Its Sitting There In The Night Sky Waiting For Us To Return - To Stay

Amen!

The late, great Krafft Ehricke puts us to shame with his subtle message-but is anyone listening? If LCROSS and LRO find a frozen lake in the shadows, it won't matter if America fiddles while Rome burns-the gold rush will commence. Commercial space entrepreneurs will find a way to extract the water and make the Moon a refueling base for deep space missions-flown by any comer.
Will America lead-will Obama be a JFK or a Dwight Eisenhower when it comes to "boldly going"? A nation's character is destiny-let us hope for leadership.

My thoughts are similar. We have the technologies, explorers with the courage, the destinations and the reasons to go.

Yet the lack of a tiny portion of the federal budget stands in the way for now.

Amen! And I'm an atheist:-)

Maybe if NASA would put some money into the R&D for a system to extract water, in a couple of decades we might be in a position where we could do something significant.

But instead they keep working on low tech rockets and capsules, most of their efforts a waste of the taxpayers' dollars because of poor management processes.

How much money has Constellation put into ISRU and resources extraction ? I participated in the early architecture studies and they gave lipservice then, but when they went to Apollo redux, all the talk got shelved.

I know this starts off a bit off topic but read on; the "dreaded" Oil business and more TO the point the offshore side of it have over the years developed numerous new technologies to allow them to go into deeper and deeper water to drill for and FIND oil at greater & greater depths. Most of, well all of the equipment on the seafloor is run autonomously. I know that at JSC they use a tank of water (Nuetral bouancy simulator) to train the astronauts for space walks. My point in all this is that if they can develop autonomous systems to run entire production facilities at the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico(GOM) they sure as h@ll can develop and implement similar technology in a relatively short time frame for extracting the water from the Lunar soil to be processed for consumption and also to be used for rocket fuel for orbiting depots.

It's time to: Take another walk!!!

How much money has Constellation put into ISRU and resources extraction ? I participated in the early architecture studies and they gave lipservice then, but when they went to Apollo redux, all the talk got shelved.

Posted by: Frank A Curtis at September 25, 2009 8:24 AM

Well Frank, maybe if the money had been there like it was supposed to be, the ISRU research could have been saved instead of shelved. Seems to me you have the cart before the horse IF the idea is to have a system to get there (LEO, ISS, moon or elsewhere). ISRU research is pointless if you can't get there. LIMITED BUDGET folks, that's the key to this whole debate.

Far be it from me to suggest that we shouldn't try things that are hard -- like squeezing a liter of water from a tonne of regolith. But we should definitely choose our battles carefully. Over the next 10 years we could focus our attention on any combination of the following:
** Lunar ISRU to extract water and produce propellant and/or resources for human habitation
** Permanent lunar bases
** Radio and optical telescopes and interferometers on the moon
** Lunar robotic science missions
** Moon-Earth L1 space station
** Mars robotic science missions
** HSF to Mars without orbiting
** HSF to Mars with orbiting and optional rendezvous with Phobos and Deimos
** HSF to Mars with robotic landers under joystick control
** HSF to Mars with human-piloted landers
** HSF to Mars with inhabited permanent bases
plus several hundred other options

Funding circumscribes the mix we can choose, and the schedule on which we complete it. We may find technical reasons why one thing must be put in series with others; for example, some people believe lunar ISRU must precede Mars HSF. Thus our technology development path affects our choices. Our interests also guide the choices.

Ehricke's sly quip contains only an emotional edge, not a technical one. It is not enough to compel us to choose differently.

Will, you are spot on!
NASA turned to Oceaneering for the Constellation spacesuits because of their deep diving experience. The oil and gas industry is expert at difficult extractions-but they have to be summoned to this task by government or by commercial space entrepreneurs with deep pockets.
Who will rise to the challenge?

Frank:
The truth is, that Constellation has spent almost nothing on their moon planning. They can't even fund the studies necessary to determine if it is best to build a base and build up infrastructure at one location or if they should perform sorties to a lot of different locations for the first decade.

Until Constellation gets funding to do more than Ares 1 & Orion, which Congress is insisting on happening as soon as possible to 'close the gap', they're not going to do much more than pay lip service to all of the ISRU issues.

How many times do people need to explain it?
You are not going to return to space and stay there by going back to disposable rockets and capsules.
Even if this return to the 60's does fly, it too will run into the realities of the 70's where Congress will simply say "Enough!" And close the checkbook the same way it did on Apollo.

Mr. Reality, It was flavor-aid, not Kool-aid. Learn your history.

The reality is that there will always be naysayers saying nay while men and women of vision are busy doing great things to further the species.

@Papa

I think you've got it exactly right! A Moon base followed by an L1 space station-- possibly radiation shielded by lunar regolith from via lunar mass drivers-- would be the next logical step towards sending humans to Mars and the moons of Mars.

Most Americans like a sense of progress as we invest our tax dollars into the New Frontier. And that's the type of exciting long term agenda that NASA should be mapping out for us!

Frank,

Thanks! I have a feeling that Halliburton/KBR, Shell's E & P group, ExxonMobil, FMC and others are already looking at ways to modify existing technologies or ven put some $$$ from their R & D accounts into maunufacturing equipemt for thsi very purpose. A few years back at one of the OEM trade shows in Houston this very scenario was posed as a means of initiating a dialog amongst the OEM's about how to apply their experience & technologies to other fields. One topic out of this was using subsea systems form the GOM for Lunar colonies and terraforming Mars.

Where there is a will there is a way!!

Bernie said, "You are not going to return to space and stay there by going back to disposable rockets and capsules."

So you worked that out on the back of an envelope? Space flight is engineering at the edge of the possible, so tight control over all parts in a system is essential. In that situation, some critical systems are actually cheaper to build from scratch, where you control the conditions, than to refurbish them after one or more launches, where you DON'T control the conditions. Furthermore, engineering things to be recoverable and reusable will add mass to every stage of the mission.

So where's the big pinata?

The Isp of cool-aide is ~ 180 s with sugar, and maybe ~150 - 200 if it's just the flavoring.

Andrew

If God wanted man to become a space-faring species, He would have given man a closer target of value than Mars

... and the Moon isn't it.

Mr. Reality, It was flavor-aid, not Kool-aid. Learn your history.

The reality is that there will always be naysayers saying nay while men and women of vision are busy doing great things to further the species.

Posted by: BH at September 25, 2009 1:25 PM
(Quote)

Returning to an obsolete method of getting into space is not a vision to the future. It is a return to the past. The advocates of Orion /Ares are the real naysayers.

- A shuttle cannot be built to operate economically

- A rocket / capsule splashing down in the Ocean is and will be the only way to go for the next 30 years.

- No matter how expensive this obsolete method of travel is, the taxpayer needs to keep his mouth shut and checkbook open.

No, No, No.

No return to going to space the way it was done 40 years ago.

No littering the lunar surface with expended decent stages

No dumping hug expended rockets into the Ocean

No Throwing away the propulsion, main power, attitude control, and life support after every flight.

No tying up the Navy to recover every return from Space.

And this 'nyah nyah nyah' back and forth is contributing SO much to advancing spaceflight. Way to go, folks.

"The Isp of cool-aide is ~ 180 s with sugar, and maybe ~150 - 200 if it's just the flavoring."
Andrew

"Mr. Reality, It was flavor-aid, not Kool-aid. Learn your history.

No, I double checked the theory, got some other opinions from my peers, even did some experiments, it's definitely purple koolaide, Dogma brand to be precise, and plain white crackers."
Reality Base

"Plain white crackers"...sounds like borderline racism to me! Let me watch "Nat X" a few times...

But seriously, people, anyone with children knows that the ISP of Kool-Aid (tm) is directly proportional to the amount of sugar you add to it. This isn't rocket science. By the way, this also applies to genuine Southern sweet tea!

And do NOT make the mistake of confusing Kool-Aid with Water Wetter!

If you carefully read the hear transcripts from the House and Senate hearings about the Augustine summary report, it is clear that Congress will not allow the cancellation of Constellation. Period. So it will have to either be modified to accommodate "Deep Space" options, or include international partnerships for the Moon base. This is not a technical decision made on the merits, but a political decision-"We've spent $8 billion of the public's money on this and you just expect us to throw it away and start over?" Consider ourselves lucky if we get commercial crew access to ISS.
Beyond that, don't expect Obama to fall over himself with an additional $3b a year for the next four years.
Not gonna happen, unfortunately.

@Reality Base;

Chill dude! Who made you the moral compass let alone the dictator of thought for this forum??

Fine you DON'T AGREE with someone elses thinking (Frank) but they are HIS thoughts/feelings about the situation. You are in no more of a position than I or anyone else (Less Keith since this IS his site) to dictate too anyone that if they DON'T tow the line with repsect too HOW YOU FEEL about Constellation or any other subject for that matter that you will:
"here's the deal, if Constellation is not cancelled within the next six weeks, and if I'm not opted out by cash, then the rhetoric is going to become extreme, virulent, vulgar and directed specifically at INDIVIDUALS who have been part and parcel of this complete fiasco, including administrators, senators, congressmen and WOMEN, astronauts and especially, YOU. Verbs and adjectives are going to rain down upon you like a hailstorm from hell, and if you don't believe me, go right ahead, punk, and make my freakin day"

We all have various positions on things, that is why we post on this board, NOT to told, what too think/say!

"What is the Isp of koolaid again?"

As much as I hate people who made food analogies about propaganda, (i.e. "just eat it up.. yum yum!"), that was really funny.

Frank,

Personally I expect commercial crew to ISS. A modified Orion on EELV for "space exploration" and a focus on Ares V or SDV down the road for cargo to support the Orion. This could be developed at a pace to allow it to be shoehorned into the existing budget without the political impact of actually killing Constellation.

What I would like to see is a dedicated series of lunar rovers and orbiters to better understand the resource base for ISRU. A Lunar Explorer series of missions if you would. But I don't see that coming from NASA since it would be applied versus basic science. It would require too much of a return to the 1960's NASA paradigm of robotic science missions as scouts for human missions versus the current focus of robot missions seeking to answer scientific questions.

Thomas-
Not to mention the internal "war" against lunar robotics by SMD leadership. The pressure will greatly increase for restoration of the canceled lunar robotic lander and perhaps a drilling robot, too. SMD seems to think this is a threat to their greatly-over budget Mars missions. Maybe commercial entrepreneurs will step in and fly these robotic missions....yes, the divide between SMC and ESMD grows with each passing lunar discovery...just wait til LCROSS and LRO hit!

Reality Base, an accurate description of your "position" would warrant a fine from the FCC.

Frank,

I agree. You could almost count on those press conferences being cut short by new "discoveries" on Mars as well. This is why I feel the lunar mission really needs to be taken away from the NASA sphere of influence and given to an organization that would focus on it. Left to NASA the Moon will just continue to be neglected, a unwanted orphan.

"For posting gratuitous insults directed towards specific Constellation supporting individuals on internet forums?"

No, not at all.

For posting gratuitous insults directed toward a specific individual who said nothing of the sort.

Frank said that Constellation won't be canceled, and that it will be a "a political decision", then suggested it'd be backed by the sunk cost fallacy.

He then described the result thus:

"Consider ourselves lucky if we get commercial crew access to ISS ... don't expect Obama to fall over himself with an additional $3b a year ... not gonna happen".

If this sounds like a Constellation supporting comment, you may need pills.

If it was meant as a Constellation supporting comment, then Frank needs pills too ;)

Hey, I'm making a prediction, not lobbying for a particular outcome. IMHO the "Deep Space" option sans Ares 1 sounds like the most promising-but then again, I'm not a policymaker. Read the hearing transcripts-these guys cannot be shamed into steering the human spaceflight program in any direction that doesn't jive with their particular local situation-which means minimal layoffs. I resent the implication that I am blindly supporting Constellation-I think the aggregate postings I have made over the years should clearly distinguish me as a supporter of getting NASA OUT of the spacelift business, and that includes LEO crew access. But if we are about to embark on a period of killing the messenger for the message than we're not going to achieve anything with heated rhetoric and threats. I gave you posters more credit than that. I'm gonna call 'em like I see 'em-what else would you all have me do, shade the truth for popularity?