NASA is preparing for a change in leadership and a possible revision of the lunar programme

Against this backdrop, the agency is facing another change in leadership, and it is already clear that NASA will have to go through new tests in the coming year. Universe Today reports that.

"A lot of things are still hanging in the air, although things look better now than they did a couple of months ago," Casey Dreyer, director of space policy at the nonprofit Planetary Society, said at the ScienceWriters2025 conference in Chicago.

One of the key questions remains who will lead the world's premier space agency. On his first day in office, President Donald Trump picked tech billionaire Jared Isaacman as NASA administrator. Trump withdrew his nomination in May amid conflict with SpaceX founder Ilon Musk, but Isaacman's nomination was renewed this month.

In the interim, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, who was also reportedly seeking the permanent post, served as NASA's interim head. Now the rivalry appears to have been smoothed over.

Isaacman, who has effectively created his own space programme and has already flown into orbit twice on privately funded missions, received generally positive reviews after his first Senate hearing in April. Dreier said it is likely that the second hearing, the date of which has not yet been set, will also end with an endorsement of his nomination.

"A lot of people think that given the range of options and who's leading other science agencies today, having someone at the head of NASA who at least doesn't hate the agency he wants to lead is not a bad thing," he said.

Project Athena leaks and criticism

However, Isaacman will still have to answer questions. Days before announcing his re-nomination, Politico obtained a leaked copy of a 62-page report in which he laid out his vision for NASA reforms. It is believed that the document, titled Project Athena ("Project Athena"), may have been leaked by Duffy in hopes of boosting his own chances of taking office.

"Project Athena" proposes transferring some responsibility for scientific space missions from NASA centres to commercial companies. The document calls for NASA to get out of the "taxpayer-funded climate science business" and leave climate research to the academic community. Separately, long-term funding for the Space Launch System (SLS) heavy-lift rocket and the Gateway near-lunar station are questioned.

All of these moves are in line with the Trump administration's budget priorities, but are unlikely to please congressmen from states that receive significant funding for SLS, Gateway and other elements of the current Artemis lunar programme.

The report also suggests an assessment of the "relevance and necessity" of each of NASA's more than a dozen centres around the country - including the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), which manages many robotic missions to explore the solar system.

"What is being 'built' at JPL anyway?" - Isaacman asks in the document.

After the leak, Isaacman responded to critics in a sprawling post on social media X. He said the leaked draft was written before his original nomination was withdrawn in May and that "parts of the document are now out of date." He also stressed that the plan "never favoured a single contractor, proposed closing centres or called for programmes to be cancelled before their objectives were met".

Isaacman said the report did not explicitly call for closing the SLS programme, but only suggested considering "the possibility of redirecting equipment and resources to the nuclear-electric propulsion system programme once the President's budget targets are met".

"This was written as a starting point to give NASA, international partners and the commercial sector the best chance for long-term success," he wrote. - The more I see the imperfections in the policy and what people are willing to do, the stronger my desire to serve and be part of the solution ... because I love NASA and I love my country."

Dreyer admits that many of the ideas of "Project Athena" are close to his heart.

"There are things in there that I liked ... like setting clear requirements for the efficiency needed to do big things," he said. - "I really think nuclear-electric power is incredibly important and will probably be his main legacy if he can realise that.

Dreier estimated that the fact that Isaacman is not a strongly partisan ideologue will help him navigate the "narrow straits" of Senate confirmation procedures.

"He really wants to make NASA better, and I'm personally optimistic that he will take that feedback into account and learn from it," Dreier said. - But he's probably going to have to make a lot of promises not to implement the provisions of this document to get confirmed."

Budget Scissors, Moon and Mars

If Isaacman is confirmed, he will have to guide NASA through a political obstacle course as challenging as the asteroid field in "The Empire Strikes Back." Among the key questions:

How deep will the cuts to science go?
The Trump administration's budget request calls for cutting NASA's overall funding by 24% in 2026 and nearly halving spending on science programmes by 47%. If such cuts are implemented, dozens of science missions would be jeopardised, including the campaign to deliver soil samples from Mars, the Juno mission near Jupiter and the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope. Congress is unlikely to support such drastic measures, and it is Isaacman who will likely have to find a compromise between the Capitol and the White House.

When exactly will they return to the moon?
The current schedule calls for the Artemis 3 mission astronauts to land on the moon in 2027. But last month, Duffy hinted that this could be pushed back to 2028. He also said NASA may reconsider the plan to have SpaceX's Starship deliver the first crew to the lunar surface.

"They keep moving their timelines and we're in a race with China," Duffy said. - "The president and I want the moon landing to happen within his term, so I'm going to 'open' the contracts."

In response, SpaceX promised to build a "simplified" version of Starship for Artemis 3. Going forward, it will probably be up to Isaacman to decide whether to stay with SpaceX or bet on Blue Origin.

Moon or Mars?
The Trump administration wants the Artemis programme to get Americans back to the Moon before a Chinese crew does. But Trump himself is most interested in landing astronauts on Mars. SpaceX has previously talked about the possibility of sending an automated Starship to the Red Planet in 2026 or 2028, and while those timelines look unrealistic now, Isaacman may be under pressure to bring them closer to reality. "Project Athena" mentions a certain "Project Olympus" that is supposed to test technology to land humans on Mars.

Conflict of interest with SpaceX?
Isaacman worked closely with SpaceX on two of its orbital missions and reportedly invested tens of millions of dollars in the company. His first nomination was largely "stalled" precisely because of concerns that such ties to SpaceX and Ilon Musk would be a conflict of interest.

During a Senate hearing last year, Isaacman sought to dispel those doubts. "NASA is a customer," he said at the time. - They work for us, not the other way around." In upcoming deliberations, he will almost certainly have to explain again the nature of his relationship with SpaceX.

Dreier admits he is troubled by SpaceX's dominant role in the US space programme, including plans to land astronauts on the moon.

"If you think of this as a national space race and a national goal, we're essentially putting the reputation and goals of the country in the hands of one single company that has to 'deliver' the outcome in that race," he explained.

What will happen to science and scientists?

Dreyer is also concerned about the risk of NASA focusing only on "one or two celestial bodies" while cutting back on a wide range of scientific research.

"There are a lot more opportunities for engineers and a lot less for scientists," he said. - "People ask, "Why do we need NASA when we have SpaceX?" Then show me how many interplanetary vehicles SpaceX has built. How many scientific instruments have they developed and sent to Venus or wherever? They could if they wanted to, but they don't because they're not interested... Where scientists would go in this situation, I honestly don't know."