Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NASA To Cancel Lunar Resource Prospector Mission (theverge.com)

Posted by msmash on from the strange-priorities dept.

New submitter XXongo writes: NASA has told the Lunar Resource Prospector Mission team to cease work on developing the mission by the end of May. The proposed mission was in development to send a rover to the lunar pole in 2022, with the objective to drill into ice frozen in permanently shadowed craters. Use of such ice has been proposed as a resource that could be processd into rocket fuel, oxygen, and water for life support systems.

The cancellation apparently is partly due to the mission having been shifted from the Human Exploration directorate of NASA, which is excited by the possibility of lunar resources supporting exploration, to the Science Mission directorate, which does not consider lunar ice a high priority for science. The cancellation of the mission has gotten some controversy from the lunar science community, with the members of the Lunar Exploration Analysis Group (LEAG) writing an open letter to new administrator Bridenstine protesting the cancellation.

12 of 95 comments (clear)

  1. Boston Robots. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Send Boston Dynamics to the moon.

  2. Lunar Base by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Establishing a permanent lunar base is the logical first step towards a Mars trip.

    I heard someone once say that if you want to grind a 6 inch telescope mirror, it is faster and more prudent to grind a 3-inch mirror first and then a 6-inch mirror than to try to go for the 6-inch mirror on the first attempt.

    1. Re:Lunar Base by TheZeitgeist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I've never understood how going to the Moon is good practice for manned trip to Mars.

      For one thing, the voyages are completely different. Not just the distances and duration, but a Mars vehicle would use aerobraking (not possible on the Moon) which ironically takes total delta-V for a Mars mission below delta-V req for a Moon mission which has to expend propellant to land.

      And the destinations are so different. The spacesuits, tools, transports, infrastructure...not much similarity between what would work well on the Moon vis-a-vis what would work ideally on Mars.

      I think the manned-mission centric science that needs to be done in space is partial gravity research on biological systems. We have tons of experience and data telling us how bad it is for one's health to be in zero-g for extended periods. We basically have zero data on how bad 50% earth gravity is, or 10% earth gravity. Is the physiological impact of zero g vs. 1 g linear? Such to say if one is in gravity field 20% strong as Earth's for a long time, will they experience only 80% of the deleterious effects of zero G? Whats the scale there? Interesting very important aspect of our entire future in space and we have no data on it. Bizarre.

    2. Re:Lunar Base by edi_guy · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Aerobraking and spacesuits are a small part of the equation. Probably the most relevant reason is the idea of people surviving off the 'grid', way off the grid for extended periods of time. Figuring out the mundane things like food, water, waste, breathable air. The moon, being much closer allows us to start figuring stuff out in this regards with a much more favorable plan B when things go wrong. . Also, and this is getting much farther down the timeline, but at some point it would make a lot more sense to use the moon as launch base for all things interplanetary. As all decent Sci-fi readers know the moon will become the industrial center of the solar system once we decide to start working in space for real.

      Ideally the two things could be done in parallel, get people living on the moon at the same time advanced robotic missions to Mars are occurring. I for one would trade the $406 billion dollar F-35 boondoggle for a real space program. Maybe we can reduce the nuclear arsenal to a reasonable 1000 warheads (down from 4000), that's save some cash. Also foreign wars...we should stop participating/starting in wars that do not pose at least somewhat of an existential threat. That should save a ton of money...and lives, and arms and legs.

    3. Re:Lunar Base by edi_guy · · Score: 2

      Ok, we can check that off the list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    4. Re:Lunar Base by TheZeitgeist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As all decent Sci-fi readers know the moon will become the industrial center of the solar system once we decide to start working in space for real. Ideally the two things could be done in parallel, get people living on the moon at the same time advanced robotic missions to Mars are occurring.

      Aerobraking is not small part of equation. Aerobraking changes delta-V req's and also needs a heatshield and some aerodynamics for atmospheric entry; a Moon lander would essentially be different vehicle from a Mars lander - i.e. there is no practical experience gained practicing Moon landings in Moon-landers as it relates to doing anything like that on Mars. You'd actually get better practice just lobbing Mars lander up close to escape and aerobrake coming back down. (that technique actually employed during Apollo - which is good analog of what I'm talking about...compare the CM to the LM. They are both landers and yet nothing alike).

      Also the Moon becoming industrial center of solar system is more fiction than science. What resources are there (beyond the ice) is all diffuse in the regolith. Most everything you'd need on the Moon has to be shipped from somewhere else. It will always cost more delta-V (hence propellant) to ship something from point A to the Moon and then from Moon to point B instead of just going from point A to point B. Delta V is everything in space travel.

    5. Re:Lunar Base by TheZeitgeist · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The best Mars-simulator available to humans is Antarctica here on Earth. Lets compare.... Atmosphere? Mars and Earth have one, Moon none. Weather? Well, with atmospheres come weather. Sorry Moon. Diurnal period? Earth's day = 24 hours. Mars day = ~24 hours. Moon day? About a month. Temps? Antarctica very good imitator of Martian temps; Moon swings hundreds of degrees just between light and shadow. The only thing Moon and Mars really share relative to us is that humans have to get on a rocket to go to either place. That's about it.

    6. Re:Lunar Base by Chelloveck · · Score: 2

      I was listening to an interview with one of the Biosphere 2 team the other day. It wasn't a failure, it was an experiment. One which didn't go exactly as planned. But that's not a bad thing. They learned a crap ton of stuff from it, probably more than they would have if it all went perfectly. The sphere is still out there and still being studied, though it's not a closed system anymore.

      The moon is a logical next step. The person interviewed said they had some rough times in Biosphere 2, but at the end of the day they knew that if it got to be too much they could just open the door and walk out. The moon is the next step up from that. You can't just open the door, but if things go sideways rescue is only days away, not months. Mars is far enough away that there's pretty much no hope of rescue. If things go wrong, all we can do is watch them die. We can't even send words of encouragement without a substantial time delay.

      Biosphere 2, like any Earth-based habitat, is a tricycle. It's hard to tip over, and if you do the worst that happens is you get a skinned knee. The moon is a bike with training wheels. You can tip it over and you might actually get hurt, but the injuries are unlikely to be fatal. Mars is a two-wheel bike in traffic. Failures are going to leave a pavement stain. It's a really good idea to have an intermediate stage between the tricycle and riding in traffic.

      (And to extend the analogy to the point of absurdity, I'd argue that colonizing a moon of Jupiter or Saturn is careening down Mt. Everest on a mountain bike. An interstellar colony is a unicycle on a tightwire over Niagara Falls. Blindfolded. In a hail storm.)

      --
      Chelloveck
      I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
  3. Iron Sky by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Funny

    NASA doesn't want to disturb the Nazi base under the Lunar ice cap, so they cancelled the project. And all because the president said they were some "very fine people".

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  4. Re: Not a priority for science. by cyber-vandal · · Score: 2

    Luckily the Earth's resources are infinite and it will always be habitable.

  5. Re:Idiots write an open letter by foxalopex · · Score: 2

    Speaking of budget, when you work out how much the US spends per person roughly a year. For military it's about $1,800. For NASA it's about $50! Sort of sad when you think about it.

  6. Re: Not a priority for science. by scottrocket · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Human civilization was made by nutters, one footstep at a time. Then the practical naysayers came along and just ruined everything.