5 ms·

Add to that, it's a research mission down another gravity well. There are so many practical advantages in a Moon base that I don't know where to start. It's ve

by narag 6y ago

Add to that, it's a research mission down another gravity well. There are so many practical advantages in a Moon base that I don't know where to start. It's very surprising to see them ignored in every discussion about relative merits of the Moon respect other options. Maybe they've been forgotten because much time passed since Apollo. The main point is probably that the Moon is not another gravity well. It's a much much weaker gravity well. Take a look at the Saturn V and then to the LEM. Of course the former had to carry the later and the other modules. But still, only the upper half of the LEM was needed to put two humans in lunar orbit: https://youtu.be/sj6a0Wrrh1g?t=171 https://youtu.be/sj6a0Wrrh1g?t=171 Another important point: you can cover habitational containers with regolith to provide a good protection against micrometeorites. Eventually factories will be made. Unlike humans, you don't need to take stuff from Earth, saving tons of fuel. The only things that seem to be a problem to make there are fuel, and oxygen because there's no water. Solar energy is even stronger while not at night, obviously. Oh and "research project" is a way of talking. You can say "exploration" as well, eventually "industry". Edit: a couple of advantages more, that I don't see mentioned. One that the Moon has gravity and a surface. That means that humans can work more like on Earth and storage is much cheaper to build. And another one: if a way to make ships or fuel from lunar materials is found, it would help any other mission. Taking cargo from the Moon to Earth orbit is much cheaper than doing that from Earth surface. Even if you plan to go to Mars or the asteroids, a Moon base is a great thing to have.

catalogia 6y ago
> Solar energy is even stronger while not at night, obviously. Something to keep in mind is that lunar nights last something like 13 earth days (a full lunar day is 27 days, 7 hours, and change.) So there's a big power storage issue to contend with. Perhaps nuclear power on the moon is the way to go. It wouldn't be the first time a fission reactor has been put into space.
- narag 6y ago
  One solution would be to build a base in a pole with solar arrays in opposite directions so when one of them is blind, the other takes over. The poles are also interesting for other reasons, see detritus' comment. Anyway, I'm sure there would be some other solution, maybe just halting production for two weeks.
  - catalogia 6y ago
    How would the power be transmitted? Laying wires across the moon seems like a huge undertaking. Maybe this would be an ideal application for microwave power transmission between satellites or even statites? If long-term human occupancy of the moon became a thing, it would be interesting to see what sort of cultural changes occur in a population working on a 'two productive weeks; two rest weeks' schedule.
    - narag 6y ago
      No atmosphere, I guess a laser would transmit power well.
    - emiliobumachar 6y ago
      I'm reading gp's suggestion as a single base in a single pole, which always gets sunlight from one direction. Cabling can be very short.
      - narag 6y ago
        Yes, but even in a single pole cable would not be too short. After all we're considering bootstrapping, and moving tons of copper to the Moon doesn't sound cheap. I've heard there are points which the sunlight never reach, but not about permanent sunlight.
        emiliobumachar 6y ago
        A quick search indicates that indeed there is no permanent sunlight, which, yes, invalidates the suggestion that just solar panels could be enough. https://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2018/02/03/commentary-the-poles-of-the-moon-are-the-most-valuable-real-estate-in-the-solar-system/ https://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2018/02/03/comment... "Due to the orientation of the moon’s spin axis, the sun skirts and circles around the polar horizon. On certain mountain peaks, or elevated crater rims, the sun shines 80 percent to 95 percent of the year, with short periods of darkness easily bridged by temporary power sources, such as fuel cells."
detritus 6y ago
I thought that we were fairly sure there's water at the poles, frozen in the permenant shadows created in some craters? checks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_water https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_water suggests we have a lot of evidence to imply there is, but until we get there and extract enough for a cup of tea, I guess we can't be sure.
- 0xffff2 6y ago
  We're pretty sure, and we are working on getting samples [0]. I'm not sure if we have a plan to send up a tea bag on the rover, but I'm going to suggest that that be added. [0]: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/new-viper-lunar-rover-to-map-water-ice-on-the-moon https://www.nasa.gov/feature/new-viper-lunar-rover-to-map-wa...
throwaway052020 6y ago
A lot of the justification for human space exploration seems to be circular and rest entirely on the quasi-religious belief that sending people into space is inherently good. Once you take away that belief, there's not much reason to do things like building factories or habitats on the moon.
- avmich 6y ago
  > A lot of the justification for human space exploration seems to be circular and rest entirely on the quasi-religious belief that sending people into space is inherently good. It's just a short summary of the reasoning. Here - https://launiusr.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/why-explore-space-a-1970-letter-to-a-nun-in-africa/ https://launiusr.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/why-explore-space-... - some arguments for space exploration in general. Human exploration in particular becomes more clear when one realizes that modern robotics can't fit a lot of exploration requirements as well as humans can. Aside from commercial goals - like resources, tourism, support of space equipment - we have natural, if strategic, curiosity of environment around us. We're just at the point when that "around" starts getting bigger than the planet.
  - throwaway052020 6y ago
    > Here - https://launiusr.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/why-explore-space-.. https://launiusr.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/why-explore-space-.... - some arguments for space exploration in general. I don't think anyone is against using space, but that's quite a different thing from human space exploration. The only specific example he gives of the direct use for space - using artificial satellites - don't require human space exploration. Neither do the more indirect benefits he mentions - international cooperation and having high level challenges. There are plenty of high challenges (even if we just look at space), many that would also have much more tangible benefits in addition to being a high level challenge. Talking about our natural curiosity isn't a great reason either - we're already doing much more robotic exploration of space than most cultures historically did of their surroundings. And this exploration doesn't necessitate humans.
    - 6y ago

by narag 6y ago

catalogia 6y ago

> Solar energy is even stronger while not at night, obviously. Something to keep in mind is that lunar nights last something like 13 earth days (a full lunar day is 27 days, 7 hours, and change.) So there's a big power storage issue to contend with. Perhaps nuclear power on the moon is the way to go. It wouldn't be the first time a fission reactor has been put into space.

narag 6y ago
One solution would be to build a base in a pole with solar arrays in opposite directions so when one of them is blind, the other takes over. The poles are also interesting for other reasons, see detritus' comment. Anyway, I'm sure there would be some other solution, maybe just halting production for two weeks.
- catalogia 6y ago
  How would the power be transmitted? Laying wires across the moon seems like a huge undertaking. Maybe this would be an ideal application for microwave power transmission between satellites or even statites? If long-term human occupancy of the moon became a thing, it would be interesting to see what sort of cultural changes occur in a population working on a 'two productive weeks; two rest weeks' schedule.
  - narag 6y ago
    No atmosphere, I guess a laser would transmit power well.
  - emiliobumachar 6y ago
    I'm reading gp's suggestion as a single base in a single pole, which always gets sunlight from one direction. Cabling can be very short.
    - narag 6y ago
      Yes, but even in a single pole cable would not be too short. After all we're considering bootstrapping, and moving tons of copper to the Moon doesn't sound cheap. I've heard there are points which the sunlight never reach, but not about permanent sunlight.
      - emiliobumachar 6y ago
        A quick search indicates that indeed there is no permanent sunlight, which, yes, invalidates the suggestion that just solar panels could be enough. https://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2018/02/03/commentary-the-poles-of-the-moon-are-the-most-valuable-real-estate-in-the-solar-system/ https://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2018/02/03/comment... "Due to the orientation of the moon’s spin axis, the sun skirts and circles around the polar horizon. On certain mountain peaks, or elevated crater rims, the sun shines 80 percent to 95 percent of the year, with short periods of darkness easily bridged by temporary power sources, such as fuel cells."

detritus 6y ago

I thought that we were fairly sure there's water at the poles, frozen in the permenant shadows created in some craters? checks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_water https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_water suggests we have a lot of evidence to imply there is, but until we get there and extract enough for a cup of tea, I guess we can't be sure.

0xffff2 6y ago
We're pretty sure, and we are working on getting samples [0]. I'm not sure if we have a plan to send up a tea bag on the rover, but I'm going to suggest that that be added. [0]: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/new-viper-lunar-rover-to-map-water-ice-on-the-moon https://www.nasa.gov/feature/new-viper-lunar-rover-to-map-wa...

throwaway052020 6y ago

A lot of the justification for human space exploration seems to be circular and rest entirely on the quasi-religious belief that sending people into space is inherently good. Once you take away that belief, there's not much reason to do things like building factories or habitats on the moon.

avmich 6y ago
> A lot of the justification for human space exploration seems to be circular and rest entirely on the quasi-religious belief that sending people into space is inherently good. It's just a short summary of the reasoning. Here - https://launiusr.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/why-explore-space-a-1970-letter-to-a-nun-in-africa/ https://launiusr.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/why-explore-space-... - some arguments for space exploration in general. Human exploration in particular becomes more clear when one realizes that modern robotics can't fit a lot of exploration requirements as well as humans can. Aside from commercial goals - like resources, tourism, support of space equipment - we have natural, if strategic, curiosity of environment around us. We're just at the point when that "around" starts getting bigger than the planet.
- throwaway052020 6y ago
  > Here - https://launiusr.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/why-explore-space-.. https://launiusr.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/why-explore-space-.... - some arguments for space exploration in general. I don't think anyone is against using space, but that's quite a different thing from human space exploration. The only specific example he gives of the direct use for space - using artificial satellites - don't require human space exploration. Neither do the more indirect benefits he mentions - international cooperation and having high level challenges. There are plenty of high challenges (even if we just look at space), many that would also have much more tangible benefits in addition to being a high level challenge. Talking about our natural curiosity isn't a great reason either - we're already doing much more robotic exploration of space than most cultures historically did of their surroundings. And this exploration doesn't necessitate humans.
  - 6y ago