Sending A Rocket To The Moon! (Progress Sheet)

[Dork_Vader]

Indeed. Even to know that life pops up infrequently elsewhere would be amazing

Yes one of the things I often wonder about is whether or not life has to be carbon based and requires oxygen water... I don't see why not? I think if you have a diverse environment with diverse elements with some what stable conditions like earth some type of life will pop up. why couldn't life be silicone based? I tend to agree that planets like Jupiter will not have any type of life. The climate is to extreme.. But Titan? Wouldn't it be amazing if they discovered a fungi or mold like organism growing on/in the methane lakes?

 

[dlazarus6660]

I hope if they go to Europa they find a big monolith floating in space protecting the European moon. Yeah, that's the ticket!
Are they going to build a big Discovery, install HAL and have a guy named Dave fly it?
Better yet, lets forget the whole thing and launch a model rocket to the moon.
If this sounds over the top, you need to reread the very first post.
I won't be surprised to see this post removed. I'm not trying to be nasty, I'm just perplexed.
Launching a model rocket to the moon is just increadulous waste of time and money. How are they going to verify it hitting the moon?
I thought the idea of launching a model rocket was to recover the rocket? Does this violate any codes?
I think I'll contact my Twinkie reporter and ask if they would like to report upon this subject.
What do you guys think?

 

[dlazarus6660]

Yes one of the things I often wonder about is whether or not life has to be carbon based and requires oxygen water... I don't see why not? I think if you have a diverse environment with diverse elements with some what stable conditions like earth some type of life will pop up. why couldn't life be silicone based? I tend to agree that planets like Jupiter will not have any type of life. The climate is to extreme.. But Titan? Wouldn't it be amazing if they discovered a fungi or mold like organism growing on/in the methane lakes?

It's funny you mentioned this, I had a math book in middle school that had a cartoon of an alien on his hands and knees, one hand holding his throat, drowning in the air, saying 'methane, I need methane'.

 

[jadebox]

So long have a strong enough motor and enough thrust to push you beyond the gravitational pull you're good. I should say enough thrust and a long enough burn.

Yes. "Escape velocity" is that speed and direction at which the rocket could continue on a ballistic (unpowered or "free fall") path without falling back to earth or into orbit around it. As long as your thrust (aided by the pull of gravity from the moon) is greater than the force of gravity pulling you back to earth, you could, in the fashion of "Salvage 1," still make it to the moon without ever reaching escape velocity.

-- Roger

 

[bobkrech]

I've been doing a bit of reading on escape velocity.. Correct me if i'm wrong.. From what I've read you don't have to reach the specific velocity to escape the gravitional pull of earth. So long have a strong enough motor and enough thrust to push you beyond the gravitional pull you're good. I should say enough thrust and a long enough burn.

Now I don't know what would be easier reaching the 11 km/s mark or having a booster to push you beyond.

The wiki references for escape velocity and delta-V budget will give you a clearer understanding of what is involved as far as the velocity and propellant requiements are for a lunar mission.

One way lunar missions typically have several delta-v steps: Ascent from the ground into low earth orbit with a delta-v requirement of 7.8 km/s. After attaining LEO, then you typically perform a second burn with a delta-v of ~3.1 km/s to leave LEO and go to the moon. Unless you plan to directly crash into the moon, you then need a decellerating burn of ~0.9 ikm/s to go into lunar orbit followed by another ~0.5 km/s decellerating burn to make a soft landing. So if I did the math right you need a delta-v of ~13.2 km/s to get a payload to the moon's surface in one piece.

Planning of the exact trajectory minimizes the fuel burned and permits the maximum payload to be put on the moon surface. With current engine technology the most economical way to do this is to have several short duration (minutes) high impulse burns that generate high incremental velocity changes at fixed trajectory points. For long duration (years) missions of an interplanetary type, electric thrusters operating for months or years and gravitational slingshot trajectories are employed to minimize fuel mass.

Bob

 

[shrox]

A short burn on a long outward spiral. Takes a long time but it could be done with model rocket.

 

[jadebox]

A short burn on a long outward spiral. Takes a long time but it could be done with model rocket.

Spiral or not, it would still have to reach it's escape velocity (or continue firing the motor), to avoid falling back to earth or into orbit.

-- Roger

 

[shrox]

Spiral or not, it would still have to reach it's escape velocity (or continue firing the motor), to avoid falling back to earth or into orbit.

-- Roger

Think about it in a way that would work. We've been taking about a model rocket that is theoretically already in orbit...

A few lunar probes have been launched this way. It takes months.

 

[maxvelocity]

You know Safari might be on to something.

He's young, ambitious but he has no idea of what it takes and how much it costs to get a payload on the moon, but we at TRF certainly do. From our collective experience we know his budget is about 2 orders of magnitude short of the cheapest proven 1-way lunar launch solution available. I think we at TRF need to set up a LLC and raise the $200,000,000 required for a credible launch effort via one of the internet project funding sites. It just might be possible. We need only convince a mere 3% of the earth's population to each kick in $1 US to fund the project. That's only 10% of the funding SpaceX had to raise to merely put their rocket into low earth orbit. I think this is a much better deal and would give TRF some real bragging rights.

My proposal is simple. We'll contract the LV, facilities and support systems from Starsem, the Soyuz Company, since the Soyuz was the first and cheapest LV to place a probe on the moon, as they have hardware and permits in place to do it. That would eliminate all LV development costs and give us a 95% probability of getting something successfully planted on the moon. The going price for the Soyuz LV, launch facility rental, and support personnel is between $100,000,000 to $150,000,000 which would leave us at least $50,000,000 to develop the payload. I think if we put out minds together collectively we could put together a very creative payload for $50,000,000 and get a 2 month vacation at Balkonur Cosmodrome for the management team. Hey we might even be able to make a contest out of it. May be we'll simply plant $1,000,000 in gold bars on the lunar surface and offer to pay a 10% finders fee for some one to go up and return it to us.

Anyway, this plan is as plausable as any I've seen to get a payload to the moon. The Soyuz LV had a 95% success rate since the 50's so it's a really low risk high reward program, certainly far better than our typical Class 3 amateur launch attempts. We just have to convince 200,000,000 suckers, aka investors to cough up a buck each to get this program off the ground.

Aim high, somewhere around 250,000 miles high, more or less, and shoot for the moon.

We can do it. Yes we can. I know we have the talent here at TRF to get it done. :grin:

Bobski

Agreed

I'm going over to Facebook now to find someone who has 200,000,000 friends. One wall post and TRF should be funded.

Someone should start to assemble a crew.

 

[shreadvector]

It's funny you mentioned this, I had a math book in middle school that had a cartoon of an alien on his hands and knees, one hand holding his throat, drowning in the air, saying 'methane, I need methane'.

No. It was Ammonia.

https://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/A/ammonialife.html

 

[Salvage-1]

Wot about using Mono Hydrazine and a concertina tank??

 

[bobkrech]

Agreed

I'm going over to Facebook now to find someone who has 200,000,000 friends. One wall post and TRF should be funded.

Someone should start to assemble a crew.

No. Kickstarter.

 

[daveyfire]

He's done a 10,000 lb. thrust motor

You're a few years behind the times
[video=youtube;XaVC3r8yw6g]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaVC3r8yw6g[/video]

 

[bobkrech]

A short burn on a long outward spiral. Takes a long time but it could be done with model rocket.

A model rocket motor doesn't provide enough delta-V. A 160 Ns impulse model rocket motor in a rocket weighing 1 pound would produce a delta-V of only 0.387 km/s if the propellant had a specific impulse of 2 N/g where as you need a delta-V of 3.1 km/s to go to the moon from LEO. All you would accomplish is to make the orbit elliptical.

If you use model rocket propellant with an Isp = 200 seconds, the Mass Ratio require to attain a delta-v = 3.1 km/s is 0.2. This means you need 4 pound of propellnat for every pound of rocket structure and payload you want to deliver to the moon from LEO. You alsd have to make your pointed in the right direction as the is no fuel left to correct the trajectory. For every pound of payload and rocket structure you want to soft land on the moon, you need to burn 9 pounds of propellant with an Isp = 200 seconds. It is very difficult to get the structural weigth down to less than 10% of any rocket, so you either have to have 2 stages or need a much higher Isp propellant system than model rocket propellant.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_impulse

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_ratio

Bob

 

[shrox]

A model rocket motor doesn't provide enough delta-V. A 160 Ns impulse model rocket motor in a rocket weighing 1 pound would produce a delta-V of only 0.387 km/s if the propellant had a specific impulse of 2 N/g where as you need a delta-V of 3.1 km/s to go to the moon from LEO. All you would accomplish is to make the orbit elliptical.

If you use model rocket propellant with an Isp = 200 seconds, the Mass Ratio require to attain a delta-v = 3.1 km/s is 0.2. This means you need 4 pound of propellnat for every pound of rocket structure and payload you want to deliver to the moon from LEO. You alsd have to make your pointed in the right direction as the is no fuel left to correct the trajectory. For every pound of payload and rocket structure you want to soft land on the moon, you need to burn 9 pounds of propellant with an Isp = 200 seconds. It is very difficult to get the structural weigth down to less than 10% of any rocket, so you either have to have 2 stages or need a much higher Isp propellant system than model rocket propellant.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_impulse

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_ratio

Bob

I didn't say soft land.

 

[jadebox]

Think about it in a way that would work. We've been taking about a model rocket that is theoretically already in orbit...

A few lunar probes have been launched this way. It takes months ...

.... and still requires that the spacecraft reach escape velocity.

The odd trajectories are used because they require less fuel to put the spacecraft into lunar orbit. Basically, they fly the spacecraft to a Lagrange point (which requires it reaching escape velocity - otherwise it would fall back to earth or earth orbit). Then they set it on a course where it falls in a ballistic trajectory to the moon. The trajectory to the moon is designed so that the spacecraft catches up the moon from behind. This means that the spacecraft is going slower relative to the moon as they approach it, so there's less fuel required to enter lunar orbit.

-- Roger

 

[dave carver]

You're a few years behind the times
[video=youtube;XaVC3r8yw6g]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaVC3r8yw6g[/video]

Looks like I'm many years behind but still, Dave Crisalli could do more with $1.5 than anyone else. He wouldn't contract out any work him and his group can do.

Even then ... a rocket to the moon... I don't know...

 

[shrox]

.... and still requires that the spacecraft reach escape velocity. ...

-- Roger

I never said it didn't. Do I have say it requires a universe to exist in too?

 

[mikemech]

Wether Safari is stupid, brilliant or wacko, he started an excellent thread. I'm sorry he's gone.

Mike

 

[GDJ]

I have to admit, I would have loved to see him try.

Pity.

 

[shrox]

Yeah, some people drove him away.

 

[beezwax]

Yeah, some people drove him away.

Good grief, seriously? If all the terrible mistreatment he received from the big meanies here is responsible for stamping out this dream then it never had a chance to begin with. A project of this magnitude is going to face some slightly bigger challenges than a bit of skepticism and snickering on TRF. If that causes you to turn tail then you don't have enough determination to get yourself to the mall let alone the moon. Give me a break.

 

[dlazarus6660]

No. It was Ammonia.

https://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/A/ammonialife.html

Yes, I know, I just change the chemical to fit the joke. Thanks for the reminder. That was almost 40 years ago!

Did you have the same math book?

 

[shrox]

Good grief, seriously? If all the terrible mistreatment he received from the big meanies here is responsible for stamping out this dream then it never had a chance to begin with. A project of this magnitude is going to face some slightly bigger challenges than a bit of skepticism and snickering on TRF. If that causes you to turn tail then you don't have enough determination to get yourself to the mall let alone the moon. Give me a break.

The point is, I wanted to read it, you did not have to.

Funny that you would...oh nevermind.

 

[cwbullet]

I just ignore threads I do not feel meet my need to kow or want to participate standards.

 

[SteveA]

Safari,
In honor of your project. I hope you're successful.

 

[dlazarus6660]

Does that mean this thread is over....

Hello?

Is there anybody here?

Hello?

 

[shrox]

Does that mean this thread is over....

Hello?

Is there anybody here?

Hello?

Probably.

As I understand it, the OP displayed less that civil behavior elsewhere in the forums...

 

[dave carver]

Here also. Around 8 posts from his spoof and those of us on that early who responded to the tripe were deleted. I think bob or WiK came through and cleaned up the mess.

It needed to be done...

 

[jadebox]

I never said it didn't. Do I have say it requires a universe to exist in too?

My point is that a model rocket lauched from the space station would have to reach escape velocity before it could reach the moon. I don't think that's possible. So, it doesn't matter which course it takes.

-- Roger