The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

SpaceNut · 2004-12-14 06:00:04

I know we spoke briefly on space elevators for moon use and that it would be possible with todays technology, well though I could not calculate any of this I was sure it would work best there from the little science knowledge that I have. Here is an article the speaks to this.
Going Up, Next Floor Elevating to the Moon

Pearson knew the technical challenges were formidable, so he wondered, "why not build an elevator on the Moon?"
On the Moon, the force of gravity is one sixth of what we feel here on Earth, and a space elevator cable is well within our current manufacturing technology. Stretch a cable up from the surface of the Moon, and you'd have an inexpensive method of delivering minerals and supplies into Earth orbit.
A lunar space elevator would work differently than one based on Earth. Unlike our own planet, which rotates every 24 hours, the Moon only turns on its axis once every 29 days; the same amount of time it takes to complete one orbit around the Earth. This is why we can only ever see one side of the Moon. The concept of geostationary orbit doesn't really make sense around the Moon.
There are, however, five places in the Earth-Moon system where you could put an object of low mass - like a satellite... or a space elevator counterweight - and have them remain stable with very little energy: the Earth-Moon Lagrange points. The L1 point, a spot approximately 58,000 km above the surface of the Moon, will work perfectly.

Grypd · 2004-12-15 19:33:06

It may work it really then just comes down to how much mass can be moved by such a device. And is it really worth it, of course we could always attach a solar power satelite on the top of the chord. Certainly would sort the long Day/Night power problem until a circumfrential power grid and soletta arrays are possibly in place.

SpaceNut · 2004-12-16 05:42:13

It is not just a matter of moving mass but also of saving the resources that are fuels and oxygen that get brought from Earth or from the insitu creation of these.

SpaceNut · 2004-12-16 15:07:48

Missile team homes in on the Moon

Pretty novel approach to using what you have to get the job done.

A US firm is proposing to use guided missile technology to make a precision, automated landing on the Moon.
Raytheon has outlined plans for a low-cost lunar lander that uses elements from missiles designed to intercept and destroy enemy warheads fired at the US.

SpaceNut · 2004-12-16 15:18:10

South African chemical engineer has come up with a way to produce liquid oxygen from lunar rock.

This process would make it feasible to establish permanent manned bases on the moon sometime in the future.
US space agency Nasa has made available R82m to further develop the process devised by Shaan Oosthuizen, 28, who works for British Titanium in Cambridge.
Oosthuizen is a co-inventor of the Ilmenox process, named after the process' ability to produce oxygen from the lunar mineral ilmenite.
The process exctracts oxygen from moonrock, which are metal-oxides that may contain up to 30 or 40% oxygen.

GCNRevenger · 2004-12-16 16:02:49

Somebody working out the details for O2 extraction... good.

John Creighton · 2004-12-16 18:56:48

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4093339.stm]Missile team homes in on the Moon
Pretty novel approach to using what you have to get the job done.
A US firm is proposing to use guided missile technology to make a precision, automated landing on the Moon. Raytheon has outlined plans for a low-cost lunar lander that uses elements from missiles designed to intercept and destroy enemy warheads fired at the US.

I am surprised you need to compare images with the ground. I would of thought that triangulation combined with accelerometers and kalman filters would of been enough. It works well for GPS guided arcraft landing.

SpaceNut · 2004-12-16 20:53:49

I missed something I think but the object was to modify there current product for a moon mission. Which would render GPS of no value and I think the accelerometer would be off since they are not calibrated for the moons gravity, I think. kalman filters well that I know nothing of so no comment.

But the good thing is that such a mission would be somewhat subsidized by the military in that I am sure they would want to be present so as to not give away any technology inadvertently if there vehicles are used. Plus these would already be payed for by the military budget.

Grypd · 2004-12-17 16:44:34

The military have a long history of testing new technology as a science project for the Moon. Clementine showed that the military are willing to do science but only if it will ultimatly benefit them.

John Creighton · 2004-12-17 16:54:28

Which would render GPS of no value and I think the accelerometer would be off since they are not calibrated for the moons gravity.

Oh I get the idea is accurate landing without kneading satellites for guidance. Or in the militaries case they can still have precision weapons even when all the satellites go out. Neat. I was thinking of a lunar GPS but I suppose the earth GPS system is close and could be used instead. Interesting comment about not being calibrated for lunar gravity. You mean relativity corrections? Interesting again. I am sure this can be corrected for some how computationally on the Lander. Interesting, Interesting, Interesting…………

Grypd · 2004-12-17 17:14:38

Of course this could be training for the day when GPS could be shot out of space by a hostile power or the US had to shut down its own system and needed to strike somewhere.

SpaceNut · 2004-12-20 06:26:53

Much like the topic of the Going to Mars To stay How Much Mass To LEO, the moon needs many of the same questions answered if we are going to be successful beyound flags and foot prints as well.

Where do I start, in order to know the down mass we must detail the needs for the given size crew and the stay time frames plus a buffer zone on consumables and this includes energy needs.
Energy needs are not only for science, lighting, Heat and other uses. So what is the exact quantity of the supply that we can send and what forms of creation can be supplied for the safety of the crew(solar, nuclear..).
If nuclear we can detail out what it would provide and we know how much it weighs but what happens when it is not working for any reason or that it must work at a reduce power available rate. What them would the crew do for there energy needs?
Multiple power sources are needed and they each must be capable of at least half of all power requirements or needs each or more.

Mars is different from the moon, The moon lack of atmosphere, gravity levels and yes radiation exposure are greater and these along mean we must work out the details of a sealed habitat.

Actually the plan would be to demostrate the ability on the moon with a mars pre-planning process being put in place.
Meaning make the goals to design hardware to last as long as a mars mission would, design ships capacities to those that are required for a mars mission.
Doing all the ground work as it were in order to justify funding for Mars, for we can say we can do it then. There would be no nay sayers for We will have worked out the radiation potential for damage to crew, to have worked out the power requirement and types needed, the consumables of food, water and air regeneration as well as resupply capabilities and lastly the ship will have been designed for the journey.
Until Nasa can get the shuttle flying to finish the ISS we will not be able to do any of this without some contractors just say no to profits and doing the work needed.

SpaceNut · 2004-12-21 06:30:55

Tele robotics is one of those technologies that we must make use of if we are going to stay and not just do the flag and foot print thing again. One of those places can be at the ISS or the moon or on mars but we must decide what it will do for man to prepare the way.
NASA Selects Northrop Grumman To Help Achieve Vision for Space Exploration
Company Offers Innovative Concepts for Human and Robotic Technology proposals valued at approximately $137 million over four years.

Grypd · 2004-12-21 09:08:30

There are many simularities between Mars and Moon missions and it seems to me that the different space advocate groups tend to get hung up on the few differences.

some examples of simularity.
Both destinations could really do with a much better and cheaper launch capacity. Neither benefit from the continuation of the shuttle or even the ISS white elephant.

Both destinations need to have Industrial capacity designed that can be transported and set up to use insitu materials to make more capacity and to further missions.

Both destinations need a new style of spacesuit which is easier more flexible and easier to put on. Both destinations need the problems of the charged dust on there surface from becoming a real hindrance.

This is only an example of those things that really should be tackled together and the solution to one destinations problem will give hopefully a good solution to the other.

SpaceNut · 2004-12-22 06:11:35

NASA announced yesterday that it has handed out over $1 billion in contracts to research organizations, universities, and aerospace companies

Northrop Grumman received $137 million - the most of any contractor - to help fulfill space exploration goals to design gadgets to help U.S. return to the moon and travel to Mars.
See previous post image:
Device is a 44-pound, six-legged robot, shaped like an insect, that will inspect and maintain exteriors of any Nasa spacecrafts.

side project:

Northrop Grumman will also work on a heat-resistent "skirt" that would deploy around a spacecraft just before re-entry, slowing the vehicle down and thus reducing dangerous heat damage, which contributed to the Columbia shuttle accident nearly two years ago.

SpaceNut · 2004-12-28 09:44:12

The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter or LRO has had some work on what it will contain.
Science instruments picked for NASA's new lunar probe

Selected investigations and principal investigators:
"Lunar Orbiter Laser Altimeter (LOLA) Measurement Investigation" - principal investigator Dr. David E. Smith, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), Greenbelt, Md. LOLA will determine the global topography of the lunar surface at high resolution, measure landing site slopes and search for polar ices in shadowed regions.

"Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera" (LROC) - principal investigator Dr. Mark Robinson, Northwestern University, Evanston, Ill. LROC will acquire targeted images of the lunar surface capable of resolving small-scale features that could be landing site hazards, as well as wide-angle images at multiple wavelengths of the lunar poles to document changing illumination conditions and potential resources.

"Lunar Exploration Neutron Detector" (LEND) - principal investigator Dr. Igor Mitrofanov, Institute for Space Research, and Federal Space Agency, Moscow. LEND will map the flux of neutrons from the lunar surface to search for evidence of water ice and provide measurements of the space radiation environment which can be useful for future human exploration.

"Diviner Lunar Radiometer Experiment" - principal investigator Prof. David Paige, UCLA, Los Angeles. Diviner will map the temperature of the entire lunar surface at 300 meter horizontal scales to identify cold- traps and potential ice deposits.

"Lyman-Alpha Mapping Project" (LAMP) - principal investigator Dr. Alan Stern, Southwest Research Institute, Boulder, Colo. LAMP will observe the entire lunar surface in the far ultraviolet. LAMP will search for surface ices and frosts in the polar regions and provide images of permanently shadowed regions illuminated only by starlight.

"Cosmic Ray Telescope for the Effects of Radiation" (CRaTER) - principal investigator Prof. Harlan Spence, Boston University, Mass. CRaTER will investigate the effect of galactic cosmic rays on tissue- equivalent plastics as a constraint on models of biological response to background space radiation.

SpaceNut · 2005-01-12 08:39:47

Not only does this research apply to the moon but equally as well to the Mars missions of the future.

Lunar Shields: Radiation Protection for Moon-Based Astronauts

eletrostatic ball generation

Multi level and multiple shield approach

ITV shield concept

Very neat stuff but still a long way to go....

A team of researchers is looking to the moon to develop the tools future astronauts may need to ward off potentially life-threatening levels of space radiation.
Currently mid-way through their NASA-funded study, the researchers are working to determine whether a set of electrically charged shield spheres atop 40-meter masts could deflect radiation from a populated moonbase.
If it proves possible, such a radiation-proof screen - called an electrostatic shield - could protect astronauts from the long-lasting, and possibly fatal, radiation hazards of spaceflight beyond the Earth's magnetic field.
"The electrostatic radiation shield is a pretty simple idea," said the study’s co-principal investigator John Lane, an applications scientist with ASRC Aerospace Corp. at Kennedy Space Center (KSC). "We're concerned about charged particle radiation."
That radiation, high-energy protons and electrons spewed out by the Sun during massive solar storms or traversing the universe as galactic cosmic rays (GCRs), are the main hazard targeted by Lane, his colleagues. ASRC researcher Charles Buhler is leading the study, which is a Phase 1 project funded by the NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts (NIAC).
Currently, Lane and his colleagues are trying to find the best way to arrange large field generators - the spheres - of different sizes to create an electric field that repels high-energy protons and electron.
Current designs call for weak, negatively charged spheres distributed along the shield’s outer regions to sift out electrons while strong, positively charged generators cluster at the center to deflect high-energy protons.
The challenge lies in arranging a number of spheres to build a comprehensive electric field that is strong enough to deflect radiation, but not so strong that it rips electrons out of the moonbase structure or surrounding material - hence the 40-meter poles to keep generators at a safe, water tank-high distance.

Martian Republic · 2005-01-12 09:44:50

According the article the other possibility besides electrostatic shield, there is also a possibility of a electromagnetic shield. But they were working on the electrostatic shield side to see if they could put together a shield for future astronauts. We definitely need more of this kind of work done to make space a more friendly place to live and work in.

Larry,

Grypd · 2005-01-12 10:11:41

It is interesting how so often science fiction and real life space science advances tend to mirror each other. Just remembering a dodgy 70s TV series called space1999 that had the same means of protection.

Still it appears from the sketches that the plan for use of these Electrostatic balls where for the use of a very junior initial base. Frankly no base until it has a lot more power capacity could hope to have full electromagnetic protection and partial electromagnetic protection is worse than none at all. So for any initial base it looks like sandbags of regolith or the shelters being place in trenches carved out by a telerobotic digger and simply infilled. Still there use on long duration flights where the risk of being caught in a solar storm is high is a good development. It means that as long as the storm is going we could use the shield and when finished power it down. It may not be necassary for a storm shelter to be developed for these flights if the shield is effective enough so saving a small mass and space saving as long as the system is not too heavy.

One other point is that the shield is really designed to stop the dangerous elements from the sun and really only have to operate when the sun is shineing so the power for them could be got from solar cells. But it would be a heavy energy burden that an initial base could not afford.

SpaceNut · 2005-01-12 11:35:42

NASA seeks space business partners

Well the last statements sort of explains why we are looking at electrostatic shields.

Radiation exposure - from the sun and other solar systems - is among the biggest risks astronauts face as they explore space.
The particles can make the astronauts sick on their journey, rendering them unable to finish their mission, or they can leave astronauts cancer stricken soon after their glory years.
The old Apollo spacecraft, she said, used aluminum shielding. Newer spacecraft use shielding made of various materials.
Liquid hydrogen is an excellent radiation shield, Simonsen said, but it's flammability makes it a poor bet for the new space vehicles.
One shielding method uses magnetism to control the radioactive particles. But because of health concerns arising from the magnetism, NASA has decided those active systems - as opposed to more passive shields - are not worth the risk.

GCNRevenger · 2005-01-12 12:30:49

Not to mention the effects on the electronic componets of the spacecraft and the fact that if the system broke... the astronauts would fry.

The liklyhood that the system would be knocked out by the radiation (say, a solar flare) when it is needed most would be a big risk.

Martian Republic · 2005-01-12 14:01:08

Not to mention the effects on the electronic componets of the spacecraft and the fact that if the system broke... the astronauts would fry.
The liklyhood that the system would be knocked out by the radiation (say, a solar flare) when it is needed most would be a big risk.

Then if our shield get knocked out, we might need to have a storm cellar on the moon for emergencies. But, if we have space ship flying either between Earth, moon or Mars they could have a problem though. To get the best of both passive and active shields, we would probably want to use both of them, but that would also cost a little bit more too. But, if we are going to be able to be able guarantee a certain amount of safety within certain limits, I see no way around it.

Larry,

GCNRevenger · 2005-01-12 20:47:56

Certainly there is a way around it: Just use more passive shielding.

Grypd · 2005-01-13 15:48:06

Yeah but we can use techniques to ensure that our equipment does not fail.

At one time in the cold war the west was very worried that in the case of a nuclear war our weapons would all be destroyed but not the USSRs. The reason our advanced expensive weapons where based on the silicon chip and circuit board technologies and as such where at risk of EMP overload. The poor warsaw pact countries though still used valve technology as the mainstay of its electrics in its weapons. Valve technology is naturally a lot more resistant to radiation overload then integrated circuits.

And there is nothing to stop us having a lot more effective means to protect us from the effects of a storm surge from the sun and if it saves weight its worth it.

GCNRevenger · 2005-01-14 09:41:52

Unfortunatly no, this is a fundimental problem.

Problem #1: Humans and the computers any mission will rely on are vulnerable to radiation damage, particularly from solar events, but also from the continuous cosmic radiation

Problem #2 Active, powerd methods for deflecting radiation may be effective, but the probability of their failure is far higher then blocks of plastic, water tanks, or bags of dirt. In fact, since solar flares destroy electronics, relying on a system to protect you that uses electronics is a serious risk if you are relying on it. If there is a short in the superhigh voltage field generators or a cryogenic leak in the cryomagnets, then you are dead... However much extra radiation shielding for spacecraft weighs is probobly worthwhile versus the mass and risk of an active system failing.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#201 2004-12-14 06:00:04

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#202 2004-12-15 19:33:06

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#203 2004-12-16 05:42:13

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#204 2004-12-16 15:07:48

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#205 2004-12-16 15:18:10

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#206 2004-12-16 16:02:49

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#207 2004-12-16 18:56:48

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#208 2004-12-16 20:53:49

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#209 2004-12-17 16:44:34

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#210 2004-12-17 16:54:28

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#211 2004-12-17 17:14:38

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#212 2004-12-20 06:26:53

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#213 2004-12-21 06:30:55

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#214 2004-12-21 09:08:30

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#215 2004-12-22 06:11:35

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#216 2004-12-28 09:44:12

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#217 2005-01-12 08:39:47

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#218 2005-01-12 09:44:50

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#219 2005-01-12 10:11:41

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#220 2005-01-12 11:35:42

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#221 2005-01-12 12:30:49

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#222 2005-01-12 14:01:08

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#223 2005-01-12 20:47:56

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#224 2005-01-13 15:48:06

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

#225 2005-01-14 09:41:52

Re: The need for a Moon direct *2* - ...continue here.

Board footer

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.

Re: The need for a Moon direct 2 - ...continue here.