3 ms·

We have to start by assembling in space first. SpaceX's Lunar Starship is a little bit like that. They have to launch tankers to orbit and refill the lander. I

We have to start by assembling in space first. SpaceX's Lunar Starship is a little bit like that. They have to launch tankers to orbit and refill the lander. I can imagine someone making rockets from multiple separately launched parts that are then assembled in space. It would allow to use well tested rockets to launch smaller parts instead of trying to build a huge rocket at once.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> We have to start by assembling in space first You need to solve the material-cost problem first. Either a space gun / elevator or ISRU. Otherwise, assembling on the ground is cheaper for everything but the most massive objects. (At which point a constellation or fleet usually makes more sense.) > would allow to use well tested rockets to launch smaller parts instead of trying to build a huge rocket at once Bigger rockets have moderate economies of scale. Optimising for a particular launch vehicle doesn’t make sense in the long run.
- gshubert17 3y ago
  ISRU - In-Situ Resource Utilization The farther humans go into deep space, the more important it will be to generate products with local materials, a practice called in-situ resource utilization.
dotnet00 3y ago
At this point it isn't just SpaceX's Starship, but in general the direction Artemis is heading in, since the secondary lander design (from Blue Origin, Lockheed Martin et al) that was recently chosen also uses in-space refueling and is designed with Lunar ISRU in mind. Shelby finally retiring has been a great boon for NASA's human space exploration programs. Also, technically the Lunar Gateway would fit your second point, considering that it's split into a separate habitation module and power+propulsion element.
Retric 3y ago
We’ve had space assembly for decades, just look at the ISS which both consists of many modules and used regular fuel deliveries to maintain orbit etc. Manufacturing seems possible but is several orders of magnitude more difficult because many processes on earth simply aren’t viable without access to earths vast array of manufacturing infrastructure, organic chemicals, or even gravity.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> We have to start by assembling in space first You need to solve the material-cost problem first. Either a space gun / elevator or ISRU. Otherwise, assembling on the ground is cheaper for everything but the most massive objects. (At which point a constellation or fleet usually makes more sense.) > would allow to use well tested rockets to launch smaller parts instead of trying to build a huge rocket at once Bigger rockets have moderate economies of scale. Optimising for a particular launch vehicle doesn’t make sense in the long run.

gshubert17 3y ago
ISRU - In-Situ Resource Utilization The farther humans go into deep space, the more important it will be to generate products with local materials, a practice called in-situ resource utilization.

dotnet00 3y ago

At this point it isn't just SpaceX's Starship, but in general the direction Artemis is heading in, since the secondary lander design (from Blue Origin, Lockheed Martin et al) that was recently chosen also uses in-space refueling and is designed with Lunar ISRU in mind. Shelby finally retiring has been a great boon for NASA's human space exploration programs. Also, technically the Lunar Gateway would fit your second point, considering that it's split into a separate habitation module and power+propulsion element.

Retric 3y ago

We’ve had space assembly for decades, just look at the ISS which both consists of many modules and used regular fuel deliveries to maintain orbit etc. Manufacturing seems possible but is several orders of magnitude more difficult because many processes on earth simply aren’t viable without access to earths vast array of manufacturing infrastructure, organic chemicals, or even gravity.