Lunar freight line

[Knuckledragger]

We've been docking in space for decades. We know how to send landers/rovers ahead and put them on a foreign surface. So why do we insist on building one huge rocket to take everything to the moon in one trip instead of staging items enroute or landing as separate modules? The ISS wasn't delivered in to orbit in one package so why not do the same for lunar landing. When divers explore cave networks, teams go ahead and stage, then leapfrog to stage more equipment ahead of the survey. If NASA wants to mine the lunar surface or send man back in 2024, why not put equipment in earth orbit, dock, transit and land near equipment already staged?

 

[Steven]

The question to ask is: what method would be more cost effective.

 

[Knuckledragger]

I stumbled across this just after I posted the thread: https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Suppor...h/Energy/Helium-3_mining_on_the_lunar_surface

Costs vs returns have always been the issue up front but to hinge everything on one vessel's successful launch and expect increased return seems like a Sir Martin Frobisher repeat, a lot of glitter of little substance. Was deciding what I want to build next, scratch build something non tubular. What would a freight system look like? What would get it in to orbit? What would a surface module look like? The Apollo 15 lunar lander wasn't stored "flush" within the confines of the LM, in fact it hung out a bit and the fenders could be seen in the photos. So a habitat, transportation, communication, and exploration rigs could go as separate modules. Could items that are currently listed as space junk orbiting the earth be repurposed in orbit for use elsewhere. That seems like the prequel for a Mad Max rig but still.

 

[Cape Byron]

Could items that are currently listed as space junk orbiting the earth be repurposed in orbit for use elsewhere. That seems like the prequel for a Mad Max rig but still.

I'd see that movie!

 

[Jeff Lassahn]

I believe when they thought this through in the Sixties, the conclusion was that a multilaunch approach that built up infrastructure in orbit and at the moon is better in nearly every way. The only problem was that it meant the first moon landing would happen later because there was more prep work to do. So the built one giant rocket because that was the way to win the race, and Von Braun was very sad.

 

[manixFan]

I believe when they thought this through in the Sixties, the conclusion was that a multilaunch approach that built up infrastructure in orbit and at the moon is better in nearly every way. The only problem was that it meant the first moon landing would happen later because there was more prep work to do. So the built one giant rocket because that was the way to win the race, and Von Braun was very sad.

Here's a short but good article on that. It just very briefly mentions that Von Braun wanted to build a space station as part of the moon mission to have a lasting platform in space. It's odd now that the winning way was the dark horse candidate, because it worked so well and seems to obvious in retrospect.


Tony

https://www.npr.org/2019/07/18/7399...-how-to-go-to-the-moon-but-few-were-listening

 

[OverTheTop]

What would a freight system look like?

Check out Sirius Rocketry SS Cestris for their take on a future space freighter.
https://www.siriusrocketry.biz/ishop/sirius-rocketry-s-s-cestris-140.htmlI have one of these and it flies well BTW .

 

[Ronz Rocketz]

Elon Musk says he plans to send 1 million people to Mars by 2050 by launching 3 Starship rockets every day and creating 'a lot of jobs' on the red planet

Can you imagine 3 launches per day from Boca Chica?

https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-plans-1-million-people-to-mars-by-2050-2020-1
I take it you're not a fan of the Sea Dragon concept? That woulda been a massive tug boat.