Recently TMRO did an episode on the National Space Council (NSC) event that had me thinking about America's role in space in the next decade. As a space fan, I'm disappointed in the overall direction the US has taken in the past 10 years in space. While I'm happy about the robotic missions NASA has done in the past decade, human spaceflight has gone nowhere in America. I'm aware that SLS (Space Launch System) is coming (possibly, I'm doubtful) but I feel that we need to develop SLS and at the same time grow commercial launch providers with purpose.
Essentially the arguments boil down to the fact that the engineering problems for Mars are different than the problems you'd have to solve for the Moon. These are driven by the simple fact that the environment on the Moon is very different from the environment on Mars. Here are the general differences.
In addition, Mars atmosphere is really thin. This presents its own engineering challenges - it's just enough there that you must account for it during landing. The Moon has no atmosphere, so you don't have to worry about covering your landing spacecraft with any other items to slow your landing down.
On the Moon, we have no equivalent.
A day on the moon is 27 days. That obviously means that the day/night cycle for solar power will be completely different. It also means that any establishment must account for long temperature swings between being in the sun and being in the dark.
With the above in mind the general feeling is that if you want to go to Mars, go to Mars. There's no need to go to the Moon since the problems you'll need to solve are so different. I used to have the same thinking but over the past year my thinking has evolved to trying to establish humans in the cis-lunar space. These thoughts mainly are based on the need that NASA and the US overall should be doing something different but that is closer to Earth. I now feel that we need a lunar base.
In addition; although not directly related to opening a lunar base, it would seem to me that America by investing in cis-lunar facilities could "rent" or "loan" out areas for other nations to conduct their research without the need for having to fully establish their own launch systems.
Finally, national pride is of course, the easiest one. Being the nation that both first landed on the moon and the nation that returns to lead the world into the solar system has motivating power to citizens.
Moon versus Mars
For those that watched the NSC event, the intent is to get America on a "Moon, Mars" plan. For some online, there's a lot of disagreement about going to the Moon first before Mars. For the uneducated, I'll briefly go into the reasons why many feel the Moon is a distraction to Mars.Essentially the arguments boil down to the fact that the engineering problems for Mars are different than the problems you'd have to solve for the Moon. These are driven by the simple fact that the environment on the Moon is very different from the environment on Mars. Here are the general differences.
The EDL (Entry, Descent, Landing) profiles are different
For those that don't understand, EDL is exactly as it sounds - everything that any spacecraft must do to get on ground of any celestial body. To get to Mars, you must account for Mars' atmosphere - something that the Moon doesn't have. Thus, the type of landing spacecraft you build will be different. For Moon vs Mars, this means that a Mars spacecraft may need a heat shield or parachute, or other items which means weight. Weight means fuel.In addition, Mars atmosphere is really thin. This presents its own engineering challenges - it's just enough there that you must account for it during landing. The Moon has no atmosphere, so you don't have to worry about covering your landing spacecraft with any other items to slow your landing down.
The base camp setup will be different
Since Mars has an atmosphere, there's some interesting things we can do in terms of generating fuel. For one, since we can make methane on Mars, we can generate our own fuel for a return trip back (this is done through the Sabatier reaction).On the Moon, we have no equivalent.
The days are different
A day on Mars is roughly only 40 minutes longer than a day on Earth. That makes it roughly translatable to the 24-hour cycle we humans experience on Earth. It also provides a predictable cadence for solar power.A day on the moon is 27 days. That obviously means that the day/night cycle for solar power will be completely different. It also means that any establishment must account for long temperature swings between being in the sun and being in the dark.
Cis-Lunar Space
There are a lot more reasons we can go into over why the environments between the Moon and Mars are different, but for now these are just an example of some major ones that require thought while developing a mission to each. The time you spend solving for problems on the Moon may not always be translatable to problems on Mars.With the above in mind the general feeling is that if you want to go to Mars, go to Mars. There's no need to go to the Moon since the problems you'll need to solve are so different. I used to have the same thinking but over the past year my thinking has evolved to trying to establish humans in the cis-lunar space. These thoughts mainly are based on the need that NASA and the US overall should be doing something different but that is closer to Earth. I now feel that we need a lunar base.
Trailblazing new science
We have done plenty of research within low earth orbit. There’s very little research that America has done in GEO and in low G environments. If we aimed for establishing a lunar research station this would open the doors to many new things to study.
Studying the effects of low G versus zero G on the human body
I personally find it objectionable that we can just simply launch humans on a 6-month mission and expect them to just “land on Mars” and get to work. Yes, the astronauts would survive, but the effects of gravity sickness, the problem of reacquainting the human body to gravity, are well known. If a 6 month mission to Mars were developed, the astronauts upon landing would still spend some time dealing with gravity sickness before being able to conduct operations on the martian surface.
As well, it would appear that there are serious detrimental effects to having humans in zero G for long periods of time. One of those being loss of vision.
We should research the effects of spaceflight in a much closer environment to Earth on the human body; including the effects of radiation in an environment with no magnetic shielding. Since the moon is roughly a three day trip, we could study the effects of humans in low G environments much more rapidly than on a Mars mission.
Researching minerals and resources on the moon
We’ve got literature on this, but nothing really has been actionable until we start to establish a permanent presence on the moon.Opening observatories/telescopes on the lunar surface
Having an environment that we could research the rest of the universe from without an atmosphere would really help in our studies. As well, having an observatory in a G based environment would make servicing any observatory much easier than trying to service a unit in zero gravity.Opening new economic avenues and industry
For years now, many people (and companies) believe that asteroid mining could be an incredible boon to earth’s economy. Having a presence in the cis-lunar area would be an obvious (to me) first step in realizing this economic avenue. In addition, it's well known that theoretically helium-3 could be mined from the lunar surface.In addition; although not directly related to opening a lunar base, it would seem to me that America by investing in cis-lunar facilities could "rent" or "loan" out areas for other nations to conduct their research without the need for having to fully establish their own launch systems.
National Security and Pride
Although I am not that technically inclined; it would seem to me that having a presence on the lunar surface is the ultimate high ground in terms of signals intelligence and observation on other countries movements both on Earth’s surface and in Earth’s orbit.
Further Reading
Here's a list of other books you might enjoy if you found this post interesting. These are books I've personally read. I have no affiliation to the authors.
Comments
Post a Comment