a space station

[Mr. physics]

let us put our minds together and design a space station fitting the leading choise in the poll above.

lets think of the best way to utulize the Moon for our benefit and try to figure out whats the difficulties of living in space and how to solve them.

give me any ideas you have or any tips for our Moon design and ill try to put ut all together.

thank you.

[Zolar V]

I would like to add, that the moon should both be a power station and a research area. along with some of it being used as a factory. imagine construction on superstructures with 1/5th of the consideration due to gravity.

[Airbrush]

I am more interested in robotic missions which can accomplish almost as much as astronauts can, in many cases.

 

However, for a base on the Moon (or asteroids or Mars) the base should be underground and have artificial gravity by means of a "Merri-go-round" style, slowly rotating centrifuge. If anyone wants to know how to create artificial gravity on the Moon or Mars, I will be glad to elaborate.

 

As for factories on the Moon, maybe, but logistics will be a problem transporting material to and from the Moon.

[Leader Bee]

 

 

As for factories on the Moon, maybe, but logistics will be a problem transporting material to and from the Moon.

 

What about a mass driver on the moon, with a capsule similar to the landing modules used by astronaughts to land it safely on Earth?

 

As for getting it up there, thats harder - but once you have the materials you can mine the rest from the surface?

[Airbrush]

What I would like the Moon to be used for is asteroid defense. If you have telescopes and other detection devices on the far side of the Moon, they will always be pointed away from Earth, and they can make a complete sweep of the space around Earth once per month from an excellent vantage point. Info gathered would be beamed to satellites orbiting the Moon and relayed to Earth.

[Zolar V]

I am more interested in robotic missions which can accomplish almost as much as astronauts can, in many cases.

 

However, for a base on the Moon (or asteroids or Mars) the base should be underground and have artificial gravity by means of a "Merri-go-round" style, slowly rotating centrifuge. If anyone wants to know how to create artificial gravity on the Moon or Mars, I will be glad to elaborate.

 

As for factories on the Moon, maybe, but logistics will be a problem transporting material to and from the Moon.

 

I don't think the logistics of transporting material would be all that hard.

There are many methods that may be able to transport the material from the moon to earth:

1. precision tossing the material to the earth surface. (kinda like how we can decide where to drop a shuttle on return orbit)

2. do the same as above just in a reusable container that can be rocketed back up to the moon.

[Moontanman]

Of course there is the all of the above option, why does it have to be either or?

[Leader Bee]

I don't think the logistics of transporting material would be all that hard.

There are many methods that may be able to transport the material from the moon to earth:

1. precision tossing the material to the earth surface. (kinda like how we can decide where to drop a shuttle on return orbit)

2. do the same as above just in a reusable container that can be rocketed back up to the moon.

 

 

Thing with number 2 is that sending things to space isn't cheap and you'd need to ask yourself if the materials you are sending back can offset the expense of actually getting the reuseable container back up there.

[Zolar V]

Well, it really isn't a question of about the prospected profit of the material mined on the moon. It is much more of a question of whether or not the material on the moon will allow the transporter to be cheaper and therefore more cost effective.

[the tree]

If we continue to put more satellites into Earth's orbit, then it would perhaps be easier to chuck them from the moon - with a lower escape velocity than from the Earth. Particularly if we were to continue space exploration then the moon would be a reasonable jumping off point.

 

Though I'd still go for all of the above.

[Airbrush]

Thing with number 2 is that sending things to space isn't cheap and you'd need to ask yourself if the materials you are sending back can offset the expense of actually getting the reuseable container back up there.

 

This is true. The material you get from the Moon and transport back to Earth must be worth its' weight in gold or diamonds. How likely is it that we will discover valuable minerals on the Moon? The Moons' crust is low in metals.

 

As for industries on the Moon, how common are the metals necessary for making building materials (iron, aluminum, etc) in the surface of the Moon?

 

Maybe it would be more worthwhile to mine asteroids for metals. Some asteroids are rich in metals.

Edited July 21, 2010 by Airbrush

[michel123456]

Point 1: Living. You need water.

Point 4: factory areas. If i am not too wrong, you need water again (for cooling & other purposes).

 

So I would discard points 1 & 4.

 

Point 2: polluting power stations. The problem is how to transmit power to Earth. I think our technology is not adequate.

 

So I would discard point 2.

 

Point 3: research area. What would be this research about? I don't see anything that could be researched better on the Moon than on Earth or on a space station.

 

So I would discard point 3.

 

There is nothing left.

Edited July 21, 2010 by michel123456

[Moontanman]

Point 1: Living. You need water.

Point 4: factory areas. If i am not too wrong, you need water again (for cooling & other purposes).

 

So I would discard points 1 & 4.

 

Point 2: polluting power stations. The problem is how to transmit power to Earth. I think our technology is not adequate.

 

So I would discard point 2.

 

Point 3: research area. What would be this research about? I don't see anything that could be researched better on the Moon than on Earth or on a space station.

 

So I would discard point 3.

 

There is nothing left.

 

 

Well concerning the water, recent news seems to indicate there is indeed significant quantities of water on the moon, as for research the far side of the moon would be great for radio astronomy, i am sure there are other things that would be better not done on the earth or be easier on the moon. as for power, aneutronic fusion needs helium 3, lots of it on the moon, almost none on the earth, the equivalent of a space shuttle load of such fuel could power the entire USA for one year with no radioactive waste at all.

[New Zealand]

The moon would be a good 'starting point' for long distance space missions. Because it has much less gravity, we could build much larger and more long-term interplanetary vehicles, and it would require less feul to get them away from the gravitational pull.