Golden Spike announce Phase A for commercial lunar landing missions

[mmeijeri]

Of course it could, because you could launch it dry and push it through TLI dry.

[Robotbeat]

Of course it could, because you could launch it dry and push it through TLI dry.

And just In case anyone is confused... We already have refueling technology for hypergols. Progress has it as well as ATV. Well-understood. We are even demonstrating the technique of refueling of satellites never designed for refueling on ISS right now. Fueling up a hypergolic lander is absolutely a relatively high TRL approach.

That means that a reusable lander isn't even that difficult of a problem, necessarily. It is smart to slow-boat the tanker, though.

This goes somewhat beyond their concept of operations... But if they launched a lander (dry or wet) and a big tank of hypergols into LEO attached to a modified 702 satellite bus with another couple extra solar arrays attached,  all on a single Falcon Heavy launch to LEO, they could make a few trips With just the one tank of fuel. Single-launch of crew (in a Dragon with a propulsion module) on a Falcon Heavy, and you've got yourself a lunar mission for about 1.3-1.5 launches per mission.

If you had cheaper LEO access, you wouldn't even need the SEP and you could have a reusable architecture for a rather low initial cost.

[neilh]

I have a lot of hope for Golden Spike, but I'm kind of worried that their lack of an entrepreneurial bootstrapping plan is going to bite them. It feels a little bit like if SpaceX had announced in 2002 that their first product would be the Falcon Heavy (without first going through Falcon 1/9), or if Planetary Resources had announced they'd go directly for asteroid mining (without first selling smallsat services).

While having an impressive team/board is all well and good, one of a startup's first priorities should be to show potential investors/customers that they can work well together and execute. Asking people to hand over money and wait many years to see the first major results works ok in the government world (sometimes), but usually doesn't work too well for startups.

I really hope I'm wrong and Golden Spike is massively successful.

[RocketmanUS]

It could use the methane RL-10 ( CECE ) engines with a high ISP. Same system could be used to fill a lander in LLO without the Dragon.

Yes, in theory, and eventually. But for now we don't have CECE, and storage and transfer will be more difficult than with hypergolics. Switching to LOX/methane isn't a big gain, and losing propellant transfer and storage is a big loss.

This goes back to the Direct days when I was looking at Lunar to start off with hypergolic lander and the later switch to reusable LH2/LOX.
So yes hypergolics it looks like would be the better choose.
It can be sent from LEO to LLO by a SEP tug ( it is it's own tanker ).
Or use an EDS for part of the TLI burn and the lander does the rest to LLO and is refueled at LLO.
Could even be refueled in LLO.
Super Draco, that could be the main engine.
RCS would use the same propellent.
Would need to send additional pressurization gasses if refueled.

From your other post above.
I think we are about on the same page for the tankers on the post above.

Keep in mind that it take longer if they go through EML1/2 than LLO. So for now use LLO. Dragon can have a SM so it can handle LLO, just have the EDS fueled in LEO.

[Robert Thompson]

Re: sample return market.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2012/12/11/rock-tasting-at-biosphere-2/
Rock Tasting at Biosphere 2, Scientific American, December 11, 2012

"Some of the rocks that Zaharescu uses ... are sent to him by mountaineers and explorers affiliated with Adventurers and Scientists for Conservation (ASC). This organization pairs adventure athletes with scientists who need help collecting samples or data from extreme environments. Mountaineers associated with ASC collect bedrock for Zaharescu from the tops of mountain ranges. ... He feels a close bond with these citizen scientists, who risk life and limb to collect samples for him. “Anything can happen to them. They can die.” "

[spectre9]

Historically, use of the solid is not new or innovative.

This is NSF, we're the world's premier HSF forum but you already knew I was talking about HSF.

I know what unmanned probes have done.

Does this means SEP is fully qualified because Dawn is flying to Ceres? Of course not. 

Thanks for your input but these solids are way bigger and much better performing than stuff made 50 years ago.

Did those making the LEM consider solids? If not why not?

Maybe they're better today?

This is what I want to find out.

If these Star motors can save serious money it's a good idea.

[Jason1701]

I have a lot of hope for Golden Spike, but I'm kind of worried that their lack of an entrepreneurial bootstrapping plan is going to bite them. It feels a little bit like if SpaceX had announced in 2002 that their first product would be the Falcon Heavy (without first going through Falcon 1/9), or if Planetary Resources had announced they'd go directly for asteroid mining (without first selling smallsat services).

Or if Stratolaunch had announced that their first product would be  . . . oh wait.


Sorry.

[neilh]

I have a lot of hope for Golden Spike, but I'm kind of worried that their lack of an entrepreneurial bootstrapping plan is going to bite them. It feels a little bit like if SpaceX had announced in 2002 that their first product would be the Falcon Heavy (without first going through Falcon 1/9), or if Planetary Resources had announced they'd go directly for asteroid mining (without first selling smallsat services).

Or if Stratolaunch had announced that their first product would be  . . . oh wait.


Sorry.

How many paid customers does Stratolaunch have on their manifest? How many investors do they have that aren't also co-founders? Granted, having a billionaire as one of your co-founders helps with the bootstrapping, but as far as I've been able to tell Golden Spike unfortunately doesn't have that.

[RocketmanUS]

Re: sample return market.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2012/12/11/rock-tasting-at-biosphere-2/
Rock Tasting at Biosphere 2, Scientific American, December 11, 2012

"Some of the rocks that Zaharescu uses ... are sent to him by mountaineers and explorers affiliated with Adventurers and Scientists for Conservation (ASC). This organization pairs adventure athletes with scientists who need help collecting samples or data from extreme environments. Mountaineers associated with ASC collect bedrock for Zaharescu from the tops of mountain ranges. ... He feels a close bond with these citizen scientists, who risk life and limb to collect samples for him. “Anything can happen to them. They can die.” "

OK that make sense. ( for a short stay on the surface )
SpaceX could supply the pilot for Dragon and GSC could supply the pilot for the lander. Both would go to the Lunar surface and collect samples for the customer. With live video and audio with the customers experts they could collect the samples that the customer wants from that site. They could use a small remote control ( toy size ) rover with a camera on it to search out more of the site. If it has solar panels on it, then it can be used after they leave.

So for $1.5B they can return 50kg of samples.
50kg x 2.2046 ( convert to pounds ) = 110.23lb
110.23lb x 16( to get oz ) = 1763.68oz
$1.5B / 1763.68oz = $850,494.42 ( rounded down to nearest cent )

More could afford this kind of option.

[Robert Thompson]

Re: sample return market.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2012/12/11/rock-tasting-at-biosphere-2/
Rock Tasting at Biosphere 2, Scientific American, December 11, 2012

"Some of the rocks that Zaharescu uses ... are sent to him by mountaineers and explorers affiliated with Adventurers and Scientists for Conservation (ASC). This organization pairs adventure athletes with scientists who need help collecting samples or data from extreme environments. Mountaineers associated with ASC collect bedrock for Zaharescu from the tops of mountain ranges. ... He feels a close bond with these citizen scientists, who risk life and limb to collect samples for him. “Anything can happen to them. They can die.” "

OK that make sense.
SpaceX could supply the pilot for Dragon and GSC could supply the pilot for the lander. Both would go to the Lunar surface and collect samples for the customer. With live video and audio with the customers experts they could collect the samples that the customer wants from that site. They could use a small remote control ( toy size ) rover with a camera on it to search out more of the site. If it has solar panels on it, then it can be used after they leave.

So for $1.5B they can return 50kg of samples.
50kg x 2.2046 ( convert to pounds ) = 110.23lb
110.23lb x 16( to get oz ) = 1763.68oz
$1.5B / 1763.68oz = $850,494.42 ( rounded down to nearest cent )

More could afford this kind of option.

Now you're feelin it. And it's quite obvious that the customer needs to be in a robust, heavily shielded habitat at EML2 so that the latency for the sample selection is as low as possible.

[RocketmanUS]

Re: sample return market.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2012/12/11/rock-tasting-at-biosphere-2/
Rock Tasting at Biosphere 2, Scientific American, December 11, 2012

"Some of the rocks that Zaharescu uses ... are sent to him by mountaineers and explorers affiliated with Adventurers and Scientists for Conservation (ASC). This organization pairs adventure athletes with scientists who need help collecting samples or data from extreme environments. Mountaineers associated with ASC collect bedrock for Zaharescu from the tops of mountain ranges. ... He feels a close bond with these citizen scientists, who risk life and limb to collect samples for him. “Anything can happen to them. They can die.” "

OK that make sense.
SpaceX could supply the pilot for Dragon and GSC could supply the pilot for the lander. Both would go to the Lunar surface and collect samples for the customer. With live video and audio with the customers experts they could collect the samples that the customer wants from that site. They could use a small remote control ( toy size ) rover with a camera on it to search out more of the site. If it has solar panels on it, then it can be used after they leave.

So for $1.5B they can return 50kg of samples.
50kg x 2.2046 ( convert to pounds ) = 110.23lb
110.23lb x 16( to get oz ) = 1763.68oz
$1.5B / 1763.68oz = $850,494.42 ( rounded down to nearest cent )

More could afford this kind of option.

Now you're feelin it. And it's quite obvious that the customer needs to be in a robust, heavily shielded habitat at EML2 so that the latency for the sample selection is as low as possible.

Customer would be on Earth, not EML1/2. The communications between the two is only a few seconds.

This is still a smash and grab option.

Just add the right size lander and we can have a Lunar program with multiple partners.

The hypergolic lander seams to be the best option for this. For smash and grab sorties use smaller propellent tanks on the lander.

They could have two sizes.
~1,000lb round trip ( smash and grab, small rover, or emergency equipment ) or ~10,000lb to surface.

Keep in mind they are to be a rail road to the moon. Any on surface equipment would be payed for by customer(s), they just deliver it .

[joek]

Now you're feelin it.

Me too. I love customers who snap to attention and agree when I tell then what the want, what they need, and write billion-dollar checks on demand.

Seriously, changing GSC's model from putting persons-of-your-choice-on-the-lunar surface to lunar-sample-return-for-hire probably warrants a different thread.

[RocketmanUS]

Now you're feelin it.

Me too. I love customers who snap to attention and agree when I tell then what the want, what they need, and write billion-dollar checks on demand.

Seriously, changing GSC's model from putting persons-of-your-choice-on-the-lunar surface to lunar-sample-return-for-hire probably warrants a different thread.

It's not changing anything. It's about the need for trained personnel to operate the Dragon and lander. If one person can fly both vehicles then the other person can be the customers choice ( their own person or a person for hire ).

[JohnFornaro]

Or if Stratolaunch had announced that their first product would be  . . . oh wait.

Another fine graduate from my fictitious online school of sarcasm.

Couldn't resist.

[joek]

It's not changing anything. It's about the need for trained personnel to operate the Dragon and lander. If one person can fly both vehicles then the other person can be the customers choice ( their own person or a person for hire ).

That's not what you said...

SpaceX could supply the pilot for Dragon and GSC could supply the pilot for the lander. Both would go to the Lunar surface and collect samples for the customer. With live video and audio with the customers experts they could collect the samples that the customer wants from that site.

If the lander holds two people, and one of them is SpaceX-provided and one is GSC-provided, and they're collecting samples for the "customer", where are the customer personnel?

Customer would be on Earth, not EML1/2. The communications between the two is only a few seconds.

Right... the customer is on Earth, not on the Lunar surface.  Presumably because the two available seats are occupied by "trained personnel" from SpaceX and GSC?  Or what?

Again, how does that not fundamentally change GSC's approach, assumptions and business model beyond recognition?

[RocketmanUS]

It's not changing anything. It's about the need for trained personnel to operate the Dragon and lander. If one person can fly both vehicles then the other person can be the customers choice ( their own person or a person for hire ).

That's not what you said...

SpaceX could supply the pilot for Dragon and GSC could supply the pilot for the lander. Both would go to the Lunar surface and collect samples for the customer. With live video and audio with the customers experts they could collect the samples that the customer wants from that site.

If the lander holds two people, and one of them is SpaceX-provided and one is GSC-provided, and they're collecting samples for the "customer", where are the customer personnel?

Customer would be on Earth, not EML1/2. The communications between the two is only a few seconds.

Right... the customer is on Earth, not on the Lunar surface.  Presumably because the two available seats are occupied by "trained personnel" from SpaceX and GSC?  Or what?

Again, how does that not fundamentally change GSC's approach, assumptions and business model beyond recognition?

Not all customer will have or want to have their own trained personnel to send to the moon. It would not change the cost for GSC as they would still have to train the customers personnel. So GSC would just train people that would want to do such a mission(s) that are qualified. Some of the trained personnel could see several sorties.

Remember if the customer does supply the person(s) to land on the moon then those people will have to be trained. It can be cheaper to reuse personnel that have already flown on a mission before and gain from their experience.

Even if the customer does supply the person(s) to land on the moon they would most likely also have experts on the ground helping the personnel on the Lunar surface with sample collection.

GSC Business Objective web page
http://goldenspikecompany.com/our-business/business-objectives/

[QuantumG]

GSC is talking about doing test flights.. presumably they'll be looking to do some "science" on those missions and getting paid for it. Especially sample return.

There ya go, now you're not offtopic

[joek]

Not all customer will have or want to have their own trained personnel to send to the moon. It would not change the cost for GSC as they would still have to train the customers personnel.

Sez who?  GSC's business model is based on customers wanting, and willing to pay for, putting their own personnel on the moon (mostly those "sovereign states").  While not putting customer personnel on the moon may not change GSC's costs (much), it will definitely reduce revenue.

Unless you're suggesting that customers would be willing to pay the same for a sample-return-for-hire mission as a customer-person-on-the-moon mission?  Or that GSC could make up the reduced revenue by increased volume of sample-return-for-hire missions?  Sure, sample return and sales may be part of the business model, but if that's all they manage, they'll never survive.

Again, you're attempting to turn GSC's model into something completely different, with nothing but specious assumptions and assertions.

[RocketmanUS]

Not all customer will have or want to have their own trained personnel to send to the moon. It would not change the cost for GSC as they would still have to train the customers personnel.

Sez who?  GSC's business model is based on customers wanting, and willing to pay for, putting their own personnel on the moon (mostly those "sovereign states").  While not putting customer personnel on the moon may not change GSC's costs (much), it will definitely reduce revenue.

Unless you're suggesting that customers would be willing to pay the same for a sample-return-for-hire mission as a customer-person-on-the-moon mission?  Or that GSC could make up the reduced revenue by increased volume of sample-return-for-hire missions?  Sure, sample return and sales may be part of the business model, but if that's all they manage, they'll never survive.

Again, you're attempting to turn GSC's model into something completely different, with nothing but specious assumptions and assertions.

Please read GSC web page on the business objectives.
http://goldenspikecompany.com/our-business/business-objectives/

And there should be more to be announced in 2013.

[joek]

Please read GSC web page on the business objectives.
http://goldenspikecompany.com/our-business/business-objectives/

Please also read their whitepaper (emphasis added):

The enterprise proposed here opens up the possibility for private individuals, private companies, space and science agencies abroad, or even US agencies to purchase transportation services to and from the lunar surface. Possible motivations might include individual ambition or curiosity, tourism, scientific investigation, or profit. Governments of other nations desiring to participate in space exploration but unable to afford a standalone lunar exploration program could, for example, purchase rides for scientists or other citizens for scientific and technical advancement or simply for national pride.

NB:  "transportation services to and from the lunar surface".