Lunar outpost (NASA)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Lunar outpost will be an inhabited facility on the surface of the Moon which NASA currently plans to construct over the five years between 2019 and 2024. On December 4, 2006, NASA announced the conclusion of its Global Exploration Strategy and Lunar Architecture Study.[1] The Lunar Architecture Study's purpose was to "define a series of lunar missions constituting NASA's Lunar campaign to fulfill the Lunar Exploration elements" of the Vision for Space Exploration.[2] What resulted was a basic plan for a lunar outpost near one of the poles of the Moon, which would permanently house astronauts in six-month shifts, similar to the crew rotation aboard the International Space Station.
Contents |
[edit] Reference architecture
A reference architecture has been established for this outpost, based on a location on the rim of the Shackleton crater, located in the immense South Pole-Aitken basin, near the Moon's south pole. At a presentation on December 4, 2006, Doug Cooke (Deputy Associate Administrator, NASA Exploration Systems Mission Directorate) described an area "that is ... sunlit ... 75 to 80 percent of the time, and it is adjacent to a permanently dark region in which there are potentially volatiles that we can extract and use. ... This sunlit area is about the size of the Washington Mall."[3] (approximately 1.25 km²).
Other locations considered for possible lunar outposts include the rim of Peary crater near the lunar north pole and the Malapert Mountain region on the rim of Malapert crater.
The current outpost design includes:
- habitation modules
- solar power units
- unpressurized rovers
- In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) unit
- surface mobility carrier
The outpost would be supplied by a mixed crew and cargo Altair lander, capable of bringing four astronauts and a payload of 6 tons to the Moon's surface.
As currently planned, an incremental buildup would begin with four-person crews making several seven-day visits to the moon until their power supplies, rovers and living quarters were operational. The first mission would begin by 2020. This would be followed by 180-day missions to prepare for journeys to Mars.
[edit] Justification
NASA proposes six "Lunar exploration themes" to answer the question "Why should we return to the Moon?"[4]
- Human Civilization: Extend human presence to the Moon to enable eventual settlement.
- Scientific Knowledge: Pursue scientific activities that address fundamental questions about the history of Earth, the solar system and the universe - and about our place in them.
- Exploration Preparation: Test technologies, systems, flight operations and exploration techniques to reduce the risks and increase the productivity of future missions to Mars and beyond.
- Global Partnerships: Provide a challenging, shared and peaceful activity that unites nations in pursuit of common objectives.
- Economic Expansion: Expand Earth's economic sphere, and conduct lunar activities with benefits to life on the home planet.
- Public Engagement: Use a lively space exploration program to engage the public, encourage students and help develop the high-technology workforce that will be required to address the challenges of tomorrow.
[edit] Criticism
NASA's plans have not gone uncriticized. Jeff Foust, writing for The Space Review, called the six themes that NASA released too "broad" and the explanations supporting them "shallow." He also argues that a Moon base is a poor use of resources, since "science can be done for far less money by robotic missions—which also don’t put human lives at risk."[5] The Los Angeles Times seconded that in an editorial, saying "Manned moon flight may appeal to baby boomers, but it makes little scientific sense for most space missions these days. Robots can now perform, or be developed to perform, most of the tasks people would do at a moon station." [6]
Columnist Gregg Easterbrook has criticized the plans as a poor use of resources. He writes that
Although, of course, the base could yield a great discovery, its scientific value is likely to be small while its price is extremely high. Worse, moon-base nonsense may for decades divert NASA resources from the agency's legitimate missions, draining funding from real needs in order to construct human history's silliest white elephant. [7]
According to Easterbrook, the billions of dollars that a lunar colony might cost should instead be devoted to exploring the solar system with space probes; space observatories; and protecting the Earth from Near-Earth asteroids.
[edit] See also
- Lunar Architecture (NASA)
- Exploration Systems Architecture Study
- Project Constellation
- Vision for Space Exploration
- Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter
- Colonization of the Moon
[edit] References
- ^ "NASA Unveils Global Exploration Strategy and Lunar Architecture", 2006-12-04. Retrieved on 2007-01-12.
- ^ Dale, Shana (2006-12-04). Exploration Strategy and Architecture. NASA. Retrieved on 2007-01-12.
- ^ Microsoft Word - lunar_architecture.DOC
- ^ "Why The Moon?". Dec. 4, 2006
- ^ Jeff Foust. "Moonbase Why". The Space Review. Dec. 11, 2006
- ^ "Don't colonize the moon". Los Angeles Times. Dec. 10, 2006
- ^ Gregg Easterbrook. "Moon Baseless: NASA can't explain why we need a lunar colony". Slate. Dec. 8, 2006.
[edit] External links
- Exploration strategy and architecture (PDF).
- Lunar outpost trailer (NASA)
- Nasa proposes lunar outposts
- Why the Moon?
- lunar architecture
|
||||||||||||||||
