IM-1
lunar lander built by Intuitive Machines targeting the Malapert-A crater on the Moon
IM-1 was a robotic Moon landing mission conducted by Intuitive Machines under NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) program. The Nova-C lander, named Odysseus, touched down near the Malapert-A crater in the Moon's southern hemisphere on February 22, 2024. It had launched on a Falcon 9 from Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39A on February 15. IM-1 was the first lunar soft landing by a private company and the first US lunar soft landing since Apollo 17 in 1972. It was the second launch under CLPS, after the failure of Peregrine Mission One in January 2024.
After contact with the lunar surface, the lander tipped to an unplanned 30 degree angle. All instrument payloads remained functional and the mission was deemed a success, though the data transmission rate was significantly below the planned rate. NASA provided funding support for the mission through the Commercial Lunar Payload Services program. carried six NASA-developed payloads and several others from commercial and educational customers. On February 29, Odysseus lost power and shut down with the start of the lunar night, and could not be reactivated at the start of the next lunar day.
“IM-1” enters the record as lunar lander built by Intuitive Machines targeting the Malapert-A crater on the Moon. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what IM-1, lunar and lander can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“IM-1” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, IM-1, lunar and lander provides the most credible route into that argument.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 22, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q112959040. Authority coordinates are -80.130, 1.440. 1 of 2 selected statements include explicit references; 1 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2024 and 1972.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “IM-1”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow IM-1 primary sources, IM-1 archive and IM-1 research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “IM-1”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “IM-1” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.