Moon 2.0: Join the Revolution

Page 2 - Seeking answers about space? Join the Space community: the premier source of space exploration, innovation, and astronomy news, chronicling (and celebrating) humanity's ongoing expansion across the final frontier.
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

themanwithoutapast

Guest
"Don't you need to start with the rover, how heavy it is and what its landing systems going to be and how heavy they are and if it needs an orbiter for communications and how heavy that is."<br /><br />Exactly. Any proposal has to start with the rover and base componentes (transmitter etc.). These systems have to be as low-mass as possible. <br /><br />You won't need an orbiter for communication if you land the rover on the Earth facing side of the Moon. The Moon is locked into always facing only one side to the Earth. You of course would need different relay stations on Earth to have 24 hour coverage but no orbiter around the Moon.<br /><br />"And speaking of TLI booster, are you going to use one or use an ion engine to get to lunar orbit in 3 years like SMART-1 did?<br /><br />Or are you going to try to use an unconventional method like a solar sail? "<br /><br />This is a competition that needs to stay as cost-effective as possible. Any advanced propulsion system (i.e. non-chemical) would increase mission costs and complexity. The key is to reduce the effective payload mass of your rover and base components + increase the odds for a possible mission success by using reliable technology for the TLI-burn and descent burn (that is proven chemical (storable) propellants).<br /><br />"Ion engine and solar sail have the advantage that you don't need such a big launcher to begin with."<br /><br />True, but as mentioned they also increase the complexity + you can use an ion engine like Smart-1 only for getting to lunar orbit, not to land anything on the Moon.
 
T

themanwithoutapast

Guest
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>According to msnbc's Cosmic Log<br /><br />"Musk already has a growing launch manifest, but he's willing to provide launches at cost for competitors in the Google Lunar X Prize. "We don't expect to generate any extra sales out of this," he said. Instead, Musk - who is a member of the X Prize Foundation's board of trustees - sees this as a way to contribute to the success of the X Prize program."<br /><br /><br />That should be great for both those companies after the Xprize and SpaceX. Rad.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />If Musk really once to contribute to this XPrize challenge he should commit one Falcon 1 launch for free for a team that comes to him with flight ready hardware and a rover + he would get paid the launch costs (8 million USD) if the team reaches the lunar surface and wins the prize money.
 
J

j05h

Guest
<i>> ...he should commit one Falcon 1 launch for free for a team ...</i><br /><br />SpaceX has offered a blanket discount for all teams on the Falcon I. If they offered a completely free ride to one team, they'd have to offer it to any ready teams. SpaceX is a sponsor of this X Prize, they can't play favorites. The solution they have proposed (blanket 10% discount) is a very good compromise that definitely makes them competitive with other light launchers. This is also a great way for them to gain experience in launch operations on the F1 instead of the more complex F9.<br /><br />I don't understand why they would only get paid if the rover succeeded in landing? The Falcon is at most going to take the payload TLI. It's someone else's ballgame from there. Launch failure is usually handled by insurance, not withholding payment. <br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>
 
W

windnwar

Guest
launching on Falcon for U.S. based teams will also eliminate any of the regulatory hurdles for exporting the technology to launch on a foriegn based launcher. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font size="2" color="#0000ff">""Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." --Albert Einstein"</font></p> </div>
 
R

rybanis

Guest
I wonder...with a F1 that means you can get to LEO (Merlin 1st stage, Kestrel-powered second stage). After that, I wonder if you could use a solid-kick motor for TLI? That might be a good power-to-weight solution for at least getting there. I haven't the faintest idea on how you would slow down once you got there, however. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
T

themanwithoutapast

Guest
I wonder...with a F1 that means you can get to LEO (Merlin 1st stage, Kestrel-powered second stage). After that, I wonder if you could use a solid-kick motor for TLI? That might be a good power-to-weight solution for at least getting there. I haven't the faintest idea on how you would slow down once you got there, however.<br />------------<br />Like all current probes are slowing down - chemical, restartable engines using storable propellants.
 
G

gunsandrockets

Guest
<Like all current probes are slowing down - chemical, restartable engines using storable propellants. ><br /><br />That's not the only way to do the job. The very successul Surveyor lunar landers used a solid propellant 'crasher' stage which braked the probe to a standstill above the lunar surface and was then jettisoned; the probes final approach to a soft-landing was controlled by a liquid mono-propellant vernier thruster.
 
R

radarredux

Guest
> <i><font color="yellow"> I haven't the faintest idea on how you would slow down once you got there, however.</font>/i><br /><br />A funny image just came to mind. Ever see those egg drop contests (often off the side of the physics building on campus)? A common approach is to use some crumple zone to spread out the time/distance that the stopping force is applied.<br /><br />Imagine a super-version of the egg drop, but the egg is your lander and you are dropping it on the Moon. Maybe you could use a large amount of aerogel that would collapse (or squirt out) as the lander hits the surface. No rocket needed. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /></i>
 
R

radarredux

Guest
> <i><font color="yellow">Maybe you could use a large amount of aerogel that would collapse (or squirt out) as the lander hits the surface.</font>/i><br /><br />OK, my numbers may be <i><b>way</b></i> off here, but you would need to apply an acceleration of 100 Gs for 2.4 seconds to slow the rover down from Lunar escape velocity to 0. Even worse, the distance travelled over these 2.4 seconds would be 2880 meters.<br /><br />I don't think a 3000 meter aerogel crumple zone approach will work. <img src="/images/icons/frown.gif" /></i>
 
J

j05h

Guest
<i>> A funny image just came to mind. Ever see those egg drop contests ... could use a large amount of aerogel that would collapse (or squirt out) as the lander hits the surface. No rocket needed</i><br /><br />It's also an art school project. One of my buddies kind of combined your idea. He filled a container with rubber cement (a very sticky glue), and embedded the egg in the center. Apparently it worked, but that was a 6-story building not lunar velocity.<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>
 
K

kelvinzero

Guest
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p><br />OK, my numbers may be way off here, but you would need to apply an acceleration of 100 Gs for 2.4 seconds to slow the rover down from Lunar escape velocity to 0. Even worse, the distance travelled over these 2.4 seconds would be 2880 meters. <br /><br />I don't think a 3000 meter aerogel crumple zone approach will work. <br /><p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Im guessing any 'lithobreaking' technique should probably be based on skimming at tangental angle.<br /><br />What about something like a hairy wheel of some sort of very strong carbon hair, oriented like a plane wheel coming in for landing? Tumbling at great speed the hairs would be very rigid. The hairs only need to provide enough force to suspend the payload above the moon as the regolith chews into it, slowing the payload.<br /><br />These hairs could make a wheel a hundred meters in diameter of basically no substance. Perhaps only a hundred hairs in all?<br /><br />An advantage of hairs is that they could be unwound as they are worn away to keep the payload some meters above the regolith. Dunno if that is necessary.
 
H

holmec

Guest
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>True, but as mentioned they also increase the complexity + you can use an ion engine like Smart-1 only for getting to lunar orbit, not to land anything on the Moon.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />I can see that being true with ion engines, but the Planetary Society made a solar sail craft (cosmos 1, which blew up on launch with its Dneper rocket), so how hard could a solar sail be, and how costly? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>
 
N

no_way

Guest
Uh, microspace was "involved" in original X-prize, was supposed to win the lunar lander challenge and end the world hunger at the same time .. all that ever was produced by them are forum posts.<br />I wouldnt get too excited.<br />
 
G

gpbrainard

Guest
I DONNT THINK SO BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT NASA ASTROL SCIENTIST ARE IDEAL SCIENTIST SO THEY CAN NOT THINK BELOW THE UNIVERSAL LIMIT OF FORMING THERE OWN COMPANY OR WHAT EVER ANY ONE CA N THINK
 
D

drwayne

Guest
gpbrainard,<br /><br />Welcome to the forum.<br /><br />Please note that messages in all capital letters are considered "shouting" and are not considered polite.<br /><br />Please do not do that in the future.<br /><br />Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>"1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything."  Admiral Jackie Fisher</p> </div>
 
D

drwayne

Guest
Stop<br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br />Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>"1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything."  Admiral Jackie Fisher</p> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts