Posted on 07/24/2015 5:25:44 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Traveling to the Moon just got a whole lot cheaper. A NASA-funded study (PDF) has found that the cost of lunar missions could be reduced by a factor of 10 using a number of techniques – and it could also have implications for getting humans to Mars.
The extensive NexGen Space study by the National Space Society (NSS) and the Space Frontier Foundation (SFF) said that partnerships with private companies could return humans to the Moon for $10 billion (£6.4 billion), rather than the previosuly estimated $100 billion (£64 billion) that had turned off potential suitors. Utilizing fuel sourced from the Moon – namely water and hydrogen – could also drastically reduce the cost of space travel further into the Solar System.
“A factor of ten reduction in cost changes everything,” said NSS Executive Committee Chair Mark Hopkins in a statement.
The goal of the study was to see if public-private partnerships and other approaches could result in a low-cost and low-risk method to return humans to the Moon while supporting future missions to Mars, dubbed an Evolvable Lunar Architecture (ELA).
The study points to NASA’s successful investments in private spaceflight so far through its COTS and CRS programs. By 2017, two manned spacecraft are set to launch as a result of the subsequent Commercial Crew Program – SpaceX’s manned Dragon capsule and Boeing’s CST-100.
Heavy-lift rockets are also in production, notably SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy and United Launch Alliance's (ULA) upcoming Vulcan rocket, that could be used to launch astronauts there without relying on NASA’s costly Space Launch System. Reusable spacecraft and lunar landers could also keep things on the cheaper side.
In five to seven years, the study says the U.S. could return astronauts to the Moon for $10 billion (£6.4 billion) – less than $2 billion (£1.3 billion) a year. In 10 to 12 years, it says that a four-person industrial base on the Moon could be operational, costing $40 billion (£26 billion), less than $4 billion (£2.6 billion) a year.
Both of these proposals could be covered by NASA’s existing deep space human spaceflight budget, which stands at about $4 billion a year.
Crucially, the study says that a manned base on the Moon could produce 200 million tons of spacecraft propellant per year from water and hydrogen on the lunar surface. This propellant could be utilized by NASA for missions to Mars, drastically reducing their cost. The study notes, though, that it would be necessary to send robotic explorers to the Moon first to confirm that water and hydrogen are “economically accessible near the surface inside the lunar craters at the poles.”
The study also recommends creating an International Lunar Authority, “modelled after CERN,” to manage the combined business and technical risks of lunar operations. “A permanent commercial lunar base might substantially pay for its operations by exporting propellant to lunar orbit for sale to NASA and others to send humans to Mars, thus enabling the economic development of the Moon at a small marginal cost," it said.
At the moment, NASA does not have plans to return to the Moon. It is using its Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM) – sending humans to an asteroid – as a cheaper stepping stone to Mars. But this study follows another by the National Research Council last year that suggests perhaps a return to the Moon would be a better option, and it might even be more economical.
“This is the way that America will settle the final frontier, save taxpayers money and usher in a new era of economic growth and STEM [science, technology, engineering, and math] innovation,” the Space Frontier Foundation’s Chairman of the Board, Jeff Feige, added in the statement.
Great, we can send all the libs to the moon for less than previously thought.
Ok, but if we are going back to the moon, next time, let’s tie a rope to the capsule, connected to a giant spool down here on Earth. Then, once it gets to the moon we can just zipline on over.
Okay let’s just get there doing it the gayest way possible. /s
*Yawn*
We knew that not just 25 years ago but 50 years ago
I know you’re kidding, but they’re actually thinking along those lines.
This Japanese company is building a space elevator
http://www.aol.com/article/2015/07/24/this-japanese-company-is-building-a-space-elevator/21213829/
—The study also recommends creating an International Lunar Authority, “modelled after CERN,” to manage the combined business and technical risks of lunar operations.“—
‘International Lunar Authority’.
Mmmm...sounds Orwellian, or Brave New World, or 1984ish to me.
Certainly not something we should be subject to.
Gotta plant the rainbow flag there... dontcha know?
They could have had a dedicated ship parked at the space station that could make runs to the moon and back, no need for re-entry. Could be refueled by unmanned ships until it was ready for a crew.
Well, I know all about space elevators, but I don’t even have to read that article to know they aren’t actually building one.
At the moment, building one is physically impossible, because there are several major engineering problems that haven’t been overcome. At best, they are probably trying to find solutions to those problems so that they can maybe one day build a space elevator.
Have you ever read a short story called “The Marching Morons”?
We could sell the Moon trip in the same way.
The ships would all detonate after leaving the vicinity of earth and glowing letters of satisfaction along with photoshopped pictures could be sent to family members waiting for the next launch.
So this is a great idea.
How about we make things in America once again so we aren’t spending our nation’s fortune on Chinese imports?
(not kidding in the slightest)
Once upon a time, we actually expected to get there. Now it's a distant dream, even at a tenth of the expected price.
The best bet for returning to the Moon is based on the idea of “cumulative” results. That is, every mission there improves the place, so missions are not redundant, and can last on the Moon longer and be more productive.
The cheapest and best way to do this with existing technology is to first send nuclear powered tunneling robots. Horizontal tunnel habitats in the interior walls of crater cliffs, plugged with pressure doors, solves the big problems on the Moon.
They protect from vacuum, extremes of heat and cold, cosmic and enhanced radiation, and the very abrasive Lunar dust. The robots could begin years before people set foot on the Moon, and continue to tunnel even after the people leave, creating a larger and larger habitat. And while the people visit, they would have abundant energy from the robots nuclear power.
Since the robots would be on a one way trip to the Moon, their landers could be designed to be cannibalized for pressure doors, structural supports, ceiling, walls and floor, all “plug and play” for that purpose, wired with electrical and other conduits.
And, after a substantial, permanent Moon base was built, the concept could be reused to go to Mars. A far more hospitable place if improved by robots for years before we set foot on it.
Smells like saying anything while trolling for funds.
Smells like saying anything while trolling for funds.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.