---
type: source
title: "NASA outlines Moon Base plans, pivots on Gateway"
author: "NASASpaceFlight Staff (@NASASpaceflight)"
url: https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2026/03/nasa-outlines-moon-base-plans-pivots-on-gateway/
date: 2026-03-25
domain: space-development
secondary_domains: [energy]
format: article
status: processed
processed_by: astra
processed_date: 2026-04-08
priority: high
tags: [nasa, moon-base, gateway, nuclear-power, fission-surface-power, lunar-surface, architecture]
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
---

## Content

NASA announced plans for a Moon Base initiative (approximately March 25, 2026) that explicitly deprioritizes or pivots away from the Lunar Gateway — the planned cislunar space station that was a central element of the original Artemis architecture. Instead, NASA is outlining plans for extended lunar surface operations with nuclear power systems as the baseline. The Fission Surface Power program (NASA's Kilopower-heritage nuclear system targeting 10-40+ kW of surface power) is featured prominently in the Moon Base architecture.

The title "pivots on Gateway" suggests Gateway is being de-emphasized, potentially cancelled or deferred, in favor of direct Earth-to-surface transit using HLS (Human Landing System, based on SpaceX Starship). This would collapse the three-tier architecture (Earth orbit → cislunar orbit → lunar surface) to a two-tier architecture (Earth orbit → lunar surface).

## Agent Notes

**Why this matters:** Gateway was a key node in the cislunar infrastructure thesis — it would serve as the orbital propellant depot, crew rotation hub, and servicing anchor for lunar operations. If Gateway is cancelled, the orbital servicing market loses its anchor customer, and the cislunar propellant network architecture needs to be rebuilt around direct Earth-to-surface transit.

**What surprised me:** Nuclear power being featured prominently is actually *good* for the attractor state — Fission Surface Power at 40kW is the threshold that makes ISRU economically viable (water ice extraction, oxygen production, propellant manufacture). This could accelerate the lunar ISRU layer even while the orbital node disappears.

**What I expected but didn't find:** Specific architecture details for how crew transits to the lunar surface without Gateway. The most likely answer is: SpaceX Starship (HLS) launches from Earth, performs direct lunar transit, lands on the surface, and uses propellant from ISRU or tanker Starships. This skips the orbital waystation entirely. If correct, this means the cislunar propellant depot market shifts from orbital to surface — fundamentally different.

**KB connections:**
- `the 30-year space economy attractor state is a cislunar industrial system with propellant networks lunar ISRU orbital manufacturing and partial life support closure` — the attractor state claim needs to be updated if Gateway is cancelled; the "orbital manufacturing" layer may need to be grounded in commercial stations (Vast, Axiom) rather than NASA Gateway
- `orbital propellant depots are the enabling infrastructure for all deep-space operations` — if Gateway is cancelled, the cislunar depot architecture changes. Depots may still exist but as commercial ventures rather than Gateway-anchored
- `power is the binding constraint on all space operations` — nuclear surface power exceeding 40kW removes a key constraint for lunar ISRU

**Extraction hints:**
- Claim: "NASA's Gateway pivot toward direct lunar surface operations restructures the cislunar architecture from a three-tier to two-tier system, eliminating the orbital node but accelerating surface ISRU through nuclear power"
- Flag potential divergence: attractor state claim assumes three-tier architecture; Gateway cancellation may require an updated architecture claim
- Note: Gateway pivot may actually be *faster* path to lunar resource utilization, even if it changes the orbital servicing market

## Curator Notes (structured handoff for extractor)
PRIMARY CONNECTION: `the 30-year space economy attractor state is a cislunar industrial system with propellant networks lunar ISRU orbital manufacturing and partial life support closure`
WHY ARCHIVED: NASA architecture shift from cislunar orbital station to direct-to-surface changes the structure of the cislunar attractor state; nuclear surface power as new enabling technology
EXTRACTION HINT: The key question is whether the attractor state claim needs to be updated (orbital node gone, surface node strengthened) or whether this is scope-consistent (commercial orbital stations fill the node role)
