It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A why to get a mobile camera to the moon.

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 12:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: xDeadcowx
A private company should put it together.

Imagine a set up where they could charge people to get a chance to control vehicle bit. Maybe even have a few small R/C rovers running at the same time, with a couple more on standby as backups.

I would consider paying $100 or so for 10 mins on the moon, some might even pay more.

If you can find a way to make it profitable, the private sector will find ways of making things happen that NASA could only dream of.



Let's say in cost them $40,000,000 to develop this rover, get it there, communicate with it, and pay the salaries of the employees who made it all possible (which sounds roughly reasonable cost). They would need to charge enough to make that money back.

Now, let's say they had a continuous supply of customers willing to pay $1000 for 10 minutes. If the consumer public agreed with that cost enough to run the rover continuously, they could make $5000 per hour (assuming 10 minutes each session, with 2 minutes between each customer session). $5000 per hour is $120,000 per day.

Now, considering that any part of the moon will experience 2 weeks of sunlight followed by 2 weeks of darkness (the lunar night), the rover will only be in sunlight for about 180 days per year, which is the maximum number of days it would be in sunlight (assuming the soar cells work at even very low sun angles). That equates to $21.6 million ($120,000 x 180 days). That would mean that even if you could have continuous customers for 24/7, you would need that continuous stream of paying customers (continuous for 2 weeks at a time) for about 2 years before making a profit.

And then there is the issue with the 2 weeks of darkness. The rover would need to be designed to b e able to have enough battery power saved up prior to those 2 weeks of darkness to be able to survive in the near-absolute zero temperatures until the next daylight comes along.

I suppose it isn't technologically impossible to do that, but I doubt the solar panels would be enough to (1) run the motor on an almost continuous basis for 2 weeks at a time, (2) run the video camera and communications equipment almost continually for 2 weeks at a time, and (3) be storing up battery power to run the heaters for 2 weeks of cold and darkness.

It seems a radioactive power source would be necessary for that, and that seems expensive. It's either that, or don't run the rover on a continuous basis (allowing more power for the battery to charge) -- but if you do that, then it may take longer than 2 years to turn a profit, and then there also is no guarantee that the rover would last past 2 years (or even consumer interest lasting that long).


By the way, there are in fact private groups vying to get a private rover to the moon and photograph it. It's part of the "Google Lunar X Prize", but they are not doing it in order to turn a profit.

Google LunarX Prize Website



edit on 7/22/2014 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 12:39 PM
link   
My personal wishlist for a "public" rover on the Moon:

1. Photograph the lunar terrain lit by earthshine (i.e. during the lunar night, when the full Earth is shining overhead.)

2. Photograph the Earth and the lunar terrain during a total lunar eclipse. This should show a remarkable red ring around Earth, and the dim red light on the lunar terrain.

3. Colour photography to depict the subtle colours of the lunar surface. (The Moon does have colour, it's not utterly black&white)



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 12:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
Let's say in cost them $40,000,000 to develop this rover, get it there, communicate with it, and pay the salaries of the employees who made it all possible (which sounds roughly reasonable cost). They would need to charge enough to make that money back.

Now, let's say they had a continuous supply of customers willing to pay $1000 for 10 minutes. If the consumer public agreed with that cost enough to run the rover continuously, they could make $5000 per hour (assuming 10 minutes each session, with 2 minutes between each customer session). $5000 per hour is $120,000 per day.

Now, considering that any part of the moon will experience 2 weeks of sunlight followed by 2 weeks of darkness, the rover will only be in sunlight for about 180 days per year, so that equates to $21.6 million ($120,000 x 180 days). That would mean that even if you could have continuous customers for 24/7, you would need those customers for 2 years before making a profit.


Aside from the technical hurdles, of which there are many...a 2 year to profit would be considered exceptional by any business manager...especially if that included a complete payout of startup costs.

So, I am doubting that they can get a project like this running on $40 million. Or, (long shot theory) they are not even allowed to try.
edit on 22-7-2014 by peck420 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 12:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: peck420

Aside from the technical hurdles, of which there are many...a 2 year to profit would be considered exceptional by any business manager...especially if that included a complete payout of startup costs.



Yeah -- but the 2 year profit on a $40,000,000 initial investment also assumes that consumers would be willing to pay $1000 for 10 minutes -- and continue to have the interest to do so for 2 years continuously during the 2 weeks per month of "Lunar daytime".

I think it would be difficult to keep up consumer interest that long at that price.




So, I am doubting that they can get a project like this running on $40 million. Or, (long shot theory) they are not even allowed to try.

They are current allowed to try, which is what the Google Lunar X prize is all about. There are a few teams who may actually have what it takes to win the prize.


edit on 7/22/2014 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 12:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
I think it would be difficult to keep up consumer interest that long at that price.

They would be booked solid by universities and schools, around the globe, for decades.

They would require multiple rovers if Average Joe consumer ever wanted a crack at his/her own 10 minutes.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 01:27 PM
link   
A single moon rover would not be able to explore more than a tiny fraction of the surface. Lunokhod 2 has the distance record but only covered about 25 miles in four months. And if anyone could control it and keep on going back and forth it would be a lot less!

If you want to explore the moon, the LRO is the way forward.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Dont forget the moon is super cold and super hot. it is bombarded by radiation. Also there is a large time delay to send instructions so a remote control would be a bit difficult.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: PhoenixOD


Plus, I'd hate to be "that guy" who had public control of the rover and sent it down into a crater that it could not get out of.



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 12:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

The yocks will crash it.



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 12:22 AM
link   
a reply to: wildespace

If I remember the Life magazine supplements of the time correctly, it's mostly ochre fading to khaki.

But that's not how a guy who went there remembers it.




posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: wildespace

If I remember the Life magazine supplements of the time correctly, it's mostly ochre fading to khaki.

But that's not how a guy who went there remembers it.


There's more to it than a yellowish/brownish hue. Titanium-rich areas, such as in the sea of Tranquility, have dark blue hue. Apollo astronauts themselves saw rocks of many hues: the-moon.wikispaces.com...



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 10:40 AM
link   
a reply to: lord sword
The easy part is making the probe.

The hard part is getting it there!

And when I mean hard I mean most expensive.

edit on 23-7-2014 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: eriktheawful

You forgot the moon dust.

Thats what kills most probes and rovers sent up.
edit on 23-7-2014 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 08:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: eriktheawful

You forgot the moon dust.

Thats what kills most probes and rovers sent up.


I think the vacuum and extreme temperature changes will kill most store bought electronics before any dust does.

Here is the iPhone 5's specs for environment:




Operating ambient temperature: 32° to 95° F (0° to 35° C)
Nonoperating temperature: -4° to 113° F (-20° to 45° C)
Relative humidity: 5% to 95% noncondensing
Operating altitude: tested up to 10,000 feet (3000 m)


Apple - iPhone 5s

The temps alone will kill it, and unknown how it will handle above 10,000 feet (really? There are places in the world that people go to that are higher than that, seems they'd be able to test it for that).

My own Cannon DSLR EOS Rebel T3i has a limited temp range too

Motors for the wheels would certainly have an issue with lunar dust, unless sealed well. However, the controlling electronics, again, they'd have to be very high grade to handle the extreme environment.

Ah, "G" forces too, for acceleration of launch and deceleration to land would be something to take into account also.



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: wildespace

Did you click the link? That painting is by Alan Bean.



posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 01:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: lord sword
The easy part is making the probe.

The hard part is getting it there!

And when I mean hard I mean most expensive.


The hardest part: Keeping it functioning in the harsh environment that is the moon.

People don't realize how extreme an environment the moon is. Stuff does not function long on the surface due to the temperature extremes.

And if you are rolling around with a roller then count Moon dust as some of the nastiest stuff in the solar system. It gets in EVERYTHING and usually that means eventually ruining what it gets into.

Mars by comparison looks like a paradise other than the dust storms.

There's a reason why the rovers we send to Mars operate for years or even a decade, while the ones we send to the moon operate for months at best.
edit on 24-7-2014 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 10:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: PhoenixOD
Dont forget the moon is super cold and super hot. it is bombarded by radiation. Also there is a large time delay to send instructions so a remote control would be a bit difficult.


Not that large about 1.5 seconds.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008

Yeah my mistake, thats not to bad.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 11:16 AM
link   
Google X prize is offering 30 million so there's a bit of extra incentive for you. Many martian rocks have reached earth from asteroid impacts on mars so you really don't need a rocket to send matter into space, a large enough cannon will do it (aka Jules Verne in one of his novels wrote about sending men to moon by using a cannon etc.).

edit on 27 7 2014 by glend because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 11:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: wmd_2008

originally posted by: PhoenixOD
Dont forget the moon is super cold and super hot. it is bombarded by radiation. Also there is a large time delay to send instructions so a remote control would be a bit difficult.


Not that large about 1.5 seconds.


But the round-trip time needs to be considered.

The time delay is about 1.3 seconds, so the time between me sending a command to the moon and me actually seeing the results of that command is double that -- about 2.6 seconds.

Another example would be if I saw that the moving rover was headed toward a deep crater that I wanted to avoid. By the time I actually SAW the dangerous crater, the rover would be 1.3 seconds closer, and by the time the signal I sent to the rover to turn got there, an additional 1.3 seconds would have past ...

...so 2.6 seconds total -- Which is still a short time, but still it's something that needs to be considered.







 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join