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.

 

Low Cost Lunar Plan Unveiled From The Private Sector!

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 05:35 AM
link   



A newly released study has focused on how best to return people to the Moon, reporting that future lunar missions can be done for under $10 billion - far less than a NASA price tag.
The multi-phased three-year study was done by a private space firm, SpaceDev of Poway, California, and concluded that safe, lower cost missions can be completed by the private sector using existing technology or innovative new technology expected to be available in time to support human exploration of the Moon in the near-future.
SpaceDev announced the results of its International Lunar Observatories Human Servicing Mission study last week at a meeting conducted by Lunar Enterprise Corporation (LEC), a wholly owned subsidiary of Space Age Publishing Company of Hawaii’s Island, Hawaii, and Palo Alto, California. The study was funded by LEC.

I found this quote particuarly interesting aswell:


Each mission, as envisioned by SpaceDev, would position a habitat module in lunar orbit or on the moon's surface. The habitat modules would remain in place after each mission and could be re-provisioned and re-used, thus building a complex of habitats at one or more lunar locations over time, according to a press statement on the study findings.


This article also stated that human surveying could begin as early as 2010-2015 with sending at least 40 people at the cost of the first trip to the moon NASA intends.
This is an amazing proposal and I really hope that SpaceDev achieve their vision.
Link:www.space.com...




posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 07:23 AM
link   
Thats amazing! I was stunned by the $100-billion+ dollar price tag NASA stuck on going to the moon and the time it would take to put together a mission. Taking into account they did it 40 years ago with the power of a pocket calculator, I am amazed they can't just go there next week!

Good old private corps! get out the way Government, as usual, you waste a load of money and take far too long to do anything, now it's time to do it properly!



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 07:55 AM
link   
Maybe the NASA meeting room was going something like this..

"Dubya wants to go to the moon, he wants to know how much it will cost!"

"Oh, well these days it can be done for probably... 10 billion."

"Shh! No, this is our chance! Tell him 100."

"You're right. The new shuttle program won't fund itself".

But seriously! 10b, thats awesome!


Maybe the US can just use its capitalistic approach and out-source/contract-out NASA's work to other agencies.



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Here's another link for a related article on SpaceDev's 10Billion Luner Vision:
Link:www.spacedaily.com...



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Wow 10 billion that would be amazing if they could do it for such a low cost.

Even if these plans never get used by the private sector the cost saving tactics should be looked at by NASA and other space agencies.



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 08:26 PM
link   
I like SpaceDev, I took an interest in them once they took control of Nasa's X-34, which I thought looked damn cool. They relabeled it the DreamChaser, and are planning in the future to use it for tourism as well as science, since they are making it capable to go into LEO, and as a biproduct of that they will be able to bring tourist up to sub-orbit altitudes.





posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 10:53 PM
link   
Funny how something like exploring a big rock can make us think $10 billion dollars is such a miniscule amount when millions of americans are struggling to raise a family and make ends meet.
$10,000,000,000....forget going to the moon, i say NASA starts a lottery!

[edit on 22-11-2005 by Uber Fr0g]



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Uber Fr0g
Funny how something like exploring a big rock can make us think $10 billion dollars is such a miniscule amount when millions of americans are struggling to raise a family and make ends meet.


[edit on 22-11-2005 by Uber Fr0g]


Out of entire US budget NASA gets less than 0.8% .That's less than 1 penny for every dollar spent.

If you factor in all the tech spin offs we have thanks to NASA all that money is returned in spades to American. NASA spin off tech has personally saved the life of someone in my family.

link



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 11:22 PM
link   
Two words: Space Pen!

I am totally on board for this plan, but somehow I doubt that ANY of it will be realized.

Zip



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 11:32 PM
link   
I was thinking more along the lines of the dialysis machine.

But I guess the space pen is a NASA spin off too



posted on Nov, 22 2005 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zipdot
Two words: Space Pen!

I am totally on board for this plan, but somehow I doubt that ANY of it will be realized.

Zip


People said the exact same thing about the XPrize in the 90s(and the Orteig prize to fly across the Atlantic)


It's all about Engineering Talent and Funding. If they(private companies) can compete with Russia and the USA then there is part of the Funding for this plan. Tourism will be another revenue stream as will "Made in Space" merchandise will be eventually as well.

BTW They are primarily seeking Private Financing for this endevor and I think they will get it. If not they can also slow down a bit and rely on the launch business to pave the way to the Moon and Mars. I still think NASA should invest in this as well. Maybe create a PPP(Public Private Partnership) but I don't think it'll happen unfortunately.

[edit on 22-11-2005 by sardion2000]



posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 04:04 AM
link   
I don't think it could really even be called a plan at this stage, but with a little encouragement it could certainly turn into one. Undoubtedly, the price tag will escalate over time, but probably no where near the estimated cost for NASA. People have forgotten just how energetic the aerospace business used to be before JFK. Had he left them alone, I'm not so sure they wouldn't have beat him to the moon even back then. What JFK did though was put all this countries eggs in one basket and it has suffered ever since. Now we see evidence of a new vitality and I sincerely hope someone else doesn't come along to sidetrack it again.

Not that we don't need NASA, because we do--someone has to go into space purely for the science and to pay the upfront costs for the development of new technology. I would prefer to see NASA assume a role more akin to DARPA.

[edit on 23-11-2005 by Astronomer68]



posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 04:44 AM
link   
I'm not too sure what effect this would have on NASA if a private company beats them to the moon on one tenth of their budget and can send up to 40people while building a lasting structure in orbit or on the moons surface.
If things can be done so cheap through the private sector then NASA should seriously considered commissioning different companies for certain tasks, e.g. cheap flights to orbit/the moon/developments of new tech. Less money will be spent and things will progress a lot faster, while developing new cheap and inventive technologies like spaceshipone achieved.



posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 10:08 PM
link   


I would prefer to see NASA assume a role more akin to DARPA.


I have no problem with that. Just as long as NASA plays a strong supporting role in private startups maybe even set up a Venture arm ala the CIA's In-Q-Tel.



posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astronomer68
I would prefer to see NASA assume a role more akin to DARPA.

I've never thought about that...But I think thats an excellant idea.


But that would be a HUGE change for Nasa...so I just dont see it happening.




top topics



 
0

log in

join