Author Topic: Google Sponsors Lunar X PRIZE to Create a Space Race for a New Generation (Read 84792 times)

tnphysics · « **Reply #40 on:** 09/13/2007 10:39 pm »

Use a moble lander. It shoud be as fast as the lunar rover. And at least 2 people should land.

Bill White · « **Reply #41 on:** 09/13/2007 10:51 pm »

Quote

bad_astra - 13/9/2007 3:30 PM

Quote
OV-106 - 13/9/2007 3:17 PM

Wow, I am surprised....and a bit disappointed....in the negative attitudes. This place used to be a welcome retreat from the normal "blogosphere" where everyone is a critic and say's it can't be done, acmchair quaterbacking 101.

I think a lot can be done. I'm the last person you'd call a cynic. I'm sure some uni or private group could get a vehicle with rover developed and landed on the moon. But not for $20 million.

Google has left the door open for additional sponsors and I see no reason why a team couldn't solicit sponsorship money to supplement their program.

Is this an American only prize?

If not, funds could be raised using national pride for overseas efforts. A South Asian cell phone company for example (or Japanese company) could easily justify a $5 million or $10 million sponsorship of an Indian or Japanese or South Korean effort to win the prize. Cobble a few of those together and add in the prize money and your budget gets much bigger, fast.

Larry Ellison (of Oracle) spent almost $200 million earlier this year NOT winning the America's Cup.

halkey · « **Reply #42 on:** 09/13/2007 11:24 pm »

With beamed propulsion being a relatively new technological development that could use a lot more development, I'd like to see a prize which would award the first team to lift a small payload into suborbital space using a ground-based power plant. I'd like to see technology such these developed:

http://news.rpi.edu/update.do?artcenterkey=1221&setappvar=page(1)

http://monolith.caltech.edu/Papers/Kare_Parkin_ISBEP-4.pdf

Such a prize could lead to profitable technology.

Michael Z Freeman · « **Reply #43 on:** 09/13/2007 11:34 pm »

This really is very good news. With Richard Branson and Virgin Galactic already going ahead with the Spaceport in New Mexico, partly helped by X-Prize. Now NASA are running "You could work on the Moon" adverts. The UK has just announced via a working group that British astronauts will be funded. I wonder if the X-Prize / Google announcement was timed to go along with the recent release of Google Sky ?

Extraordinary times. My current Heinlein reading "The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress" goes along very well with this !

DJ Barney

nacnud · « **Reply #44 on:** 09/13/2007 11:58 pm »

It's a bit early to say UK astronauts will be funded, it's only a suggestion being put forwards by a study group to a non government body.

Michael Z Freeman · « **Reply #45 on:** 09/14/2007 12:08 am »

True, I should have said "the group has recommended that funding be made available", but it looks like the ball is rolling now. I have already found out via the BNSC that a long term policy on no British astronauts (since the Apollo days apparently) has been overturned. That has got to be a major shift. Discussion here.

DJ Barney

Danderman · « **Reply #46 on:** 09/14/2007 12:36 am »

This is very reminiscent of the original X Prize announcement, with some people claiming that no one could win the prize, and others claiming that lots of teams would be in position to win. My personal feeling is that at least one team will at least come close to winning, and if they do win those that claim now that its impossible will transmogrify their opinion to "so, they landed a rover on the Moon, anyone could do that".

Namechange User · « **Reply #47 on:** 09/14/2007 12:55 am »

Quote

bad_astra - 13/9/2007 5:11 PM

There's no private business to be done on the moon right now. Why should private companies bother to prospect it when they know several governments are about to do it for them.

See, that's what I have an issue with. You say above you are not a person that is negative about it but by this statement here you are saying essentially "why bother"

History has proven time and time again that people who say this are consistently wrong.

As for the rest, $12 million is a lot of money for really making a "system of sytems", none of which require radical technolicigal deevelopment. The "shift" and frankly the more important and overiding goal of this competition which I think everyone is missing, is not if a private company can do it but if a private company can do it at relatively low cost. That in my opinion will be the real benefit of this prize. If that can happen, which I think it can, will open up the frontier to other companies as well as force government to accept it can truely do a lot more for the same amount of money.

HIP2BSQRE · « **Reply #48 on:** 09/14/2007 01:24 am »

Guess what---once you land a rover what else might you land on the moon very cheaply? You might have all the things for a lunar base just waiting for the astronuats to set up shop! Additionaly, futher development of the rocket could be used to bring logistics supplies to the base?

One last thing---how many people have followed the mars rover over the last 2+years? Would people pay $x to "drive" a real life rover on the moon for x seconds? People would follow the explots of "Microsoft/Google Moon Rover"!

sammie · « **Reply #49 on:** 09/14/2007 01:26 am »

There is a big difference between the first X-prize and this Moon X-prize. There is a sizeable sub-orbital tourist market for the ones that can get there first, and the X-prize was a great way of getting a head start. Now with this moon prize, there is less of well defined market at the end of the development process.

This is quite important, winning the sub-orbital X-prize can be seen as an investment in getting into the sub-orbital tourist market. The Moon Xprize doesn't feature such a market, it will thus be harder to get investors on board, at least ones with the intention to make a profit

mr.columbus · « **Reply #50 on:** 09/14/2007 08:00 am »

Quote

GW_Simulations - 13/9/2007 6:27 PM

I'm not sure of costs, but I think that should be profitable. I'm allowing about 20 million dollars for launch (not sure if this is right, but I seem to remember reading that Dnepr launches cost about $13 million (I could be wrong), and assuming that the upper stage wouldn't cost as much as the carrier rocket). Not much money would be left for the spacecraft. I'm allowing about $3m, assuming everything can be built at the cheapest price, and the design kept really simple. One of the bonust prizes would be required to make sure the venture is profitable.

The launch of Dnepr is definetely more costly than 13 million USD - especially with current exchange rates. But you forget that you don't need to have a dedicated launcher for your payload, you could ride as a secondary payload on a couple of rockets including Rockot, Dnepr, Soyuz etc. It depends on the LEO mass of your payload on how much you would need to pay. For instance, if you can get your payload (rover, avionics, transmitter for base station, descent stage, EDS stage) to be under 500 kg, you will find launch opportunities that cost you between 5-8 million USD (depending on the primary payloads, exchange rates and timing).

P.S. this XPrize is geared towards university teams, no private company will touch it (no money to be made). You can build a complete package for a rather small sum, test it etc. by using commercially available components. Other rovers like Pathfinder do not compare well with what teams for this XPrize will come up - they use custom made components, have high standards for reliability, require the use and functioning of scientific instruments and extensive testing + a profit for the company that actually built the rover.

mr.columbus · « **Reply #51 on:** 09/14/2007 08:07 am »

Quote

HIP2BSQRE - 13/9/2007 9:24 PM

Guess what---once you land a rover what else might you land on the moon very cheaply? You might have all the things for a lunar base just waiting for the astronuats to set up shop! Additionaly, futher development of the rocket could be used to bring logistics supplies to the base?

One last thing---how many people have followed the mars rover over the last 2+years? Would people pay $x to "drive" a real life rover on the moon for x seconds? People would follow the explots of "Microsoft/Google Moon Rover"!

1. The strategy to win this XPrize is to build a minimum weight package in order to cut costs. The winning team might put an actual payload (rover and base station) on the lunar surface with less than 30 kg. And the launch of this mission would still cost several million USDs. With 30kg increments, it would be rather problematic to build a lunar base.

2. People might pay to drive a river on the lunar surface. The problem is, it's real tricky to get your rover hibernating through the lunar night. So the "common" small and simple rover will probably not live longer than 14 days. Even if you charge 50 dollars for 5 minutes driving, you will earn less than 200,000 USD in that period (assuming there are no gaps between the 5 minute drives). In order to recoup a 20 million investment, you would need 400,000 people to be willing to come up with 50 USD each for 5 minute drives and a rover that is able to survive approximately 4-5 years on the lunar surface...

bad_astra · « **Reply #52 on:** 09/14/2007 02:55 pm »

Quote

OV-106 - 13/9/2007 7:55 PM

Quote
bad_astra - 13/9/2007 5:11 PM

There's no private business to be done on the moon right now. Why should private companies bother to prospect it when they know several governments are about to do it for them.

See, that's what I have an issue with. You say above you are not a person that is negative about it but by this statement here you are saying essentially "why bother"

In this case, yes. There isn't enough money, not enough time, not enough reason.

I was all for the CATS prize, X-Prize, elevator contest, regolith challange, LLC etc, just not this one. I think X-Prize foundation would have helped themselves out much better by aligning with the V-Prize.

wannamoonbase · « **Reply #53 on:** 09/15/2007 03:33 am »

At first I was disappointed with the announcement. But then I thought about the fact that there are no humans needed to fly here and so far I haven't seen anything saying that the rover needs to be minimum size.

I would approach it as a secondary payload to minimize launch costs and make the rover as small as possible and still make the 500 meters in one lunar daylight period. (its hard to imagine a solar power vehicle surviving a cold lunar night but perhaps its possible, I don't know if anyone has tested it, but maybe thats on technology that would be found)

Navigating and Landing the payload softly is the hardest part in this challenge and its pretty hard.

I think there will be several teams in position to win this prize and perhaps the bonus money. Universities world wide could form groups with lots of students doing grunt work and programming, using Masters and PHD students to do some heavy lifting. Many schools will want to wave the flag of winning the Google X-Prize.

I can also easily see SpaceX just throwing money and a launch vehicle at it and not to make the money.

SpaceDev maybe but being publicly traded would make it tougher.

Then there is the billionaire benefactor that just does it for kicks.

Also, I think a group like a low cost group of Indian engineers could be a series threat.

This one is going to be fun. In many ways its harder than the first X-Prize and in some ways easier.

And yes a non goverment funded lunar rover will be a big deal and will spur development, no question.

A_M_Swallow · « **Reply #54 on:** 09/15/2007 05:04 am »

Quote

wannamoonbase - 15/9/2007 4:33 AM
{snip}

Navigating and Landing the payload softly is the hardest part in this challenge and its pretty hard.
{snip}

And nearly size independent.

a) Lunar X prize
Say 444 kg in LEO landing 300 kg on Moon. This mass includes the lander.

b) Use a larger rocket and scale up the Lunar Lander.
4444 kg in LEO landing 3000 kg on Moon. Say half to be the final payload.

c) Use an EELV
25mT in LEO landing 17mT on Moon.

Someone may wish to have a 1.5 tonne explorer running around the Moon. There are lots of minerals to find.

When 8mT of cargo can be delivered ask about transporting parts of the Lunar Base. A commercial company may be interested in delivering mining and refining equipment to the Moon. The mining company can then try selling construction materials such as aluminium bars to the owner of the Moon Base.

This X Prize will have taught lowish cost transfer, so say $400 million to deliver 17 / 2 mT = 8.5mT
$400,000,000 / 8,000 kg = $50,000/kg on the Moon. ($22,700/lb)

bad_astra · « **Reply #55 on:** 09/15/2007 05:59 am »

If you get get a corporate sponsored rover up close to one of the Apollo landing sites to take pictures.. THAT would get people's interest.

mr.columbus · « **Reply #56 on:** 09/15/2007 08:30 am »

Quote

wannamoonbase - 14/9/2007 11:33 PM

I would approach it as a secondary payload to minimize launch costs and make the rover as small as possible and still make the 500 meters in one lunar daylight period. (its hard to imagine a solar power vehicle surviving a cold lunar night but perhaps its possible, I don't know if anyone has tested it, but maybe thats on technology that would be found)

Agreed.

Quote

Navigating and Landing the payload softly is the hardest part in this challenge and its pretty hard.

There are many other things that are problematic and risky. To be honest, the hardest part will be to find someone to finance the launch costs...

Quote

I think there will be several teams in position to win this prize and perhaps the bonus money. Universities world wide could form groups with lots of students doing grunt work and programming, using Masters and PHD students to do some heavy lifting. Many schools will want to wave the flag of winning the Google X-Prize.

Agreed. I think this prize is nearly exclusivity geared at universities, no private company has funds to waste for a prize that could be very easily won by someone else before them - so the risk is not worth the investment. University groups on the other hand can of course work on this task and build hardware on basically non-existing budgets - the hard part is to get someone to pay them a couple of millions for launching their project.

Quote

I can also easily see SpaceX just throwing money and a launch vehicle at it and not to make the money. SpaceDev maybe but being publicly traded would make it tougher. Then there is the billionaire benefactor that just does it for kicks. Also, I think a group like a low cost group of Indian engineers could be a series threat.

As mentioned above, professionals will not bother working on this Prize. They would have burned through the potential Prize money in the development phase already (40-50 engineers working on a proposal for 12 months using the facilities of the relevant company (for instance SpaceX) would come to a prize tag of up to 10 million USD).

docmordrid · « **Reply #57 on:** 09/15/2007 08:35 am »

Don't forget the requirement for HD video capability, which makes financial participation by the Discovery Channel or some other network a natural. I can imagine the runup ads....

mr.columbus · « **Reply #58 on:** 09/15/2007 08:40 am »

Quote

A_M_Swallow - 15/9/2007 1:04 AM

a) Lunar X prize
Say 444 kg in LEO landing 300 kg on Moon. This mass includes the lander.

b) Use a larger rocket and scale up the Lunar Lander.
4444 kg in LEO landing 3000 kg on Moon. Say half to be the final payload.

c) Use an EELV
25mT in LEO landing 17mT on Moon.

Unfortunately, for such LEO mass/payload efficiencies you need a propulsion system with an ISP of more than 2000. So you would need to wait for a high thrust implementation of concepts such as VASIMR...

To give you some references on large payloads on their LEO mass/payload to the moon efficiencies - EADS calculated a 1:9 ratio for Ariane 5 ECA (23 tons into LEO; 10 tons into GTO; 2.6 tons of effective cargo on the lunar surface.

A smaller robotic mission put together on a shoestring budget cannot aim of course to the performance of an Ariane 5. I have calculated one scenario above, that yielded a mass/payload ratio of about 1:20. Your 444 kg LEO mass would give you an effective payload mass of approximately 20-25 kg on the lunar surface (still enough for a transmitter on the base and a small rover)

CommercialSpaceFan · « **Reply #59 on:** 09/15/2007 12:00 pm »

Thank you to the X-prize foundation!! This is very exciting. What a great way to boost excitement among the next generation of engineers and entrepreneurs (assuming university entrants)! For smaller companies and even the larger launch companies this is a great way to improve name recognition among the general public. I for one truly wish everyone competing a lot of luck. Question, who are the likely competitors?