Intuitive Machines' Odysseus moon lander beams home 1st photos from lunar surface

It has been four days since the first private moon landing took place, an event shrouded in a variety of emotions. We'll get into that in just a bit. First things first, a few hours ago, we got some brand new footage of the feat — as well as a sad but inevitable update on the lander's fate.

For a quick explanation, on Feb. 26, Intuitive Machines announced on X (formerly Twitter) that Odysseus is still communicating with ground control despite having gently tipped over on its side after a bit of a wonky lunar touch down. Better yet, Odysseus managed to send back a pair of images from the moon. One was taken as it approached its landing site, dubbed Malapert A, and the other seems to be the first close-up angle we've seen of the lunar surface.

It would also appear that NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, which has been scanning the moon from lunar orbit since 2009, caught sight of Odysseus (as it has done with many a moon lander before) from an altitude of about 56 miles (90 km). Dutifully, it beamed its birds-eye-view back to Earth. "Images from NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera team confirmed Odysseus completed its landing at 80.13°S and 1.44°E at a 2579 m elevation," Intuitive Machines explained in the X post. "After traveling more than 600,000 miles, Odysseus landed within 1.5 km of its intended Malapert A landing site, using a contingent laser range-finding system patched hours before landing."

Related: Intuitive Machines' Odysseus lander tipped over on the moon during 'spicy' lunar landing

Odysseus sent images from the lunar surface of its vertical descent to its Malapert A landing site. (Image credit: Intuitive Machines)

However, in addition to this moon gallery, mission controllers offered a more practical update on the mission, too. "Based on Earth and moon positioning, we believe flight controllers will continue to communicate with Odysseus until Tuesday morning," the team said in a statement on the company website.

If you're a little dismayed by the quality of Odysseus' images (not LRO's, those are always surprisingly high-resolution), you can blame the complicated, almost twisty landing situation the lander had to endure on Feb. 22.

An LRO image showing where Odysseus is positioned on the moon. (Image credit: NASA/Goddard/Arizona State University)

The drama 

When the geometric Odysseus spacecraft arrived on the lunar surface, its achievement wasn't immediately met with cheer. The team was perplexed

It was because the lander wasn't phoning home at first; even the company's public broadcast of the event was spotted with radio silence, nervous laughter and stalling. The estimated time of landing had passed, but where was the concrete proof that Odysseus didn't crash? Furthermore, tensions were heightened by a dramatic situation that'd happened just a couple hours earlier; Odysseus' laser rangefinders, meant to tell the spacecraft where it is and how fast it's going, stopped working. Engineers had to scramble to solve the problem as the issue arose just hours before the landing window opened — a window that was ultimately delayed due to the mishap. 

Brilliantly, the team found a way to repurpose one of Odysseus' 12 payloads known as the Navigation Doppler Lidar for Precise Velocity and Range Sensing to act as the mission's new compass. In a sliver of good luck, the NDL had some laser software of its own that could serve as a substitute GPS.

Yet even when Odysseus finally sent back a communications signal, the signal was extremely faint. 

Eventually, after looking into what's going on with the spacecraft, scientists were able to confirm that Odysseus was alive and well on the moon. However, they also realized Odysseus, somewhere on the road to landing, accidentally tipped over during its journey, ending up on its side. Per Intuitive Machines, this image of the landing, captured by a camera on the starboard aft-side of the lander, was taken approximately 35 seconds after Odysseus pitched over prior to touchdown. 

Odysseus captured this image approximately 35 seconds after pitching over during its approach to the landing site.  (Image credit: Intuitive Machines)

All wasn't lost, as the team said there were science investigations onboard that could still be used. For instance, according to the Feb. 26 X post, "Hazard Relative Navigation algorithms detected nine safe landing sites within the targeted south pole region, which is an area that contains permanently shadowed regions that may be rich in resources, including water ice that could be used for future propulsion and life support on the moon."

Odysseus also seemingly got a bit stronger over time compared to its original delicate comms signal. Still, one major imagery component of the mission experienced a setback

Originally, a camera dubbed EagleCam was supposed to deploy as Odysseus landed, capturing some spectacular views of the whole sequence. Yet, "the decision was made to power down EagleCam during landing and not deploy the device during Odysseus' final descent," Mike Cavaliere, Embry Riddle Aeronautical University's director of news and media relations, wrote in an update on Feb. 23. That's the university behind EagleCam's design. Cavaliere did, however, assure that EagleCam would be turned on for a photoshoot at a later date.

According to Intuitive Machines' latest update, the team has also confirmed that Odysseus represents "the furthest south any vehicle has been able to land on the moon and establish communication with ground controllers." This is a big deal because space agencies have been racing to get to the lunar south pole as of late, including the Indian Space Research Organization's Chandrayaan-3 and Russia's (failed) Luna-25 endeavor.

And at the end of the day, even with its hiccups, Odysseus is a lander that'll surely be going down in history. It's the first private spacecraft to reach the lunar surface and the first successful proof-of-principle for NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services program, meant to revolutionize the way we see lunar exploration's accessibility play out in the future. Alas, we'll soon need to say goodbye.

"Flight controllers intend to collect data until the lander's solar panels are no longer exposed to light," Intuitive Machines said in the X post. Without sunlight, Odysseus will be left to withstand the frigid lunar night — a night that most of our robotic explorers do not survive.

Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.

Monisha Ravisetti
Astronomy Channel Editor

Monisha Ravisetti is Space.com's Astronomy Editor. She covers black holes, star explosions, gravitational waves, exoplanet discoveries and other enigmas hidden across the fabric of space and time. Previously, she was a science writer at CNET, and before that, reported for The Academic Times. Prior to becoming a writer, she was an immunology researcher at Weill Cornell Medical Center in New York. She graduated from New York University in 2018 with a B.A. in philosophy, physics and chemistry. She spends too much time playing online chess. Her favorite planet is Earth.

  • Sadot
    Not trusting anything they are saying about this probe...
    They edited the Bill Nelson video... He originally said "We've Taken the Moon" during the playback or the message during the live stream.... Now they have edited it to show him saying "Odysseus has taken the moon"

    Why the deception

    If this thing landed in the correct origination the software would have launched the 3rd person view camera... in fact it would have launched they regardless of ordination I suspect unless it was program not too if it was out of limits.

    I would only imagine the limit would be if the the probe was upside down...

    Also one more thing... if this thing is upright as shown in the the photo... why is it now so hard to communicate with it?

    You cant tell me they sent something that is about 3days from earth travel time... and put a mono directional antenna on it that requires the thing to be mega precise in it's landing direction?

    That would make no sense... That it like putting a directional mic in a place you want to capture sound from all around you.

    As stated I don't trust anything that is coming from these people.
    Reply
  • Classical Motion
    Many aspects of this mission were disappointing to me. And they hype it as a success. First of all along with the engineering software for design and operation that we have had for decades, we also have project planning software. The planning software should have caught that switch. That manual interlock switch.

    They used our military network space wifi for navigation/communication to the moon. And it worked very well from the reports. I would assume this is an array antenna. A stationary antenna that can be aimed electronically. And automatically.

    After moon orbit, they switched on their moon navigation and that's when they found a dead navigation/landing system from that switch. That is a huge OOPS.

    So they sent a patch to route another instrument for landing navigation. That patch did not try to integrate the landing cameras. They were left non functional. A proper integrated patch can be uploading after landing. Patch might not be needed after landing.

    But the patch was not successful. And evidently there was some lateral motion upon landing.......tipping the craft over.

    However there seems to be no shame in declaring the patch and landing a success.

    How does the previous team of a few weeks ago feel about that? They made a "landing" too.

    The job of a project manager is to confirm every detail. And confirm every contingency protocol.

    And that was not done by man or machine. An interlock switch of all things. How many techs and engineers signed off on that procedure? Have you ever seen the documents of maintenance at a nuclear plant?

    And why didn't the project software flag it?

    Either there is was a lapse in the protocol(software error) or someone skirted the protocol.

    I can only surmise with what I read. And I'm sure there are other undisclosed factors.

    And I don't believe a celebration is in order. I judge it as a failure. But have no standing before them.
    Reply
  • Sadot
    Classical Motion said:
    Many aspects of this mission were disappointing to me. And they hype it as a success. First of all along with the engineering software for design and operation that we have had for decades, we also have project planning software. The planning software should have caught that switch. That manual interlock switch.

    They used our military network space wifi for navigation/communication to the moon. And it worked very well from the reports. I would assume this is an array antenna. A stationary antenna that can be aimed electronically. And automatically.

    After moon orbit, they switched on their moon navigation and that's when they found a dead navigation/landing system from that switch. That is a huge OOPS.

    So they sent a patch to route another instrument for landing navigation. That patch did not try to integrate the landing cameras. They were left non functional. A proper integrated patch can be uploading after landing. Patch might not be needed after landing.

    But the patch was not successful. And evidently there was some lateral motion upon landing.......tipping the craft over.

    However there seems to be no shame in declaring the patch and landing a success.

    How does the previous team of a few weeks ago feel about that? They made a "landing" too.

    The job of a project manager is to confirm every detail. And confirm every contingency protocol.

    And that was not done by man or machine. An interlock switch of all things. How many techs and engineers signed off on that procedure? Have you ever seen the documents of maintenance at a nuclear plant?

    And why didn't the project software flag it?

    Either there is was a lapse in the protocol(software error) or someone skirted the protocol.

    I can only surmise with what I read. And I'm sure there are other undisclosed factors.

    And I don't believe a celebration is in order. I judge it as a failure. But have no standing before them.
    Yes you nailed... Failure passed off as a success.. That is what left a bad taste in my mouth. The Commentators constantly telling us that was a great call for everything that was going on... they where lying to us in real time ...that is fine their space craft their mission so in reality they did not have to let us tag along... but everyone on the live stream could tell something was going wrong and that is what bites about putting your information public... they started to censor at the end there.

    As for the so called switch and the patch software.. First as a pilot, heck any pilot will tell you follow your checklist. This team should have had a before flight checklist and multiple people running through that check list before it was mounted to a boaster. So that was unacceptable.

    That Software patch.. see they way I see that is if those laser where capable of a secondary function that program should have been loaded to the probe for she left Earth so that could be proven and tested as a reliable back up should something happen to the main range finder... So I don't give them the props everyone is giving them on that one..

    Any programmer will tell you push something into production untested is a recipe for a bad outcome...

    But hey this is space travel so I should be more forgiving.. But like you wrote... The hype pre and post is sickening...

    Every one gets a trophy I guess.
    Reply
  • Brad
    Yes this mission is really an abject failure being passed off as a great success. SLIM, which also failed to a certain degree (at least they got some science) has now come back to life and sent more pictures from the surface of the moon then Odysseus has it's whole mission. What a disappointment and waste of funds. I know innovation has a cost but honestly most of these issues are because of sloppy protocols and a lack of attention to certain details.
    Reply