5 ms·

This [0] is also an interesting piece. SpaceX won a contract for logistics services to the lunar gateway but not much has happened on that front yet. Here is an

This [0] is also an interesting piece. SpaceX won a contract for logistics services to the lunar gateway but not much has happened on that front yet. Here is an excerpt from the article: "NASA, in a statement provided to SpaceNews April 14, said it has yet to formally authorize SpaceX to proceed on the Gateway Logistics Services contract because the agency is studying the overall schedule of the Artemis lunar exploration program, of which development and use of the Gateway is just one part. “An agency internal Artemis review team is currently assessing the timing of various Artemis capabilities, including Gateway. The goal of this internal review is to evaluate the current Artemis program budget and timeline, and develop high-level plans that include content, schedule, and budgets for the program,” the agency stated.", from [0] Now this is pure speculation but they are not maybe working towards doing away with the Gateway and going directly to the moon instead? [0] https://spacenews.com/nasa-delays-starting-contract-with-spacex-for-gateway-cargo-services/ https://spacenews.com/nasa-delays-starting-contract-with-spa...

avmich 6y ago
> Now this is pure speculation but they are not maybe working towards doing away with the gateway and going directly to the moon instead? You don't assume the humanity doesn't need a Moon orbiting outpost, do you? Insisting that all materials and devices have to go to Moon or Earth with no intermediate point sounds, shall I say, interesting.
- bryanlarsen 6y ago
  Spacecraft can dock with other spacecraft, they don't need a station to facilitate that. It's especially nonsensical now that Starship was chosen, since Starship is much larger than Gateway.
  - NotSammyHagar 6y ago
    Gateway could have coasted out in space for years though, like the the existing space station. starship won't be able to sit there forever. But that's an interesting point in general, will the starship 'habitable space' be bigger than gateway?
    - _Microft 6y ago
      Starship is huge, it is supposed to have up to 1000m³ of pressurized volume. That would be 10% more than the ISS currently has. Gateway should have at least 125m³ from what I saw on its Wikipedia page.
      - avmich 6y ago
        A good Moon base should for sure be bigger than an orbital outpost; unless we have an awful lot of traffic there, on the orbit around the Moon... but we're not there yet. However, to completely avoid having a Moon orbiting facility would be to err to the other direction. Suppose, for example, you have an emergency on the Moon. If you need to fly to Earth, it's easier to meet an Earth-bound ship in the Moon orbit than to have that ship landed on Moon; reminding, SpaceX lunar ship isn't intended to fly to Earth, with good reasons. Or if you need an urgent delivery of something unique from the Earth, it's easier to deliver to the Moon orbiting outpost, rather than to have it with Moon landing capabilities. If you need delivery of materials from the Moon, a convenient place is to accumulate them in orbit; Earth's history of sea shipments suggests that. Of course there could be other reasons. Size of Starship doesn't really matter - Gateway could be smaller, and still quite useful.
        bryanlarsen 6y ago
        Gateway will be almost completely useless for this. Gateway is in a very odd orbit, a near rectilinear halo orbit. that NRHO spends most of its time a massive distance from the moon. Most of the time the Earth is closer to the moon than the gateway is. You can make a good argument for having a station in low lunar orbit, but NRHO is really silly. It was only chosen because it's all the Senate boondoggle SLS could reach. Edit: NRHO is only close to the moon once every 7 days, versus a low lunar orbit which orbits the moon in 2 hours.
        GoOnThenDoTell 6y ago
        It’s not about distance, it’s about deltaV necessary to get to it
- KineticLensman 6y ago
  > Insisting that all materials and devices have to go to Moon or Earth with no intermediate point sounds, shall I say, interesting. Apollo did quite well without an intermediate point.
  - avmich 6y ago
    > Apollo did quite well without an intermediate point. Not particularly relevant. At the JFK planning moment, there were no plans, and hardly means, to fly to the Moon to stay. Different from what we have now. Today, "just" repeating "the small step" would be quite anticlimactic.
Tepix 6y ago
It seems unlikely. The lunar gateway is a cornerpiece of the international collaboration at the moon.
skissane 6y ago
I doubt they'll cancel Gateway. They have already awarded contracts for its manufacture and launch, and they have international partners (Europe, Japan, Canada) committed to manufacture and launch components as well. What might get cancelled however, is Dragon XL. I'm sure SpaceX is going to ask to change the contract to replace Dragon XL + Falcon Heavy with cargo Starship. Now that NASA is relying on Starship for HLS, it is going to be hard for them to say "no" to Starship for Gateway cargo as well.
perl4ever 6y ago
Gateway! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_(novel) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_(novel)

avmich 6y ago

> Now this is pure speculation but they are not maybe working towards doing away with the gateway and going directly to the moon instead? You don't assume the humanity doesn't need a Moon orbiting outpost, do you? Insisting that all materials and devices have to go to Moon or Earth with no intermediate point sounds, shall I say, interesting.

bryanlarsen 6y ago
Spacecraft can dock with other spacecraft, they don't need a station to facilitate that. It's especially nonsensical now that Starship was chosen, since Starship is much larger than Gateway.
- NotSammyHagar 6y ago
  Gateway could have coasted out in space for years though, like the the existing space station. starship won't be able to sit there forever. But that's an interesting point in general, will the starship 'habitable space' be bigger than gateway?
  - _Microft 6y ago
    Starship is huge, it is supposed to have up to 1000m³ of pressurized volume. That would be 10% more than the ISS currently has. Gateway should have at least 125m³ from what I saw on its Wikipedia page.
    - avmich 6y ago
      A good Moon base should for sure be bigger than an orbital outpost; unless we have an awful lot of traffic there, on the orbit around the Moon... but we're not there yet. However, to completely avoid having a Moon orbiting facility would be to err to the other direction. Suppose, for example, you have an emergency on the Moon. If you need to fly to Earth, it's easier to meet an Earth-bound ship in the Moon orbit than to have that ship landed on Moon; reminding, SpaceX lunar ship isn't intended to fly to Earth, with good reasons. Or if you need an urgent delivery of something unique from the Earth, it's easier to deliver to the Moon orbiting outpost, rather than to have it with Moon landing capabilities. If you need delivery of materials from the Moon, a convenient place is to accumulate them in orbit; Earth's history of sea shipments suggests that. Of course there could be other reasons. Size of Starship doesn't really matter - Gateway could be smaller, and still quite useful.
      - bryanlarsen 6y ago
        Gateway will be almost completely useless for this. Gateway is in a very odd orbit, a near rectilinear halo orbit. that NRHO spends most of its time a massive distance from the moon. Most of the time the Earth is closer to the moon than the gateway is. You can make a good argument for having a station in low lunar orbit, but NRHO is really silly. It was only chosen because it's all the Senate boondoggle SLS could reach. Edit: NRHO is only close to the moon once every 7 days, versus a low lunar orbit which orbits the moon in 2 hours.
        GoOnThenDoTell 6y ago
        It’s not about distance, it’s about deltaV necessary to get to it
KineticLensman 6y ago
> Insisting that all materials and devices have to go to Moon or Earth with no intermediate point sounds, shall I say, interesting. Apollo did quite well without an intermediate point.
- avmich 6y ago
  > Apollo did quite well without an intermediate point. Not particularly relevant. At the JFK planning moment, there were no plans, and hardly means, to fly to the Moon to stay. Different from what we have now. Today, "just" repeating "the small step" would be quite anticlimactic.

Tepix 6y ago

It seems unlikely. The lunar gateway is a cornerpiece of the international collaboration at the moon.

skissane 6y ago

I doubt they'll cancel Gateway. They have already awarded contracts for its manufacture and launch, and they have international partners (Europe, Japan, Canada) committed to manufacture and launch components as well. What might get cancelled however, is Dragon XL. I'm sure SpaceX is going to ask to change the contract to replace Dragon XL + Falcon Heavy with cargo Starship. Now that NASA is relying on Starship for HLS, it is going to be hard for them to say "no" to Starship for Gateway cargo as well.

perl4ever 6y ago

Gateway! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_(novel) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_(novel)