Dispute Erupts Over Lunar Lander Challenge Decision

Not being a lawyer, it appears NASA and Space X have gotten themselves into a PR quandary by playing a bit loose with the rules. Why does one team have more time then another to attempt to qualify? If this is in the rules then end of story, but reading AA's version it sounds like their was an offer made to one and not the other that was beyond the rules. Short of rolling back the clock, they should admit they screwed up and offer AA another day to better their accuracy, or take the total 1st and 2nd prize purses and split between the two and call them co- 1st place winners. Giving 1st place to Masten will leave a "foul" taste. Then again this sort of drama does liven things up. Best to all teams

Editor's note: SpaceX has absolutely nothing to do with this competition so I don't know why you make such accusations.

I think you mean "The X-Prize Foundation" rather than "Space X". Space X is not involved in this competition. The X-Prize Foundation is running it. Despite both having to do with space and both having an "X" in the name, the X-Prize Foundation and Space X are not related.

You are correct. I stand corrected.

From these two items, it does seem a bit unfair, unless there was some extenuating circumstances that one company was given more time than the other...

We need all of these players to win. Not necessarily in terms of the prize purse, but in terms of technical success. Protest is noted, but I hope this blows over and both Masten and Armadillo can pave the way for the next great project.

I found a discussion of this issue at The Launch Pad. It looks like the rationale is that an extra time period may be granted by the judges if a time period is forfeited before the vehicle takes off. Masten's Xoie never got off the ground on the first day, so if what I'm reading is correct, Masten would have a legitimate reason to get an extra time slot.

I read the discussion at The Launch Pad and it sounds like there is a question on what the conditions for a forfeit are. Can forfeit occur after the clock starts but before ignition? If the rules allow this then Masten appears to be the winner, if the rules don't address this explicitly then it is a judgment call for the judges, although in this case it will leave a bad taste in some people's mouth. Are the rules published online somewhere? I hope that this does not detract from what has been a very exciting and compelling challenge.

I've been able to find the 2009 rules thanks to a post on hobbyspace.com

I don't see an exact definition of forefeit. However, on PDF page 19, rule A.2.24.2 says:

"The Official Judges may elect at their sole discretion to grant
Qualified Vehicles additional Time Periods at any given Prize Winning
Attempt in the event that a Time Period is forfeited prior to Vehicle takeoff."

The key language is "prior to vehicle takeoff." Because Masten never had a "vehicle takeoff" in their first time period, it looks to me that this rule provides ample justification for the judges to allow an extra time period.

I couldn't find anything else about forfeiting, so there doesn't seem to be any formal procedure regarding what constitutes a forefeit. The only specific requirement seems to be that there was no takeoff. Beyond that, it's up to the judges, and the judges were unanimous in their decision to grant extra time.

I support Masten on this issue. The extra time period looks consistent with the rules to me.