Replace NASA With Us

[Shpaget]

You can't seriously think that materials from which some very large space station would be built are going to be mined on asteroid, bombarded the Earth with and then blasted back to space?
I mentioned steel since it's probably the best candidate for building structural components of a space station because it's fairly simple to produce it from ore and because there so much iron in asteroids.

No I don't suggest mining Moon. There are lots of asteroids in lower orbit than Earth, and there are even asteroids whose orbit crosses Earth's.

Dawn is 1,250 kg probe.
Something that could carry human workforce and heavy machinery will surely be much slower than a probe.

Propulsion is an issue because investors won't like the idea of their investment starting to return money after 30-50 years. Why? None of them will live long enough to see it.
Besides, a lot of things can change in that time period. Just look what happened in last 30-50 years.

There is no space industry that want's to buy my asteroid ore in space, therefore steel is worth zero dollars in space.

Actually I think if you could offer steel at $5000/kg in orbit, customers would be standing in line, and you'd be struggling to meet the demand.

 

[HopDavid]

About mining asteroids, in space (not bringing them home through the atmosphere), I don't really see why it should be so impossibly expensive as some people say. The way I see it, most of it is a one time cost. A 'mining ship' that is sent up to perch on a roid and gobble it up until it is done.

What's the mass of your mining ship? Delta V budget for getting there?

Is the mining ship autonomous robots or will there be humans aboard? If humans - life support complicates mission considerably.

Robots might be possible. But presently autonomous or teleoperated robots for mining are in their infancy. Most miners are still human.

This ship jettisons its ore in capsules back to earth.

What's delta V budget for capsule's trip back to earth? Where you getting the propellent? Rocket engines for the capsules? Electronics for navigation, communication? Will there be a spacecraft for each capsule?

After this roid is done, the ship goes to the next, then next, until there is not an asteroid left in the known universe ( ). All self autonomously.

Ah. This answers some of my earlier questions. You're using Harry Potter's wand.

Will Harry's wand also create the propellent for the needed delta V?

The only costs is building and a lofting the ship itself, then propellants to send the stuff back through the atmosphere in capsules.

For most of the best NEOs, delta V budget would be nearly the same as exhaust velocity for a typical chemical rocket (around 4 km/sec). That means your propellent mass would be around double that of the asteroid.

Now you can't tell me that whatever the one time cost of this mining ship, it is more than the worth of all the asteroids in the asteroid belt!

Asteroid belt! Okay, here the delta V budget is substantially more than an NEO. You're going to have to triple or quadruple the mass of the belt by send lots of propellent out there.

And your magical mining ship doesn't exist and won't exist for the foreseeable future.

 

[HopDavid]

Asteroid belt is too far away to be mined. But there are more than enough NEOs to provide (certain) materials for tens of thousands of years.

I don't think you can have your mining ship (lets be cool and from now on call it an outpost) unmanned and automated.

Correct. The unexpected frequently happens at a mine. Murphy's Law reigns (What can go wrong, will). The notion that mining can be easily automated is a naive and ignorant notion. Miners aren't like assembly plant automatons that constantly repeat the same motion in a predictable environment.

Mining is very stressful on equipment and it wears it down quickly, so constant maintenance and part replacing is required. I'm not sure it can be done remotely.

Especially for an asteroid where light lag will make teleoperation difficult.

Mining the moon is more plausible.

Sending mined (and preferably somewhat refined) material back to Earth's orbit is also an issue. Unless you can move around massive amounts of it, entire project is doomed, and I'm pretty sure current propulsion systems are not capable of doing it in reasonable amount of time.
What is needed (IMO) is a new engine capable of burning whatever is found in those asteroids (mainly various types of rocks), because sending enough propellant to the asteroid to be able to get back the material is not practical.
I guess it should be some kind of electric system (a cousin of an ion engine or VASIMR), but not too picky about the propellant.

Yes, propellent is one of the big show stoppers (that along with delta V and the rocket equation). Mining of propellent should precede mining of metals.

 

[Booban]

I wasn't really trying to advocate something, I was trying to brainstorm. There is a difference between constructive criticism and criticism. I guess you guys are just so clever you don't need to know that.

 

[Shpaget]

Well, guess what?
HopDavid and I also did some constructive criticizing, and it seems to me that you can't handle it.
Just by pointing out major flaws in an idea you make sure early on that these flaws are taken into account when developing later ideas.

Were we supposed to clap out hands and pat you on your back? How would that help in coming up with a good idea? It wouldn't.

 

[Booban]

You clever guy, finding flaws on a community forum, you are just too smart! Wow. And all that criticism was spot on, nobody can argue with that, your opinion is just too true! You know exactly how space exploration will pan out.

I am sure you have the one idea that is flawless that will propel humanity to space. OMG, no don't tell us, I wouldn't know what to do with my time anymore.

 

[Booban]

You can't seriously think that materials from which some very large space station would be built are going to be mined on asteroid, bombarded the Earth with and then blasted back to space?
I mentioned steel since it's probably the best candidate for building structural components of a space station because it's fairly simple to produce it from ore and because there so much iron in asteroids.

Yes, I can. I do not know what fantasy very large space station you are talking about, but keeping the manufacturing infrastructure down on earth is cheaper than putting an entire space station factory in space just for a one off space station. The day that you are talking about mass producing space stations is when you want to keep the infrastructure in space. And I wasn't even talking about building anything in space, I'm talking about space enterprises directly benefiting humanity here on EARTH FIRST. I do not care about steel, I am interested about metals valuable on mother earth, not in space. If you are going to answer me, talk about what I am talking about please.

No I don't suggest mining Moon. There are lots of asteroids in lower orbit than Earth, and there are even asteroids whose orbit crosses Earth's.

Why should I care which space rock is mined?

Dawn is 1,250 kg probe.
Something that could carry human workforce and heavy machinery will surely be much slower than a probe.

Yeah, so?

Propulsion is an issue because investors won't like the idea of their investment starting to return money after 30-50 years. Why? None of them will live long enough to see it.
Besides, a lot of things can change in that time period. Just look what happened in last 30-50 years.

Says you. Warren Buffet makes some investments for a 30 year time frame, he doesn't even care if he is going to die before then. If the investment is sound for 30 years, it will probably pay back before then too.

Yes, look whats happened in the last 30-50 years...we're still on this planet! I do not think we are talking about those investors who are looking for a 5 year payback. If you read from the start of this thread, Bill is talking about us investing in space, people who really want things to happen.

There is no space industry that want's to buy my asteroid ore in space, therefore steel is worth zero dollars in space.

Actually I think if you could offer steel at $5000/kg in orbit, customers would be standing in line, and you'd be struggling to meet the demand.[/quote]
Erm, yeah, that's what you think. Who has that space factory pumping out space ships up there to buy your steel?

 

[Boots09]

Well, heres my two cents. One, I do kind of think it sad that no one seems to be interested in exploring space just out of curiosity or the desire to learn. But for the question of people going into space in large numbers. ..when they can do so in comfort. Mining won't do it. We have plenty of ore right here yet and by the time we don't we'll be manufacturing other replcements for it right here...like the carbon fiber tech etc. Even if we do need to mine from other than earth...ok..you have a automated facility with a few bored out of thier skull miners to watch the gagues. But, figure out a way to get people from point A to B fast and in comfort..then buid a resort/casino. Some who work there will live there, might become a retierment destination someday. Or maybe just a vacation option. Look at Antartica. Whos there? A handful of researchers......and thousands of people on cruise ships. But, sadly I think its a few hundred years off yet.

 

[HopDavid]

Why is propulsion such an issue? It's frictionless space, isn't it ways easier to move things about there?

To get from here to there, you need delta V, change in velocity.

If there is no propellent at your destination, delta V must include the return leg of the trip.

Delta V is part of the exponent in the rocket equation:

Mass propellent / Mass payload = e^(delta V/Vex) - 1.

e - Euler's number which is about 2.72
delta V - total change in velocity needed.
Vex - exhaust velocity of propellent. For liquid oxygen/liquid hydrogen Vex is about 4.46 km/sec

Achieving low earth orbit takes about 9 km/sec. Due to gravity and drag loss, it takes about 12 to 13 km/sec to escape earth's gravity well. You will some more than that to fly to an NEO.

After arriving at the NEO, you must match velocities before you land. After getting ore, it must be sent back to earth - more delta V.

After arriving at earth, the incoming cargo must match velocities with our earth moon system or it will go sailing past the earth. Perhaps some or all of this delta V can be acheived with aerobraking/lithobraking.

The delta V budgets for returning material from various asteroids can vary quite a lot depending on the asteroid you pick.

Achieving low earth orbit (LEO) is a large part of the mission. But once you're in LEO, getting there and back isn't trivial.

 

[Shpaget]

Who's talking about one time missions? You sound like your final goal is to mine few grains of precious ore, get it to Earth (burning half of it in the process) and throwing away your entire space program.
You don't care about steel? Maybe you should, since it's one of the most important products of our society and as such is extremely important no matter where you are.
I gave an example of steel and now you hold on to it like a drunkard to a floor. Of course there would be other ores and minerals mined, and of course they would be used.
And yes, I am talking about building stuff in orbit.

You're the one that brought the Moon in the discussion, not me. You said something about it having tidal effect on Earth. I think you were worried about humans mining so much that it would affect its gravity... well... not possible in this solar system's life time.

You gave an example of Dawn's 10-year mission as acceptable for humans.
I said that a ship with human on board would be much slower, and that the mission would extend well beyond acceptable.
Do I need to draw it for you? I will if you ask me politely.

Unfortunately not all of us are Warren Buffett (two "t"s).

As for your last question, the answer is: Nobody, primarily because transporting cargo at $10 000 - $20 000/kg is not economical.
But like I said, if you could offer it at much lower prices and offer custom made parts bigger than what is transportable by rockets, you'd have clients waiting in line.


Oh, and yes, I am a clever guy. Thanks for noticing my unbearable awesomeness.

 

[mj1]

It may not be time to replace NASA per se, but I do say it may be time for NASA to get out of the LEO business. It's time for them to put those brains down there to work designing a ship for deep space exploration on the moon and beyond that is built and launched in space. Yes, it will take some time to get us to that point, but it will be time better spent on this than on expensive boosters that private companies can design and launch for a fraction of the cost. I'd rather them wait 10-20 more years and build a real ship that can go to the moon and beyond rather than use a rehashed Apollo program to go to the moon. Let the privateers handle getting men and material to LEO. NASA has been there and done that. They can invest a fraction of the money they would spend designing new boosters in private industry and get a lot more bang for the buck. It is time for them to move onto new frontiers in space exploration and get a more long term view.

 

[dryson]

If we cancelled NASA and let the people run it what do you think would happen? The first tycoon or tycoon's that don't like space exploration would form together and enact laws prohibitng such actions as well as bribing people to not work for the corporation. NASA is good as a government entity in so much that NASA does receive money on a yearly basis as a budget that is factored into the enconomy.

NASA does make a profit by launching government sponsored satellites into orbit for companies that want the track record of NASA of being able to get it up there. NASA has also been involved with testing various materials in space that have then been used to create sleeping materials and other materials. It would be nice if shoe companies like Nike and Rebok invested in NASA to develop material for the padding of shoes to help eleviate sore backs and muscles associated with walking and other strenous excercises or even shoes made out of all NASA designed materials.

Companies like Burt Rutan's are doing an excellent job at designing vehicles to get us up there, but without consumer interest in a reason why we should go to the Moon or Mar's everyone will turn their heads and go back to watching the reality t.v. shows that currerntly air on t.v.

One aspect of a business that could be started would be mining moon rocks to make jewelry out of. Although the same type of material could be mined here on Earth, just think of the emotional value of wearing a ring made of Moon ore set with a 24 karat perfectly cut diamond, if that doesnt say I love you and is not spirtual when you look up at the moon and can see the glint of the moon's light reflecting in the diamond upon the ring itself, then I don't know what does.

This is a fight that must be led by the women of the world however in so much that they have to demand more from their husbands when it comes to expressing their love.

 

[kelvinzero]

Oh, and yes, I am a clever guy. Thanks for noticing my unbearable awesomeness.

I think you can get an ointment for that..

But yeah, I think asteroid mining is far too long term, and even then it probably will be most plausible for space construction where it is competing with launch prices from earth. Besides, it is a topic in its own right.

I am most interested in things we can do now, with our own money.

Just roughly I think what we should be talking about now is more on the scale of a hundred dollar/year investment/donation from under 1% of the industrial nations citizens.. my guess at the potential space nerd demographic

Still, that could give you $100 million a year or more.

So what could inspire space nerds like us to donate that much, and what could be achieved? Of course the two are strongly interrelated.

I would pay that much to see a continually growing robotic outpost on the moon for example. Missions every year, landing a few hundred kg. Robotic rovers, ISRU, teleoperation etc. And the base just keeps getting bigger. Something is always happening; if not on the moon then with experiments on earth competing to be sent there.

Is this doable? not easily! Prizes could help multiply the worth of the dollar though: After anyone wins the google x-prize, how about the same competition every year, $30 million to whoever lands the most kg of useful payload, $15 million to the runner up. It isnt enough to pay for it but the prestige would be worth a lot to a company and they are allowed to make their own money from the subsidised missions. Universities all around the world could compete for the most worthwhile experiments to send, so they would also be putting in a lot of their own money in also.

 

[Shpaget]

So lets do it.
First thing we need to decide on the acronym. Every cool agency has some 3-4 letter acronym.
How about PISE (Public Initiative for Space Exploration)? nah...
Maybe OSE (Open Space exploration)?
No, no, I've got it.

OS (Open Space)
I covers pretty much anything space based.

Now, are there any millionaires out there wishing to back up this with some $?

 

[MeteorWayne]

Sad news that Bill has apparently passed away. See this thread:

viewtopic.php?f=23&t=21056&p=402522#p402522

 

[wildwell]

I like the idea of growing the privatized space industry, but as others have said, this proposal isn't going to turn a profit in time to attract investors.

This forum is the ideal target market for such an enterprise and no one here is biting. A project with these funding needs is also going to need to attract professional investors from Wall Street. Fund managers need to see a solid plan for the company in 1, 3, 5, 10 years plus. "Experimental," and "Maybe" aren't the kind of words that will impress them.... or me.

Besides lets be honest, you are talking about bombing parts of the earth. Somehow I don't see the federal government, even an all Republican one, trading NASA in for some private company to begin bombing the country with WMDs from space.

 

[Shpaget]

So... is there interest in exploring the possibility of mining the asteroids, and all the details surrounding it (getting there, mining, maintenance, resource refining, in situ fuel/parts production, getting the ore/refined materials back etc.)?

Setting up a forum and a basic site is half an hour job, and I have some free server space I'm not currently using (and even a domain that could be used). I would be more than happy to see it used for something like this.
Anyone interested?

 

[HopDavid]

So... is there interest in exploring the possibility of mining the asteroids, and all the details surrounding it (getting there, mining, maintenance, resource refining, in situ fuel/parts production, getting the ore/refined materials back etc.)?

Setting up a forum and a basic site is half an hour job, and I have some free server space I'm not currently using (and even a domain that could be used). I would be more than happy to see it used for something like this.
Anyone interested?

I'm interested.

There's a number of asteroid advocacy sites out there but I haven't seen any with a forum. http://permanent.com has a forum link that apparently goes nowhere.

 

[Shpaget]

I thought it was only my poor googling skills...
Yes indeed, there are plenty of sites dealing with the idea of asteroid mining, but most of them just talk about how nice it would be to have billions of tons of pure platinum, without actually doing or attempting to do anything productive.

So, who else wants to join?

I started to clean up my hosting plan. There is 800 MB free right now, I guess it should be enough for a while.

 

[DragonTamer]

I’ve just finished reading this thread and find it very interesting. Some of the ideas are truly amazing. What if, instead of abolishing NASA, we try to make the space agency a permanent part of the government? A constitutional amendment establishing a separate arm of the government dedicated to space exploration and colonization. It could initially be funded by a percentage of the total budget or contribution by each state and territory with a goal of self funding from the establishment of colonies and their taxation. Make it a right for mankind to pursue knowledge and explore the cosmos. I for one believe that our continuation as a species depends on establishing colonies in and out of this galaxy. I sometimes wonder if our existence on earth isn’t from this type of expansion.

 

[Shpaget]

Watch your step DragonTamer, on this forum considering colonies out of this galaxy might earn you a tin foil hat :lol:
Not to mention one way ticket to the Unexplained for this topic.

Anyway, if anybody's interested, I've set up the forum (no content yet), so anybody interested in grabbing a space pick and shovel, kindly visit http://gxtool.com

 

[EarthlingX]

Shpaget, what is wrong with this forum ? Beside the usual provider dependent frivolities ...

 

[Shpaget]

You mean what's wrong with SDC? Nothing except it would be rude to hijack such a large part of it... :?

Or do you mean with the other one? It seems to me it works.

 

[EarthlingX]

You can start a couple of threads, see what gives. In worst case you'll be accused of spaming, or moved to the free space.
In my experience here, people usually contribute to the best of their abilities, from all over the spectrum

And i have seen some long posts here before, no one was accused of hijacking .. There is always first, of course :lol:

 

[EarthlingX]

To return to the topic, what do you think about this:
- change a shuttle into an orbital bus.
It can bring 20t of stuff to ISS, let's say you need 500 kg per person for a short visit, so only (!) 40 passengers per flight.
For 40 M$ per seat, it would be rather competitive. Some real estate would probably be required in orbit before such a massive touristic invasion. My piglet needs to get much fatter, though ..