The Space Show Presents Dr. Michael Griffin On Our National Effort To Return To The Moon Based On His Dec. 4, 2025 House Testimony.

Note: A PDF of his House testimony including factual and quantitative analysis is available on line & at www.thespaceshow.com for the Dec. 21, 2025 Space Show program with Mike. He testified before the House on Dec. 4, 2025.

The Space Show Presents Dr. Mike Griffin, Tuesday, Dec. 23, 2025

Quick Summary:

Our program with guest Dr. Mike Griffin primarily focused on discussing NASA’s current lunar exploration program and its challenges, with extensive testimony from Mike about the technical limitations and risks of the Artemis III plan. The participants explored alternative architectures and technical solutions, including the need for orbital flight tests and cryogenic propellant management capabilities. The discussion concluded with concerns about the program’s timeline and infrastructure limitations, while emphasizing the importance of U.S. leadership in space exploration and the need for more diverse expert participation in future discussions.

David and Mike discussed the challenges and concerns surrounding NASA’s current approach to returning to the moon, with Mike emphasizing that the existing plans with SpaceX and Blue Origin are unlikely to succeed. They highlighted the need for a different launch system and expressed frustration over the perceived mismanagement of the mission timeline. The conversation also touched on the potential for additional space vehicles to support lunar missions, though Mike noted that the current architecture does not require them. David introduced the evening’s program and mentioned that Mike’s testimony would be a key focus, setting the stage for a detailed discussion on the future of lunar exploration.

Dr. Griffin testified before Congress about China’s moon program and the United States’ response, emphasizing that China is actively developing lunar capabilities while the U.S. lacks a coherent strategy at a special House committee meeting on Dec. 4, 2025. He criticized the Artemis III plan, arguing it cannot succeed due to technical challenges with cryogenic propellant storage and the near rectilinear halo orbit design, which leaves crews stranded for extended periods. Dr. Griffin proposed an alternative dual-launch architecture using the SLS, similar to China’s approach, but acknowledged that the U.S. needs more heavy lift capacity.

Mike explained that switching the program of record to a new architecture would require a significant commitment and involve multiple steps, including the new NASA administrator investigating the controversy, the president approving a change, and Congress appropriating funds. He emphasized that the current Artemis program architecture will not work and offered an alternative solution, while noting that other approaches could also succeed. I inquired about the process to switch the program of record, and our guest outlined the steps that would need to be taken, including potential sole source assignments to contractors.

Our Space Show Wisdom Team discussed the technical challenges and feasibility of NASA’s lunar mission concept, focusing on the difficulties of cryogenic propellant management and boil-off control in the lunar environment. Mike emphasized that the mission’s current design lacks necessary expertise and experience, particularly in maintaining cryogenic temperatures for extended periods, and expressed concerns about the potential risks to crew safety. The participants agreed that the concept, as currently proposed, is unlikely to succeed within a reasonable timeframe. Marshall highlighted the specific challenge of managing heat on the sunlit lunar surface. I inquired about SpaceX’s perspective regarding the challenges and risks, but Mike clarified that he could not speak for SpaceX engineers and emphasized that no amount of engineering brilliance can rescue a fundamentally flawed concept.

We continued discussing concerns about the U.S. lunar exploration program and its competitiveness with China. Mike expressed frustration that the current architecture lacks sufficient delta-V and a credible lunar lander, while Ajay raised questions about the feasibility of multiple refueling missions. The discussion highlighted tensions between using cryogenic versus storable liquid propulsion systems, with Griffin advocating for storable liquids for the first crewed mission due to infrastructure limitations on the moon. The conversation concluded with his emphasizing the importance of U.S. leadership in space exploration and his preference for a simpler, safer approach to lunar missions.

Mike and Ajay discussed the challenges of refueling in space, particularly for cryogenic liquids, and the risks associated with multiple launches. They expressed skepticism about the Blue Origin architecture and the feasibility of the NRHO concept due to technical limitations and the lack of demonstrated technology. Mike emphasized that if a mission failed, the fleet would likely be grounded until the problem is understood and solved, similar to historical practices in air and spaceflight. David asked about a potential point of no return for a new mission design, but Mike suggested there isn’t a definitive point where re-engagement would be impossible. He expressed concern about the U.S. not being actively involved in lunar exploration, noting that China’s success is not guaranteed lunar success either.

Mike further emphasized the necessity of conducting an orbital flight test to demonstrate cryogenic propellant transfer and boil-off prevention before committing to a mission that involves significant national investment. He highlighted the importance of seeing such a test to validate the technology, as calculations alone would not be sufficient. Phil noted the success of the space shuttle’s test flight and asked if thorough analysis and ground tests could convince Mike to which Mike responded that the shuttle’s testing was significantly more extensive than what had been proposed for Artemis. Marshall suggested building a high-quality space station as a more efficient use of national resources than a moon mission, but our guest argued that space stations should serve mission needs and not be the initial focus. John proposed the idea of constructing a propellant depot with refrigeration capabilities to support future lunar missions, which Griffin supported as a viable option for refueling architecture.

Our guest discussed the technical limitations of NASA’s current approach to lunar missions, emphasizing that the proposed method of refueling in Earth orbit before heading to the moon is not feasible due to the lack of cryogenic fluid management capabilities. He compared this to a hypothetical cross-country flight that requires frequent refueling, highlighting the impracticality of the current plan. Mike expressed concern that the project may eventually stall due to technological constraints, noting that previous attempts to address similar issues in NASA’s history faced significant political and public backlash. He also acknowledged the challenges faced by Jared Isaacman, the new NASA administrator, in making major changes to the current plan, but declined to offer specific advice on how to navigate these challenges.

We also focused on NASA’s responsibility for selecting the right approach to return to the moon, with Mike emphasizing that technical decisions should not be made through public votes. David expressed appreciation for Mike’s insights and mentioned plans to share the discussion on Space Show global media accounts. The conversation ended with a reminder about supporting the Space Show through various payment methods, including PayPal, Zelle, and checks, with details provided for each option.

Our Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)

For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.

The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:

To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.

If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:

One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135

Upcoming Programs:

Broadcast 4477 Zoom: Special Space Show Msg Program | Friday 26 Dec 2025 930AM PT

Guests: Dr. David Livingston

ZOOM: To Be Determined

Broadcast 4478: Zoom: TOM OLSON | Sunday 28 Dec 2025 1200PM PT

Guests: Thomas A. Olson

Zoom: Tom returns for his annual year in review program. Always exciting and fun. Don’t miss it.