Rocket Lab is seeing red about NASA’s decision on a Mars spacecraft

Rocket Lab 对 NASA 的火星航天器决策感到不满

In theory, developing a spacecraft that will fly to Mars, insert itself into orbit around the red planet, and relay transmissions back and forth to large satellite dishes on Earth is a relatively straightforward proposition. NASA’s procurement of a “Mars Telecommunications Network” spacecraft, however, has turned out to be one of the most engrossing dramas of the year for the US space agency. 从理论上讲，开发一种能够飞往火星、进入这颗红色星球轨道，并与地球上的大型卫星天线进行双向信号传输的航天器，是一个相对直接的命题。然而，NASA 对“火星电信网络”航天器的采购，却成了该机构今年最引人入胜的戏剧性事件之一。

The agency finally reached a decision earlier this month, selecting Blue Origin to develop, launch, and operate a $700 million spacecraft at Mars. However, the main competitor for the award, Rocket Lab, was not happy—at all. On Friday, the company filed a protest of NASA’s decision with the US Government Accountability Office. 本月早些时候，NASA 终于做出了决定，选择蓝色起源（Blue Origin）公司来开发、发射并运营一个价值 7 亿美元的火星航天器。然而，该项目的主要竞争对手 Rocket Lab 对此非常不满。周五，该公司向美国政府问责局（GAO）正式对 NASA 的决定提出了抗议。

“NASA’s award decision appears to be inconsistent with the eligibility criteria mandated by Congress,” the company said on X. “In addition, the agency’s punitive review of Rocket Lab’s technical volume was inconsistent, making incorrect assertions and conclusions.” “NASA 的授标决定似乎与国会规定的资格标准不符，”该公司在 X 上表示。“此外，该机构对 Rocket Lab 技术方案的惩罚性审查前后不一，做出了错误的断言和结论。”

In response, Blue Origin said the protest could potentially delay the mission’s goal of launching in 2028. “We remain confident in the strength of our proposal, in NASA’s rigorous selection process, and in Congress’s clear intent to support competition for the Mars Telecommunications Network program,” the company said. “We look forward to advancing this urgent mission. With limited Mars launch windows, any delay will greatly risk the timely deployment of this critical communications capability.” 对此，蓝色起源回应称，此次抗议可能会推迟该任务 2028 年的发射目标。“我们对我们的提案实力、NASA 严格的选拔程序以及国会支持火星电信网络项目竞争的明确意图充满信心，”该公司表示。“我们期待推进这一紧迫的任务。由于火星发射窗口有限，任何延误都将极大地危及这一关键通信能力的及时部署。”

One Big Beautiful spacecraft

一个“宏大而美丽”的航天器

Rocket Lab’s protest announcement references “eligibility criteria mandated by Congress,” and this appears to be the heart of the issue at hand. The origin of the Mars Telecommunications Network spacecraft came as part of the supplemental funding package for NASA provided by the “One Big Beautiful Bill” passed by the US Congress in 2025. It was not widely expected in the space community, but the new start was welcome, given that NASA’s spacecraft orbiting Mars are aging. Rocket Lab 的抗议声明提到了“国会规定的资格标准”，这似乎是当前问题的核心。火星电信网络航天器的起源是美国国会 2025 年通过的“宏大而美丽法案”（One Big Beautiful Bill）为 NASA 提供的补充资金方案的一部分。航天界此前并未广泛预期到这一点，但考虑到 NASA 在火星轨道上的航天器正在老化，这一新项目的启动受到了欢迎。

This NASA-specific legislation, led by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), included some curious wording. It specified that the Mars orbiter must be selected from among US companies that “received funding from the Administration in fiscal year 2024 or 2025 for commercial design studies for Mars Sample Return; and had proposed a separate, independently launched Mars telecommunication orbiter supporting an end-to-end Mars sample return mission.” 这项由参议员泰德·克鲁兹（Ted Cruz，共和党，德克萨斯州）领导的针对 NASA 的立法包含了一些令人好奇的措辞。它规定，火星轨道飞行器必须从那些“在 2024 或 2025 财年获得政府资助进行火星样本返回商业设计研究，并曾提出过支持端到端火星样本返回任务的独立发射火星电信轨道飞行器”的美国公司中选出。

The reference to “commercial design studies” meant companies that proposed faster and more affordable missions to return samples from Mars, which were selected in 2024 and 2025. Rocket Lab is one of several companies eligible to compete based on this commercial design study requirement. Other eligible bidders include: Blue Origin, L3Harris, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, SpaceX, Quantum Space, and Whittinghill Aerospace. 文中提到的“商业设计研究”是指那些在 2024 年和 2025 年入选、旨在提出更快速且更经济的火星样本返回任务的公司。Rocket Lab 是基于这一商业设计研究要求有资格参与竞争的几家公司之一。其他符合条件的竞标者包括：蓝色起源、L3Harris、洛克希德·马丁、诺斯罗普·格鲁曼、SpaceX、Quantum Space 和 Whittinghill Aerospace。

This seems reasonable, as those companies had all been working with NASA on Mars spacecraft concept studies. But why, some Capitol Hill sources wondered, must the bidder for a relatively straightforward orbiter around Mars have previously proposed an orbiter as part of an “end-to-end” mission to return samples from Mars? 这看起来很合理，因为这些公司此前都一直在与 NASA 合作进行火星航天器的概念研究。但一些国会山的消息人士质疑，为什么一个相对简单的火星轨道飞行器的竞标者，必须此前曾提出过作为“端到端”火星样本返回任务一部分的轨道飞行器方案？

This “end-to-end” language, according to sources, was intended to favor Rocket Lab and its proposal for a telecommunications orbiter. Around the time of the legislation’s passage, Rocket Lab seemed to believe it was the only company to propose a qualifying “end-to-end” mission, which it claimed to shareholders during its Q2 2025 investor update. 据消息人士称，这种“端到端”的措辞旨在偏袒 Rocket Lab 及其电信轨道飞行器方案。在该法案通过前后，Rocket Lab 似乎认为自己是唯一一家提出符合条件的“端到端”任务的公司，并在其 2025 年第二季度投资者更新中向股东宣称了这一点。

Why was this decision made?

为什么会做出这个决定？

There is still a lot we do not know about this procurement. Perhaps most important is why Congress wrote the language in the bill the way it did. Sources said that while Cruz’s office was responsible for the language overall, Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) was involved with the Mars Telecommunications Network language. 关于这次采购，我们还有很多不了解的地方。也许最重要的问题是，国会为什么要以这种方式撰写法案中的措辞。消息人士称，虽然克鲁兹的办公室负责整体措辞，但参议员罗杰·威克（Roger Wicker，共和党，密西西比州）也参与了火星电信网络相关条款的制定。

So why did NASA ultimately decide to select a spacecraft based on Blue Origin’s Blue Ring technology instead? It’s possible the agency did not have confidence in Rocket Lab completing development of the spacecraft and its Neutron rocket by late 2028, when the mission is due to launch. It’s also possible that selection officials felt like Blue Ring was a more capable spacecraft that better fulfilled the agency’s needs. 那么，为什么 NASA 最终决定选择基于蓝色起源“Blue Ring”技术的航天器呢？可能是该机构对 Rocket Lab 能否在 2028 年底任务预定发射前完成航天器及其“中子”（Neutron）火箭的开发缺乏信心。也有可能是评审官员认为“Blue Ring”是一款能力更强、更能满足机构需求的航天器。

We don’t know the answers to these questions because NASA has yet to publicly release a “source selection statement,” which provides the technical rationale for why a decision was made. It is strange that, nearly two weeks after an award was made, this document is still not public. All we really know is that Rocket Lab, from its statement, feels as though NASA’s review of its technology was “punitive” and “inconsistent.” 我们不知道这些问题的答案，因为 NASA 尚未公开“来源选择声明”（source selection statement），该文件提供了做出决定的技术依据。奇怪的是，在授标近两周后，这份文件仍未公开。我们唯一确定的是，根据 Rocket Lab 的声明，该公司认为 NASA 对其技术的审查是“惩罚性”且“前后不一”的。

All of this continues to produce uncertainty around an award process that has been hotly contested in technical proposals, political maneuvers, and on social media, where Rocket Lab and Blue Origin have been sniping at one another. While the spacecraft may not be super exotic, there is a lot at stake here. This is the first time NASA is using a fixed-price contract to select a US company to build a spacecraft, launch it, and operate the network around another planet. The winner of this competition, Blue Origin, at least for now, will have a first-mover advantage in future Solar System exploration for NASA. 所有这些持续为这一采购过程带来不确定性，该过程在技术方案、政治博弈以及社交媒体上一直备受争议，Rocket Lab 和蓝色起源在社交媒体上更是互相指责。虽然该航天器可能并不算特别新奇，但其中涉及的利益巨大。这是 NASA 首次使用固定价格合同来选择一家美国公司建造航天器、发射它并运营另一颗行星周围的网络。此次竞争的获胜者蓝色起源，至少目前看来，将在 NASA 未来的太阳系探索中占据先发优势。