Google Lunar X Prize Teams Now In a Race With China As Well As Each Other
MarkWhittington writes "The Google Lunar X Prize rules of competition have a clause that reduces the $20 million grand prize to $15 million for the first private group to land a rover on the lunar surface should a government funded rover land first. The first scheduled government funded rover to land on the moon is the Chinese Chang'e 3. It is slated for a 2013 landing."
Hasn't this already happened?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunokhod_programme
Governments have been landing objects the moon for a few decades now. If the idea is to prove the free market can do things more effeciently wouldn't a bonus more in order?
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
The government funded project doesn't qualify. But if a government funded project beats a privately funded project to the moon then the reward decreases, think of it as a penalty for being second
I believe a government funded projects won't get the money. It says that the first private group to land a rover on the lunar surface will only get 15 millions $ instead of 20 millions $ should a government funded rover land first.
So if China lands first, they get nothing and first private group to land a rover on the lunar surface afterward only gets 15 millions $.
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
Then again, what is private group, would In-Q-Tel qualify ?
http://www.iqt.org/
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
It's not about the money anyways. .
No? it's about getting a 15 millions $ first price instead of a 20 millions $ one. It makes a difference for the one that pays the price at the very least. In the end it's always about the money ;-)
ILast I looked, the wiki said a standard Falcon 9 launch starts at $55 million.
SpaceShipOne cost something like $25 million. The prize they won was $10. It's about doing the thing and winning the challenge, not about make stacks of prize cash for it.
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
I would have thought that as big as US corporates can get, national governments can still throw more resources (people, money) at such a goal - so isn't it a different game? (commercial as opposed to govt. funded). And we know that governments have previously landed on the moon and will continue to do so (I'd expect India to also have further ambitions, perhaps Brazil, etc). So why reduce the money?
At first read, I thought the same thing. We need to remember that English is like an object-oriented language...that many people object to.
jsut athnoer menagiensls ltitle psrhae for you to dcoede. Why do we wtsae our tmie dnoig tihs?
I don't think the idea is that the vehicle going to the moon will need a dedicated Falcon 9. Most teams intend to make their project a secondary payload... hopefully avoiding the problems that Orbcomm faced with the last CRS-1 flight (crew resupply service) to the ISS, where NASA said SpaceX couldn't use the booster to push the satellite into a higher orbit.
A secondary payload can be somewhat or even considerably less than $55 million.
Regardless, your point is still holding true to an extent. The team which gets to the Moon first gets the $15 - $20 million is mostly going to be covering basic expenses and essentially getting a subsidized trip to the Moon. On the other hand, Scaled Composites was able to leverage their "win" from the original X-Prize competition to turn into a merger with Northrop-Grumman for far more than the $25 million investment in SpaceShip One (on top of the prize money), and they also landed a contract with Virgin Galactic to make Spaceship Two for a price that also far exceeded the $25 million investment.
Any group of researchers who have figured out how to land a vehicle on another planet (you can split hairs about the Moon on this topic, given the context) for less than $100 million and return useful data has a bright future ahead of them in planetary science research. By comparison, Curiosity and the Mars Science Laboratory cost about $2.5 billion to get to Mars. It may be possible to build something a fair bit cheaper than that if it was a private development instead.
It should also be noted that the co-founders of Google are also major investors in Planetary Resources. It may be very possible that company will hire anybody who worked on successful mission to the Moon to help them with their endeavor to mine asteroids. Working hardware somewhere else in the Solar System is definitely a resume enhancement.
You don't need life support to survive on a sound stage in Burbank. :>)