2 ms·
> it's more there as a "petrol stations Which makes very little sense from a delta V standpoint. I’ve yet to see a good justification for the gateway, especial
by messe 4y ago
> it's more there as a "petrol stations
Which makes very little sense from a delta V standpoint. I’ve yet to see a good justification for the gateway, especially after NASA selected Starship (which contains more useable living space than the proposed gateway) as its lander for Artemis.
- pmontra 4y agoMaybe to send fuel in orbit along several weeks or months instead of with one giant rocket. Less efficient but easier.
- messe 4y ago> Maybe to send fuel in orbit along several weeks or months instead of with one giant rocket. Less efficient but easier. Unless you're getting fuel from the moon, the sensible way to do that is to do your refueling in LEO. Otherwise your tankers of fuel are going to need to refuel in LEO to even get to the lunar gateway in the first place. That's in fact Starship's architecture: It's going to launch on a SuperHeavy booster, and then refuel in Low Earth Orbit, utilising tanker-variants of Starship.
- panick21_ 4y agoYou could do that by directly going to the moon. No matter how you look at it, it makes no sense.