Print 39 comment(s) - last by JPQed.. on May 7 at 2:18 PM

Pair will be tasked with baking designs for mankind's first extra-terran outpost

A staple of science fiction for nearly a century, mankind has long dreamt of colonizing the moon.  Now those dreams could be a bit closer to reality thanks to an enterprising entrepreneur.  He's paired with America's space agency to develop plans for a moon base -- and he's doing it for free to start.

I. Big Science Comes and Goes

Man first set foot on the moon on July 20, 1969.  High on the competitive thrill of the Cold War, the U.S. spent nearly $130B USD in today's money ($25.4B USD back in 1973) to send six manned missions to the moon.  The intention was to eventually create a permanent outpost, but by the mid-1970s the U.S. government had shuttered those plans.

Frustrated by close calls and enervated by an easing of Cold War tensions, the U.S. would drop its dreams of lunar colonization, occasionally toying with them in the 1980s and 1990s.  Instead it focused its efforts on Earth orbit shuttle missions.

Nearly a decade ago, in January 2004, President George W. Bush called on The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to launch a new wave of lunar exploration, establishing a permanent presence on Earth's rocky satellite.

President Bush
Nine years ago President Bush called on the U.S. to colonize the Moon. [Image Source: EPA]

In a speech he remarked:

Establishing an extended human presence on the moon could vastly reduce the cost of further space exploration, making possible ever more ambitious missions.  Lifting heavy spacecraft and fuel out of the Earth's gravity is expensive. Spacecraft assembled and provisioned on the moon could escape its far lower gravity using far less energy and thus far less cost.

[The moon] contains raw materials that might be harvested and processed into rocket fuel or breathable air.  With the experience and knowledge gained on the moon, we will then be ready to take the next steps of space exploration -- human missions to Mars and to worlds beyond.

He claimed that NASA could return to the moon for $12B USD by 2020.  But as the years have rolled on, that figure looked increasingly unrealistic -- both historically and in terms of NASA's current budgetary and brainpower shortages.  Experts recently estimated a return trip to the moon would cost around $145B USD.

II. Lunar Plans Stall Under Obama

President Bush's successor, President Barack Obama has made the goal of a lunar landing in the near future seem even less likely.  He's shifted focus from the Moon mission to a more ambitious goal -- a Mars landing. At the same time he retired the Shuttle Program in 2011, turning to commercial contractors like SpaceX to provide for NASA's future manned and unmanned space transportation needs.

NASA's budget
NASA's budget has been on a downward tilt. [Image Source: NASA]

And NASA's budget continued to slide as Congress looked to sacrifice space exploration and other science programs to sustain the pork payouts they owed the folks who got them elected: in 2010 the average cost of a successful U.S. House run was ~$1.4M USD, and ~$8.9M USD for the U.S. Senate [source] and a recent University of Kansas School of Business study [PDF] indicates that for every dollar donated to a federal candidate by special interest they "owe" that entity roughly $240 USD in taxpayer-funded payouts.
Under President Obama a smaller NASA has refocused on commercial partnerships. 
[Image Source: SpaceX]

Amid that climate, there seems to be little hope for big science at NASA, and organization with little in the way of well-heeled lobbyists or silver-tongued sponsors.

III. Bigelow Looks to Salvage Mankind's Colonization Hopes

And yet the goal of a lunar base still creeps on in NASA's dark age.  The agency is today looking to private contractors to potentially allow it to establish a lunar base on a budget.  

Bigelow Aeropsace moon base
Bigelow's Moon base will likely use inflatable modules. [Image Source: Bigelow Aerospace]

This week, David Weaver, NASA Associate Administrator, announced that it would conduct an "initial planning phase" study with Bigelow Aerospace with the intent of developing a design for a lunar outpost.

Mr. Weaver comments:

As part of our broader commercial space strategy, NASA signed a Space Act Agreement with Bigelow Aerospace to foster ideas about how the private sector can contribute to future human missions.

This will provide important information on possible ways to expand our exploration capabilities in partnership with the private sector.  The agency is intensely focused on a bold mission to identify, relocate and explore an asteroid with American astronauts by 2025 — all as we prepare for an even more ambitious human mission to Mars in the 2030s. NASA has no plans for a human mission to the moon.

Bigelow Aerospace shares many similarities to SpaceX.  The Las Vegas-based company was founded in 1998 by a Robert Bigelow, who made his wealth off of the Budget Suites of America hotel chain he owned managed.  The company's trademark is low-cost inflatable spacecraft made from high-tech materials.

IV. A Rising Star of the Commercial Spaceflight Industry

In January 2013, Bigelow scored its biggest hit yet, winning a $17.8M USD contract to develop and build an inflatable expansion for the International Space Station.  The ISS, which launched in 1998, will deorbit and be sent to the ocean around 2020 according to recent remarks from the deputy head of Russia's Roskosmos space agency, Vitaly Davydov.

While NASA isn't paying Bigelow Aerospace anything for this initial phase lunar study, Robert Bigelow doesn't seem too bothered by that.  After all, the space entrepreneur says he's been carrying out crude preliminary phase planning sessions about a moon base for years now.

According to Mr. Bigelow, the initial phase study will take about 100 days.  He's already making plans for a second phase 120-day study, which could snage some funding from NASA.

Bigelow moon base
The initial phase of the study will take 100 days. [Image Source: Bigelow Aerospace]

Bigelow Aerospace's Moon shot will likely make use of inflatable modules -- possibly from repurposed launch vehicles. 

Source: Space Industry News

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Why bother?
By mjv.theory on 4/23/2013 12:10:41 PM , Rating: 0
Spacecraft assembled and provisioned on the moon could escape its far lower gravity using far less energy and thus far less cost.

To launch from the Moon involves lifting from Earth at g=9.8, lowering on to the Moon at g=1.6 and then lifting back off the Moon, another g=1.6. So launching from Earth involves escaping from g=9.8, launching from the Moon involves g=13; over 30+% INCREASE in energy required. Also, the cost of fuel on Earth is almost negligible. For long term interplanetary travel around the solar system, nuclear thermal or electric plasma engines are the only realistic option, further reducing the fuel mass required when actually in space. So mining the Moon for water (fuel) is of limited usefullness and mining the Moon for minerals to build spacecraft is always going to be more difficult and much more expensive than building on Earth and lifting to orbit. You can also add to that other problems specific to the lunar surface environment: horrible sticky dust and 14 days of night. If you want to build spacecraft that are too large to launch in one go, then build them in orbit. Why make life difficult by going to the Moon. A quite legitimate case can be made for the Moon as a destination for scientific study. However, the Moon as a manufacturing base or stepping stone for solar system exploration is nonsense. Of course, if you want to side with the famous intellectual George W when it comes to delta-v calcs then you are free to do so.

RE: Why bother?
By superkev72 on 4/24/2013 12:01:09 AM , Rating: 2
Gotta love how you amalgamate all the launch costs into a single figure automatically assuming that development of any resources on the moon is impractical and as you put it illegitimate. If facilities for fuel and spare parts production even in a limited sense were located on the moon you gain back the re-entry costs every time it's used. Lot's of benefits to being there (research being only one).

RE: Why bother?
By JKflipflop98 on 4/24/2013 2:03:58 PM , Rating: 2
Don't waste your bandwidth, man. He clearly has no idea what he's talking about.

RE: Why bother?
By BRB29 on 4/25/2013 7:58:41 AM , Rating: 2
The point of the moon is to make it a hub instead of earth. You can launch the same spacecraft 10x but you only need to leave earth once. The other 9 times are from the moon.

What the hell is g? it is normally referred to as gravity or gangaster/goon. You are using it as energy. but 9.8 and 1.6 is acceleration rate isn't it? you cannot count acceleration as energy like that. Energy requirements increase exponentially compared to a linear increase in mass or acceleration.

"If they're going to pirate somebody, we want it to be us rather than somebody else." -- Microsoft Business Group President Jeff Raikes

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki