Author Topic: Best Region for a Base/Outpost?  (Read 37977 times)

Offline redliox

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2535
  • Illinois USA
  • Liked: 683
  • Likes Given: 96
Best Region for a Base/Outpost?
« on: 03/11/2014 07:21 pm »
There have been past discussions about the best place for a lunar base/colony/outpost, but since it has been a while I thought to refresh the topic with or without the likelihood of a lunar expedition in the immediate future (ask this question again with the next US president or Congress and I'll bet the chances change once again).

Previously, the Lunar poles garnered attention since the presence of ice is confirmed.  While this is logical for long-term sustained settlement, if we're talking the first 20 years it is not so much.  I state this because it will be some time before we figure out what to do with the ice, partly because we aren't fully certain if it's fluffy space snow or thin veins in a rocky matrix.  Add to that, neither the north or south poles are friendly places to land blindly since they are, for better or worse, crater quagmires.  Regarding the poles, definitely study them both with robots and astronauts but hold off on any fledgling lunar cities.

Without a communication link, the far side is impossible, but should be scouted once some form of network is established.  Any bases established there should devote themselves to astronomy and the geology of the lunar farside, i.e. to science.

Obviously the near side is easy to reach and support, perhaps even "too easy" since Apollo and what robotic landers we sent did explore numerous regions of it.  Still the maria are as easy a landing site to find and their volcanic nature offers plenty in both resource utilization and science.  Any one of them ought to offer some opportunity.

Personally, I would suggest a base on the limb of the moon where it would still be within communications range of Earth yet within scouting range of the unexplored far side.  The Western Hemisphere offers the Ocean of Storms and Mare Oriental whereas the Eastern Hemisphere has Mare Smythii (which has been suggested in some studies), presuming a simplified preference for the equator.

Wherever we land, initially it should be someplace practical yet with opportunities to explore and experiment with ISRU.  Since I specifically refer to the first 20 years of exploration and settlement, it should be assumed most resources will still come from Earth - hence emphasis on easy-to-reach spots.  Unlike Mars, that is an asset, not a weakness during the formative years with the benefit of a nearby Earth.

Bear in mind 3 factors when you make suggestions:
1) Ease of access (both landing and roving)
2) Function
3) Exploration

Again my suggestion would be the westernmost 'shores' of the Ocean of Storms near the equator.  Overall the region may be bland, but numerous craters are half-buried and easier to rove into; not to mention the size of the Ocean implies it has a major role in the near side's history.  Between the lunar craters & mountains and the maria there would be numerous regolith types accessible to testing, with titanium, iron, and illemite plentiful.  Not necessarily the only place to go, but good to begin.
"Let the trails lead where they may, I will follow."
-Tigatron

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7194
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 2039
  • Likes Given: 1962
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline mdatb

Re: Best Region for a Base/Outpost?
« Reply #2 on: 03/11/2014 07:36 pm »
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whipple_(crater)

Pros:

-A sunlit plateau that can be used to generate power.
-Ice, which can be used as rocket fuel and water.
-Other craters in the area may have ice

Cons(compared to your suggestion):

-Not as smooth of a driving area.
-Harder to access.
-Might be less endowed with metals.
-Ocean of storms still has a fuzzy origin. Something to explore!
« Last Edit: 03/11/2014 07:45 pm by mdatb »

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: Best Region for a Base/Outpost?
« Reply #3 on: 03/11/2014 07:56 pm »
For any base to survive it needs power 24/7. A nuclear power supplied base can be placed anywhere. In case of solar power it needs to be near a pole for higher sunshine hours.  During lunar nights a solar power system will be running on batteries or fuel cells.


Offline rusty

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 191
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 18
Re: Best Region for a Base/Outpost?
« Reply #4 on: 03/11/2014 08:59 pm »
The "Best Region for a Base/Outpost" is in LLO, not on the surface. From there, sorties to all regions of interest can be carried out, samples gathered, tests performed and instrumentation laid. Only if that location is worth hanging around for or is ideal for testing surface equipment for other (Mars?) operations should a surface base/outpost be established. From a previous post of mine, the LLO temporarily-manned base/outpost;

For maximum scientific, modular and reuse capability with minimum size, fuel use and cost I've gone with polar LLO, possibly 86 degrees as that appears to be highly stable. I've calculated delta-v at 2.014 for obit between 85 - 103km with inclination/plane change budget of 15 - 10 degrees, respectively, to cover the entire polar regions. The polar regions with their possibility of ice are a must, the far side equator prime for radio telescopes and the Apollo 15 site the most geologically interesting.

All these are readily accessible from the PLO mentioned, as well as much more. Since then I've buttoned down and tweaked the orbit to be elliptical, but the fundamentals and reasons remain: "Anytime return" from all areas of interest, lowest fuel requirements for multi-sortie missions, shortest duration (safest) and smallest craft to LLO return, greatest downmass capability especially if delivered via SEP, etc.

Offline gbaikie

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1592
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Best Region for a Base/Outpost?
« Reply #5 on: 03/11/2014 09:38 pm »
There have been past discussions about the best place for a lunar base/colony/outpost, but since it has been a while I thought to refresh the topic with or without the likelihood of a lunar expedition in the immediate future (ask this question again with the next US president or Congress and I'll bet the chances change once again).

Previously, the Lunar poles garnered attention since the presence of ice is confirmed.  While this is logical for long-term sustained settlement, if we're talking the first 20 years it is not so much.  I state this because it will be some time before we figure out what to do with the ice, partly because we aren't fully certain if it's fluffy space snow or thin veins in a rocky matrix.  Add to that, neither the north or south poles are friendly places to land blindly since they are, for better or worse, crater quagmires.  Regarding the poles, definitely study them both with robots and astronauts but hold off on any fledgling lunar cities.
NASA's job is to explore space.
As your post suggests the lunar poles have not been adequately explored despite decades of strong public support and funding of NASA so that NASA can explore space.

What NASA needs to do is explore space in order to lower the cost of doing such thing as space mining and space development [settlements] so these can be developed in the future. And related to this would having rocket fuel made in space from water.

So order for there to lunar water mining, NASA [or someone] must first explore the moon to determine where and how this might be done the most efficiently.
Considering that there could hundreds of billion dollars worth of recoverable lunar water, and that the mining of lunar water makes it possible to make cheaper lunar rocket fuel. Thereby enabling use the Moon for many different things, at significantly lower cost, it seems wise that before NASA does anything else in regard to the Moon [or for that matter, the rest of solar system]  that NASA should be exploring the lunar poles to determine if and where there is minable lunar water.


Offline Andrew_W

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 754
  • Rotorua, New Zealand
    • Profiles of our future in space
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Best Region for a Base/Outpost?
« Reply #6 on: 03/12/2014 06:06 am »
The "Best Region for a Base/Outpost" is in LLO, not on the surface. From there, sorties to all regions of interest can be carried out, samples gathered, tests performed and instrumentation laid. Only if that location is worth hanging around for or is ideal for testing surface equipment for other (Mars?) operations should a surface base/outpost be established. From a previous post of mine, the LLO temporarily-manned base/outpost;

For maximum scientific, modular and reuse capability with minimum size, fuel use and cost I've gone with polar LLO, possibly 86 degrees as that appears to be highly stable. I've calculated delta-v at 2.014 for obit between 85 - 103km with inclination/plane change budget of 15 - 10 degrees, respectively, to cover the entire polar regions. The polar regions with their possibility of ice are a must, the far side equator prime for radio telescopes and the Apollo 15 site the most geologically interesting.

All these are readily accessible from the PLO mentioned, as well as much more. Since then I've buttoned down and tweaked the orbit to be elliptical, but the fundamentals and reasons remain: "Anytime return" from all areas of interest, lowest fuel requirements for multi-sortie missions, shortest duration (safest) and smallest craft to LLO return, greatest downmass capability especially if delivered via SEP, etc.

And when the Sun has one of its hissy fits?
I confess that in 1901 I said to my brother Orville that man would not fly for fifty years.
Wilbur Wright

Offline Andrew_W

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 754
  • Rotorua, New Zealand
    • Profiles of our future in space
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Best Region for a Base/Outpost?
« Reply #7 on: 03/12/2014 06:11 am »
I don't think any other location comes close to the poles in desirability, and that makes it the #1 initial base location to obtain "propriatory" rights.
I confess that in 1901 I said to my brother Orville that man would not fly for fifty years.
Wilbur Wright

Offline redliox

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2535
  • Illinois USA
  • Liked: 683
  • Likes Given: 96
Re: Best Region for a Base/Outpost?
« Reply #8 on: 03/12/2014 07:10 am »
For any base to survive it needs power 24/7. A nuclear power supplied base can be placed anywhere. In case of solar power it needs to be near a pole for higher sunshine hours.  During lunar nights a solar power system will be running on batteries or fuel cells.

Agreed.  Solar power is obvious with the weakness being lunar night, but inversely a nuclear reactor I don't see happening at least in the first 10 years from a combination of anti-nuke protesting and lack of funding between both NASA and the DOE.  More than likely the base would be similar to the ISS' own early years, being only temporarily occupied during the first few years and abandoned/powered down during the lunar night.  Fuel cells would be the best backup power outside of a massive battery array.

One link between formative and advanced bases could become utilizing polar ice not merely for rocket fuel or drinking water, but fuel cell replenishment.  I could see that happening perhaps year ~18 onward, though hopefully sooner depending on future space ambitions.
"Let the trails lead where they may, I will follow."
-Tigatron

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: Best Region for a Base/Outpost?
« Reply #9 on: 03/12/2014 07:49 am »
I don't think powering down base is an option. The extreme cold of lunar night will kill the electronics and other components, a low level of heating will be needed. The Chinese solution is radioactive isotopes for Chang3.

Offline redliox

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2535
  • Illinois USA
  • Liked: 683
  • Likes Given: 96
Re: Best Region for a Base/Outpost?
« Reply #10 on: 03/12/2014 08:04 am »
I don't think any other location comes close to the poles in desirability, and that makes it the #1 initial base location to obtain "propriatory" rights.

Desirable yes, practical another question.  We don't know how to mine lunar ice and landing on or near a shadowed crater is not easy.  However, landing at one of the mares near the north pole would be possible, and either by rovers or short-range rocket jumps venturing into the polar craters themselves to build up confidence.
"Let the trails lead where they may, I will follow."
-Tigatron

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7276
  • Liked: 2781
  • Likes Given: 1461
Re: Best Region for a Base/Outpost?
« Reply #11 on: 03/12/2014 09:10 am »
And when the Sun has one of its hissy fits?

Shielding from solar particle events isn't that difficult: the particles, though very numerous during an event, are not of terribly high energies.

Offline Solman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 670
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: Best Region for a Base/Outpost?
« Reply #12 on: 03/12/2014 02:02 pm »
For any base to survive it needs power 24/7. A nuclear power supplied base can be placed anywhere. In case of solar power it needs to be near a pole for higher sunshine hours.  During lunar nights a solar power system will be running on batteries or fuel cells.

 Another possibility is beaming power from Lunar polar orbit. I don't know the ideal number and orbital altitude but solar power laser or microwave beaming orbital sats could even provide constant power. This could allow a base to be placed anywhere on the Moon and if the power level was high enough even allow for beam powered rocket propulsion, perhaps using regolith derived oxygen using beamed power, to and from LLO.

 This could also solve the problem of powering ice miners in the permanently shadowed craters. 

Offline TrevorMonty

Re: Best Region for a Base/Outpost?
« Reply #13 on: 03/12/2014 05:26 pm »
Pros.
A solar satellite beaming power maybe able to deliver enough power on each pass to keep a hibernating base alive for lunar night.

Cons.
 Solar satellites don't exist so it would have to be developed. Between satellite and ground station this base has suddenly become complicated and expensive.

Offline Andrew_W

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 754
  • Rotorua, New Zealand
    • Profiles of our future in space
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Best Region for a Base/Outpost?
« Reply #14 on: 03/12/2014 08:43 pm »
I don't think any other location comes close to the poles in desirability, and that makes it the #1 initial base location to obtain "propriatory" rights.

Desirable yes, practical another question.  We don't know how to mine lunar ice and landing on or near a shadowed crater is not easy.  However, landing at one of the mares near the north pole would be possible, and either by rovers or short-range rocket jumps venturing into the polar craters themselves to build up confidence.

Apollo went for large flat areas because hitting a predesignated specific landing spot was near impossible, in effect the Mare gave many landing sites. a Lunar base would require multiple flights to one spot, so any single spot a few meters across will do.
 The selected site will be initially marked with beacons by unmanned flights if that's required.
I confess that in 1901 I said to my brother Orville that man would not fly for fifty years.
Wilbur Wright

Offline aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3628
  • 92129
  • Liked: 1145
  • Likes Given: 360
Re: Best Region for a Base/Outpost?
« Reply #15 on: 03/12/2014 09:33 pm »
Pros.
A solar satellite beaming power maybe able to deliver enough power on each pass to keep a hibernating base alive for lunar night.

Cons.
 Solar satellites don't exist so it would have to be developed. Between satellite and ground station this base has suddenly become complicated and expensive.

I think the Lunar Space Elevator would be very helpful in this regard. Simply run a power conductor from a Solar Power Station at L1, down the tether to the ground station. It would be a long run but at least the technology is understood. And as I have pointed out before, the tether anchor on the moon does not need to be a single anchor point, rather it could be a single tether from the L1 station down to a reasonable lunar altitude and branch from there, with branches going to a number of bases. Sort of like guy wires on a utility pole, except holding the main tether down instead of holding the pole up.

Add: You might even get fancy and tap off the conductor to power the climbers of the elevator.
« Last Edit: 03/12/2014 09:35 pm by aero »
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline rusty

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 191
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 18
Re: Best Region for a Base/Outpost?
« Reply #16 on: 03/12/2014 11:04 pm »
Apollo went for large flat areas because hitting a predesignated specific landing spot was near impossible...
False. Apollo 15 was one hairy ride between a mountain and canyon that produced excellent science. Apollo 17 went into a hilly region with serpentine valleys. Suggesting large flat spaces are required is completely incorrect.


Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13463
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11864
  • Likes Given: 11086
Re: Best Region for a Base/Outpost?
« Reply #17 on: 03/12/2014 11:19 pm »
I don't think any other location comes close to the poles in desirability, and that makes it the #1 initial base location to obtain "propriatory" rights.

Desirable yes, practical another question.  We don't know how to mine lunar ice and landing on or near a shadowed crater is not easy.  However, landing at one of the mares near the north pole would be possible, and either by rovers or short-range rocket jumps venturing into the polar craters themselves to build up confidence.

We need the water and a rational exploitation architecture will send robotic explorers (perhaps ICE powered) to sort all that detail out and get pilot ISRU water extraction going so of course the poles are going to be first. To me it doesn't even really seem like much of a question. IMHO of course.
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline Andrew_W

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 754
  • Rotorua, New Zealand
    • Profiles of our future in space
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Best Region for a Base/Outpost?
« Reply #18 on: 03/12/2014 11:37 pm »
Apollo went for large flat areas because hitting a predesignated specific landing spot was near impossible...
False. Apollo 15 was one hairy ride between a mountain and canyon that produced excellent science. Apollo 17 went into a hilly region with serpentine valleys. Suggesting large flat spaces are required is completely incorrect.


Both Apollo 15 and 17 had target landing sites in places with tens of square kilometers of flattish ground.

A landing near one of the peaks of eternal light above Whipple or Shackleton would mean a far smaller LZ.
« Last Edit: 03/12/2014 11:46 pm by Andrew_W »
I confess that in 1901 I said to my brother Orville that man would not fly for fifty years.
Wilbur Wright

Offline Warren Platts

Re: Best Region for a Base/Outpost?
« Reply #19 on: 03/13/2014 01:57 am »
Amateurs.....
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1