1oldman2
- 1,450
- 1,210
This could be useful.
http://hdl.handle.net/2060/20150016539
http://hdl.handle.net/2060/20150016539
LEO? I guess you mean a low lunar orbit (LLO).Al_ said:So yes, as you say, two vehicles. They dock in LEO, and as they transfer the payload they also transfer some Lunar fuel to the re-entry module.
With centuries of tools used to make better tools we established a complex network where you need parts from hundreds of companies to build anything. That won't work on Moon.Al_ said:How did we start off making things on Earth without the original Uber-Tool that makes all the others?
Al_ said:In the oxygen poor environment on the Moon, we know that some iron exists as ore, and some as pure iron or nickel iron. Metoerites, for example. Sweep a magnet over the lunar dust and it will jump out of the ground for you.
Al_ said:Why is there a feeling that "we've done the Moon, and it's barren"? A hang-over from Apollo? Like writing off Earth because you landed in the Pacific and found just clear salt water, and in the Sahara and found just sand.
In the last several years other space agencies sent probes to the Moon, with new technology they looked in new places, and they re-wrote the book. Several more probes by NASA and others, and we now have a big book of questions, mostly starting with "How much of this stuff is there?"
Well, the Moon is big. There's probably a lot.
Whilst that is probably true, we make a lot of use of totally non-organic based chemicals.Drakkith said:Well, many of the chemicals and materials we use here on Earth are not located on the Moon for the simple reason that life has never existed there.
Doh! I missed a trick here. I meant LEO, but you point out a useful saving too.mfb said:LEO? I guess you mean a low lunar orbit (LLO).
You can replace the Lunar ascent/descend module with the space elevator, that also lowers delta_v requirements for the Moon/Earth transfer.
I agree with u broDrakkith said:I seriously doubt that.
Well, many of the chemicals and materials we use here on Earth are not located on the Moon for the simple reason that life has never existed there.
Ok broAl_ said:Can you provide some evidence for this statement?In the oxygen poor environment on the Moon, we know that some iron exists as ore, and some as pure iron or nickel iron. Metoerites, for example. Sweep a magnet over the lunar dust and it will jump out of the ground for you.Why is there a feeling that "we've done the Moon, and it's barren"? A hang-over from Apollo? Like writing off Earth because you landed in the Pacific and found just clear salt water, and in the Sahara and found just sand.
In the last several years other space agencies sent probes to the Moon, with new technology they looked in new places, and they re-wrote the book. Several more probes by NASA and others, and we now have a big book of questions, mostly starting with "How much of this stuff is there?"
Well, the Moon is big. There's probably a lot.Not autonomous, but remotely controlled.
And "industry" makes it sound big. You can start with a unit that makes a few gallons of fuel a month.
Then add a rover that sweeps a magnet along the surface collecting iron.
A robotic concentrating mirror to fuse dirt.
A basalt fibre spinner.
etcBut - going up from Earth is the most expensive step, and there's no absolute need for it in this cycle.
All you need to drop down is the precious metal, so all your expensive kit can stay up.
The vehicle at the top end of the tether is in lunostationary orbit. That involves significant KE (the equivalent to the work done getting it there - but you know that). I can't think of a system that would give the vehicle more velocity for a given amount of work done. How would the bolus (bolas?) function? A winch on the surface? That would be more efficient than a rocket but how much extra KE would you get? All these things are so much easier to arrange on the Moon. No weather and very few objects to run into - plus easier engineering.Al_ said:maybe a bolus would be more use because it imparts a velocity on leaving the space end?
Interestingly, regolith would be very well suited to surface mining (more like ploughing) with various methods of separating the various component parts. Separation by magnetisation, by size, by density. Lack of atmosphere would mean dealing with the dust could be done by panning methods. On the whole, it could be much more convenient than it is on Earth - at least for the first pickings. Then there's no NIMBYs and no sacred sites or sites of special Scientific interest.Aditya Shende said:Its called regolith
Why do you want to go to LEO at all? Going from LEO back to anything is such a waste of fuel - several km/s delta_v.Al_ said:Three vehicles is the most fuel efficient arrangement.
1. Moon to LLO, and back. Carries the payload and 2 types of fuel up to the ion motor tug in LLO.
2. Ion motor tug. Using very little fuel and carrying payload and fuel from LLO to LEO, then cycling back to LLO.
3. LEO to re-entry, picks up fuel and payload from 2, releases payload into a precise re-entry trajectory, then boosts back to LEO without re-entering.
They sifted through sub-millimeter grains with some high-tech equipment and got some enrichment in ilmenite (FeTiO3) and pyroxene (silicon, aluminium, oxygen, and various other metals mixed together). That is not just holding a magnet over the lunar surface, and the result is not iron.Al_ said:Magnetic mining: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/224662745_Magnetic_Separation_of_Lunar_Soils
I don't think anyone thought the clause was to be taken literally.mfb said:That is not just holding a magnet over the lunar surface
sophiecentaur said:I don't think anyone thought the clause was to be taken literally.
You ain't getting the problem.sophiecentaur said:Interestingly, regolith would be very well suited to surface mining (more like ploughing) with various methods of separating the various component parts. Separation by magnetisation, by size, by density. Lack of atmosphere would mean dealing with the dust could be done by panning methods. On the whole, it could be much more convenient than it is on Earth - at least for the first pickings. Then there's no NIMBYs and no sacred sites or sites of special Scientific interest.
Aditya Shende said:So about mining and stuff that you are talking about won't work coz the mining , separating equipments ,etc have got moving parts and regolith messes up with them it doesn't matter if you try to keep moving parts sealed .
It still would mess them up (as I said above).
So, I don't think it's going to work.
Well it's not just a little spiky sandDrakkith said:While certainly an obstacle, I doubt a little spiky sand is a obstacle that cannot be overcome.
Aditya Shende said:Well it's not just a little spiky sand
It's a 20 m thick layer of regolith
And it's all spread in the atmosphere of the moon
YepDrakkith said:Estimates place the total mass of the dust in the 'atmosphere' of the Moon at 120 kg. This is an extremely small amount of dust and is unlikely to cause significant issues. The dust in the regolith is a much larger problem, but I see little reason to believe dust is a major inhibitor in colonizing the Moon.
What is in what "air"?Aditya Shende said:It's in the air
Yes, exactly. It's those rocks themselves that bring the Iron. Some of them are Iron meteorites.Aditya Shende said:The surface of the Moon has been subject to billions of years of collisions with uncountable space rocks
What, everywhere? Can you provide a reference?Aditya Shende said:It's 20 metres thick
Can I suggest a definition: People go to stay, and have children. Enough of them so the children can stay and have families.sophiecentaur said:But, as usual, we haven't defined what we mean by 'a Colony'.
Why? I just don't get this. Sure, Mars looks prettier, and it has a kinder day/night cycle.Aditya Shende said:Colonizing on moon = not so great
Elon Musk's idea is that it would be self-funding. He might even be right!sophiecentaur said:For Mars, the cost of transport is so much higher that staff would need to be there for much longer; long enough to breed? That would be one definition of a colony. We would be talking in terms of hundreds of colonists. Ye gods, there go all my taxes.
This all puts me in mind of the way 'they' extract gold from sediments. They go over the same river bed time and time again, squeezing harder every pass as the particles get smaller and the cost per gram goes up. Most of the Moon's surface is the equivalent to this river bed. No need to drill for a long long time.Al_ said:Yes, exactly. It's those rocks themselves that bring the Iron. Some of them are Iron meteorites.
This problem has been solved.Aditya Shende said:This poses a problem because it gets into moving parts and causes problems.
It also messes up seals to keep enclosures airtight.
At least someone shares my opinion [emoji28]sophiecentaur said:What is in what "air"?
Compare the way a 'cloud' of dust behaves on Earth and how the dust from the wheels of the Lunar Rover behaves in that famous film.
You may not like the idea of colonising the Moon (I rather share your opinion on that) but I really don't think that the mineral gathering technology would need to be all that different from what's used in deep mining on earth. The dust and shards in a mine haven't been weathered; they've only just been exposed.
But, as usual, we haven't defined what we mean by 'a Colony'. Any station on the Moon would not be a holiday camp and only a minimum of human staff would be needed. (The management would all be tucked up in their posh ranches on Earth). How many staff does it take to make a 'colony'?
For Mars, the cost of transport is so much higher that staff would need to be there for much longer; long enough to breed? That would be one definition of a colony. We would be talking in terms of hundreds of colonists. Ye gods, there go all my taxes.
Only about the principle - not about the problems that you foresee about mining on the Moon.Aditya Shende said:At least someone shares my opinion [emoji28]
NoAl_ said:Yes, exactly. It's those rocks themselves that bring the Iron. Some of them are Iron meteorites.What, everywhere? Can you provide a reference?Can I suggest a definition: People go to stay, and have children. Enough of them so the children can stay and have families.Why? I just don't get this. Sure, Mars looks prettier, and it has a kinder day/night cycle.
But the Moon should be first, because it would be much quicker, and it gives a really useful platform to go further and more easily.
What we learn on the Moon is very likely to be useful elsewhere, and it's material resources too.
Mars is down a deep gravity well. So, in the Solar System's economy of the 22nd century, it will be an isolated backwater compared to the asteroids, trojans, rings and small moons.Elon Musk's idea is that it would be self-funding. He might even be right!
"Need to be there" you say? Like it's an difficult mission? Can't wait to get home?
Imagine, you're on the Moon. You are making a fortune from precious metals, TV rights sales, comms, etc. You buy architect services and robots from Earth and they build you a palace with gardens, pools, low-g sports gym, etc. Now, want to go home?
If Elon does start to offer tickets I will be looking for the Lunar Return prices!
Yes I got thatsophiecentaur said:Only about the principle - not about the problems that you foresee about mining on the Moon.
The larger asteroids are very, very rare. They don't hit the Moon so much more often than they hit Earth. The smaller ones are not a problem if you live below metres of lunar regolith.Aditya Shende said:We know that the moon saves Earth from so many asteroid and space rock impacts
Just think
If such a space rock or asteroid hits the colony?
I meant it as an ideal case, picking the low-hanging fruit so to speak.Drakkith said:I did. Perhaps erroneously.
I think that's a different thread!Aditya Shende said:What do you guys think about Terraforming ?
Well let's talk about it hereAl_ said:I think that's a different thread!![]()
No. Do not derail this thread with this off-topic subject.Aditya Shende said:Well let's talk about it here
Ok sorryDrClaude said:No. Do not derail this thread with this off-topic subject.
Warning: threads on terraforming usually have a very short half-life because there is not much science and much speculation in them.