This article is based on an official press release from Lockheed Martin and additional industry reporting regarding NASA’s Fission Surface Power program.

Lockheed Martin Advances Fission Surface Power to Meet NASA’s New 100-Kilowatt Lunar Goal

As the global race to establish a permanent human presence on the Moon accelerates, the engineering challenges of the lunar environment are becoming increasingly critical. Foremost among them is the “lunar night,” a two-week period of freezing darkness that renders standard solar power ineffective. In response, Lockheed Martin is advancing its Fission Surface Power (FSP) technology, a nuclear solution designed to provide continuous, reliable energy for future lunar bases.

According to an official press release from Lockheed Martin, the company is positioning its fission reactor concept as the backbone of a sustainable lunar grid. This technology is essential not only for survival during the long lunar night but also for powering the industrial machinery required for In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU), such as mining water ice for fuel.

Recent industry developments have significantly raised the stakes. As detailed in NASA directives from late 2025, the agency has pivoted its requirements, moving from a 40-kilowatt (kWe) demonstration to a more ambitious 100 kwe target by 2030. This shift underscores the urgency of the Artemis program and the need for robust power infrastructure to support a sustained human footprint.

Conquering the Lunar Night

The primary driver for nuclear power on the Moon is the celestial mechanics of the lunar cycle. A single lunar day lasts approximately 29.5 Earth days, meaning any location on the surface experiences roughly 14 consecutive days of sunlight followed by 14 days of darkness.

Lockheed Martin highlights the severity of this environment in their release. During the lunar night, temperatures can plummet to -280°F (-173°C). Relying solely on solar power would require massive battery banks to store two weeks’ worth of energy, a solution that is currently prohibitively heavy and expensive to launch from Earth.

Fission Surface Power offers a solution by operating independently of the Sun. By splitting uranium atoms in a reactor, the system generates heat that is converted into electricity, providing a steady “baseload” of power 24/7. This ensures that life support systems, rovers, and scientific experiments can continue uninterrupted regardless of the time of day.

NASA’s Strategic Pivot: The 100 kWe Requirement

While Lockheed Martin’s initial designs were part of a Phase 1 effort targeting a 40 kWe system, the landscape of lunar exploration changed in August 2025. According to industry reporting and NASA directives, the agency scrapped the lower power target in favor of a 100 kWe class reactor. This upgrade is intended to support a larger lunar base and industrial processing capabilities sooner than originally planned.

The timeline for this deployment is aggressive. NASA aims to have a launch-ready reactor by 2030. This acceleration is widely viewed by industry analysts as a strategic response to the International Lunar Research Station (ILRS), a competing project by China and Russia that targets a similar nuclear-powered presence in the mid-2030s.

Lockheed Martin has publicly embraced this shift. In statements regarding the program, company leadership has affirmed their readiness to scale their designs. While the fundamental physics of fission remain the same, the engineering challenge lies in packaging a more powerful reactor into a form factor that can be launched on a rocket and landed safely on the lunar surface.

Technical Innovations: The Hybrid Grid

Lockheed Martin’s approach to lunar energy is not limited to nuclear power alone. The company is advocating for a “Lunar Power Grid” that integrates fission with solar technology to maximize efficiency and redundancy.

Vertical Solar Array Technology (VSAT)

Alongside the reactor, Lockheed Martin is developing Vertical Solar Array Technology (VSAT). These are tall, deployable masts designed specifically for the lunar South Pole, where the sun remains low on the horizon. By capturing this low-angle light, VSAT can handle peak power loads during the lunar day.

Thermal Management Systems

One of the most significant technical hurdles for a lunar reactor is cooling. On Earth, power plants use water or air to dissipate excess heat. In the vacuum of space, there is no air to carry heat away. According to Lockheed Martin, their engineering teams are focusing heavily on advanced radiator designs and thermal management systems to reject waste heat efficiently, a critical component for preventing the reactor from overheating.

Power Conversion

To convert the reactor’s heat into electricity, the system is expected to utilize a Brayton cycle engine. This method uses heated gas to spin a turbine and is favored by NASA for its high efficiency and scalability compared to other methods, such as Stirling engines.

AirPro News Analysis

The shift from a 40 kWe to a 100 kWe requirement represents a massive leap in engineering complexity, particularly given the 2030 deadline. While the underlying nuclear technology is mature, the U.S. has flown nuclear reactors in space as far back as 1965, the integration of such a high-power system into a lander remains a formidable challenge.

We observe that this pivot signals a change in NASA‘s risk tolerance. By demanding a full-scale industrial power source immediately rather than a smaller demonstrator, the agency is acknowledging that power is the bottleneck for all other lunar ambitions. Without 100 kWe, producing propellant from lunar ice, a key goal for Mars missions, would be nearly impossible. Lockheed Martin’s strategy of pairing nuclear with solar (VSAT) appears to be a prudent hedge, offering a diversified grid that mimics terrestrial power infrastructure.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why can’t we just use batteries for the lunar night?
Current battery technology is too heavy. Launching enough batteries to power a base for 14 days would require multiple heavy-lift rocket launches, making it economically unviable compared to a compact nuclear reactor.

Is the reactor safe to launch?
Fission surface power systems are designed to be launched “cold,” meaning the reactor is not turned on until it has safely landed on the Moon. It contains no highly radioactive fission products during launch.

When will this reactor be on the Moon?
Under the new NASA directive issued in August 2025, the target for a launch-ready 100 kWe reactor is 2030.

Sources

• Lockheed Martin: Fission Surface Power
• NASA Directives & Solicitations (August 2025)

This article is based on an official press release from Applied Aerospace & Defense.

Applied Aerospace & Defense Acquires Vestigo Aerospace to Tackle Space Debris

On February 24, 2026, Applied Aerospace & Defense (Applied) announced the acquisitions of Vestigo Aerospace, a specialist in space debris mitigation technologies. The transaction integrates Vestigo’s proprietary Spinnaker® deorbit systems into Applied’s broader portfolio, positioning the company to address increasingly stringent regulatory requirements for satellite disposal.

The acquisition marks a significant step in the industrialization of space sustainability. By bringing Vestigo’s passive deorbiting hardware in-house, Applied aims to offer a streamlined solution for satellite operators facing the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) “5-Year Rule,” which mandates the removal of satellites from Low Earth Orbit (LEO) within five years of mission completion.

Integrating Passive Deorbit Technology

At the core of this acquisition is Vestigo’s Spinnaker® product line. According to the company’s announcement, these systems utilize large drag sails to passively deorbit satellites at the end of their operational lives. Unlike active deorbiting methods that require thrusters and fuel reserves, the Spinnaker® system deploys a sail that increases atmospheric drag, accelerating the satellite’s orbital decay until it burns up in the Earth’s atmosphere.

Technical Capabilities

Data provided in the announcement highlights the versatility of the Spinnaker® technology. The systems are designed to handle a wide range of hardware, from small satellites to launch vehicle stages weighing up to 1,000 kg. The technology is effective at altitudes up to 800 km for compliance with the 5-year deorbit timeline, and up to 1,000 km for the traditional 25-year standard.

Because the system does not rely on propulsion, it offers a critical compliance pathway for satellites that lack onboard engines, allowing operators to meet legal requirements without sacrificing payload mass or fuel capacity.

Strategic Rationale and Leadership

The deal underscores a broader trend of consolidation within the space supply chain. Applied Aerospace & Defense, formed in December 2025 through the merger of Applied Aerospace and PCX Aerosystems, has been aggressively expanding its capabilities. This acquisition follows the March 2025 purchase of NeXolve, a manufacturer of polymer films and sunshields.

Vestigo founder Dr. David Spencer, a former mission manager at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), will join Applied as the Vice President of Deployable Systems. In the press statement, Dr. Spencer emphasized the scalability of the combined entity:

“We are proud to join the Applied team and look forward to accelerating the evolution of Spinnaker® as a proactive and scalable solution for deorbit compliance.”

The integration is described as a natural progression for both firms; Vestigo had previously utilized Applied as a supplier for the advanced thin-film polymer materials and deployable booms used in its sails.

AirPro News Analysis

This acquisition signals a shift in the space industry from discussing sustainability as a theoretical goal to treating it as a hardware requirement. The regulatory pressure from the FCC and the FAA is forcing operators to “check the box” on disposal plans before launch licenses are granted. By acquiring Vestigo, Applied is positioning itself not just as a component manufacturer, but as a regulatory compliance partner.

Furthermore, the move illustrates the influence of private equity in the space sector. Backed by Greenbriar Equity Group, Applied is building a vertically integrated platform capable of delivering end-to-end subsystems. This strategy likely aims to capture value from the thousands of satellites projected to launch, and eventually deorbit, in the coming decade.

Sources

• Applied Aerospace & Defense

FAA Greenlights SpaceX Starship Operations at Kennedy Space Center

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has officially cleared the environmental review process for SpaceX to operate its massive Starship-Super Heavy launch vehicle from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center (KSC). According to reporting by Florida Today, the decision allows the aerospace company to proceed with plans for up to 44 launches annually from the historic Launch Complex 39A (LC-39A).

This regulatory milestone, formalized in a Record of Decision (ROD) signed in late January 2026, marks a critical shift for the Starship program. While development and testing have primarily centered on the company’s Starbase facility in Texas, this approval paves the way for operational missions from Florida’s Space Coast. These missions are essential for NASA’s Artemis program, which relies on Starship to return astronauts to the lunar surface.

However, the approval comes with significant conditions. The FAA has mandated strict protocols to mitigate the impact of sonic booms, noise, and airspace closures on local communities and wildlife.

Operational Scope and Infrastructure

The FAA’s decision permits a high cadence of operations at LC-39A, a pad previously used for Apollo and Space Shuttle missions. As detailed in the environmental review, SpaceX is authorized to conduct:

• 44 annual launches of the Starship-Super Heavy vehicle.
• 44 annual landings of the Super Heavy booster back at the launch site.
• 44 annual landings of the Starship upper stage, either at the launch site or in the Atlantic Ocean.

To support these operations, SpaceX is finalizing massive infrastructure upgrades at the pad. These include a dedicated launch mount, a “Mechazilla” catch tower designed to recover returning boosters mid-air, and extensive propellant storage farms. According to the research data, initial launches from Florida are expected later in 2026, pending the completion of construction and the issuance of specific vehicle operator licenses for each mission.

AirPro News analysis

The authorization for 44 launches per year represents a significant scaling of operations. For context, this cadence would rival the current frequency of Falcon 9 launches from some individual pads. This suggests that SpaceX intends to rapidly transition Starship from an experimental vehicle to a workhorse for heavy lift and orbital refueling, which are prerequisites for their Mars colonization ambitions.

Community and Environmental Impacts

The introduction of the world’s largest rocket to the Space Coast brings distinct environmental challenges. Florida Today highlights that the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) identified noise and sonic booms as primary concerns for residents in Titusville, Cape Canaveral, and Merritt Island.

Sonic Booms and Noise Levels

Unlike the Falcon 9, the Super Heavy booster creates a sonic boom upon its return to the launch site. The FAA report notes that launch noise could exceed 90 decibels (dB) in nearby communities. This level of noise is sufficient to interfere with conversation and cause “behavioral awakening”, waking residents from sleep.

With up to half of the approved operations potentially occurring between 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM, the potential for sleep disturbance has been a focal point of local concern. In response to the anticipated vibrations and shockwaves, the Cape Canaveral City Council has reportedly discussed seeking state and federal grants to reinforce local infrastructure.

Airspace and Wildlife

Beyond noise, the launches will require regulations lasting between 40 minutes and two hours. This could disrupt commercial aviation routes over Florida and the Atlantic. The FAA has stated it will work to optimize trajectory planning to minimize these delays.

Wildlife protection is also a major component of the approval. The operations pose risks to protected species such as sea turtles, Florida scrub-jays, and the North Atlantic right whale. The FAA has mandated several mitigation strategies:

• Lighting controls to prevent disorienting nesting sea turtles.
• Seasonal restrictions on offshore landings during right whale migration periods.
• Mandatory observers on recovery vessels to prevent marine life collisions.

Stakeholder Reactions

The approval has elicited mixed reactions from stakeholders. SpaceX and CEO Elon Musk view the Florida launch site as vital for achieving multi-planetary life, with Musk previously emphasizing that high-cadence operations are necessary to build a city on Mars.

Conversely, local residents have expressed apprehension regarding property damage and the “startle effect” of sonic booms. According to the source report, some community members have voiced a preference for keeping the testing phase in Texas. Environmental groups have also criticized the decision, arguing that the mitigation measures may not go far enough to protect the sensitive Indian River Lagoon ecosystem.

“Residents in Titusville, Cape Canaveral, Merritt Island, and Cocoa Beach may experience these elevated noise levels.”

, Summary of FAA findings via Florida Today

Frequently Asked Questions

When will the first Starship launch from Florida happen?

Initial launches are expected later in 2026. This timeline depends on the successful completion of pad infrastructure at LC-39A and the issuance of specific launch licenses.

How loud will the launches be?

The FAA estimates noise levels could exceed 90 dB in nearby communities. The return of the Super Heavy booster will also generate a sonic boom, which is a new phenomenon for local residents accustomed to Falcon 9 landings.

Will this affect my flight?

Potentially. Launches will require airspace closures ranging from 40 minutes to two hours. The FAA intends to manage these closures to minimize disruption to commercial air travel.

Sources

• Florida Today