The Artemis II mission's Orion capsule leaves Earth on its way to fly by the moon, after launching from the Kennedy Space Centre in Cape Canaveral, Florida, U.S., April 1, 2026 in a still image from video. | Photo Credit: NASA TV

NASA's Artemis II mission is shaping up to be more than just the ​next step in returning humans to the moon — it is a key test of whether the agency's traditional contractor-built systems can remain viable in a rapidly shifting space ‌industry.

The mission, set to launch on Wednesday evening from the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, will send astronauts around ​the moon for the first time in over 50 years. It will be the first crewed flight of Boeing and ⁠Northrop Grumman's Space Launch System (SLS) rocket and Lockheed Martin's Orion capsule.

While both systems have undergone years of development and uncrewed testing, with the rocket's more than $24 billion development beginning in 2010, Artemis II marks the moment when their reliability will be judged under the highest possible stakes: human flight.

The outcome of Artemis II could reshape the political narrative around ‌Orion as well as SLS, the world's most powerful active rocket, which has faced persistent criticism over delays, ballooning costs and a relatively slow launch rate.

"The stakes are extremely high whenever there are astronauts on board," said Michael Leshock, equity research ‌analyst at KeyBanc Capital Markets, adding that Artemis II represents "a critical validation moment" as NASA evaluates proven commercial options.

COMMERCIAL RIVALS CHALLENGE SLS DOMINANCE

A new ‌wave ⁠of private rockets inspired by SpaceX's reusable Falcon 9 has challenged NASA's thinking with the expendable SLS, a reincarnation of decades-old, ⁠Shuttle-era tech as the industry has focused on reusability in more recent years.

Commercial players like Elon Musk's SpaceX and Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin are already waiting in the wings. NASA chief Jared Isaacman announced last week that the agency intends to open the SLS mission - launching Artemis astronauts and cargo off Earth - to competitive bids from other companies for missions ​after Artemis V.

That was one of many changes Isaacman has ‌made to the Artemis program in recent weeks. He also cancelled plans to upgrade SLS with a more powerful upper stage meant for later Artemis missions, instead tapping United Launch Alliance - the joint rocket venture of Boeing and Lockheed - to use its less powerful Centaur upper stage.

"If they (NASA) do include SpaceX or Blue Origin, it would give the U.S. more flexibility in who they partner with in the future, as SpaceX ‌and Blue Origin are already part of Artemis; it's just how much larger a part they can play," said Andrew Chanin, CEO ​of ProcureAM, the issuer of the Procure Space exchange-traded fund.

HIGH COSTS THREATEN SLS FUTURE

Analysts say the SLS program is costly and is unlikely to be a viable long-term option for NASA to return to the moon on a regular, ⁠cost-effective cadence.

That makes the high-profile Artemis II mission a critical validation point for the contractors behind the program, as newer, lower-cost rockets try to prove their own reliability. Each SLS launch is estimated to cost between $2 billion and $4 billion. By contrast, SpaceX's Starship and Blue Origin's New Glenn are far cheaper, though ‌pricing could fluctuate by tens of millions of dollars depending on the mission complexity. NASA paid $18 million for an initial New Glenn flight in 2025, according to contracting data. Space station company Voyager paid $90 million for its planned Starship launch, according to a recent earnings report.

NASA tried to impose SLS cost-reduction strategies in 2023, to little avail. Boeing and Northrop set up a joint venture at the time through which NASA would hand its ownership of the rocket to the companies, encouraging them to sell the rocket commercially.

NASA has already begun incorporating commercial systems into its Artemis architecture, awarding SpaceX and Blue Origin central roles for each to develop lunar landers. Future missions could expand that reliance, raising questions about how long SLS will remain a cornerstone of ‌the program.

LEGACY PLAYERS HAVE POLITICAL BACKING

Still, not everyone is ready to write off the legacy systems, with some analysts pointing to political staying power and a track record ​that commercial rivals have yet to match.

"SLS still has a lot of congressional support, which makes it difficult to kill the program," said Austin Moeller, director of equity research at Canaccord Genuity.

Starship has test-launched 11 times since 2023, but ⁠has not yet deployed payloads into orbit. SLS and Orion achieved a successful uncrewed test flight in 2022 around the moon and back.

Supporters of SpaceX and the ⁠commercial-focused contracting culture it prefers have argued for SLS cancellation for years, with some attempts to do so failing.

The Trump administration's budget proposal last year sought to end SLS after Artemis III, but Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Cruz, whose home state of Texas ‌includes Boeing employees and SLS suppliers, swiftly countered with a bill that cemented the rocket's role in the program through Artemis V.

"It could not have been a faster repudiation," said Casey Dreier, chief of space policy at the Planetary Society, a space policy nonprofit co-founded by famed astronomer ​Carl Sagan.

While privately owned rockets have shown lower costs and greater innovation, he said, "the need to stick with SLS is political."

Published on April 2, 2026