Slashdot Mirror
NASA's Plans To Build A Human Settlement on The Moon (discovermagazine.com)
Nine private spaceflight companies are bidding on contracts to deliver robotic NASA payloads to the moon -- and Thursday NASA said they'd like them to start flying "this calendar year."
Discover magazine reports NASA envisions this "as the first step toward returning to the moon, this time for good." The first tasks will be to practice launching and landing on the moon, as well as answering questions about its surface... They will test habitation for future crewed missions. They'll prove that they can collect materials from the lunar surface and return them to space or Earth. And they'll establish communication networks between robots on the moon's surface, way stations in lunar orbit, and mission control on Earth.
But NASA also wants to deploy demo technology that can mine the moon's resources "to pave the way for human settlement," Space.com reports: The main lunar resource to be exploited, at least initially, is water. The lunar surface has lots of this stuff, locked up as ice on the permanently shadowed floors of polar craters. This water will aid lunar settlement and further exploration, and not just by slaking astronauts' thirst, NASA officials say. Water can also be split into its constituent hydrogen and oxygen, the chief components of rocket fuel.
The Commercial Lunar Payload Services program is just part of NASA's broad moon-exploration plan, which prioritizes an open architecture that encourages cooperation with many commercial and international partners. (Indeed, NASA wants to be the commercial landers' first, but not only, customer.) One of the most critical pieces of this plan is a small space station, called the Gateway, which NASA aims to start building in lunar orbit in 2022. Gateway will be a hub for many kinds of lunar exploration, including sorties to the surface by landers both crewed and uncrewed.
If everything goes according to plan, NASA astronauts will take their first such sortie in 2028 -- 56 years after Apollo 17 crewmembers left the last boot prints on the lunar surface
Discover magazine reports NASA envisions this "as the first step toward returning to the moon, this time for good." The first tasks will be to practice launching and landing on the moon, as well as answering questions about its surface... They will test habitation for future crewed missions. They'll prove that they can collect materials from the lunar surface and return them to space or Earth. And they'll establish communication networks between robots on the moon's surface, way stations in lunar orbit, and mission control on Earth.
But NASA also wants to deploy demo technology that can mine the moon's resources "to pave the way for human settlement," Space.com reports: The main lunar resource to be exploited, at least initially, is water. The lunar surface has lots of this stuff, locked up as ice on the permanently shadowed floors of polar craters. This water will aid lunar settlement and further exploration, and not just by slaking astronauts' thirst, NASA officials say. Water can also be split into its constituent hydrogen and oxygen, the chief components of rocket fuel.
The Commercial Lunar Payload Services program is just part of NASA's broad moon-exploration plan, which prioritizes an open architecture that encourages cooperation with many commercial and international partners. (Indeed, NASA wants to be the commercial landers' first, but not only, customer.) One of the most critical pieces of this plan is a small space station, called the Gateway, which NASA aims to start building in lunar orbit in 2022. Gateway will be a hub for many kinds of lunar exploration, including sorties to the surface by landers both crewed and uncrewed.
If everything goes according to plan, NASA astronauts will take their first such sortie in 2028 -- 56 years after Apollo 17 crewmembers left the last boot prints on the lunar surface
We all know what eventually happens if you store nuclear waste on the moon.
Not only will we get practice in living on another planet, and a chance to build some lunar-based space industry, but having a working colony of humans off-world is good against the possibility of some major catastrophe on Earth.
NASA's sudden interest... cause (China) and effect.
Just asking, because otherwise declaring a state of emergency on the moon might be the only way to get this funded.
I would love to see this put in motion, but with the political climate in the US, not going to happen. The fights over NASA funding has been happening since 1970 and I doubt NASA will ever get decent funding.
My guess is China or possibly India will have a better chance of accomplishing that than the US
that purple hair or a purple wig is part of their uniform. /s
The first fucking Moon missions were because of Russia.
Now, it's because of China.
That's correct. Keep up, or get left behind. If there is a strategic use for the moon and planets, and we're busy whining about robots and meatbags, whoever sends the meatbags ends up winning.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Sure, let the national space agencies build settlements on the Moon. There is no commercial viability in those places. Commercial organizations will go where the money is -- deep space asteroids and Mars.
The Moon will be very costly to maintain humans on. The "plentiful" water on the Moon is in very relative terms. It's likely to take days of work for a glass full enough to drink. And the extremely abrasive regolith and pitch-black-only shadows plus zero protection for radiation is all going to add risks and work.
Still, I do think some inflatable habitats on the Moon, once buried in regolith will have their uses, in terms of science and long term commercial uses.
On Mars, north and south of the equator hold hundreds of large, fresh water glaciers more than 2 km deep. The soil elsewhere holds about two liters of water per square meter of regolith. And the regolith is very soft and less abrasive than soil on Earth. Metals in Martian rock are all the same as Earth except about twice as much, in proportion. Martian Basal is near ore-grade for iron. Waving a magnet over the surface is all you need to do to collect very rich iron ore. And the atmosphere and gravity make it easy to launch this stuff into orbit on single-stage rockets.
Although the Moon is closer and therefore easier to send help from Earth, it's also far more likely that help will be needed. It won't take much to become self-sufficient on Mars.
However -- I would prioritize exploration of lunar lava tubes. It's reasonable to think that larger concentrations of water ice might exist in them. If that's the case then settlements in lava tubes on the Moon could be very profitable.
Elon Musk will have his Mars Colony up and running by then.
What is the strategic use of the moon and planets? Please explain without using scifi or references to any Heinlein novel.
So does china and Russia. The question is who will get their first and have prime real estate, as well as the bonafide for being first base.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
China is powerful, growing, but also vulnerable. Dictatorships tend to be grossly inefficient, as without a civil society there is nothing to stop nepotism and corruption. Sure, Xi Jinping is trying to have both Dictatorship and Economy, but I think that it will eventually falter.
China also needs to import food if its people are to maintain the high protein diet to which they have recently become accustomed..
The real danger is that as China's economy reduces its growth rate from the currently very high rate, politics will become messy. And then Xi might pull the standard trick, produce an external enemy. And "Unify" Taiwan.
So do not be too sure about China. It is complex, and potentially dangerous. There is currently no quiet way to get rid of Xi, it would take bloody revolution.
What is the strategic use of the moon and planets? Please explain without using scifi or references to any Heinlein novel.
Hmmm. That seems quite difficult since any strategic use of the moon would have likely been covered in some sci-fi somewhere.
I have some Heinlein novels in my possession but I have not read them yet. I do recall mention by Heinlein as a high ground position from which a military strike could be launched to most anywhere on Earth's surface. I'm sure some sc-fi covered the possibility of mining something of relative rarity on Earth but abundance on the moon. There's certainly been mention in numerous sci-fi stories that I can recall of the moon being a base of operations for exploration to other planets in the solar system and beyond. The moon can also be a place from which observations of the universe, or of Earth, that might be difficult on Earth's surface or near Earth orbit.
Seems to me what you are asking is for an explanation of the strategic value of the moon that nobody else thought up first. Seems like a lot of people thought of good strategic value for a moon colony, is there any real need to think of another? Just having one good reason to go there seems like enough to me. Sometimes the challenge alone is a good enough reason. As in "we choose to go to the moon because it is hard" or something like that, I heard that before somewhere. Not in science fiction either.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Why would you launch a military strike from the Moon? Wouldn't it be easier to launch a strike....from Earth?
NASA couldn't find its way out of a paper bag nowadays.
Bureaucratic money pit that has accomplished near nothing in decades.
Next, "let's go to Mars".
Yeah. Sure.
I hear the moon is full of cheese.
Cheeeese.... (where's Wallace?)
Next headline: "NASA plans to mine cheese on the moon".
Lame-O's
The anti-vax quarantine problem.
Have gnu, will travel.
What is the strategic use of the moon and planets? Please explain without using scifi or references to any Heinlein novel.
Perception. Like anything else - why do we need computers, appendectomies, cars? Because we have a perceived need for these things. It doesn't matter in principle if the perceptions are ill-conceived or practical, because those too are perception-based opinions, or the political optic of a certain number of humans. Perception. If you disagree with me then, well...perception.
Libtards have been screaming that Trump is going to prison for what, 2+ years now? Still hasn't happened. You know what? It's never going to happen!
Just this week, the Senate has uncovered no direct evidence of conspiracy between Trump campaign and Russia.
No need to refer to SF or Heinlein. All I need to do is point out that as far as the Earth/Moon system is concerned, having a base on the Moon gives you control of the ultimate High Ground.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
The Moon is 3 days away and highly visible. Low Earth orbit is much better, come over the horizon and drop rocks or crowbars with guidance systems. A crowbar dropped from orbit has a lot of kinetic energy, almost as much as launched from the Moon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Sure, let the national space agencies build settlements on the Moon. There is no commercial viability in those places.all we need is just peace of mind. https://hitsalbumuk.com/
Why would you launch a military strike from the Moon? Wouldn't it be easier to launch a strike....from Earth?
Maybe you'd launch a military strike from the moon because it's a Heinlein story that was written 50+ years ago.
Did you miss the part where I hadn't read the book yet? I assume that the why is explained in the book. I also assume that the books diverge a bit from reality. The challenge was to explain the strategic value of going to the moon while not repeating something in science fiction. I use that as an example of how science fiction, given the large numbers of stories in the genre, likely covered them all and then some.
Can you think of a reason for going to the moon that wasn't already envisioned in some science fiction story somewhere? Maybe we will find a strange monolithic device buried in the moon's surface and want to send a bunch of people to investigate. Or maybe we'll take harpoons to go hunt whales and tell tall tales. Oh, wait, those were already mentioned in science fiction too.
Maybe we just feel a need to climb mountains on the moon, because they are there.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
honestly its so funny, how do dey expect the poor to live on it, because we all know they would want too. #SAVE THE POOR
A crowbar dropped from orbit has a lot of kinetic energy
Orbital mechanics don't work that way. You cannot "drop" anything from orbit. And even if you manage to accelerate the crowbar enough to drop straight down, it would vaporize before it hit the ground.
Did someone show Trunp the IronSky Movies and this is what happend after he spoke with the NASA folks and he realized Mars isn't an option?
Well a ÂÂstrikeÂÂ in this context is a strategic strike with a kinetic impactor. Think a big rock that does nuke like damages but with no radiation. You just let the rock fall toward the ground and voila. Honestly itâ(TM)s a cool idea but it probably not that much of an upgrade over continental missiles especially with MIRV being worked on.
The US is $22 trillion in debt. Our infrastructure is crumbling. Vets are sleeping outside in the freezing cold and not given the health care they entitled to. The US cannot healthcare for it's poorest citizens. And I could go on.
How much would it cost to put a colony on the moon, and what is the payoff? What do we have on the moon that we don't have on earth?
I think NASA decided it did not want any kind of artificial gravity. The micro-gravity in the space station is something NASA wants.
A space station like the one in 2001, would require millions of tons of material, and cost trillions, maybe tens of trillions, to build.
Bottom line: what's the point?
Heinlein didn't do much in the way of Moon wars.
He was more interested in warping the social norms.
- Stranger in a Strange Land - He created a messiah.
- Farnham's Freehold - He flipped the Black and White races.
Heinlein was more about adventure and inventing story lines that normalized the taboo than dystopian Moon murder.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Don’t build “Gateway” in lunar orbit. Build it at L5. Constant communications with earth, not much difference in cost to get there from the lunar surface, and easier station keeping. Put an LPS system of sats in orbit though. They can also relay from the far side of the moon as well to enhance exploration.
- Tjp
I am in wallow with my inner money grubbing capitalistic pig. ... Oink!
No need to refer to SF or Heinlein. All I need to do is point out that as far as the Earth/Moon system is concerned, having a base on the Moon gives you control of the ultimate High Ground.
Controlling the L5 And L6 points is probably far more significant!
https://www.space.com/30302-la...
And even if you manage to accelerate the crowbar enough to drop straight down, it would vaporize before it hit the ground.
Not necessarily, particularly since you wouldn't want to drop it straight down. You get to choose the entry trajectory and the trajectory that uses the least delta-v also has the best profile for entry (dropping the perigee just low enough that the rod re-enters). A steel rod has a good ballistic coefficient so it won't heat nearly as much as most of the objects that enter the atmosphere (space vehicles, asteroids, etc.). And even if part of the rod ablates away as long as a decent portion still strikes the target the weapon would be effective, there isn't a ton of difference between getting hit with 20 KG of steel at orbital velocities vs. 15 KG of molten steel and 5 KG of white-hot iron plasma.
Enigma
Enigma2175 explained things pretty well. Try Googling "rods from god" or "project thor" or start here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... to quote,
Though it does seem the original idea was closer to telephone pole size.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Trump is a career criminal, and supporting him on this level is willfully aiding and abetting criminal activity, dude.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Best done here, of course, but I can't think of a better application. Send an automated manufacturing colony up that can make more copies of itself as it extracts useful things for humans. Wait a few years, have tons and tons of resources waiting, habitats built.
Don't tell me this is beyond our current tech. It's within reach. Certainly closer than the original moon shot was fifty years ago.
What is the strategic use of the moon and planets? Please explain without using scifi or references to any Heinlein novel.
Hmmm. That seems quite difficult since any strategic use of the moon would have likely been covered in some sci-fi somewhere.
Without using sci-fi does not mean you cannot mention any use that is also incidentally covered in some sci-fi. Same goes for Heinlein novel, whatever Heinlein means.
If I write a use for something, and the use has something to do with a phone - and 3200 among the stories I have read also have a phone involvement : I am not really *using* the 3200 stories to write the use for that something.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
Does anyone know why they aren't building a mass driver or something like that to do this?
Fuel is the biggest cost prohibition and humans won't mind the 110 g's or whatever because its just got robots.
I'm shocked at the inaccuracy of your comment.
First, the US is without question the most advanced spacefaring nation. Our probes are Roving Mars now, exploring asteroids, and of course New Horizons and let's not forget Voyager. Russia is obviously a close #2.
Our discussion has to start with that understanding.
NASA obviously gets "decent" funding....funding enough to do the most advanced spacefaring in human history.
The idea that NASA can't get funding to do a project is clearly contradicted by several successful examples currently exploring the universe.
China is a polluted cesspool with a population crisis and it is broke. It has no resources like intellectual base, creativity, or experience to do this. The country is a constant disaster and all the Chinese government can do is keep things from imploding day to day.
Same with India...only worse. I'll grant you that over time, India will eclipse China due to the deterious effects of communism on a populace. India at least values free thinking.
Plus, China and India have no experience, compared to the US's 60 years of sending people and machines to other worlds
Thank you Dave Raggett
Why would you launch a military strike from the Moon? Wouldn't it be easier to launch a strike....from Earth?
Why would you launch a military strike from the Moon? Wouldn't it be easier to launch a strike....from Earth?
Use your orbital mechanics knowledge to understand why the strategic use of the moon in the event of war is not the moon attacking the earth, but the problems the earth would have attacking the moon. One of these things is not like the other.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
A crowbar dropped from orbit has a lot of kinetic energy
Orbital mechanics don't work that way. You cannot "drop" anything from orbit. And even if you manage to accelerate the crowbar enough to drop straight down, it would vaporize before it hit the ground.
He forgot to tell you about the engines and guidance system strapped onto the crowbar.
Orbital mechanics are a bit of a bitch.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.