Jump to content

So how about Moon 2020

Spudmeist3r

By Spudmeist3r
in Science & Spaceflight

 Share

Recommended Posts

Gaarst

Gaarst

Posted
Posted (edited)

Moon orbit? Sure, that's the goal of EM-1, even though it will not be crewed, in 2019. EM-2 in 2022 will put people in lunar orbit.

On the Moon? No. You don't build a full lunar programme from the ground up in 2 years.

Edited by Gaarst
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GoSlash27

GoSlash27

Posted
Posted

Spudmeist3r,
 There's a lot of politics involved, but what it boils down to is SLS is getting more funding and having it's early mission schedule reshuffled. It will now focus more on low lunar orbit and the DSG proposal. Asteroid redirect and lagrange points have been cancelled.

 Best,
-Slashy

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sh1pman

sh1pman

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, GoSlash27 said:

Spudmeist3r,
 There's a lot of politics involved, but what it boils down to is SLS is getting more funding and having it's early mission schedule reshuffled. It will now focus more on low lunar orbit and the DSG proposal. Asteroid redirect and lagrange points have been cancelled.

 Best,
-Slashy

SLS isn’t going to low lunar orbit, Orion with ESM doesn’t have enough juice to make a round trip to LLO. DSG is supposed to be either at distant retrograde orbit or that other weird eccentric non-keplerian orbit which name I forgot. 

Found it - Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FleshJeb

FleshJeb

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, sh1pman said:

Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150019648.pdf

https://engineering.purdue.edu/people/kathleen.howell.1/Publications/Conferences/2017_IAA_ZimHowDav.pdf

I'm sure I googled the same stuff you guys did, but there it is. I read through both papers, and while the math is over my head (FOR NOW cackle), I understand that complex dynamic systems have stable and unstable regimes. The Purdue paper is particularly interesting for how they quantify and examine these things. I had a Spock-like "Fascinating" moment while reading it.

On the subject of technical papers: Earlier today I read a really interesting National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Aircraft Accident Report:
http://www.rvs.uni-bielefeld.de/publications/Incidents/DOCS/ComAndRep/ChinaAir/AAR8603.html
The way the NTSB investigates and dissects an accident, including the human factors, is extraordinary. From these reports, new procedures and regulations are developed. As a lot of pilots like to say, "Regulations are paid for in blood." Meaning, they take them very seriously.

Now, my interests are typically what space exploration will look like in 100-200 years, so I don't pay a lot of attention to current events or the immediate future. I've been holding the commonly-shared opinion that the Moon is not a very interesting place, and we might as well skip it and go to Mars. As LOL-tastic as KSP can be, it's still a very "clean" experience compared to real life. We need to actually GO and break things and make mistakes and learn from them. From reading the papers on NRHOs, I've realized that the Moon IS an interesting environment, and a fairly convenient one. The lessons we learn from exploring and inhabiting those subtle orbital dynamics will be useful no matter where we explore in the future.

Thanks for that great term @sh1pman.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Canopus

Canopus

Posted
Posted (edited)

While the plans with the SLS and the DSG might not come into being as they are envisioned right now, we will definitely see a resurgence of activity in and around the moon starting in the 20s. All Space agencies have expressed great interest in the moon and there seem to be many private companies who are eager to provide transportation of payloads to the surface. I'm sure this will eventually lead to a manned return, even if we have to wait another 20 years.

Edited by Canopus
Link to comment
Share on other sites
YNM

YNM

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Canopus said:

... we will definitely see a resurgence of activity in and around the moon starting in the 20s. ...

Had the same been said to the 10s during the 00s ?

 

IMHO, philantrophy for space ftw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Canopus

Canopus

Posted
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, YNM said:

Had the same been said to the 10s during the 00s ?

 

IMHO, philantrophy for space ftw.

The main difference is that we now have Companies like Astrobotic, Blue Origins and even ULA working on solutions independent of a NASA directive.

Edited by Canopus
Link to comment
Share on other sites
YNM

YNM

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Canopus said:

The main difference is that we now have Companies like Astrobotic, Blue Origins and even ULA working on solutions independent of a NASA directive.

If they haven't got any profit off it, it's arguably philantrophic. *spX ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PB666

PB666

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Canopus said:

While the plans with the SLS and the DSG might not come into being as they are envisioned right now, we will definitely see a resurgence of activity in and around the moon starting in the 20s. All Space agencies have expressed great interest in the moon and there seem to be many private companies who are eager to provide transportation of payloads to the surface. I'm sure this will eventually lead to a manned return, even if we have to wait another 20 years.

Wishes horses beggars. Talk is cheap, and I am very dubious. The chinese may opt to go to the moon, but they wont be sharing their operations with others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DDE

DDE

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, sh1pman said:

Monster rockets straight out of KSP. When in doubt, add more stages and boosters!

TBH there's quite a bit of brilliance in that school of design - we'll avoid having too much hardware that's only useful for a prestige op. The first two stages are Soyuz 5 and the upper stage is the poor Blok D, which in 50 years hasn't done its primary job of injecting manned ships into Lunar orbit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NSEP

NSEP

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Ultimate Steve said:

When I was seven or so and just getting into space stuff, I got this book about space which said "NASA plans to have fully operational moon base by 2020 at the latest..."

RIP childhood hopes and dreams

One of my old books said we would have people on the Moon by 2015.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
_Augustus_

_Augustus_

Posted
Posted
On 1/21/2018 at 1:25 PM, NSEP said:

Lets all be optimistic here and hope Orion and Dragon will go around the Moon before the decade is out.

Dragon will; Orion won't. EM-1 is currently scheduled for December 2020 and we all know that'll slip because SLS is such a garbage, overpriced, bloated failure of a rocket designed solely to get some Congress-critters money from contractors and lobbyists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sh1pman

sh1pman

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, _Augustus_ said:

garbage, overpriced, bloated failure of a rocket designed solely to get some Congress-critters money from contractors and lobbyists.

AND it reuses existing technologies from Space Shuttle. Imagine how much worse it would get if everything had to be developed from scratch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...