Live in about 80 minutes.

"NASA News Briefing on Intuitive Machines' First Lunar Landing" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWEwR8fscFY

Tipped to it's side, bummer. No photos yet - stopped listening to them 'stroke' themselves. "Qualified" success my butt.

Most organizations first attempts at this sort of thing end with a space craft in smithereens. Also, there primary landing velocity/altitude sensor array didn't work, but NASA had an experimental one on board for testing, which they managed to substitute. If that hadn't worked they would never have attempted to land. That shows reslience in the command and support engineer crew. And any vehicle that is set down 90 degrees from any orienation it was ever designed to have and still mostly works is demonstrating a certain unusual engineering robustness. If no other shoe drops and they more tha half the data they wanted, I'd give the ride 4 out of 5 uber stars. How many rockets did SpaceX blow up before they got ready for living cargo? How many rockets did NASA blow up with living cargo? This this basically a self landing delivery drone to be flown over a barrenwasteland through empty "air" space, performance standards are lower to begin with.

Oh, I think it was a success. Got to the surface in one piece and still working on the very first try seems like an awesome success!!! And to switch laser systems in real-time under pressure... That was a success too. Space travel is 'hard'. They did good.

I noticed listening to the panel discussion that they'll be adding to their documentation a note to turn off the 'manual' laser safety switch before they button up the machine for launch though! And it was just 'luck' that they found it, because normally it would be activated on final descent which would have been to late to fix. As the had to adjust the orbit, the system was turned on ... and nothing... Whoops. Blood pressure on the rise... Go around the moon (2 hours) and attempt a fix... Had to smile, because one of our high power rocketeers (a few years ago), 'remembered' that he forgot to arm his chute deploy system just as he fired his rocket off the pad. Flew great, but made a nice hole in the ground on return. He's keep the scrunched nose cone as a reminder...

Ok. Maybe I let disappointment get the best of me. On reflection it was a great team effort. Hopefully we'll yet get some good 'science.'

"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. 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. Image credit: NASA/Goddard/Arizona State University." https://twitter.com/Int_Machines/sta...11943161037015

The best composite image is on X but this pdf has a few photos.
https://7c27f7d6-4a0b-4269-aee9-80e8...63081b5d23.pdf

'"So we're coming down to our landing site with no altimeter," Altemus said.

Unfortunately, as it neared the lunar surface, the lander believed it was about 100 meters higher relative to the Moon than it actually was. So instead of touching down with a vertical velocity of just 1 meter per second and no lateral movement, Odysseus was coming down three times faster and with a lateral speed of 2 meters per second.

"That little geometry made us hit a little harder than we wanted to," he said.

But all was not lost. Based upon data downloaded from the spacecraft and imagery from NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, which flew over the landing site, Intuitive Machines has determined that the lander came down to the surface and likely skidded. This force caused one of its six landing legs to snap. Then, for a couple of seconds, the lander stood upright before toppling over due to the failed leg.

The company has an incredible photo of this moment showing the lander upright, with the snapped leg and the engine still firing. Altemus plans to publicly release this photo Wednesday.' https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/0...ltimetry-data/

It is a great achievement.

Like the Japanese lander, it is very roughly cylindrical so that it fits into a rocket.

Are there any reasons why the cylinder shape cannot be designed to land on its side in future missions, and also be legless, so it is much more stable?

The need to have the engine exhaust pointed downward while landing might be a constraint?

Also, I doubt an impact that breaks the lander's legs would somehow be handled better by a lander that didn't have any legs. A force which snaps the legs would surely break the main body apart.

Sounds like something to work on before the next attempt :) . Hopefully by the 10th try, they'll have it nailed down :) .

Landers ought to be made like a roly-poly toy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roly-poly_toy or a tortoise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B...ion_to_animals

It took many attempts with a very high percentage of losses to get robotic landers to succeed on Mars and it has an atmosphere to aid in braking. Additionally it's a lot easier to find a clear landing site on Mars than on the Moon, at least for robotic landers. Adaptability is still, at least for the time being, a major advantage humans have over machines. Nevertheless, NASA banked on IM because they had good design with reasonable odds of success. It is a qualified success and the next one will likely be much better.

Here's what the first one did accomplish (From the IM website)

1) Validated the performance of the Company’s proprietary liquid methane and liquid oxygen propulsion system through the first-ever deep space ignition, followed by multiple restarts, repeatedly providing successful spacecraft maneuvers

2) Became the first commercial-sector company and NASA CLPS (Commercial Lunar Payload Services) provider to successfully land and transmit scientific data to and from the Moon
Landed Odysseus, farther south than any vehicle in the world has ever soft-landed on the Moon, which we believe is significant given NASA’s $93B Artemis Campaign is targeting the region for human missions

3) Traveled over 600,000 miles and softly landed less than one mile from its intended Malapert A landing region

4) Transmitted over 350 megabytes of science and engineering data, which was collected across all payloads; NASA confirms mission success
Exceeded one of the mission objectives to operate 144 hours on the lunar surface and entered standby mode on February 29, 2024, as we await two to three weeks for the next lunar day and a potential for Odysseus’ revival

5) Fundamentally disrupted the economics of landing on the Moon through a fixed-price performance contract, demonstrating unprecedented economics and efficiency to commercial customers and NASA

They could land on their feet like a cat, which appears to work even without air.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat_righting_reflex

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falling_cat_problem

Why It’s So Challenging to Land Upright on the Moon (NYTimes) (archive.is copy).