NASA is a winner of the 2026 Gizmodo Science Fair for the stellar performance of the Orion spacecraft during the Artemis 2 mission, the first to send humans back to the Moon since the Apollo era. The question: Can Orion’s life support systems keep astronauts alive for 10 days without a safety net, and can NASA’s redesigned reentry trajectory protect the crew during their return? The Results On April 1, NASA’s Space Launch System rocket lifted off from the Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Florida, propelling the Orion spacecraft into orbit. The capsule carried the most valuable cargo any spacecraft can hold: human lives – the first astronauts tasked with returning to the Moon in more than 50 years. This mission, Artemis 2, was Orion’s first manned test flight. The stakes could not have been higher. Orion had never flown with full life support and human-grade systems, and the capsule needed to keep its crew (Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, Christina Koch and Jeremy Hansen of the Canadian Space Agency) alive for 10 days as it traveled around the Moon and back. Judd Frieling, a NASA flight director who worked on Artemis 1 and 2, was watching closely to make sure these systems worked as expected. Aside from some issues with the toilet and a couple of other minor anomalies, everything worked as it should, but Frieling told Gizmodo that Orion had plenty of backup equipment on board in case something broke or malfunctioned. The contingency urinals certainly came in handy. A crane returns NASA’s Artemis 2 Orion spacecraft to the Final Assembly and System Test (FAST) cell inside the Neil A. Armstrong Operations and Payment Building at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida on Friday, March 21, 2025, following the installation of four solar panel wings and adapter scrap fairings. © NASA/Glenn Benson Over the course of the flight, Orion successfully performed all of its deep space operations, life support checks and its manual demonstration of close proximity operations, but there would be one last test before its mission came to an end. During Artemis 1’s atmospheric reentry, Orion’s heat shield suffered significant damage. A similar result on Artemis 2 could have had deadly consequences. Reentry subjects Orion’s exterior to extreme aerodynamic deceleration forces and temperatures of up to 3,000 degrees Fahrenheit (1,650 degrees Celsius), so if the heat shield had suffered a significant structural breach, the Artemis 2 astronauts would have been in serious danger. Fortunately, this critical hardware worked beautifully as Orion returned to Earth 30 times faster than the speed of sound. The four astronauts left the capsule in good health and in high spirits. This was the result of years of work by NASA engineers who investigated the cause of Artemis 1’s heat shield damage and designed a solution. The heat shield investigation revealed that the problem was related to the “jumped” reentry profile, in which Orion would dive into Earth’s atmosphere, bounce back, and re-enter. Between dives, heating decreased, causing heat and gases to build up within the Avocat material of the heat shield. Because Avocat is waterproof, it was unable to release the gases, causing cracks and uneven peeling of the shield’s outer layer. NASA astronaut and Artemis 2 mission specialist Christina Koch hugs the Orion spacecraft on the deck of the USS John P. Murtha on April 11, 2026. © NASA/Bill Ingalls Instead of modifying the heat shield before Artemis 2, engineers changed the reentry profile so that Orion reentered the atmosphere at a steeper angle, spending less time in the environment where damage occurred during Artemis 1. “It worked absolutely 100%.” Frieling said. When he saw Orion’s heat shield in person for the first time after the capsule crashed off the coast of San Diego, California, “it looked absolutely pristine,” he added. Their assessment was confirmed during a recent Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) meeting, during which members reviewed the performance of the Artemis 2 heat shield, Ars Technica reports. There were more than 100 carbon loss sites along the heat shield after Artemis 1, and some were more than an inch deep. After Artemis 2, NASA observed only about nine charred sites. Why they did it The fate of NASA’s Artemis program depended on the success of Artemis 2. Validating the manned capability of both SLS and Orion was a key prerequisite for a future lunar landing and therefore essential to the agency’s goal of returning astronauts to the surface of the Moon. An artist’s rendering of NASA’s future lunar base. © NASA But if NASA already sent astronauts to the Moon decades ago, what’s the point of going back? Well, this time the agency plans to establish a permanent human presence on the lunar surface. NASA believes that building a lunar base near the lunar south pole will strengthen American leadership in space, lead to scientific discoveries, drive innovation with industry and international collaborators, and prepare humanity for missions to Mars. China is also considering this particular lunar property for its own lunar base, so the United States is pushing to get there first. While no nation can exercise sovereignty or claim ownership of the Moon under international law, whoever wins the new space race will gain first-mover advantage. That means the first government to plant its flag (or replant it, in the case of the United States) on the lunar surface will be able to establish operational standards, secure strategic high ground, and obtain the first resources. Why they are winners Artemis 2 was much more than a test flight. While the technical importance of validating SLS and Orion’s manned capabilities cannot be understated, the mission’s greatest importance lies in demonstrating that the Moon is once again within humanity’s reach. This mission was not only the first manned spaceflight beyond low Earth orbit since the Apollo era, but also the furthest manned flight in history. At the center of this achievement was Orion, whose remarkable performance was made possible by the countless people who worked to prepare the spacecraft for such a journey. Through cooperation, dedication and determination, they overcame some of the most difficult engineering challenges in human spaceflight. The Artemis 2 crew, (clockwise from left), Mission Specialist Christina Koch, Mission Specialist Jeremy Hansen, Commander Reid Wiseman, and Pilot Victor Glover, take a moment for a group hug inside the Orion spacecraft on their way home. © NASA From its life support systems to its ability to withstand the intense heat of reentry, every part of Orion had to function reliably throughout a 695,000-mile (1 million kilometer) journey. In doing so, the mission marked the beginning of a new chapter in human spaceflight. “I think the bottom line for me is that we really can do amazing things when we all work together,” Frieling said. What’s next? With Artemis 2 complete, NASA is preparing for Artemis 3, designed to test the agency’s commercial lunar landers in space for the first time. During the mission, scheduled to launch in 2027, the SLS rocket will once again launch four astronauts aboard the Orion spacecraft. They will venture into low Earth orbit, where Orion will attempt to rendezvous and dock with at least a test version of the two landers built by SpaceX and Blue Origin. SpaceX plans to test Starship V3, which will serve as the basis for the Starship Human Landing System (HLS). Blue Origin will test its planned HLS crew cabin, based on the current architecture of its Blue Moon Mark 2 crew lander. Up to two of the Artemis 3 astronauts will don their spacesuits and open the hatch to enter Blue Origin’s test lander. This mission will be the last before NASA attempts to land astronauts on the Moon with Artemis 4. Artemis 2 has proven that SLS and Orion are up to the task. Now, it’s just a question of whether commercial landers will also be ready. The Gizmodo team congratulates the entire Artemis 2 team for their invaluable contributions and for taking NASA deeper into this exciting new chapter in lunar exploration. Click here to see all the 2026 Gizmodo Science Fair winners.
