Slashdot Mirror
Chinese Space Official Seems Unimpressed With NASA's Lunar Gateway (arstechnica.com)
schwit1 shares a report from Behind The Black: At a science workshop in Europe this week, Chinese space officials made it clear that they found the concept of NASA Lunar Orbiting Platform-Gateway (LOP-G) to be unimpressive and uninteresting. Moreover, they said that while it appears we will be delaying our landings on the Moon for at least a decade because of LOP-G, they will be focused on getting and building a research station on the surface, right off the bat.
[From a report via Ars Technica:] "Overall, [Pei Zhaoyu, who is deputy director of the Lunar Exploration and Space Program Center of the China National Space Administration], does not appear to be a fan of NASA's plan to build a deep space gateway, formally known as the Lunar Orbital Platform-Gateway, at a near-rectilinear halo orbit. Whereas NASA will focus its activities on this gateway away from the Moon, Pei said China will focus on a 'lunar scientific research station.' Another slide from Pei offered some thoughts on the gateway concept, which NASA intends to build out during the 2020s, delaying a human landing on the Moon until the end of the decade at the earliest. Pei does not appear to be certain about the scientific objectives of such a station, and the deputy director concludes that, from a cost-benefit standpoint, the gateway would have 'lost cost-effectiveness.'"
[From a report via Ars Technica:] "Overall, [Pei Zhaoyu, who is deputy director of the Lunar Exploration and Space Program Center of the China National Space Administration], does not appear to be a fan of NASA's plan to build a deep space gateway, formally known as the Lunar Orbital Platform-Gateway, at a near-rectilinear halo orbit. Whereas NASA will focus its activities on this gateway away from the Moon, Pei said China will focus on a 'lunar scientific research station.' Another slide from Pei offered some thoughts on the gateway concept, which NASA intends to build out during the 2020s, delaying a human landing on the Moon until the end of the decade at the earliest. Pei does not appear to be certain about the scientific objectives of such a station, and the deputy director concludes that, from a cost-benefit standpoint, the gateway would have 'lost cost-effectiveness.'"
Their longest manned flight was only 21 hours.
Call me when China puts people on the moon with 1960's rocket tech.
Do they need to be impressed? I've tried to parse this article several times and I'm still left confused?
...they're kinda right, the LOP-G is just ISS in orbit around the moon, the real action is on and below the surface. NASA are looking at the Moon as simply a fuel station for their headlong rush to Mars, which, when you think about it, is simply a larger version of the moon wrapped in a toxic atmosphere of CO2. The Moon is the first stepping stone. We learn how to live there, we can live just about anywhere.
To pochuye ke inyalowda?
The U.S. Congress and NASA are dragged down by boondoggling and political favoritism, instead of focusing on putting men on the Moon. By the time the Lunar Gateway is finished the Chinese will be walking on the Moon and broadcasting their feats in Digital 4K UHD for all the world to see. This will be a huge blow to western morale and people will openly question our democratic system.
Yes, keep telling yourself that. Doesn't make it and more true
Time for bed, said Zebedee - boing
How long til the Stargate?
NASA will still be "studying" plans and options to get us (back) into space. The thing is, first, space is lethal to us unless we use massive barriers between us and it, and second, using anything massive makes propulsion enormously expensive. They want to do it "on the cheap" and there is no cheap in space travel. They have to propose something that Congress wouldn't choke on, and there isn't anything that is remotely possible that would actually allow us to get to Mars and back. Do the math. I wonder sometimes whether the "answer" to the Fermi Paradox isn't that "they" are waiting till we put these childish (fantasy) ideas behind us, perhaps once we just laugh at people who claim we need to "reduce corruption and waste" in government or spend money to "find a way" to get to Mars or find the next great herbal supplement that will give us wrinkle-free skin, perhaps they're just waiting till we grow up. If our species is capable of that, which is very much in doubt, imho.
I say let them build it, then the Donald Trump USA Space Force will take it over.
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
And it will never fly.
Manned missions are super pricey, dangerous and with a very low scientific reward. They are basically obsolete
Based on the way the US has spent the last half century of its manned space program jacking off, it appears that the international language of the High Frontier probably won't be English.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Lop-g is a waste of money and time. China calling it what it is, is appreciated. It is no different than the SLS.With the GOP in office and pushing the LOP-G and SLS, NASA has been forced to waste 10s of billions, which would have increased. And I love the touch China put on it, speaking of their plans. Though it is either arrogance on their part, or they are pushing us into a space race. Regardless, this should get the GOP to stop killing our space program and put it back on track.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
I have to agree - I really don't even seen the point of a lunar gateway at all, at least not before there's a thriving lunar outpost getting lots of traffic. Exactly what value does a lunar space station offer? If there's a lunar outpost producing fuel or whatever, then yeah, an orbital station starts to be useful, you don't want to have to land to refuel for an interplanetary flight. But before then?
It's not going to help with building a lunar outpost - there's precious little to be gained by stopping in orbit on your way to/from the surface. At most you might want a refueling depot for the trip home, or just a BFR tanker ship. But even that's probably overkill - getting to the moon is the hard part, the return trip is almost all down hill.
A space station isn't that great for surveying - satellites are far superior and far cheaper. And there's no point in keeping supplies in orbit when they're only useful on the ground. And microgravity research doesn't care what it's orbiting, and the ISS has that covered. So what's a lunar gateway for?
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
... half the reason why everybody hates the capitalist Murican mindset so much.
"Let's not strive for the advancement of humanity. Let's not work together, nor break bread. All that matters is ME, ME, ME! Hey, why does everybody hate me, all of sudden?
NASA has to be excessively cautious in planning any manned program because of the political fallout they get after any accident. JFK was canny in making Apollo a quasi-military Cold War effort within which it was possible to take elevated levels of risk. Washington would be totally unable to repeat anything like this in today's political climate.
If we want a lunar base we will have to call in a certain South African entrepreneur or whichever commercial competitor can take the risks necessary do the job.
Where's the profit? That's always the downfall of privatization. Lots of demand for launch services, so it's not surprising we have several private enterprises developing launch capability. But a lunar outpost? That's going to cost billions, and there'll probably be no return on investment whatsoever for decades - not until there's enough space activity to fuel demand for lots of raw materials in orbit, and enough industrial capability is established on the moon to provide it.
Plus there's not really much guarantee that there will be any first-mover advantage - the first attempts are going to be extremely dangerous and expensive, and nothing stops the next guy from poaching some of your experts and leapfrogging your capability once the path forward becomes clear.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
In the United States, we are bogged down by scientists at the expense of engineers. Even too many of our engineers are acting like scientists--telling of why we can't do this or that. If they were acting like engineers, they'd be focused on how we can. Scientists are necessarily skeptical, by profession. Engineers need heed the findings of scientists but remain optimistic, regardless. An engineer will work with what is known and around what is not to achieve objectives. The more time an engineer has, the better the solution he/she can derive.
There is plenty to criticize China's space program on but they are right that a lunar orbiter does nothing toward establishment of a lunar station. It can be helpful in testing of methods for mining asteroids, as proposed. It is great for miscellaneous NASA science projects. But overall, it's a financial sinkhole..
On the other hand, the Moon is also going to be a financial sinkhole in most ways. There are very few resources for survival on the Moon, much less exploitable profit. Perhaps, helium 3 if we can develop nuclear reactors for it. That is something China claims to be after. The costs of a Moon base are going to be difficult to justify. The regolith is extremely abrasive, quickly tearing through fabrics in space suites. The lack of dust makes working in the light/dark but no grey in between very difficult. And there is very scant water ice.. There is really nothing on the Moon that could assist man's movement farther into space.
In contrast, is very rich in water and other resources like CO2, nitrogen, argon, and many easily accessible metals. Kilometers deep fresh water glaciers strip just north and south of the equatorial region. The regolith is soft--not abrasive. There is both wind and solar power available. You can easily make oxygen, work outside, collect iron, nickel, and various other metal ores. You can make methane or pvc plastics (CO2, water, and salts in the regolith). And the salts in the regolith of both plentiful and oxygen rich, useful for welding, explosives, or rocket fuel. Start with an inflatable habitat, cover it with regolith. Then melt out a castle in the kilometers deep glacier below..
The Moon holds the advantage of being close, so we can provide assistance when necessary. Mars is far but assistance is far less likely to be necessary. The Moon will require everything continuously resupplied. Mars only needs a foothold but resupply of various technologies could be good business. For example, sending rockets into orbit from Mars with various materials would be far easier than from Earth -- metals, plastics, water, even food.
Nobody thought there was a large market for launch services either, until the private sector came in and slashed cost below the wildest expectations of economists, as competition tends to do in every line of business. Each lowering of the price level has caused new demand to magically appear.