NASA's Artemis Program Updates and Discussion Thread 3

[DreamyPickle]

Even if the vehicle is big it is always possible to build a bigger habitat using cargo carried by that vehicle.

Does NASA have any research projects for habitats that can be assembled or inflated on the surface? There is only so much you can do by shipping tin cans with a crane.

[TheRadicalModerate]

I wonder if Starship HLS could be a mobile habitat? How long could it stay on the surface at one time? What would it need? Extra solar power?

Extra solar doesn't help very much in the dark, unless you're willing to carry a whole bunch of batteries, which have fairly poor specific energy.  But a while back I back-of-napkinned that a 50kW APU would need about 16t of methalox to get through one 2-week lunar night.

[yg1968]

https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1387787460097232897

During a meeting of the Lunar Surface Science Workshop this morning, NASA acting administrator Steve Jurzcyk said the agency is studying:

• Lunar Terrain Vehicle to explore South Pole
• Mobile habitat to extend surface stays to 45 days
• A larger habitat for even longer stays

NASA has made presentations on these before:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48676.msg2182320#msg2182320

See also this link:
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-outlines-lunar-surface-sustainability-concept

[oiorionsbelt]

https://spacepolicyonline.com/news/nasa-suspends-hls-contract-with-spacex/

[Alberto-Girardi]

https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1387787460097232897

During a meeting of the Lunar Surface Science Workshop this morning, NASA acting administrator Steve Jurzcyk said the agency is studying:

• Lunar Terrain Vehicle to explore South Pole
• Mobile habitat to extend surface stays to 45 days
• A larger habitat for even longer stays

NASA has made presentations on these before:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48676.msg2182320#msg2182320

Can it fit in starship cargo bay?

[TheRadicalModerate]

Can it fit in starship cargo bay?

A better question is whether it can fit through the hatch and onto the elevator.

I expect LSS to hold 200t-300t more prop than a vanilla SS, by moving the LCH4 dome and inter-tank bulkhead a bit forward, eating into the LSS payload bay height.  But I'm still pretty sure that they'll have at least 3.5m of cylindrical height.  That's likely taller than the hatch.  And it'll be surprising if the elevator can accommodate things that are much larger than 3x3x3m.

[AU1.52]

Can it fit in starship cargo bay?

A better question is whether it can fit through the hatch and onto the elevator.

I expect LSS to hold 200t-300t more prop than a vanilla SS, by moving the LCH4 dome and inter-tank bulkhead a bit forward, eating into the LSS payload bay height.  But I'm still pretty sure that they'll have at least 3.5m of cylindrical height.  That's likely taller than the hatch.  And it'll be surprising if the elevator can accommodate things that are much larger than 3x3x3m.

Send the rover in a vanilla cargo SS. The hab could be sent in a expendable or tug version of SS that has is either missing or ejected is nose cone. Imagine a 8+ m diameter hab!

[Alberto-Girardi]

Can it fit in starship cargo bay?

A better question is whether it can fit through the hatch and onto the elevator.

I expect LSS to hold 200t-300t more prop than a vanilla SS, by moving the LCH4 dome and inter-tank bulkhead a bit forward, eating into the LSS payload bay height.  But I'm still pretty sure that they'll have at least 3.5m of cylindrical height.  That's likely taller than the hatch.  And it'll be surprising if the elevator can accommodate things that are much larger than 3x3x3m.

In fact there was a discussion about this on starship engineering thread. The columbus module of ISS (and probably all other western modules) diameter is about 4.4 meters, so the lunar base concept will probably be at least of the same diameter.

[sdsds]

Not that I expect this to happen, but it would be best if NASA was relieved of the EUS earmarking

Yes, you're correct it would be better to eliminate the earmark. Sadly yes your expectation (that it won't happen) is likely also correct.

But EUS isn't that bad. Render unto Boeing that which is Boeing's, and move on. We are so fortunate that SpaceX is successfully demonstrating another way of doing business, both on the completely private side and on the public-private partnership side. That better way of doing business will eventually displace the old way. And as soon as there is a second SpaceX-like entity competing in the mix, NASA and Congress will be dragged into the 21st century.

I predict that, before I leave for Mars, NASA will have a rational plan for getting astronauts there. ;-)

[yg1968]

Lueders: returning to the Moon "isn't a dream anymore." We have solid plans and agreements and contracts out there to go make this happen.

https://twitter.com/SpcPlcyOnline/status/1388786937041932290

[ZChris13]

https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1387787460097232897

During a meeting of the Lunar Surface Science Workshop this morning, NASA acting administrator Steve Jurzcyk said the agency is studying:

• Lunar Terrain Vehicle to explore South Pole
• Mobile habitat to extend surface stays to 45 days
• A larger habitat for even longer stays

So if I get understand this, NASA is looking at asking for
• a truck
• an RV
• a mobile home
all for the lunar surface. That's exciting.

[ncb1397]

That doesn't mean it needs to have inhabitable area, however: it's just a place for long-term storage of hardware and resources.

It is only for short term stays

Jim is correct (of course) regarding HALO: it can support short term stays, with the help of the visiting vehicle.

Our ESA partners intend to work with JAXA to provide ECLSS allowing their crews to make longer stays.
https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Images/2020/10/What_is_International_habitat

I-Hab is distinct from HALO, and might or might not have commonality with an (unfunded?) gateway element that would be used to simulate a Mars mission. In the attached image from ESA, I-Hab is colored blue.

Longer stays doing what? If you want to understand long-duration missions in space, we have a station for that. The ESA and JAXA have astronauts who are poised to embark on such a mission in less than 24 hours. If the ISS is old and falling apart and we need a new station that better represents what long-duration space voyages will be like, we can build one in LEO. The only part of a simulated Mars mission you can't replicate in LEO is the radiation environment, and I feel there's got to be a better way to study that than "expose astronauts to unknown radiation and see if they become the Fantastic Four."

It isn't just the astronauts. You have to make sure that the mice don't turn into Splinter. Just as we needed to do long term microgravity stays and built space stations to do so to make sure that people don't turn into Mr. Glass (ironically, some of them did break bones when returning).  In all seriousness, it isn't just the astronauts - plants, animals, people and hardware could or will all potentially respond to the environment differently than in LEO. Just as operational countermeasures were developed and tested for the microgravity hazard, the same will be done for the interplanetary radiological environment.

[Hog]

That doesn't mean it needs to have inhabitable area, however: it's just a place for long-term storage of hardware and resources.

It is only for short term stays

Jim is correct (of course) regarding HALO: it can support short term stays, with the help of the visiting vehicle.

Our ESA partners intend to work with JAXA to provide ECLSS allowing their crews to make longer stays.
https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Images/2020/10/What_is_International_habitat

I-Hab is distinct from HALO, and might or might not have commonality with an (unfunded?) gateway element that would be used to simulate a Mars mission. In the attached image from ESA, I-Hab is colored blue.

Longer stays doing what? If you want to understand long-duration missions in space, we have a station for that. The ESA and JAXA have astronauts who are poised to embark on such a mission in less than 24 hours. If the ISS is old and falling apart and we need a new station that better represents what long-duration space voyages will be like, we can build one in LEO. The only part of a simulated Mars mission you can't replicate in LEO is the radiation environment, and I feel there's got to be a better way to study that than "expose astronauts to unknown radiation and see if they become the Fantastic Four."

It isn't just the astronauts. You have to make sure that the mice don't turn into Splinter. Just as we needed to do long term microgravity stays and built space stations to do so to make sure that people don't turn into Mr. Glass (ironically, some of them did break bones when returning).  In all seriousness, it isn't just the astronauts - plants, animals, people and hardware could or will all potentially respond to the environment differently than in LEO. Just as operational countermeasures were developed and tested for the microgravity hazard, the same will be done for the interplanetary radiological environment.

We will have to do the same on the Lunar surface at 0.166 g.  We don't know what we don't know when it comes to certain systems in space.

[Khadgars]

https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1387787460097232897

During a meeting of the Lunar Surface Science Workshop this morning, NASA acting administrator Steve Jurzcyk said the agency is studying:

• Lunar Terrain Vehicle to explore South Pole
• Mobile habitat to extend surface stays to 45 days
• A larger habitat for even longer stays

So if I get understand this, NASA is looking at asking for
• a truck
• an RV
• a mobile home
all for the lunar surface. That's exciting.

Totally agree, lot of exciting things happening.  Should be one hell of a decade!

[TheRadicalModerate]

Can it fit in starship cargo bay?

A better question is whether it can fit through the hatch and onto the elevator.

I expect LSS to hold 200t-300t more prop than a vanilla SS, by moving the LCH4 dome and inter-tank bulkhead a bit forward, eating into the LSS payload bay height.  But I'm still pretty sure that they'll have at least 3.5m of cylindrical height.  That's likely taller than the hatch.  And it'll be surprising if the elevator can accommodate things that are much larger than 3x3x3m.

Send the rover in a vanilla cargo SS. The hab could be sent in a expendable or tug version of SS that has is either missing or ejected is nose cone. Imagine a 8+ m diameter hab!

Even if you have a fairing that can jettison, you still have an elevator problem.

Note that a 3x3x3 piece of equipment is huge.  I don't think that this will be an issue.  And if it is, deploy it in a couple of separate pieces and assemble them after they're offloaded.

[su27k]

NASA has selected its deep space hardware—now comes the fun part

We are still in early days, but there is increasing agreement at NASA about the need to focus less on transportation—the "how" of getting there—and more on what to do when astronauts get to their destinations. This is because, as the transportation pieces fall in line, NASA can think about actual exploration.

This cost savings is but one potential benefit of Starship. The other is an unparalleled capability to deliver cargo to the Moon. After refueling in low Earth orbit, a fully reusable Starship carrying cargo only—meaning it flies to the Moon, unloads its payload, and returns to Earth—could carry more than 50 tons to the lunar surface, according to estimates by physicist Casey Handmer. An expendable Starship, which lands on the Moon and stays, could bring more than 200 tons to the Moon.

Two hundred tons! If it's difficult to conceptualize how much cargo this is, consider the lunar module used by the Apollo Program. In a "truck" configuration for cargo only, it was estimated that this vehicle could bring about 5 tons down to the lunar surface. So Starship would have the capacity to bring more than 40 times as much material down to the Moon, per mission.

This is something that scientists and engineers who think about development on the Moon (and who put out reports such as the Lunar Exploration Roadmap) have only dreamed of previously. "This is really the key to sustainability," explained one of the roadmap's authors, Clive Neal, who is a lunar scientist at the University of Notre Dame.

[Slarty1080]

https://twitter.com/sciguyspace/status/1387787460097232897

During a meeting of the Lunar Surface Science Workshop this morning, NASA acting administrator Steve Jurzcyk said the agency is studying:

• Lunar Terrain Vehicle to explore South Pole
• Mobile habitat to extend surface stays to 45 days
• A larger habitat for even longer stays

So if I get understand this, NASA is looking at asking for
• a truck
• an RV
• a mobile home
all for the lunar surface. That's exciting.

Totally agree, lot of exciting things happening.  Should be one hell of a decade!

Agreed and with the mass landing capability of Starship they should be able to strong arm the whole issue of redundancy with multiple rovers and multiple rover types. This should cover just about every eventuality allowing true exploration rather than "you can't go further than you can walk back in case it breaks down" style wanderings.

[su27k]

AP Interview: NASA chief big on climate, hedges on moon date

For landing astronauts on the moon, Nelson said the goal remains 2024, a deadline set by the Trump administration. But he said he needs more time to review the matter, especially with challenges to the contract for the astronauts’ lunar lander.

“That is the intended schedule, but I think we have to put a dose of sobering reality into our analysis,” he said from NASA headquarters in Washington.

The lunar expeditions will benefit the Martian crews, according to Nelson. Whether the 2030s is still feasible for human Mars missions, “all of that is being discussed,” he said.

Nelson commended Elon Musk’s SpaceX for its achievements over the past year — flying astronauts to and from the International Space Station for NASA, and just this week successfully launching and landing a full-scale Starship prototype for the first time.

[watermod]

With the cargo carrying capacity of MoonShip/StarShip has any thought been given to modification of Boston Dynamics robots to perform survey and analysis, in a vacuum, of the Moon and asteroids.   One could see thousands of prospectors based on those robots swarming over surfaces in space.

Initial modifications would be heat radiation and spread along with some sort of long term mobile power source.

[Jcc]

Can it fit in starship cargo bay?

A better question is whether it can fit through the hatch and onto the elevator.

I expect LSS to hold 200t-300t more prop than a vanilla SS, by moving the LCH4 dome and inter-tank bulkhead a bit forward, eating into the LSS payload bay height.  But I'm still pretty sure that they'll have at least 3.5m of cylindrical height.  That's likely taller than the hatch.  And it'll be surprising if the elevator can accommodate things that are much larger than 3x3x3m.

Send the rover in a vanilla cargo SS. The hab could be sent in a expendable or tug version of SS that has is either missing or ejected is nose cone. Imagine a 8+ m diameter hab!

Even if you have a fairing that can jettison, you still have an elevator problem.

Note that a 3x3x3 piece of equipment is huge.  I don't think that this will be an issue.  And if it is, deploy it in a couple of separate pieces and assemble them after they're offloaded.

How about Bigelow expandable habitats? Is that still a thing?