What They’re Not Telling You About The Lunar Crash We Are About To Witness

In an age where space exploration has become a cornerstone of human achievement, a curious event is set to unfold that promises to challenge our understanding of lunar impacts and the very nature of space debris.

Four years ago, two craters appeared on the far side of the moon, a place where only one should exist according to the laws of physics.

NASA’s photographs revealed these anomalies, but the mystery surrounding them has only deepened since then.

As we approach another significant lunar impact, scheduled for Wednesday morning, there’s more at stake than just a simple collision; this event may hold the key to unraveling a four-year-old enigma that has baffled scientists and space enthusiasts alike.

On March 4th, 2022, a dead rocket stage collided with the moon’s far side near a crater named Hertzsprung.

This was not just any impact; it was the first human-made lunar collision ever predicted in advance.

Astronomers had tracked its trajectory for weeks, publishing the precise time and location of the impending crash.

Yet, in a twist of fate, not a single telescope on Earth was able to witness the event.

The far side of the moon, perpetually hidden from our view, became a stage for humanity’s first calculated strike against the lunar surface, all occurring in complete darkness.

Three months later, NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter located the crash site and sent back images that would leave the scientific community scratching their heads.

Instead of a single crater, the images revealed two overlapping pits—one approximately 16 meters across and the other about 18 meters wide.

NASA’s public statement acknowledged the unexpected nature of the double crater, suggesting that the rocket body must have carried substantial masses at both ends.

However, this was merely a description, not an explanation, leaving many questions unanswered.

A spent rocket stage is typically a hollow tube, with empty fuel tanks along its length and a concentrated mass—the engine—bolted to one end.

Physics dictates that such an object should create one crater upon impact, yet the evidence suggested otherwise.

In the years since those photographs were taken, no one—neither NASA, nor the tracking community, nor the nation believed to have constructed the rocket—has provided a satisfactory explanation for the double crater anomaly.

As we prepare for another lunar impact in just four days, the anticipation is palpable.

This upcoming event is set to differ in crucial ways from the 2022 impact.

To truly grasp why this new collision serves as a verdict on a four-year-old case, we must first delve into the peculiarities surrounding the original impact.

The object responsible for the double crater was initially cataloged as an unidentified point of light, known only by the temporary designation WE0913A.

The astronomer Bill Gray, a contract orbit computation specialist, worked out its trajectory and predicted its fate.

In January 2022, he announced that the object would strike the moon in March, identifying it as the second stage of a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket that had launched a space weather satellite in February 2015.

This identification made headlines worldwide, framing the narrative as SpaceX debris on a collision course with the moon.

However, as the weeks passed, the initial identification began to unravel.

An engineer’s analysis of the trajectory indicated that the object’s path did not align with the Falcon 9 launch, prompting Gray to reassess the situation.

He eventually identified it as the upper stage of China’s Chang’e 5-T1 mission, launched in October 2014.

This mission was a test run for China’s lunar sample return program, sending a capsule looping around the moon and back to Earth, leaving the booster drifting in the same poorly monitored region of space where defunct rockets often go to be forgotten.

Independent observers took the investigation a step further.

A university team measured the object’s reflectance spectrum, discovering it consistent with the materials and paint used on Chinese rocket hardware, not a Falcon 9.

China’s response was outright denial.

The foreign ministry claimed that the Chang’e 5-T1 stage had burned up in Earth’s atmosphere, a statement that seemed to confuse two different missions and was contradicted by United States Space Command tracking data, which confirmed that the stage from the 2014 flight had never returned home.

Beijing has never acknowledged the impact, creating a perplexing situation.

An object matching Chinese hardware struck the moon, leaving behind a crater formation that defies explanation, and the most likely owner of the rocket maintains that it never existed.

This denial is significant not just for diplomatic reasons; it leaves investigators without the crucial documents needed to solve the mystery of the double crater.

The physics surrounding the impact suggest something uncomfortable.

When an object strikes the moon at high velocity, the resulting crater is determined by its mass, speed, angle, and structure.

The Chang’e 5-T1 stage entered at a speed of approximately 2.58 kilometers per second—slow by cosmic standards, yet fast by human measures.

An object of that nature, hollow with a heavy engine at one end, should create a single crater.

However, the presence of two overlapping craters implies that the object must have carried significant mass at both ends.

This raises the question: what was located at the opposite end of the rocket?

NASA’s own statement hints that the object had a second mass, yet no public manifest or mission description accounts for it.

The absence of information is troubling, especially when we consider that NASA has conducted similar experiments before.

During the Apollo program, NASA intentionally crashed spent third stages of its lunar rockets into the moon to calibrate seismometers left behind by astronauts.

Each of those impacts resulted in a single crater, further emphasizing the anomaly of the double crater.

The implications extend beyond just the identity of the rocket.

There are three potential explanations for the double crater, each with its own shortcomings.

The first suggests undisclosed hardware—an instrument package or structural adapter—mounted opposite the engine that was never made public.

However, this theory is undermined by the fact that the owner denies the object’s existence.

The second possibility posits that the Chang’e 5-T1 stage had a unique structural configuration at its forward end, heavy enough to create its own crater.

But again, there is no published engineering breakdown to verify this claim.

The third, and most unsettling explanation, suggests that the physics of impact dynamics were misunderstood.

Perhaps a long, tumbling, low-density cylinder striking at a shallow angle can produce a compound crater in ways that current models do not capture.

If true, this revelation would not only challenge our understanding of the Chang’e 5-T1 stage but could also have far-reaching consequences for planetary science as a whole.

As we prepare for the new impact on August 5th, the stakes have never been higher.

This time, the impactor is a derelict SpaceX Falcon 9 second stage, striking the moon’s near side—the side visible from Earth.

The collision point is near a crater named Einstein, and its trajectory has been meticulously tracked, providing a stark contrast to the uncertainties surrounding the 2022 event.

The Falcon 9 stage is well-documented: 12 meters long, 4 meters wide, with hollow aluminum lithium fuel tanks and a single Merlin vacuum engine at one end.

Its mass is estimated between 3,900 and 4,900 kilograms, and it will strike the moon at a speed of 2.43 kilometers per second—within 6% of the speed of the Chinese stage during its impact.

This controlled experiment presents a unique opportunity to resolve the mystery of the double crater.

The prediction is clear: a single crater, approximately 17 meters across, should be the result of this impact.

In the weeks following the collision, the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter will photograph the new scar near Einstein, providing definitive evidence that could either confirm or deny the previous findings.

If the impact produces a single crater, it would validate the physics behind the event, closing the case on the double crater anomaly.

Conversely, if a compound scar emerges, it would cast doubt on our understanding of how tumbling hollow rocket bodies interact with the lunar surface, leading to a broader inquiry into the physics of impact dynamics.

As we await this monumental event, the world will be watching closely.

The impact site is positioned nearly on the moon’s western limb, creating a unique viewing opportunity.

While the flash of the impact may not be visible against the sunlit surface, the debris ejected into the dark sky could provide a spectacular sight for observers across two continents.

The potential for capturing the chemical fingerprint of the rocket in its debris cloud adds another layer of excitement to the event.

As the countdown to the impact continues, astronomers are preparing for a final refinement of the impact point, ensuring that the collision is documented with precision.

The implications of this event extend far beyond the lunar surface.

It represents a critical juncture in our understanding of impact physics and the behavior of space debris.

As we stand on the brink of this new chapter in lunar exploration, one thing is clear: the answers we seek may finally emerge from the shadows of the moon, illuminating the mysteries that have long eluded us.

In a few days, the silence surrounding the double crater may finally be broken, ushering in a new era of understanding about our moon and the objects that traverse its surface.

The world awaits the verdict, and with it, the potential to reshape our comprehension of celestial impacts and the forces that govern them.

What will the future hold? Only time—and the moon—will tell.