Leverage from lunar resources - The only reason for Moon first

BWhite · 2005-03-19 14:05:50

In January of 2004 George Bush announced the VSE.

Why return to the Moon? To begin a process of exploration that will lead to human presence throughout the Solar System.

Why the Moon first? Close and easy access for practice and the Moon has resources that can be leveraged for future missions.

Maybe I agree and maybe not but this course has been set. Fair enough.

However, if we remain consistent with this logic, unless our return to the Moon includes immediate deployment of ISRU, it is merely an Emperor's New Clothes undertaking. A pretend space program to help beltway bandits "feel good."

I submit that the very first human mission to return to the Moon should use lunar LOX to assist with its return to Earth. Of course, a reserve of Terran LOX should be carried, just in case, but the symbolism of using lunar LOX from the very beginning cannot be over emphasized.

The Moon is a waste of time UNLESS we are using it merely to practice OR we begin resource exploitation from the very beginning.

John Creighton · 2005-03-19 14:54:21

I more or less agree. Just like I think it makes since if the ISS is still there you might as well send a few flights there. If the military is going to sustain the EELV infrastructure, then perhaps NASA could use it with a minimum of cost. But NASA has to look beyond the moon, and if NASA does not address the question of how they are we going to reduce the cost of future missions then they are not doing what we want. I do believe NASA will do research on ISRU and space suit design. I think ISRU could even be done on a small scale with robotic missions both on the moon and on mars. There is one big supposed advantage of EELV. With an upgraded EELV, in theory the military could sustain that capability while NASA works on heavy lift in the future. Although at may cost billions to rebuild the shuttle infrusturture it will be rebuilt with more advanced technology in aerospace and manufacturing. It will also be built in the future and usually a future cost in the same dollars is economically equivalent to a smaller cost in today’s dollars.

GCNRevenger · 2005-03-19 16:14:56

No way, every pound for the early missions will be tied up with science and in actually finding a good place to set up shop.

THEN you set up the LOX plant.

BWhite · 2005-03-19 19:17:23

No way, every pound for the early missions will be tied up with science and in actually finding a good place to set up shop.
THEN you set up the LOX plant.

=IF= the early missions were openly and honestly acknowledged as inadequate, early scout missions without ISRU might be tolerable.

However, our government is rather prone to premature announcements of "Mission Accomplished"

:;):

= = =

As far as I can tell, we can make LOX anywhere on the Moon.

Again, to make 500 pounds of LOX will more than pay for the burden of doing so by showing the public what our intentions are , and would constitute a public declaration that a few military officers doing scout missions is VERY VERY far from fulfilling the "Vision"

= = =

PS - - Pre-position your vapor phase pyrolysis gear by seperate launch.

Edited By BWhite on 1111281532

GCNRevenger · 2005-03-19 22:02:47

You want the Lunar "dust" that comes apart chemically at the lowest temperature, has the highest solar energy absortion, and is the most finely grained to promote desorption of oxygen.

Whatever system NASA comes up with, the lander/HAB/thing should have enough mass for one "nice" thing not associated with getting there or back. Adding a solar oxygen furnace would be one of them, or Lunar radio interferometric telescope modules, a heavy rover, a multi-meter drill, etc.

As far as a demo LOX plant though, the big if is probobly how you liquify the stuff on a tight energy/mass budget.

Sending it seperatly for a technology demo would be a pricey waste.

BWhite · 2005-03-20 10:20:03

Sending it seperatly for a technology demo would be a pricey waste.

It depends on what business we are actually in.

Wingo gets all giddy about exporting $10 billion dollars in platinium to Earth, each year. Americans buy $15 billion dollars worth of blue jeans, each year!

If a LOX plant were sponsored, it could generate cash revenue for NASA rather than costing anything,

Let British Petroleum sponsor the incremental cost in exchange "promotional considerations" - - BP is working overtime to build its image as an energy company that goes beyond petroleum.

Sponsoring the first operational LOX plant on the Moon would seem at least as valuable as sponsoring Wimbleton or the Olympics.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2005-03-19 14:05:50

Re: Leverage from lunar resources - The only reason for Moon first

#2 2005-03-19 14:54:21

Re: Leverage from lunar resources - The only reason for Moon first

#3 2005-03-19 16:14:56

Re: Leverage from lunar resources - The only reason for Moon first

#4 2005-03-19 19:17:23

Re: Leverage from lunar resources - The only reason for Moon first

#5 2005-03-19 22:02:47

Re: Leverage from lunar resources - The only reason for Moon first

#6 2005-03-20 10:20:03

Re: Leverage from lunar resources - The only reason for Moon first

Board footer