Perception and Reality: The Story of the IM-1 Tweet Timeline
by John Akwei, ECMp ERMp Data Scientist
The story of Intuitive Machines’ IM-1 Nova-C Odysseus lunar landing attempt is an interesting case study on communications and perception at the intersection of public and private spaceflight efforts.
Eager anticipation built as the scheduled landing time of the IM-1 lunar lander approached. Space industry figures and enthusiasts tweeted their excitement, waiting to see if Intuitive Machines could accomplish the first private soft landing on the Moon.
Cheers erupted when NASA tweeted confirmation that the lander had touched down, delivering science instruments for Artemis. Many peer space companies and government agencies also congratulated the success, marking America’s return to the Moon after decades. Early tweets from Intuitive Machines indicated the landing was successful, though the lander’s signals were fainter than expected.
In the following hours, confusion grew as no images emerged and communication issues were alluded to. Questions mounted about what benchmark was being used for a “successful landing” and why there was no video. After admitting troubleshooting was underway, Intuitive Machines later clarified the lander was upright and starting to downlink data.
The next day, CEO Steve Altemus reported the lander likely tipped onto its side during landing. This apparent contradiction regarding the status of the IM-1 lander merits further analysis.
On February 22nd, after initially reporting a successful landing, Intuitive Machines tweeted that they were “troubleshooting communications” and then stated the lander was “upright and starting to send data.” This implied the lander was in its intended upright orientation on the lunar surface.
However, in a media briefing the next day on February 23rd, CEO Steve Altemus reported that the lander likely tipped over onto its side during landing.
There are a few potential explanations for this discrepancy.
- Intuitive Machines misunderstood or misinterpreted the early telemetry data about the lander’s orientation before amending their assessment. They may have prematurely concluded it was upright when the data was unclear.
- IM officials consciously overstated the landing’s success in the immediate aftermath for public relations reasons before conceding issues.
- There could have been a genuine effort to troubleshoot communications issues that led them to then get better data revealing the tipped over state.
Without further internal information from Intuitive Machines, it’s impossible to confirm which of these scenarios is most accurate. At best, there was overly optimistic interpretations coupled with the challenges of a complex mission. At worst, it may point to an intentional effort to spin the initial landing as more successful than it was in reality.
While the contradictions by CEO Steve Altemus, about IM-1 being upright, don’t automatically imply outright deception, they raise reasonable questions about transparency versus “messaging” in public comments about the highly watched inaugural flight. Their decision-making merits further probing.
The IM-1’s laser rangefinders also failed pre-launch. However, the navigation system was adapted to use NASA instrument data instead.
As the realization the lander was not fully upright sank in, some tweeters question the disparity between success and failure. Critics emerged, arguing it was misleading to initially claim a perfect landing. Concerns grew as days passed with no new images.
The public anticipation, temporary celebration, followed by confusion and criticism as complications emerged illustrates the unfolding story arc. While a milestone was still achieved, the overly optimistic initial portrayal was questioned as reality proved more complex. The full tale of IM-1’s landing has yet to be written.
