Author Topic: Google Sponsors Lunar X PRIZE to Create a Space Race for a New Generation (Read 84794 times)

meiza · « **on:** 09/13/2007 05:20 pm »

http://www.xprize.org/lunar/press-release/google-sponsors-lunar-x-prize-to-create-a-space-race-for-a-new-generation

Snippet:

30 Million Purse to be Awarded to Winners

SANTA MONICA, Calif., September 13, 2007 – The X PRIZE Foundation and Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) today announced the Google Lunar X PRIZE, a robotic race to the Moon to win a remarkable $30 million prize purse. Private companies from around the world will compete to land a privately funded robotic rover on the Moon that is capable of completing several mission objectives, including roaming the lunar surface for at least 500 meters and sending video, images and data back to the Earth.

stockman · « **Reply #1 on:** 09/13/2007 05:23 pm »

Well thats disappointing. Hardly what I would call Pardign shifting... I would have been more impressed with an orbital MANNED race than a lunar robot. Quite frankly I find this disappointing news...

hyper_snyper · « **Reply #2 on:** 09/13/2007 05:29 pm »

Yeah, I can't say I'm too thrilled. Make no mistake, it will be cool to watch but it won't do anything to the industry like the first XPrize did. Think about it, a contestant will concentrate on building the lander/rover then buy a ride on an already existing rocket. What exactly will that accomplish?

Danderman · « **Reply #3 on:** 09/13/2007 05:35 pm »

I have to give the prize organizers some credit - they do have a deadline, which is always good, but they also have an extension to the deadline at a lower funding level. When I was running the CATS Prize, we had a deadline, but many of the contestants believed that the deadline would be extended, and so they didn't believe us when we told them that it was fixed. Several competitors told us that if we had extended the deadline by a month, they would have launched rockets into space. None of them ever actually launched, though.

todd5ski · « **Reply #4 on:** 09/13/2007 05:36 pm »

Quote

stockman - 13/9/2007 12:23 PM

Well thats disappointing. Hardly what I would call Pardign shifting... I would have been more impressed with an orbital MANNED race than a lunar robot. Quite frankly I find this disappointing news...

You have to crawl before you can walk man.

The only other space related competition was to get a vehichle into space on a suborbital mission. That required so much money and technical know-how that only one of the teams actually came close to it and actually won it by investing over $20 million to win 1/2 of the investment back and in the process hopefully jump start an industry. Getting anything to the moon will require 15 times the amount of fuel/speed.

Besides, think of the public sector involvement. What better way to reinvigorate the general public than to have a little rover with a camera sending back video as the rover approaches Tranquility Base..... Maybe even have the rover with a robotic arm to lift the fallen American Flag and place it in a holster built into the rover itself so it will forever more be standing....

Well that's what I would propose if I were designing a mission. hehe

meiza · « **Reply #5 on:** 09/13/2007 05:37 pm »

With only 5 years time, some drastic hardware developments would need to be done. First of all, an existing rocket would have to be used for launch from earth. I don't know what the rules say about this. The 20 million prize money (for the winner) then is quite small for that. Tell me again about those Russian sub launched missiles...

Antares · « **Reply #6 on:** 09/13/2007 05:38 pm »

Anything that's done in the private sector in space beyond GSO comsats and LEO photosats is a paradigm shift. Incremental changes create something to build on. Apollo taught us that radical changes can have no coattails. 10's of $M to orbit people or 10's of $B to put people on Mars and back would have been great too. But vision of a sustained human presence in space should not be disappointed.

vt_hokie · « **Reply #7 on:** 09/13/2007 05:38 pm »

I think it'll be pretty near impossible to do that for $30 million or less.

Danderman · « **Reply #8 on:** 09/13/2007 05:41 pm »

Quote

vt_hokie - 13/9/2007 10:38 AM I think it'll be pretty near impossible to do that for $30 million or less.

Where is the requirement that spending on the mission must be constrained to $30 million? What if a competitor uses secondary markets to make up any costs over $30 million?

stockman · « **Reply #9 on:** 09/13/2007 05:41 pm »

Quote

todd5ski - 13/9/2007 1:36 PM

Quote
stockman - 13/9/2007 12:23 PM

Well thats disappointing. Hardly what I would call Pardign shifting... I would have been more impressed with an orbital MANNED race than a lunar robot. Quite frankly I find this disappointing news...

You have to crawl before you can walk man.

The only other space related competition was to get a vehichle into space on a suborbital mission. That required so much money and technical know-how that only one of the teams actually came close to it and actually won it by investing over $20 million to win 1/2 of the investment back and in the process hopefully jump start an industry. Getting anything to the moon will require 15 times the amount of fuel/speed.

Besides, think of the public sector involvement. What better way to reinvigorate the general public than to have a little rover with a camera sending back video as the rover approaches Tranquility Base..... Maybe even have the rover with a robotic arm to lift the fallen American Flag and place it in a holster built into the rover itself so it will forever more be standing....

Don't get me wrong, I hope it does exactly what you say however I just don't see it inspiring anyone in the general public... Having a manned private vehicle make orbit would probably get a lot of attention especially when sold as Not being done by NASA... putting a robot on the moon to take a few pictures will make the front page (maybe) for a day and then no one will care except those of us intimately involved and interested already.

you want an inspiring race??? get a consortium (google, microsoft etc) and offer 100m to put a manned reusable ship in orbit in 5 years. To me.. that would be impressive.

either way, I do wish anyone particpating the best of luck and I will watch as it unfolds as well, I just don't think it will be of any interest to the general populace. From that perspective I am disappointed.

Danderman · « **Reply #10 on:** 09/13/2007 05:42 pm »

Quote

meiza - 13/9/2007 10:37 AM With only 5 years time, some drastic hardware developments would need to be done. First of all, an existing rocket would have to be used for launch from earth. I don't know what the rules say about this. The 20 million prize money (for the winner) then is quite small for that. Tell me again about those Russian sub launched missiles...

Are you sure about your assumptions?

Antares · « **Reply #11 on:** 09/13/2007 05:43 pm »

In the first X Prize, it cost at least $25M (plus all of the $ spent by non-winners) to win $10M, but now we have Virgin Galactic and a whole bunch of hardware start-ups. How much capital is $30M going to bring?

Todd, love the idea of landing near Tranquility Base. Prove the naysayers wrong once and for all. However, precision landing might be a costly luxury.

todd5ski · « **Reply #12 on:** 09/13/2007 05:46 pm »

Quote

Antares - 13/9/2007 12:43 PM

In the first X Prize, it cost at least $25M (plus all of the $ spent by non-winners) to win $10M, but now we have Virgin Galactic and a whole bunch of hardware start-ups. How much capital is $30M going to bring?

Todd, love the idea of landing near Tranquility Base. Prove the naysayers wrong once and for all. However, precision landing might be a costly luxury.

True it would be costly... Oh well. heh

MKremer · « **Reply #13 on:** 09/13/2007 05:51 pm »

I don't consider that disappointing at all. This is not only incentive for privateers to develop their own landing, deployment, and robotic hardware, but means of remote control (real time with delay, programmed, or even AI-based). Not to mention what type of unique landing craft designs, propulsion systems, and rover/exploration hardware and electronics might be created.
And who knows if some original and radical hardware could end up being successful?

IMO, future 'manned' solar system exploration will be done with heavy emphasis on robotic systems for initial scouting and pathfinding (and 'grunt work' when necessary), both for safety and to allow the human part of the missions to allocate their resources and intelligence where it's most appropriate to provide the best overall benefits.

meiza · « **Reply #14 on:** 09/13/2007 05:56 pm »

Okay, let's assume a 8.5 million dollar Falcon Ie launch, say it places 800 kg to LEO. From there we have 6 km/s to the lunar surface.
Let's use two 3 km/s stages, both having an ISP of 320 s, meaning a mass ratio of 2.55. We can round off to 2.67 or 8/3 to account for tank and thruster mass, and get the payload mass which is 3/8*3/8*800 kg ~= 130 kg.

MKremer · « **Reply #15 on:** 09/13/2007 06:00 pm »

Quote

vt_hokie - 13/9/2007 12:38 PM

I think it'll be pretty near impossible to do that for $30 million or less.

Agreed, but to look back on most major "First-to-do"/technical achievement prizes, the amount of the prize money itself is much less important to any entrants than actually *winning* (and for most entrants the costs usually overwhelm the prize amount anyway).

bad_astra · « **Reply #16 on:** 09/13/2007 06:06 pm »

I can't see what kind of a market that this prize is hoping to foster.

Unless there is sponsorship, no one's going to make money off of this. If it was doable even near that price, AMSAT probably would have had a Lunar OSCAR by now.

I doubt any serious teams will even bother trying. Maybe X-Prize can get that Discraft guy to sign up again.

hyper_snyper · « **Reply #17 on:** 09/13/2007 06:15 pm »

Quote

meiza - 13/9/2007 1:56 PM

Okay, let's assume a 8.5 million dollar Falcon Ie launch, say it places 800 kg to LEO. From there we have 6 km/s to the lunar surface.
Let's use two 3 km/s stages, both having an ISP of 320 s, meaning a mass ratio of 2.55. We can round off to 2.67 or 8/3 to account for tank and thruster mass, and get the payload mass which is 3/8*3/8*800 kg ~= 130 kg.

That would be quite the accomplishment. Then again the Sojourner rover was what again? Under 15 kg?

Oh man, watch the announcement video on XPrize.org.

For a private effort, they seem to love using Constellation footage. :laugh:

MKremer · « **Reply #18 on:** 09/13/2007 06:27 pm »

Quote

bad_astra - 13/9/2007 1:06 PM

I can't see what kind of a market that this prize is hoping to foster.

Right off the top of my head I can think of a rather large one - a large stepping stone to develop and start perfecting cost-effective commercial access (for other than the huge govt-funded mega-corp's) to the moon and asteroids.

AnimatorRob · « **Reply #19 on:** 09/13/2007 06:43 pm »

I can see if NASA has interest in commercial resupply of the moon base, a few million/billionaires might fund a team with the hope of developing the necessary capabilities. Like SS1 begot SS2 , a small ( tiny ) lunar lander/rover could lead to a larger cargo lander.

As far as commercial manned orbital competition, don't forget Bigelow's America's Space Prize.