{snip}At $800M per mission price where the lander operator purchases transport to and from LLO from SpaceX for example and also a EDS that is used as tanker and crasher stage to enable the lander to reach and return from the surface it keeps them focused on the development of the primary item that will make the business work and that is the manned lander. The operator would pay SpaceX $440M per mission for the 2 EDS and crew transport to and return from LLO. They would also rent space in a Bigelow habitat at LLO. In all they could make in profit as much as $185M per mission (they are a reseller of the SpaceX transportation and they make a profit on that as well since without them SpaceX would not be doing as much cis-lunar flight business making the lander operator a mission integrator).Note mission here is being used as a placeholder for a single from Earth to Lunar surface and back transportation service to deliver 4 people to LLO and 2 of those to the Lunar surface.{snip}
Quote from: JohnFornaro on 11/22/2012 10:17 pmPretty much agree, with the additional observation that replicating an Apollo landing, or even building a four to six person base is also a problem awaiting only an engineering solution.Also awaiting a funding solution.
Pretty much agree, with the additional observation that replicating an Apollo landing, or even building a four to six person base is also a problem awaiting only an engineering solution.
Quote from: simonbp on 11/22/2012 09:06 pmProbably the best case for mining the Moon is to not actually mine the Moon. Rather, it would be find economically valuable asteroids and put them on trajectories that would impact the Moon at extremely slow velocities ...Hadn't really heard this suggestion before.
Probably the best case for mining the Moon is to not actually mine the Moon. Rather, it would be find economically valuable asteroids and put them on trajectories that would impact the Moon at extremely slow velocities ...
Quote from: oldAtlas_Eguy on 11/22/2012 10:20 pm{snip}At $800M per mission price where the lander operator purchases transport to and from LLO from SpaceX for example and also a EDS that is used as tanker and crasher stage to enable the lander to reach and return from the surface it keeps them focused on the development of the primary item that will make the business work and that is the manned lander. The operator would pay SpaceX $440M per mission for the 2 EDS and crew transport to and return from LLO. They would also rent space in a Bigelow habitat at LLO. In all they could make in profit as much as $185M per mission (they are a reseller of the SpaceX transportation and they make a profit on that as well since without them SpaceX would not be doing as much cis-lunar flight business making the lander operator a mission integrator).Note mission here is being used as a placeholder for a single from Earth to Lunar surface and back transportation service to deliver 4 people to LLO and 2 of those to the Lunar surface.{snip}If the lunar base is at one of the poles then the LLO spacestation will have to be in a polar orbit.
The question is whether a possible (most likely secondary) motive is the desire to beat the Chinese back to the Moon. The idea being that if NASA cannot/will not do it, they had better do it themselves for the sake of God and Country. The answer is: who knows? We would have to ask Diamandis whether that keeps him up at night. I'm guessing probably not. Really, the motivation is spelled out in Peter's Laws:http://www.diamandis.com/peters-laws/The answer is he wants to go to the Moon, and he realizes the only way that's going to happen is if he makes it happen himself, by hook or by crook. Of course to do that sustainably, some money is going to have to be made somewhere along the line sooner or later. In that regard, it would be better to have the option of having the liberty to make the rules yourself. To do that, it would would be better to get to the Moon yourself first. That way, you're not having to ask the Chinese or anyone else for permission or forgiveness for anything.All I can do is point out the obvious: that getting there first will carry with it certain advantages. Whether this thought actually takes up any brain cells in the people behind the rumored initiative isn't worth debating.
So for the first venture without an established EML1/2 station and no fielded cryo depots using a lunar polar LLO only reachable practically one every 28 days with a at most 1 week stay time before you have to return or there is a requirement for more delt V than what is capable with the on-board propelant. Aditional margins for TEI so that first going into a high lunar orbit allowing for a plane change to then head back to Earth maybe a solution but that adds weight.
Good find.I should note that the publication date is today.
Quote from: go4mars on 11/22/2012 05:22 pmQuote from: Danderman on 11/22/2012 03:34 amNobody is going to invest private capital in a scheme to land people on the Moon because the Chinese may someday land people on the Moon.If I were a very large mining company (or conglomerate of mining interests) and I believed that there was an economically highly attractive deposit on the moon (either because I believed in near-term reusable rockets or otherwise), then I might in fact be willing to attempt claiming and mining the deposits, using a small portion of my exploration budget toward a well-defined plan and timeframe. If I thought that the chance existed for a competitor (China) to get there first, then my motivation to fund development appropriately would be stronger, especially if losing the race held the potential to collapse the value of my current assets and operations. There is both a carrot and a stick for the private capital. I gather you have not calculated the cost per ton of moving metal from the surface of the Moon to Earth compared with the price per ton of that metal.
Quote from: Danderman on 11/22/2012 03:34 amNobody is going to invest private capital in a scheme to land people on the Moon because the Chinese may someday land people on the Moon.If I were a very large mining company (or conglomerate of mining interests) and I believed that there was an economically highly attractive deposit on the moon (either because I believed in near-term reusable rockets or otherwise), then I might in fact be willing to attempt claiming and mining the deposits, using a small portion of my exploration budget toward a well-defined plan and timeframe. If I thought that the chance existed for a competitor (China) to get there first, then my motivation to fund development appropriately would be stronger, especially if losing the race held the potential to collapse the value of my current assets and operations. There is both a carrot and a stick for the private capital.
Nobody is going to invest private capital in a scheme to land people on the Moon because the Chinese may someday land people on the Moon.
Given that Alan Stern is likely involved, could golden spike or whatever this commercial system is simply be an early UWingu project? That might make some sense.