February 2025 workshop: lunar logistics, mobility and cargo white-paper briefing (industry and academia deck)¶
Document: 2025-ia-workshop-wp-lunar-logistics-and-mobility.pdf, 8 slides, 1,051,773 bytes, from
https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/, fetched 2026-10-01T18:28:05Z (sources/manifest.csv). Title
slide: "Lunar Logistics, Mobility, and Cargo", "February 2025", Kandyce Goodliff, Deputy Lunar Architecture Lead,
Strategy and Architecture Office. Text: sources/text/docs/2025-02-2025-ia-workshop-wp-lunar-logistics-and-mobility.txt;
images in sources/raw/slides/2025-02-2025-ia-workshop-wp-lunar-logistics-and-mobility/. Read from the images:
slide 6 (text-poor), and slides 3, 4 and 7. The other text-poor slide, 1, is the title slide; its text gives title
and presenter, and its image was not viewed. No "Moon Base", "CUI" or "Pre-Decisional" in the text (searched).
What it is. A briefing of two 2024 white papers, Lunar Surface Cargo and Lunar Mobility Drivers and Needs, at the industry and academia workshop of February 2025, before ADD Rev C. The partners' workshop had the same slides under another presenter (international copy). Slide 2 reprints the first pages of both papers. Slide 8 repeats the papers' takeaways in their words, except one of the cargo paper's five: "HDL is the only lander currently expressed in the architecture that can deliver beyond 500 kg to the lunar surface" is left out (cargo paper, p. 6). This page records only what the slides add; the papers' content is on Transportation Systems and Mobility Systems.
Which paper is "Lunar Logistics and Mobility"? The deck doesn't settle it. Its own title is "Lunar Logistics, Mobility, and Cargo", and slide 2 names three papers by their own titles: "Lunar Logistics Drivers and Needs (2023 White Paper)", "Lunar Surface Cargo (2024 White Paper)" and "Lunar Mobility Drivers and Needs (2024 White Paper)". None is the 2025 Architecture Update's "Lunar Logistics and Mobility" (Update, pp. 5, 9), and the deck's title is not the Workshops page's 2025 "Lunar Mobility and Logistics" either. The wiki still doesn't identify the Update's paper (open question 30).
Slides¶
| Slide | Title, as printed | What it holds |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lunar Logistics, Mobility, and Cargo | Title and presenter |
| 2 | Architecture White Papers | The two papers' first pages; "capability gaps have been identified in" logistics systems and uncrewed mobility systems; the three papers |
| 3 | Lunar Surface Cargo Background | 17 cargo functions in ADD Rev A, nine "key" and eight "potential" |
| 4 | Lunar Surface Cargo Capacity Estimates | The cargo paper's Table 1 in tonnes, and four lander pictures |
| 5 | Lunar Mobility Drivers and Capacity | Analyses behind the mobility work; 22 mobility functions in Rev B; a capacity table |
| 6 | Lunar Mobility Demand | The mobility paper's Figure 2 |
| 7 | Lunar Mobility Demand Range | Relocation distances; a shadow-duration chart; an LTV traverse map |
| 8 | Key Takeaways | The two papers' takeaways |
What the slides add to the papers¶
Two capability gaps, by name (slide 2): "Through detailed architectural assessments of lunar surface needs, capability gaps have been identified in: Logistics Systems - elements that play a role in the containment and transportation of Logistics Items or Cargo, and Uncrewed Mobility Systems – elements capable of delivering items to their point of use."
Where the cargo analysis came from (slide 3): "Analysis leading to and supporting the small cargo lander mission concept review (MCR) also revealed implications across the architecture strategy (e.g., available/contracted cargo capacity today versus aggregated future cargo demand)." Neither paper mentions a mission concept review (search of both texts). The architecture has "several surface cargo delivery or support functions, with some — but not all — needs current fulfilled by the Human Landing System (HLS), Human-class Delivery Lander (HDL), and Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS)".
The 17 cargo functions of ADD Rev A (slide 3): "NASA allocated 17 functions to lunar surface cargo delivery in ADD Rev-A: Nine identified as key; Eight identified as potential. (Potential reflects optional services that may be needed on some but not all landers.)" and "The ability to deliver cargo to the lunar surface is critical to the architecture". A side note: "Architecture functions are intentionally decoupled from performance or demand to enable system analysis and trades." The IDs are Rev A's numbering, not Rev C's. As printed, in the slide's order:
| Rev A ID | Function, as printed | Column |
|---|---|---|
| FN-018-L | Transport cargo from Earth to the lunar surface | key |
| FN-088-L | Provide precision landing for cargo transport to the lunar surface | key |
| FN-122-L | Decommission surface delivery system(s) and/or surface asset(s) | key |
| FN-126-L | Reduce blast ejecta | key |
| FN-141-L | Deliver cargo(s) to distributed sites on the lunar surface | key |
| FN-256-L | Provide physical and electronic safeguards for automated asset(s) operating near crew | key |
| FN-257-L | Detect and avoid hazards during landing in darkness, high contrast, and long-shadowed lighting conditions in the presence of lunar dust and debris | key |
| FN-277-L | Unload large utilization assets on the lunar surface | key |
| FN-280-L | Deliver cargo(s) to south polar region sites on the lunar surface | key |
| FN-066-L | Transport cargo from Earth to the far side of the lunar surface | potential |
| FN-123-L | Provide propellant/fluid transfer through common interface(s) between assets on the lunar surface (demonstration) | potential |
| FN-129-L | Transfer of propellant/fluids between assets on the lunar surface (demonstration) | potential |
| FN-139-L | Deploy (including setup, activation, and operation) science and/or monitoring utilization payload(s) on the lunar surface | potential |
| FN-144-L | Transport large exploration asset(s) from Earth to the lunar surface | potential |
| FN-148-L | Perform robotic manipulation of payloads, logistics, and/or equipment at multiple scales | potential |
| FN-254-L | Provide safety features, including shutoff, on robotic and/or autonomous system(s) | potential |
| FN-255-L | Robotic system(s) interaction with logistics carriers on the lunar surface | potential |
The text layer lists the X's apart from the rows; the image puts an X in the "Key" column of the first nine rows and in the "Potential" column of the last eight. The wiki doesn't map Rev A's IDs to Rev C's (Rev C's lunar list is on Lunar functions).
Lander pictures (slide 4, read from the image). Under the cargo paper's Table 1 (the same four rows, here in tonnes: "0.07 – 0.475 for existing task orders", "0 - 12 or 15 t", "Up to 2.1 t", "Under study") and its banner "Current capabilities beyond HDL are not available from 500 kg to 12,000 kg, for which significant demand exists", four pictures are captioned "CLPS – Firefly Aerospace – Blue Ghost", "HDL – SpaceX– Starship", "HDL – Blue Origin – Cargo Lander" and "Lunar Surface Cargo Lander – ESA - Argonaut". The last caption sits over the picture of ESA's Argonaut. The slide doesn't say more, and the wiki doesn't read the caption as tying the Lunar Surface Cargo Lander element to Argonaut.
Where the mobility analysis came from (slide 5): "Analysis leading to and supporting surface logistics, potential utility rover concepts, and initial surface habitation mission concept review (MCR) revealed implications across the architecture strategy: Functional gaps and services not yet available for mobility of large uncrewed assets; Relocation and surface placement demand; Technological gaps in performance for mobility assets; Integrated architectural strategic considerations." "Lunar surface mobility is allocated to 22 functions in M2M ADD Rev-B." Demand is "driven by integrated architectural operations: Relocation out of lander shadows or engine blast range; Deployment to optimal solar points; Aggregation of logistics to point of use; Infrastructure deployment."
A second LTV figure (slide 5). The capacity table:
| Mobility asset | Mass transport capability (kg) |
|---|---|
| Lunar Roving Vehicle (Apollo) | 490 kg |
| Lunar Terrain Vehicle (uncrewed capability) | 800 kg (full performance); 1600 kg (reduced performance) |
| JAXA Pressurized Rover | TBR |
Its caption: "Mobility mass demand ranges are similar to those of landed cargo demand, but capabilities are not available for cargo or assets greater than 1,600 kg; No mobility assets exist that can relocate large elements (e.g., initial surface habitat)". The mobility paper gives 800 kg only; its introduction's "approximately 1,500 kg" is unexplained (mobility paper, Oddities). The slide's 1,600 kg "reduced performance" figure is in no other source read (search of all source texts for "1,600 kg", "1600 kg" and "reduced performance": only this deck and its copy).
Demand chart (slide 6, read from the image): the mobility paper's Figure 2, with the same items and the 800 kg and 490 kg lines, beside a Foundational Exploration icon, under the banner "Mobility payload mass demand forecasts range from 500 kg to 15,000 kg per asset during the Foundational Exploration segment".
Distances (slide 7): "Min relocation distance to avoid lander shadows >50m"; "Min relocation distance to avoid lander blast ejecta >1,000m"; "Relocation from potential lander sites to optimal/aggregate surface locations up to 5,000m"; and, in bold, "Attempting multi-region mobility would require a capability of hundreds to thousands of kilometers". The paper says "tens of meters" for shadows and gives no multi-region figure (PDF p. 1). Banner: "Integrated architecture operations will necessitate non-trivial relocation and aggregation range demand for cargo and assets."
Two pictures on slide 7 (read from the image):
- A chart, "Shadow Duration vs Distance from Lander", subtitled "First Entry to Last Exit from Penumbra": shadow time in hours against "Distance (edge of lander to center of MPH) (km)", from 0 to 0.5 km, for "10m dia Lander, 6m MPH (e.g. Perpendicular)" and "10m dia Lander, 3m MPH (e.g. Radial Orientation)", with an inset "MPH Orientation". Two horizontal lines are labeled "Uncrewed terrain shadow duration requirement" (at about 150 hours on the axis) and "Crewed terrain shadow duration capability (estimate)" (at about 70 hours). Both curves fall steeply within the first 0.1 km. Beside it, renderings of a tall lander's shadow on the surface, with dates "11/16/24", "11/17/24", "11/18/24" and a "500m" scale. "MPH" is not expanded on the slide.
- A traverse map captioned "LTV Standard Road Traversal map (~4km)".
The axis readings are the wiki's, at the image's resolution.
Oddities¶
- "needs current fulfilled" (slide 3), as printed.
- "Sustained Lunar Exploration" in the first takeaway (slide 8), as in the cargo paper; the chart on slide 6 says "Sustained Lunar Evolution".
- A gap the takeaways don't name. Without the cargo paper's HDL takeaway, slide 8's "To mitigate this capability gap" follows a bullet on annual demand and points to no gap on the slide.
- Rev A and Rev B in one deck. Slide 3 counts cargo functions in "ADD Rev-A", slide 5 mobility functions in "M2M ADD Rev-B".
Related pages¶
Lunar Surface Cargo · Lunar Mobility Drivers and Needs · Mobility Systems · Transportation Systems · Lunar Terrain Vehicle · Lunar Surface Cargo Lander · Lunar Utility Rover · International copy · Panels and roundtables, February 2025