4 ms·
Love this concept… one issue however if I remember correctly is that it is pretty costly (fuel wise) to keep anything in lunar orbit. The issue is that the moon
by aerophilic 4y ago
Love this concept… one issue however if I remember correctly is that it is pretty costly (fuel wise) to keep anything in lunar orbit. The issue is that the moon is very “lumpy” causing you to have to constantly correct your orbit. However maybe this is a non-issue if you are in a high enough orbit… but then you are trading how much power you can get to the surface.
- gpm 4y agoThere are a few "frozen orbits" that are stable: https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2006/30nov_highorbit/ https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2006/3...
- moffkalast 4y agoYeah and the LRO has been in one of them for 13 years now. It does restrict you quite a bit though. For Luna it doesn't make as much sense as it would for say Mars, since there's no atmosphere to reduce efficiency and no shortage of ground real estate. You can save a bit of propellant to not bring the panel assembly down, but you'll need fuel for orbital stationkeeping instead anyway.
- dylan604 4y agoWith the proposed "cheapness" of Starship $/kg, wouldn't sending fuel to refill the station keeping abilities be feasible?