Q&A: Richard P. Speck of Micro-Space Inc

[rpspeck]

jimvela - 30/8/2007  9:14 PM

I just read here:
http://www.livescience.com/blogs/author/leonarddavid

the following:

Another team — Micro-Space of Denver, Colorado has missed a required milestone — a Team Summit — making them ineligible to win prize money in 2007. The team will continue their development, however, and have a presence at this year’s Wirefly X Prize Cup.

It's been a while since we've had an update here, perhaps Mr. Speck can give some insight into the state of the team, the non-attendance at the team summit, and what various things they've been up to...

As noted, we will not be flying at the X Prize Cup this year.  We are making slow but steady progress with our lunar lander units, but realized that obtaining the FAA flight license in time was not going to happen.  We are getting close to hovering flight tests.

We are preparing to fly our "Human Lunar Lander" configuration soon thereafter.  This design resulted from recognition that when the low empty weight and high mass ratio of our systems were combined with the performance of high concentration peroxide and a hydrazine alcohol mix in vacuum, the 25 kg payload capability of our "Level 2" contender became a  110 kg payload.  This is enough for a human astronaut in a pressure suit.  

Our "Human Lunar Lander" basically splits the large cluster of fuel tanks on our "Level 2" vehicle into two groups, and puts the astronaut in a parachute harness between them.  

In addition we continue to make progress with our life support systems.  In particular we presently have three operational "Portable Life Support System" backpacks with fully redundant, fail safe systems.  To eliminate the pressure suit envelope as a catastrophic single point failure risk (like 1900s diving dress), we have of course jumped to current positive pressure breathing mask designs, which can provide the fail safe features of modern SCUBA gear.

We are presently working with three Mars Expedition teams planning to use ultralight gear and commercial "freight" services to get their expedition gear to LEO.  Two are embryonic, but what I call "Mars Team One" (the founders of www.explorersweb.com) and publicising their preparations.

[rpspeck]

tnphysics - 8/9/2007  11:17 PM

For the Mars missions, how much space will the astronaut have?

How many men could be landed on Mars using your techniques and a Falcon 9 as the LV? If you are
allowed a Falcon 9 Heavy?

Assume that both Mars surface EVA and Mars sample return are requirements.

Anything up to a 3.6 meter (12 foot) diameter habitat should be no problem.  I typically estimate "small airliner cabin" sizes (3 meter diameter and 4 meter long) at 40 to 60 pounds mass.  Volume need not be "expensive" as payload mass.  

The Falcon 9 should be able to handle a lightweight SOLO mission with Mars surface EVA and modest sample return.  

The Falcon 9 - S9 both allows a two person landing crew and greater capability for sample return or other expedition complexities.

[Lampyridae]

Have you considered other missions beside LEO, the moon and Mars? If your system pans out, explorers could visit asteroids - literally be the first to set foot on another world every time. Maybe bring along some ISRU stuff and camp out for a year until they boost back to Earth. Another opportunity would be a Venus fly-by. In terms of Delta V, it costs less to get to Deimos than the surface of the moon (which I'm sure you've looked at already). Maybe you could even work in small ion drives at some later stage.

Seems to me your tractor beam also has applications indoors as well. Zero-gee astronaut training in a room on Earth, "artificial gravity" out in space if you attach units to an astronaut's torso and limbs. Assuming I'm reading your post right. You could always spin the unit for G-force if you wanted fancy things like non-zero G toilets.

[rpspeck]

Lampyridae - 14/12/2007  10:15 PM

Have you considered other missions beside LEO, the moon and Mars? If your system pans out, explorers could visit asteroids - literally be the first to set foot on another world every time. Maybe bring along some ISRU stuff and camp out for a year until they boost back to Earth. Another opportunity would be a Venus fly-by. In terms of Delta V, it costs less to get to Deimos than the surface of the moon (which I'm sure you've looked at already). Maybe you could even work in small ion drives at some later stage.

Seems to me your tractor beam also has applications indoors as well. Zero-gee astronaut training in a room on Earth, "artificial gravity" out in space if you attach units to an astronaut's torso and limbs. Assuming I'm reading your post right. You could always spin the unit for G-force if you wanted fancy things like non-zero G toilets.

We have considered a wide range of missions in what we call "The First Hundred" (or next 88).  This is our estimate of the number of individuals who will be able to attract serious funding for deep space adventures (probably in the 2010-2020 decade).  Eventually, these adventures will, like mountain climbing, become "old hat" and have difficulty attracting funding unless they establish a niche as "competitive sports".  What I call "serious funding" is in the range of current funding for ocean racing sailboats or INDY and Formula One auto racing teams.

Venus visits, both flyby and a "landing" - actually floating high in the atmosphere - are on our list.  Asteroid visits are also.  The moons of Mars may or may not be done with the first flyby visits, but they will certainly be visited before a Mars surface landing.  

Unfortunately, our tractor beam is impractical in full Earth gravity, and does its best work in free fall orbits or deep space.

[rpspeck]

I want to wish all readers a Merry Christmas!  This day commemorates the day The Creator initiated a 33 year process which opened the door for all willing humans to enjoy a previously rare intimacy with Him!  This, for those who choose to receive it, is the greatest imaginable “Christmas Present”!  Yet it remains optional: many choose to march to a different drum and cherish other beliefs.  

I choose this day to “Come Out Of The Closet” (the “Prayer Closet” in this case). It is neither traditional nor recommended for an expert in science and technology to admit to a deep faith in Jesus Christ. Yet Jesus of Nazareth was identified in his home town as the “Tekton” (the root word for Technology, poorly translated “Carpenter” in Mark 6:3.  This is a poor translation since it is a classical Greek term for an “Artificer”, and woodworking was, and is today in Israel, a less common trade than stone work and metalwork. In a small community, most artificers would combine a number of such skills.)   It should be no mystery that Technology, and the prosperity which flows from it, have flowered in those countries which have been free to seek intimacy with the Lord Jesus Christ: the Tekton.  

We are commanded to “examine the fruit” of any scriptural conjecture or teaching.  We have Proverbs 8:12 in the King James reading “I Wisdom dwell with prudence and find out knowledge of witty inventions.” to back up this focus.  With the uneven treatment of technology by biblical scholars, the word “inventions” is often lost.   But the understanding of the Hebrew word translated “prudence” here as including “subtlety”,  and “shrewd” or “crafty” (in negative applications)  supports this older translation. The renown of King Solomon, who deliberately sought God’s Wisdom, is a strong point. The work of Nehemiah, who was given the wisdom to plan and execute the complete rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls in 52 days – a task which reasonably should have taken years – is another.  

But what I can not ignore – as an honest scientist – is the fact that after following the “prescriptions” in God’s workbook (“The Holy Bible”) I have received the same sort of supernatural insights.  I have also experienced, observed or participated in many of the types of miracles recorded in that Book, including hearing God’s voice.  Note that God is patient with the “Honest Agnostic”, and will show seekers the truth.  But He will turn away from “Dishonest Agnostics” who choose to reject the truth God knows they have seen.  

There are those equipped to do great deeds in the world without God’s help:  I am not one of them.  I abandoned that attempt 22 years ago, and must give credit for unexpected opportunities and accomplishments since then to the Lord I serve.  I invite all others whose dreams exceed your grasp, and who do not insist on going forward alone, to accept adoption as the son (or daughter) of a Loving God.  

I expect and intend to walk on the surface of the Moon.  This discussion will not enhance my reputation with nonbelievers, but I do not think that many of them will be attracted to the radical adventures I advocate.  As Apollo 8 appeared from behind the Moon, on Christmas Eve, 1968, the crew read the Creation story from Genesis to the world.  A leather bound Bible rests on the Moon from another crew.  One crew celebrated Holy Communion on the lunar surface.   It takes a special mindset to actually GO where none have gone before.  Isaac Asimov – a self proclaimed “Humanist” nonbeliever - envisioned the wonders of space, but was unwilling to leave Earth’s surface in an airplane.  As a (mediocre) mountaineer I know what it takes to combine an understanding of your equipment with faith and step off a rock face into a free rappel.  Similar understanding and faith are required to trust your rockets and life support systems far from your home planet.

I particularly invite those who have chosen to walk as I have to Dream BIG!  To reach even beyond my intentions and expect to walk on other worlds!  We need but a fraction of the wisdom granted to the Biblical Scholar, Sir Isaac Newton to accomplish the flights I have outlined.  Step by step, the necessary pieces are coming together.  For those with the required faith, these adventures will become a reality.  

Richard P. Speck   12/24/2007      

[tnphysics]

What are some performance numbers (including cost!) for your rockets?

Also, what is the mission profile in detail?

[rpspeck]

As our "Deep Space" systems are customized, and are launched to LEO on commercial vehicles, the possibilities are numerous.  Our components include a nearly operational Lunar “HTS” (Human Transport System) which can Either take an astronaut to the Moon's surface, or back to LLO.  (Two are needed for the round trip).  With 40 pound empty weight, and 300 pound fuel capacity,  the HTS can handle 300 pounds of astronaut in a pressure suit.  The pair required for a Moon walker will total 1280 pounds in initial Low Lunar Orbit – including the suited astronaut.  Add 150 pounds for Lunar escape and Earth transfer for the astronaut (his habitat and reentry system are listed separately below).  That combination will require some 6,600 pounds (3,000 kg) in LEO with the fuel for lunar transfer and injection. 

A minimum mass Earth reentry system (like the GE “Moose”, with improved and rigid heat shield) will add about 1100 pounds in LEO.  Doubling that number to allow for a tent like inflated habitat pushes the total to 8,800 pounds (4,000 kg) in LEO to accomplish a manned lunar landing.   

Since this is no strain for commercial launch vehicles, there is room for “weight growth” while maintaining feasible costs. ($30 -$50 Million?) Validating these systems in space will be a demanding process and involve up front $10 million in launch costs.  But there is actually very little technical risk in this plan, since the commercial launch systems exist and the deep space systems do also.  There is the very significant Human Risk, since the Lunar Lander may not have been tested on the Moon (equaling the Apollo 11 situation).  On the other hand, a preliminary landing of the HTS is feasible within the listed funding. 

The traveler in this case would have “austere” accommodations, like those for Steve Fossett's  “Round the World” balloon flight.  (No flush Toilet!)

[rpspeck]

Google Lunar Communications Summary

We have been working on the communications problem since we received the SETI Institute information at the February 21, 2008 “Kick Off”.  The 42 presently installed antennas at SETI should provide about 1000 square meters of signal capture area (+51 dBi at 1200 MHz, assuming 80% capture efficiency). (The eventual array is planned to produce almost ten times this signal capture).  The estimated “Gigabyte” of information required for the prize can be sent at reduced speed.  Using 1000 seconds for this transmission gives about 10 Million bits per second rate including error correction data. Using BPSK modulation with Reed Solomon (255, 223) plus R-1/2, K=7 Viterbi error correction reduces Eb/No to 2x for an excellent Bit Error Rate (10 exp -7).

As discussed previously, the “Oversize” nature of the SETI antenna array gives an advantage over a single large antenna (or close spaced array) by reducing the radio noise temperature for signals from the Moon.  This comes at the cost of introducing “sidelobes” which are the mathematical equivalents of “Aliases” in sampled signal processing.  (The “esoteric” part of the prior discussion mentioned that widely spaced radio antennas in an array have the same mathematical effect as widely spaced samples (beyond the Nyquist Criteria) in signal processing.  The “Aliases” produced in signal processing are like the “side lobes” in antenna theory.  Regularly spaced samples produce discrete aliases, often related to harmonics of the desired signal.  The same is true of the spaced antennas.  Both can be moved to pseudo random spacing which increases the number of aliases, but decreases their amplitude.)  The sidelobes and  the increased  resolution have major impact on the use of such arrays in Radio Astronomy.  To receive communication from the Moon, such an array, with proper phasing of its receivers, provides all the signal of a 40 meter diameter antenna, with a lower noise level than that huge unit would provide! 

Our estimate of a 20 to 30 K noise temperature should be well above the floor the cryo-cooled receivers in the SETI system should produce, and includes a portion of the 213K Lunar Radio Noise Emission.  With systems noise temperature below 28K, No is (4 exp -22) Joules  and Eb/No = 2.0 is achieved with 8 exp -22 Joules/bit received power.  Combining this with the 10^8 bps rate assumed above produces a minimum of 8 exp -15 Watts received power, or 8 exp -18 Watts/m^2 received for this antenna array.  Using 400,000 km to the Moon = 4 exp 8 meters, 4xPixR^2 equals 2 exp 18 m^2.  Thus only 16 Watts Isotropic ERP is required from the Moon to achieve reliable wideband communication!  This would be increased to 160 Watts ERP if a single, 40 meter diameter receiving parabola were used (with the higher noise temperature that results), and would increase to 16,000 watts if a single, 1.2 meter receiving parabola were used. 

The Lunar Lander could produce this wideband communication with a single Watt of transmitter power if a thin, lightweight transmitting antenna 14 inches square (12 dBi) were aimed at the Earth (at 1200 MHz). This transmitting array would have a beam width of 40 degrees,  so aiming would not be very critical.  But keep in mind that if the services of SETI were not secured (including payment for the ½ of the data capture not offered free), the power requirements would be much larger!  The 1.2 meter diameter antenna mentioned above would need 1000 Watts transmitter power, continued for 20 minutes, even with this transmitting antenna.   Any antenna or array  more than ten times this area (still requiring 100 Watts transmitter power on the Moon) would be a major development and construction project.  A few Ham (Amateur Radio) operators have built such systems for “Moon Bounce” (EME) communications, and might be induced to cooperate if a suitable communications frequency were selected.