NASA project leader blames next-generation X-ray telescope cancellation on agency mismanagement

When you purchase through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission.

One of NASA’s largest upcoming astrophysics missions has been brought to a grinding halt, and the project manager is blaming mismanagement at the space agency caused by last year’s budget confusion.

AXIS, the Advanced X-ray Imaging Satellite, was one of two concepts selected for detailed design studies as part of the NASA project. Astrophysical Probe Explorer Programin competition with the PRIMA far infrared observatory concept. AXIS could have replaced NASA’s aging system Chandra Observatorywhich has remained a driving force in X-ray astronomy since 1999, but the project came to an abrupt halt.

An internal email sent March 9 from AXIS principal investigator Christopher Reynolds informed members of the mission’s international team that NASA Headquarters had declared the program ineligible for selection, effectively terminating the project before its concept study could undergo a full technical review.

“NASA’s decision was NOT a judgment on the importance of AXIS science,” Reynolds said in the email. posted on social networks. He said AXIS’ removal from eligibility was related to disruptions within the NASA facility. Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) in Maryland, which managed the mission for a period of considerable labor losses and operational instability throughout 2025.

“The mission formulation process was seriously compromised by the seismic changes that occurred in NASA and the federal government,” Reynolds wrote.

A major setback was caused by the early retirement of Will Zhang, a scientist who NASA describes as a “genius in making mirrors” for space telescopes.

“The key technology for AXIS is these single-crystal silicon mirror assemblies, developed by Will Zhang at GSFC,” a Goddard scientist familiar with the matter, but not authorized to speak on behalf of NASA, told Space.com. “Will had always intended to retire soon, but he accepted the DRP.”

“One of the main goals of AXIS Phase A was to build at least one of these mirror assemblies to prove that this was possible. They didn’t build any,” the scientist said. “It seemed like every week there was an announcement that someone was leaving the AXIS team due to retirement or seeking other employment, all because of the uncertainty of NASA funding and the truly chaotic environment at GSFC.”

The project lost more than 20 GSFC personnel with key expertise as a result of NASA’s intervention. Deferred resignation program (DRP) and reorganizations align with the 2026 presidential budget requestaccording to Reynolds’ email, and faced other complications caused by the government shutdown last year.

“Work was halted for nearly seven weeks when the GSFC AXIS core study team, dominated by NASA officials, was on leaveNASA then extended the deadline for the concept study report, but Reynolds wrote that the extension was “inadequate compensation for the disruption and time lost” to address cost and schedule adjustments that had already been identified.

According to the email, Goddard management ultimately gave AXIS officials a choice: submit a concept study report with an inconsistent cost and schedule, or not submit one at all. NASA also apparently rejected the AXIS team’s call to bring the design into compliance during discussions normally held during the review process, calling that option “unacceptable,” Reynolds said.

Another Goddard scientist not authorized to speak on behalf of NASA, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Space.com that this is not how it is normally done. “It’s not at all unusual for a mission concept to be out of budget and launch date after its first attempt – on the first attempt you ask for everything you can imagine, then you start thinking about what is more reasonable while still meeting the mission requirements,” the scientist said. “The 10% they lost isn’t bad at all for a first pass, but they didn’t have time to get additional quotes to bring it down.”

They said the responsibility lies with NASA leadership.

“Internally, the general consensus is that this is 100% due to poor management by Goddard management…it has absolutely nothing to do with the AXIS team, the merit of AXIS as a concept in general, and especially not with the scientists, engineers and project managers at Goddard who put their all into this mission and were held back by management every step of the way.”

NASA said the decision followed the agency’s standard science mission selection process, which includes several checkpoints during which mission concepts are evaluated for compliance with established requirements.

“NASA has confirmed that the AXIS (Advanced astrophysics community will be announced in the coming weeks.

“Frankly, I am furious that AXIS ultimately fell victim to the programmatic chaos of 2025,” Reynolds told the AXIS team, arguing that the decision did not reflect the scientific importance of the mission.

However, AXIS was not necessarily the favorite against PRIMA, the X-ray space telescope competitor in the Astrophysics Probe program. “AXIS has always been the riskiest of the proposed X-ray probes and people in the community have been generally surprised that AXIS was chosen for Phase A,” said one of the Goddard scientists. “Some people think he was selected because he looked the most like Chandra, and Chandra is old. [and] could use replacement. “

Reynolds closed his message by wishing for “a smooth and rapid path to selection and escape” to PRIMA, which remains under review. He also noted that other X-ray astronomy projects, like SMEX and MidEXcan benefit from the research already carried out by the AXIS team.