New Mars Forums

We have no doubt there.

Oh, and for your asteroid comment, its not into air its into the vaccum of space technically. 

My personal guess is if we do extract any lunar water the likelyhood is it will be used exclusively for life support, supplementing LOX production, and propellant for surface and lunar orbital operations.  More to consider as well: water even in ice form is a scarcity on the moon. There is likely no more water on the Moon than even in one of the Great Lakes, and if it is spent as grossly as fossil fuels here on Earth within a hundred years' time it will be used up leaving nothing for any budding lunar cities to utilize.

To paraphrase that famous saying from Vegas: what water's on the Moon stays on the Moon.

Even if you found mountains of platinum and gold you'd still be lucky to come out even for balancing the NASA budget but who knows...

Carrying liquid water instead of liquid O2 and H2 isn't a half-bad idea - I am honestly suprised why neither VSE or even Mars Direct considered that possibility.  The only vague downside I can see would be needing a seperate tank to hold the water but if we're already considering using spent LSAM lower stages for LOX storage then sparing a couple for H2O should be within capability.

Again I reiterate don't count on space tugs just yet, certainly not within the next quarter century barring, perhaps, development from commercial spaceflight.  However making the tugs transfer H2O instead of cryogenics may boost their usefulness.

One further note...

I will agree on the Point of Eternal Light being a good resource utilization area, but only because of two reasons:

1) Its a confirmed source of near-constant sunlight.

2) Its within the South Pole-Aitken Basin, the moon's largest crater with numerous geological sites of interest and study applications.

Although I do not have substantial doubt wouldn't it be wise to first learn what form lunar ice is in at the least?  It could possibly be microwaved out but somehow I doubt it exists like snow here on Earth.  Definetley send a lunar lander to investigate directly otherwise a manned architecture bringing in the wrong extraction equiptment may prove detremental.

Considering thrust, lift, and minimal development efficency I think we should narrow it down to either the 4-segment or the 5-segment for the CLV.  "Stumpy" aka 3-seg. is out of the question despite its simplicity.

I have no problem with the 5-segment SRB, although I find it almost hypocritical how you support it while being critical of its lesser predecessor and its burn-throughs.  With that logic I'd assume you'd be critical of SRBs of all segments...

All things considered my idea would be to amend the 'Ares I-B' concept to use the 5-segments instead of four, otherwise it'd be either a generic fuel tank or the first stage of Ares-V - either way with the CEV sittin on top.  Utilize the 5-segments' increased thrust while simplifying the system.

Yes it'd all be atop a giant powder keg, but the CEV is in no less prone a position than any of the Mercuries, Geminis, or Apollos were before.

I don't know about modifying anything right now, but once we're landing on the Moon I'd advocate creating variations to let the architecture be adaptable; that'll have to be the case if we hope to move onto Mars as well.  I've suggested a ReuseableLSAM concept for instance and you're suggesting biggers EDSes.  We may see both applications in due time.

If I wanted to be bold I'd add, "That's what a poor person would say." 

However I think anything that delves into the millions for personal amusement is a bit gross safe to say.

I have to agree there, but we should make our equiptment universally compatable.  We don't have to rely exlcusively on one nation making this while another makes that, but it'd be handy for a USA CEV to accept the occassional cargo from a ESA ATV or a Russian Progress.  Also helpfuly for emergency rescue and what-not.

Of course the cost of two five-segment boosters on the CaCLV beats that of two three-segments anyday, which ought to be accounted for...AND the cost of modifying a 5-segment to accomidate a booster with the CEV atop in turn you seem to forget.

Each plan has a drawback.  This version doesn't need a new crawler platform built and uses alot of the equiptment that'd be used for CaCLV - no cost for new development.

I like it because I'm willing to bet it can launch a larger CEV than alotted by the Ares-I and without modifying SRBs.  And by that I mean we could stick with the old 4-segments and get the job done.

What I'm thinking about is something practical for the near-to-intermediate future.  At the least I have in mind a Reuseable LSAM to cut down on equiptment launched, at least for crewed vehicles, and modifying the CEV for wider applications.

Utilizing the Lagrange or L points isn't a bad idea, but we need to remember the lessons learned from the ISS.  A moon base with LOX production capability is a higher priority than interorbital vehicles or any type of platform like a lunar space station.  I'm trying to take a horse-before-the-carriage POV.

I believe the current VSE and its vehicles will be nessicary for the initial implementation but once a working lunar base comes into being then and only then should we begin reworking the nessicary lunar architecture and even then something akin to the Mars Direct approach is the most economical.

Here's a reiteration of my refined RLSAM idea, using the CEV as a tanker:

I noted several problems related to the concept of a Reuseable LSAM (or RLSAM)vehicle that brought this idea to me:

1) Refueling - even if LOX is developed there's still the need for either H2 or CH4 and we can't bet exclusively on lunar water ice nor utilize it in the short-term.

2) Tanker Vehicles - even if the RLSAM is reuseable, the architecture needed for a tanker (particularly if it is expendable) undermines the merits of a RLSAM and overcomplicates the project.

3) Servicing issues. Roughly a quarter of a million miles makes fixing the Hubble in LEO look like trip to a car wash.

Now why use the CEV? Or how as a refueling vehicle?

First off its already designed to rendevous with the LSAM. Its only lacking point is it is dependent on the LSAM and EDS (Earth Departure Stage) to reach the moon. It can (or ought to be able to) carry cryogenic fuel. Thirdly it itself is a manned vehicle - if servicing is thought to be required a short spacewalk ala Hubble is possible...especially since the LSAM has an airlock for egress even if the CEV doesn't. As for the worries over a fuel-line next to an airlock, well the Progress ALSO carries fuel and yet it too sports an airlock for astronauts to reach their goodies...

Now here's my senerio:

The RLSAM would be single stage - a one-piece vehicle. Larger fuel tanks to carry the total fuel volume for descent and ascent but the fuel required would be little different than for the two-stage LSAM. The need for only one set of engines would offset any mass difference. Keep in mind the RLSAM is for a crewed vehicle - a cargo LSAM would land on the moon but I doubt there's any need for one to take off again.

The CEV/tanker, which I'll call CEV2, would have the same command module, same dimensions although future variants (such as for Mars) could be scaled up. Its service module would be modified however to carry the fuel required for the RLSAM - just the fuel not the oxidider; that portion would be lunar-generated. A CEV2 would be launched via the Ares-V as well (it has been mentioned in numerous reports that the Ares-V WILL be considered as an optional manned vehicle so this is not unreasonable). It'd take the place of the LSAM atop the EDS. The rendevous would occur exclusively in Lunar Orbit instead of LEO.

Here's the launch plan itself:

1) An RLSAM is brought up in a more or less normal VSE flight plan. Instead of being disposed it instead remains in Lunar Orbit with a load of LOX sufficent for a Lunar Descent.

2) A CEV2 is launched carrying sufficent fuel & LOX for itself and also fuel for a complete RLSAM ascent/descent.

3) The CEV2 and RLSAM rendevous in lunar orbit. Once docked if deemed nessicary a space walk is done. A small fueline would perform the fuel transfer to the RLSAM.

4) The RLSAM uncouples and lands, performing the required mission. It refuels its LOX fully while on surface.

5) The RLSAM ascends, using up its remaining fuel to enter Lunar Orbit and rendevous w/ CEV2 but retains sufficent LOX for a future descent.

6) The CEV2 undocks and returns to Earth while the RLSAM awaits its next flight.

It involves modifying both the CEV and LSAM but, especially if you want a Mars mission or a more advanced lunar one, modifications like this would be nessicary, and for the most part all that is physically modified are the fuel tanks.