of orange with no key.
- The secondary-gap table's text layer puts "Habitation" in the wrong column; the image has it beside "Management of Waste Streams on Lunar Surface".
Related pages¶
Foundational Exploration gaps, international deck · Foundational Exploration · Gaps index · Power Systems · Utilization Systems · RT-8 · RT-1 · Lunar function allocation · Phase 1 functional gaps · Program Office updates deck · Architecture Updates deck