Author Topic: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture  (Read 137562 times)

Offline jongoff

  • Recovering Rocket Plumber/Space Entrepreneur
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6807
  • Lafayette/Broomfield, CO
  • Liked: 3987
  • Likes Given: 1681
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #20 on: 12/27/2010 10:06 pm »
It is very common for people who are enthusiastic about space to act as if it is a model train set.  They like to design their own architectures, pretending what they would do if they were ultimately in charge.  Like the guy who gets excited because he's going to "put the miniature town over there... and the rail yard over there... and the water tower over there..." they get caught up in designing their own lunar landers and rockets and ISRU propellant stations and fuel depots. 

But it's all fantasy.  The world doesn't work like that.  For starters, rockets, spacecraft, and certainly architectures are not designed by individuals.  They're designed by large teams of people with lots and lots of training.  Just as a town is not assembled by a single person, a rocket is not developed by a single person, and anybody engaging in that kind of exercise is engaging in play acting.

And just as importantly, these kinds of decisions--which are political, and social, and economic--are not made by single individuals.  We don't have a space king who makes all these decisions in isolation.  We have a bureaucracy that answers to an Office of Management and Budget that answers to political appointees who answer to the President and the Vice President.  And we have a bureaucracy that has to get its budget approved by Congress.  And as much as you may hate the President or hate Congress, they are democratically elected.  They're not dictators.  They represent the people.

So, this is a model train set.  It's a fun little diversion.  But it is no different than playing with Legos.

While that's all good and true, a lot of the good that happens in this world is driven by individuals with vision, passion, and the ability to communicate their ideas to others.  Sure, they have to work with the system as it really is, and that either involves convincing Congress to go along with something, or finding a way that only has to interact with Congress at points of agreement.  But thinking that somehow the future is going to just evolve out of bureaucratic wranglings and politics without individuals trying to do what they can to steer the discussion is...myopic.

Sure, a vision that doesn't deal with the reality that there is no Space King who can just get it all done, is flawed.  But acting as though space is going to ever go anywhere without many people of vision is equally flawed.

~Jon

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15286
  • Liked: 7822
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #21 on: 12/27/2010 10:30 pm »
Sure, a vision that doesn't deal with the reality that there is no Space King who can just get it all done, is flawed.  But acting as though space is going to ever go anywhere without many people of vision is equally flawed.

I never wrote that we don't need people of vision.  What we don't need are more fantasists describing how they would change everything if only they were placed in charge.  (And dangnabbit!  The world is so damned unfair that it hasn't recognized the brilliance of these people writing their manifestos, and appointed them king!)

Pick a piece that you can change and propose how to change it.  Otherwise, why stop with space?  Why not just keep going... "If I was in charge, the first thing I would do is end poverty.  Then, for an encore, I'd make sure that everybody flosses regularly.  After that, I'd colonize the Moon..."

Change is incremental.  Anybody who doesn't understand that isn't dealing with reality.
« Last Edit: 12/27/2010 10:47 pm by Blackstar »

Offline jongoff

  • Recovering Rocket Plumber/Space Entrepreneur
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6807
  • Lafayette/Broomfield, CO
  • Liked: 3987
  • Likes Given: 1681
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #22 on: 12/27/2010 11:34 pm »
Sure, a vision that doesn't deal with the reality that there is no Space King who can just get it all done, is flawed.  But acting as though space is going to ever go anywhere without many people of vision is equally flawed.

I never wrote that we don't need people of vision.  What we don't need are more fantasists describing how they would change everything if only they were placed in charge.  (And dangnabbit!  The world is so damned unfair that it hasn't recognized the brilliance of these people writing their manifestos, and appointed them king!)

Ok, fair enough.  That said, I think that sometimes it is worth describing a better end state if everything was flexible--so long as you don't stop there.  The challenge is striking a balance between being realistic, and being over-realistic (ie precluding more revolutionary but actually possible change by being too constrained by the status quo).  You have to understand where we really are, why we are here, and what the constraints are...but contrary to your quote below, not all the changes worth making are tiny incremental changes, and many of them are not directly interpolatable from the current status quo. 

But your basic point that *just* making claims about how you would do things if you were space dictator as being a weak excercise--I agree with that.

~Jon

Quote
Pick a piece that you can change and propose how to change it. 

*snip*

Change is incremental.  Anybody who doesn't understand that isn't dealing with reality.


Offline Hop_David

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1656
  • Ajo, Arizona
    • Hop's Gallery
  • Liked: 147
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #23 on: 12/28/2010 01:29 am »
They're designed by large teams of people with lots and lots of training.

Designed by large teams of congress critters with lots and lots of experience in procuring pork.

Offline Archibald

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2611
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 1096
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #24 on: 12/28/2010 06:37 am »
Lesson n°1 from this Spudis paper: Robots are small and light enough to be flown to the lunar surface using stock EELVs. Try that with human beings !

Instead of the paper suggested HLV, perhaps the humans should stop at a Gateway. Since the delta V to go there is much smaller, that balance the heavier human "cans". Humans can go to L1 on EELVs, just like lighter robots can go to the lunar surface. No ?

For the sake of comparison I've dug two papers from my HD

http://esamultimedia.esa.int/docs/exploration/ReferenceArchitecture/Final%20ReviewJan09/11_Lunar_Lander_Final_Presentation_Bischof_120109.pdf

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19790072601_1979072601.pdf

these papers have Ariane 5, Titan IIIE and... Saturn IB Centaur (long gone !) payloads to the lunar surface.

3300 Ibs for Titan, 5100 Ibs for Saturn IB, 3000 Ibs for ariane 5.

« Last Edit: 12/28/2010 07:00 am by Archibald »
Han shot first and Gwynne Shotwell !

Offline kkattula

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3008
  • Melbourne, Australia
  • Liked: 656
  • Likes Given: 116
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #25 on: 12/28/2010 07:07 am »
IMO, papers like this aren't intended to be a Master Plan For Exploration that should be implemented out of the box. 

Instead I believe they are intended to educate as to what is possible within reasonable technical and budgetary contraints. They go down to the level of describing particular spacecraft, launch vehicles, rovers, etc,  because they have to. Otherwise it would all be vague handwaving.

Papers like these define the options for those tasked with setting the overall direction (or at least those who advise them), and offer a resource of ideas for those tasked with implementing that direction.

If VSE is now refined to "mine the lunar polar regions for water and other volatiles to support a permanent base then further exploration", then this paper offers one way of doing that from which the planners can cherry pick what they like.

« Last Edit: 12/28/2010 07:08 am by kkattula »

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15286
  • Liked: 7822
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #26 on: 12/28/2010 11:46 am »
If VSE is now refined to...

VSE is dead.  Obama canceled it.  The name is not used in NASA documents anymore.

Offline Hop_David

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1656
  • Ajo, Arizona
    • Hop's Gallery
  • Liked: 147
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #27 on: 12/28/2010 01:14 pm »
But it's all fantasy.  The world doesn't work like that.  For starters, rockets, spacecraft, and certainly architectures are not designed by individuals.

The visions of individuals such as Wernher Von Braun or Robert Zubrin have had a profound influence.


Offline Namechange User

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7301
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #28 on: 12/28/2010 01:22 pm »
But it's all fantasy.  The world doesn't work like that.  For starters, rockets, spacecraft, and certainly architectures are not designed by individuals.

The visions of individuals such as Wernher Von Braun or Robert Zubrin have had a profound influence.



But according to what you just said that should not matter because you seem to believe and want to imply that it is all controlled by "congress-critters with lots and lots of experience in procuring pork". 
Enjoying viewing the forum a little better now by filtering certain users.

Offline Hop_David

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1656
  • Ajo, Arizona
    • Hop's Gallery
  • Liked: 147
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #29 on: 12/28/2010 01:53 pm »
The visions of individuals such as Wernher Von Braun or Robert Zubrin have had a profound influence.

But according to what you just said that should not matter because you seem to believe and want to imply that it is all controlled by "congress-critters with lots and lots of experience in procuring pork". 

"Want to imply"? No sly implications, I'm laying my opinion out on the table: NASA is being controlled by congress-critters with lots and lots of experience in procuring pork.

Does that mean people of vision don't matter? Absolutely false. People of vision can mobilize public opinion. And public opinion can disturb the complacency of politicians.

So far as I can see, our present direction is an HLV to nowhere. Or maybe an HLV for NEO flags and footprints in (mumble, mumble) decades.

When Spudis  sets goals for an actual destination, Dwayne Day brands him fantasist. And Day's reason: he's an individual?! As I've mentioned, Wernher Von Braun was an individual and his visions weren't idle fantasies.
« Last Edit: 12/28/2010 01:55 pm by Hop_David »

Offline Namechange User

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7301
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #30 on: 12/28/2010 02:03 pm »
The visions of individuals such as Wernher Von Braun or Robert Zubrin have had a profound influence.

But according to what you just said that should not matter because you seem to believe and want to imply that it is all controlled by "congress-critters with lots and lots of experience in procuring pork". 

"Want to imply"? No sly implications, I'm laying my opinion out on the table: NASA is being controlled by congress-critters with lots and lots of experience in procuring pork.

Does that mean people of vision don't matter? Absolutely false. People of vision can mobilize public opinion. And public opinion can disturb the complacency of politicians.

So far as I can see, our present direction is an HLV to nowhere. Or maybe an HLV for NEO flags and footprints in (mumble, mumble) decades.

When Spudis  sets goals for an actual destination, Dwayne Day brands him fantasist. And Day's reason: he's an individual?! As I've mentioned, Wernher Von Braun was an individual and his visions weren't idle fantasies.

I like Spudis' paper.  Individuals do matter and they matter right now within the agency. 

The problem I have is your attempt to imply they do not because of "congress-critters" who secretly control everything and the fact you don't want an HLV.

For goodness sake, NASA is a government agency.  That means "congress-critters" are involved in the process, like it or not.  It does not mean they have absolute control of every decision.  If the decision is made to take away an HLV (or make it something other than shuttle-derived which is really what some want), fine because I couldn't care less at this point in time, but don't be so naive to assume it does not just shift the "power" within congress to other "critters" who will do the same thing as now. 

Yet, I can't help but notice with many on here, and maybe not you because I don't know - but in general, that seems to be fine because it funds their favorite rocket.  I prefer to call it like it is, hypocritical. 
« Last Edit: 12/28/2010 02:08 pm by OV-106 »
Enjoying viewing the forum a little better now by filtering certain users.

Offline Hop_David

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1656
  • Ajo, Arizona
    • Hop's Gallery
  • Liked: 147
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #31 on: 12/28/2010 05:08 pm »
Individuals do matter and they matter right now within the agency. 

The problem I have is your attempt to imply they do not

For the second time: Absolutely false. I have said individuals do matter.

Here is the first time:

Does that mean people of vision don't matter? Absolutely false. People of vision can mobilize public opinion. And public opinion can disturb the complacency of politicians.


because of "congress-critters" who secretly control

Who secretly control everything? Where'd "secretly" come from? Probably the same rich fantasy world where an imaginary Hop is implying individuals don't matter.

everything and the fact you don't want an HLV.

I don't want an HLV? Yet another falsehood.

If it's an HLV to help establish infrastructure, I would support that.

If it's an HLV to plant a flag on an NEO at some vague point in the future, I'm against it.
« Last Edit: 12/28/2010 05:32 pm by Hop_David »

Offline Namechange User

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7301
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #32 on: 12/28/2010 05:38 pm »
Mr. Hop,

I don't know what you believe or what your opinion is.  All of this started by this post:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=23661.msg675691#msg675691

implying to me that "congress-critters" are in control of everything because they are "designing" it with only "pork" in mind. 

Four posts later you have this:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=23661.msg675759#msg675759

implying individuals do matter.  I simply commented that these two posts seem to contradict themselves.  In other words, according to you, individuals cannot matter, if large teams of "congress-critters" are designing everything.

I do not believe that to be the case with respect to NASA.  I know individuals matter and the sensationalism on this site with certain posts and elsewhere about congress "designing rockets" is exactly that and is meant to skew opinion in a direction some would like to see it go in for one reason or another. 

Now, if you would like to see an HLV, good, I'm glad for that.  I would too but at this point, again, I really don't care what it looks like (even though I have opinions and valid reasons for those opinions). 

The gun is cocked and loaded, the finger is on the trigger and we are seconds away from firing directly into our collective-foot.  I'm not sure if anything can stop that now.  While I too am not happy about the nebulous mission to a NEO 20 years from now (for a variety of reasons and one of them being because it takes "flexible path" and turns it into an excuse for doing nothing) the details of the mission are somewhat unimportant at this exact moment.  We can scope those out in the relatively near-term but because of inaction we are at a "tipping point" where action must be taken to preserve and build capability because all is about to be lost....again. 

That does not mean it will preserve every job.  That does not (and should not and must not) mean "business as usal".  There are many more than is generally given credit within the "NASA family" about what could be done and should be done to make things more efficient.  This goes beyond what a rocket "looks like" or what it is derived from.  But it is time to get on with something. 
« Last Edit: 12/28/2010 05:43 pm by OV-106 »
Enjoying viewing the forum a little better now by filtering certain users.

Offline Hop_David

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1656
  • Ajo, Arizona
    • Hop's Gallery
  • Liked: 147
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #33 on: 12/28/2010 05:41 pm »
I like Spudis' paper.

Then why are you defending Day when he says it's fantasy?

Individuals do matter and they matter right now within the agency.

Here is Day's quote where he dismisses the paper on the grounds it's from an individual:

But it's all fantasy.  The world doesn't work like that.  For starters, rockets, spacecraft, and certainly architectures are not designed by individuals.  They're designed by large teams of people with lots and lots of training.

And I say the visions of individuals do matter. I cite Wernher Von Braun.

Many of Von Braun's visions became reality. Did he do it by himself? Of course not. Neither would Spudis' vision be built by an individual. Of course it would take large teams of skilled engineers.

Did this paper all originate in the mind of a single individual? Absolutely not. The paper is co-written by Tony Lavoie. On pages 22 and 23 are a list of references. This paper is built from the thoughts of many individuals. Day's attempt to portray this as the irrelevant fantasy of a single individual destroys his credibility, in my view.

At the moment I can't tell what your position is. Should Spudis' vision be dismissed because he's an individual? Or do you disagree with Day?

Offline Hop_David

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1656
  • Ajo, Arizona
    • Hop's Gallery
  • Liked: 147
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #34 on: 12/28/2010 05:47 pm »
I simply commented that these two posts seem to contradict themselves.  In other words, according to you, individuals cannot matter, if large teams of "congress-critters" are designing everything.

I do believe that, for the moment, pork barrel politics is dominating policy.

I also believe individuals can influence congressmen.

My two statements in no way contradict each other.

Offline Namechange User

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7301
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #35 on: 12/28/2010 05:48 pm »
I like Spudis' paper.

Then why are you defending Day when he says it's fantasy?


I did not even mention Mr. Day or "Blackstar" anywhere and he is entitled to his opinion as much as anyone. 

I believe I have said more than once that individuals do matter and "congress-critters" are not "designing" anything, even though there is a relationship that must be accepted between a government agency and the branches of government that oversee it. 
Enjoying viewing the forum a little better now by filtering certain users.

Offline Namechange User

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7301
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #36 on: 12/28/2010 05:54 pm »
I simply commented that these two posts seem to contradict themselves.  In other words, according to you, individuals cannot matter, if large teams of "congress-critters" are designing everything.

I do believe that, for the moment, pork barrel politics is dominating policy.

I also believe individuals can influence congressmen.

My two statements in no way contradict each other.

What you call "pork barrel", I call the nature of the beast.  Members of congress want to preserve jobs in their districts.  That should suprise nobody. 

Yet, the California delegation, the Virginia delegation, etc are also not guilty of this making sure "policy" protects and nutures SpaceX, Orbital, etc? 

Like I said, it is the nature of the system and while not perfect, must be accepted and worked with in order to maximize the benefit and what can be done but minimize the "politics" so that *everyone* (and by that I mean the industry as a whole) benefits. 
Enjoying viewing the forum a little better now by filtering certain users.

Offline Hop_David

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1656
  • Ajo, Arizona
    • Hop's Gallery
  • Liked: 147
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #37 on: 12/28/2010 06:04 pm »
I did not even mention Mr. Day or "Blackstar"

Did you jump in without bothering to read the preceding context?

Offline TyMoore

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 478
  • Eureka, CA, USA
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #38 on: 12/28/2010 07:33 pm »
I think now would be a good time for me to demonstrate my not-inconsiderable ignorance of the subject, open my mouth... :)

I generally agree with what Blackstar is saying: the way things are, it is not unreasonable to assert that any complex space project is not conjured up in a 'vacuum' (please excuse the pun.) It takes a great deal of effort by a great number of people to create just about anything flyable in the space industry. I would point out that with every doubling of the complexity of a system, there is probably close to a squared law of required effort (and requisite personnel) to make it work. The vast resources mustered for Project Apollo is a good example.

Having just said that, I also recognize the importance of input from the 'individual.' Individuals and sometimes anonymous efforts by small groups can have a surprising amount of influence on the future courses of programs.

I think Dr. Spudis has some very good ideas by allowing the architecture to start small, more or less use conventional boosters at first, and using 'modular' components, provide an obvious means to start small, test small, and grow larger later on. People don't have to sent right away.

Fantasy or not, I think he has some very good ideas.

Offline spacester

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 332
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 178
Re: Paul Spudis has a new Lunar Architecture
« Reply #39 on: 12/28/2010 08:24 pm »
Keeping it mercifully short, I'll just say that this paper at least deserves more respect than to be contained in this marvelous forum to a single thread that gets locked due to contentious and uncivil exchanges. I'm not sure where the line is drawn, and its not my job to know, but it is clear to me that there are fresh wounds that have been inadvertently opened up here.

As a space flight fanboi, even before I was willing to accept that moniker, I've always thought that the most important thing is the idea. Whether the idea comes from a crazed individual ensconced in a one-room mountain cabin or an accomplished team from a NASA center, or anywhere in between, any full-fledged and self-consistent plan deserves to be analyzed on its own merits. Our future in space is important enough to demand that.

I have followed Paul Spudis for years. Not closely but I've always put him on the shortlist of "insiders" who "get it". Silly me, I thought that he was well known and respected. So I titled the thread as I did, giving people here enough credit to know that this was not the work of a single individual. There IS a co-author and there ARE references, and the ideas themselves are clearly derived from many many people over many years.

Any chance we could have a discussion on the merits of the plan itself? There IS an attempt included in the paper to review the big picture and other first-cut political considerations.

Tags:
 

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