It's official: the $30 million Google Lunar X-Prize will remain unclaimed

[Diche Bach]

1 minute ago, Canopus said:

That permanent Space station you propose, would you want it to be built from parts entirely sent from the surface of the earth? Or would it not make sense to eventually use as much resources from space as you can? 

No argument on that, but the question remains: what should come FIRST, what should come SECOND, third, fourth and so on?

Apparently google thinks that commercial enterprises landing spacecraft on the surface of the moon should come FIRST.

I'm asking WHY? Why should landing space craft on the moon be pushed to the front of the line in front of commercial ventures to start putting together a space station? Obviously the initial part of that structure WILL come from Earth, though admittedly long-term some non-trivial proportion of the thing may come from off-earth resources.

You see, this is why I'm not a "space nerd," I'm way too skeptical and pragmatic. I'm asking a simple question and you'd think I was a heretic or something!? 

[Canopus]

Just now, Diche Bach said:

No argument on that, but the question remains: what should come FIRST, what should come SECOND, third, fourth and so on?

Apparently google thinks that commercial enterprises landing spacecraft on the surface of the moon should come FIRST.

I'm asking WHY? Why should landing space craft on the moon be pushed to the front of the line in front of commercial ventures to start putting together a space station? Obviously the initial part of that structure WILL come from Earth, though admittedly long-term some non-trivial proportion of the thing may come from off-earth resources.

You see, this is why I'm not a "space nerd," I'm way too skeptical and pragmatic. I'm asking a simple question and you'd think I was a heretic or something!? 

Because in order to eventually extract material from the Moon or Asteroids, you need to start somewhere. Space stations, even private ones have been partially demonstrated, private moon landings haven't. 

[Diche Bach]

But how does "demonstrating" private moon landings actually advance the field?

I suggest an alternate contest for Google to back: develop a full business plan for a private-owned, semi-autonomous space station with agriculture and at least some artificial gravity (which can house X number of astronauts for Y number of days and with Z months of self-sufficiency, etc., etc.) and most importantly: a design which is extensible and can thus provide the initial core of an eventual space port that truly is 95% self-sufficient, can serve as a way station on the way to the moon, and provides an artificial living/working environment for a sufficiently large crew/passengers that it can actually function as the initial outpost in humanities ascent to spacefaring species status . . .

As far as I can tell, a private-firm landing a spacecraft on the moon does NOTHING to address the real problem of how do we get the space rush GOING in the first place. For that, we need a space station where people can stay in relative health and comfort for months or years at a time and with sufficient on site resource reclamation and growth that it can go for months or years without a resupply mission from the surface. We lack that to this day and until we have that, we are severely handicapped n all of our manned space flight aspirations, as far as I can tell.

The other completely separate objective I could see as taking precedence over a seemingly useless private landing of a spacecraft on the moon would be an actual plan for how to prospect an optimum asteroid/comet, grab it and put it close enough to the Earth-moon locale that it is useful as a resource base for either lunar or orbital enterprises.

Edited January 29, 2018 by Diche Bach
typo & clarity

[Canopus]

4 minutes ago, Diche Bach said:

But how does "demonstrating" private moon landings actually advance the field?

The Companies that arose from the competition mostly didn't plan to to land on the moon just one time. Most of them designed vehicles which are supposed to carry payload for customers to the Lunar surface. Like launch providers today, you pay them to put your stuff on the moon. Just google Moon Express or Astrobotic.

[Diche Bach]

4 minutes ago, Canopus said:

The Companies that arose from the competition mostly didn't plan to to land on the moon just one time. Most of them designed vehicles which are supposed to carry payload for customers to the Lunar surface. Like launch providers today, you pay them to put your stuff on the moon. Just google Moon Express or Astrobotic.

DAMMIT! 

This was supposed to have become commonplace ~16 years ago! 

 

[Canopus]

19 minutes ago, Diche Bach said:

As far as I can tell, a private-firm landing a spacecraft on the moon does NOTHING to address the real problem of how do we get the space rush GOING in the first place. For that, we need a space station where people can stay in relative health and comfort for months or years at a time and with sufficient on site resource reclamation and growth that it can go for months or years without a resupply mission from the surface. We lack that to this day and until we have that, we are severely handicapped n all of our manned space flight aspirations, as far as I can tell.

A Space rush only happens when it is demonstrated that money can be made in Space. And it most likely doesn't need many people. People will follow if there is sufficient need for them, for example to service equipment.