How Realistic Are Golden Spike’s Plans?
On Friday, it will have been forty years since the last man walked on the moon, and prospects of a return within half a century, at least by NASA, have been dim for a number of years now. But this past Thursday, on the eve of the anniversary of the launch of that last mission, a new company called Golden Spike announced plans to do it with a couple years to spare. As Alan Stern, company CEO, notes, the key to getting the cost down and the schedule accelerated is to use the rockets you have, and not the ones you’d like to have. To the degree that NASA has spent money on a lunar mission over the past decade (and it has spent billions) it has all gone to new rockets that aren’t needed, while virtually none of the funds have gone to things like landers that are needed.
Golden Spike’s mission architecture proposes to send people back to the moon with existing (or soon-to-be existing) launchers (like Space Exploration Technology’s Falcon Heavy) and existing capsules (such as SpaceX’s Dragon). They are focusing development resources on lunar orbit insertion stages and landers. They describe a number of scenarios utilizing United Launch Alliance Atlas Vs, and SpaceX Falcon 9s and Falcon Heavies. The latter vehicle allows a full lunar mission in only two launches. Utilizing the smaller Falcon 9 or Atlas could require four.
They have a variety of potential approaches. For the lander, they range from expendable separate descent and ascent stages (as Apollo used) with solid-rockets, to a fully reusable single-stage vehicle utilizing liquid oxygen and hydrogen propellants (the latter could in theory eventually be refueled from water at the lunar poles). Whether the lander will have a pressurized compartment or its inhabitants will just live in space suits (the latter would mean shorter, riskier and less comfortable missions) hasn’t yet been determined.
For getting the hardware into low lunar orbit, they propose an option of launching the lander into earth orbit with a Centaur upper stage, and then launching another “tanker” vehicle to refuel it to allow it to go on to the moon.
Which approach they take will depend on how much money they raise and how many orders they get. The larger the number of projected missions, the more sense it will make to invest in the development of more reusable hardware with lower marginal costs. It will also depend on the progress in development of the Falcon Heavy (SpaceX still claims that it will fly next year), and in getting the Dragon capsule ready to fly passengers.
The only fully new development is the lander — everything else is modified versions of existing systems. But we’ve come a long way since the sixties, and the companies who competed for the Lunar Lander Challenge, Armadillo Aerospace and Masten Space Systems, have developed a lot of expertise in vertical takeoff and landing vehicles. Both companies are involved with Golden Spike. In addition, computers and control algorithms are light years beyond the primitive systems used in Apollo. As Stern points out, in the sixties it took several minutes to compute a lunar trajectory using an IBM 360. Today’s desktop computers do it in a few seconds, using commercial software.
Golden Spike should go tourist LEO for a few years. Then I’ll listen to their moon plans. All hat, no cattle.
What he said.
The ’70s marked America’s tipping point. Rather than a homogeneous culture with a forward and successful world view, we have fallen back into ourselves and dedicated ourselves to coping with our new immigrants and “successful” citizens. That takes energy and treasure.
Too much. People in the Third World don’t dream of the Moon. They dream of cozying up next to success so they might have a car and laws which protect failure. Do you think narcissistic morons like the Congressional Black Congress, Sandra Fluke and Obama think about the Moon? They think about what gov’t can give.
“The ’70s marked America’s tipping point. Rather than a homogeneous culture with a forward and successful world view, we have fallen back into ourselves and dedicated ourselves to coping with our new immigrants and “successful” citizens. That takes energy and treasure.”
Indeed. Our new leftist gov has allowed immigrant moochers like that Elon Musk to come over and take from the rest of us.
“Too much. People in the Third World don’t dream of the Moon. They dream of cozying up next to success so they might have a car and laws which protect failure. Do you think narcissistic morons like the Congressional Black Congress, Sandra Fluke and Obama think about the Moon? They think about what gov’t can give.”
Right. We conservatives should support the private sector’s growth over gov control and handouts. But this leftist administration of course seeks to destroy our great space program and instead support commercial development of space, we must stop that at all costs. Oh wait…
Exception, meet rule. For every Musk there are ten thousand whose idea of a bridge is to fly across the Yungas Valley hanging from a steel cable like a circus act. History and the reality of today speaks louder than wishful thinking.
Social programs designed to prop up the flying men of the Yungas as unlucky rocket scientists has sucked our national will and treasure dry. Bring in some immigrants, sure, but don’t commit us to the wholesale transfer of Bolivia to America and call it perfume.
While Rand’s article is big on HOW Golden Spike would return mankind to the moon, it failed to mention WHY a return would be made. In other words, why should investors pony up the billions of dollars that would be required to modify existing spacecraft and train personnel for both the spacecraft and mission control.
What sort of return could investors expect on their investment? Are we talking about rare mineral extraction? Lunar tourism? Or what?
Until it can be shown that there’s potential profit in returning to the moon, I predict that this project will never get off the ground.
The closest analogue today to lunar tourism is Antarctica tourism.
Because Antarctica is inhospitable to humans. Yet tourists go there. They go to see the sights. They board airplanes and fly over the place.
I would imagine that there could be a market for tourists to *orbit* the Moon, looking down at Tranquillity Base and Tycho Crater and so on. That would be more spectacular than just landing–because landings have to be boring.
When NASA landed astronauts on the Moon, they deliberately chose “safe” landing sites with smooth terrain, devoid of spectacular scenery like big mountains and craters with giant rims. They didn’t try to land inside Tycho. I would suspect that Golden Spike will be similarly limited in landing sites–at least for years to come.
So orbiting the Moon? I would do that and I would bring a camera. But I wouldn’t pay to land on the Moon and just galumph around in a space suit looking at dirt on the ground.
I agree with sinz54, it is a form of tourism (currently called “Experiential Tourism”), but more along the lines of what adventurers have always done. One of the differences here though is that Golden Spike also plans to go after countries that want what essentially boils down to bragging rights.
Imagine if a citizen of Qatar were to be the next person on the Moon? Or Brazil? How might that change the worlds perceptions about them? $1.5B for bragging rights of that magnitude might seem like a pretty good deal.
Pretty much though this is a “because we can” deal. Golden Spike thinks they have identified the existing technologies and companies that can make it happen, and they are just the integrator. It could work given enough demand, but beyond the bragging rights for the next person on the Moon, I’m not sure how much demand there is for the 3rd or 5th.
They are targeting governments as customers. They want to provide a way for governments without their own launchers and vehicles to participate in scientific discovery.
Buying a ticket to the Moon to do some research has a little more appeal than having to build your own launchers and vehicles then hope you have enough money for some research.
I don’t think space tourism is going to be a huge business. It might be profitable for a few exclusive little companies catering to an extremely wealthy clientele. God bless the entrepreneurs, but hauling a few rich people into LEO or lunar orbit once in a while just so they can look around is a boutique business, not a sustainable industry.
Real space tourism means cheap flights carrying thousands of people to a zero-g space resort where they can play zero-g space sports, have zero-g space sex, drink zero-g space booze, eat zero-g space food, and generally have a bourgeois good time in zero-g. That’s an industry.
Their business plan spells out how they can make a profit.
The question is if there are enough customers to fill their business plan.
The only way to find out is to hang up their shingle and see if the business is going to work or not.
That is what they’ve done.
I can’t believe a Lunar landing would be boring. Especially if there’s an engine failure. But seriously, I wish I could get ahold of investors like this. Anyone who would actually sink billions into this lunatic express could be persuaded to spend all that moola just about anywhere. Here’s an experiment anyone can try: take the longest possible international flight you can, in Economy Class. In fact, do it every day for a week. Was that fun? Then maybe you will enjoy your Moon shot. Basically, these clowns are betting there is a market for an extremely dangerous and uncomfortable and very long and phenomenally expensive roller-coaster ride, for the sake of pictures and bragging-rights. Ah, the romance of the Space Age!
The reasons for going to the moon you dolt are myriad, as the jump off point for going to the asteroid belt alone makes the trip worth it. China is going and they plan on staying, I wonder why?
I think he was referring to space tourism, not exploration or investment. As I said above, only a handful of wealthy people will be able to afford to go to space (at least for the near future). Add to that Mike’s point that a trip to the moon will be long, boring, complicated, uncomfortable, and dangerous, and you’ve probably cut your potential client base at least in half. I think most rich people would rather go to the Riviera.
The business plan is aimed at middle level countries like Japan who have some sort of a space program and could afford something like this which would propell them ahead of the pack for a fraction of the cost of an Apollo style program.
When I can belly up to the Lunar Bar, spend nights in a comfortable radiation free environment, and look across the atmosphere challenged lunarscape into infinity, I will get more excited about this.
I guess this is why you call yourselves conservatives? Are you the obligatory naysayers??
To Failb I say my generation has engineered the information age since the ’70s. An accomplishment that far outshines any the previous generation could devise. Sure, the seeds were all laying around in 1970 but a it took a bunch of garage shop dreamers to come up with what we did.
Now, the piece parts of the space age are commercially available and another bunch of wild-eyed dreamers are trying to make a business out of it. Good for them! Fire-up the 3D printers and get the rest of the parts made. I want to see the Milky Way and the aurora from space. I want to see Earth in a single frame.
Good for you. By all means –you wild-eyed dreamer, you– prove us wrong, head-in-the-sand trogluddites (I couldn’t choose, so I split the difference). Just make sure you do it on your own nickel –and by ‘you’ I mean all those companies that no one could possibly imagine would ever line up for some help from Uncle Sugar.
“The Information Age” –ah, that would be the historical epoch that began around the time “The Space Age” ended.
Sounds great. Just think of the returns when you invest your retirement account and this thing really takes off.
I would, but all of my money is tied up in the Freedom Ship floating city project. You get a discount if you buy your condo now.
http://www.freedomship.com/
They have been running that “project” for about 12 years now and will probably keep it up until all of the money goes away and the lawyers start showing up.
No, that’s not a terrorist attack waiting to happen. Well, it isn’t because it seems like a huge pipe-dream.
It’s a question of resolve, not technology. What percentage of Fed. monies went to useless social and educational programs in 1970 compared to today?
Yes, but the poor people are so much smarter than they used to be!
Yes, now they’re organized con men with the backing of major institutions who taught Dennis Moore not to bring them lupins.
No one on the Moon in decades. That speaks louder than words.
I’m all for capturing asteroids, mass drivers on the Moon and living in an O’Neil cylinder. Try telling that to liberal morons who want to spend billions in the Third World towards no purpose since you cannot pay people to succeed.
I wonder why ULA’s Delta IV Heavy launch vehicle was not mentioned. As opposed to SpaceX’s heavy, the Delta already is fully operational, has excellent performance with several successful missions already under its belt.
skeet shooter asked:
“I wonder why ULA’s Delta IV Heavy launch vehicle was not mentioned.”
A Delta IV Heavy supposedly costs around $450M, whereas the Falcon Heavy costs $128M for twice the payload. You do the math.
First, do some pay-per-view unmanned “tourism”.
Launch an unmanned explorer around the Moon, and have the explorer to change its lunar orbit parameters from time to time.
Get regular subscribers to get the transmitted pictures/videos of both lunar surface and cosmos.
The launch requirements are much less than that for manned missions.
Rand
What are golden spike’s goals outside the immediate reportage? Seems to me that if they were talking to the astrophysics people wanting a farside optical telescope they ought to be working with Bigelow who probably has servicable inflatable lunar habitats that would suffice to get it built; what the telescope boffins need most is a ride for the setup crew. And bigelow again for the recently announced asteroid mining schemes for a usable lunar base, one that doesn’t need fulltime habitation (one assumes asteroid belt liftoff from the lunar gravity well would be cheaper.)
Essentially it seems we’re seeing a lot of recent announcements from different interests each with a different attack vector, many of which would be more feasible when certain parts of the efforts are combined. So… do you know if they’re talking to others of this or is this a solitary effort?
Planetary Resources has an incremental plan where they provide a product or service at each stage of development. Golden Spike should try to emulate that. Maybe they could start with a tug that could service satellites but also be capable of a trip to the Moon. This would give them experience storing and transferring fuel and would fit the imagery of their name by providing transportation infrastructure.
What would attract investors is a nuclear and solar powered robotic smelter. Nuclear powered for the times it’s in shadow (Lunar night is almost 2 weeks long)so it can collect dust and small rocks on the surface then use reflected sunlight to power the smelter once Lunar day arrives. Leave little piles of aluminum, titanium and magnesium ingots on the surface behind them. If it works, send bigger ones until there is a pile of metal worth using to build something like a REAL settlement, or a REAL ship to the asteroids.
Oh yeah, a solar smelter would also remove and collect ALL H, all O, and All H2O as water, oxygen and hydrogen, for fuel and life support.
A ship could go to the moon knowing they have water, oxygen and fuel to get home waiting for them.
Since the moon is in hard vacuum and low gravity, smelting could very well be done by using sunlight to turn all material gathered into a plasma a little bit at a time and seperating out each atom by mass in an intense magnetic field, as they do in a labratory here on earth.
This would produce 100% pure metals and related products like pure silica and sulfer, all of which would be very useful in space for construction and manufacturing of ships and bases. A smelter of this type could be very small, less then a ton total weight. The moons surface is covered with trillions of tons of dust, dust mostly comprised of aluminum, titanium and magnesium. All space age metals. dont even have to grind up, or dig for, the first million trillion tons of ore.This is what investors want to see, productivity beyond attracting goverment funding, something getting a VERY bad reputation these days.
No where in this scenario is there any hint of where a profitable return on investment might come from. If ingots of pure metals already existed on the Lunar surface, it still would not be profitable to recover them. You would argue, it seems, that the point is that it would make further space exploration less costly. In which case you’re still talking about massive investment with but vaguely speculative return. A further argument seems to be that a massive investment now would lead eventually to a self-sustaining space-based economy. A faith-based economy to begin with, then. Master first the art of lifting yourself by your own bootstraps, then we’ll talk.