Experts: 'space base' halfway between the Moon and Earth could be built in 10 years

From:
Science alert

Full title:


Experts says a 'space base' halfway between the Moon and Earth could be built in 10 years

We can't wait.

PETER DOCKRILL
22 JUN 2016


.
www.sciencealert.com...
.
.

The European Space Agency (ESA) has announced an ambitious plan to build a space base between Earth and the Moon, which astronauts could use as a kind of halfway house on lunar missions – or as a launchpad for new explorations elsewhere in the Solar System.
.
. . .
.
In addition to providing a "crossroads in space" to help with lunar research missions and other space-faring expeditions, this base – situated approximately halfway between Earth and the Moon – could also serve as a successor to the International Space Station (ISS).
.
. . .
.
"This is our deep space habitat, a new place to live and learn how to work in space, a kind of base camp for exploring the Solar System and reaching back down to the surface of the Moon," he said. "[Astronauts] can look down on a Moon untroubled by humans in more than 50 years. We want to go back there, we've barely scratched the surface."
.
. . .

.
Sounds exciting. Would love to see it happening.
.
I wonder if we'll still be a technologically functional culture by then. The oligarchy seems soooo determined to take us back to the stone age, one way or another.
.
I understand that the ISS is degrading etc. etc. . . . but couldn't they at least boost it to a much higher orbit . . . if nothing else . . . as a museum of our early efforts? That's a LOT of stuff . . . to let burn up in the atmosphere! Supposedly safely???
.
Maybe some space jockeys hereon can inform us . . . let's assume they begin to build this thing . . . could they get raw material from the moon a lot cheaper than they could the earth--given that leaving the moon with it would be a lot less expensive energy wise?
.
Or are we assuming that the anti-grav vehicles would be used for such things?
.
What would the advantages be of such a location?
.
It kind of sounds a bit ideal in terms of a balanced distance between two large masses . . . but are there advantages that arise from that or is it merely a kind of philosophical symbolic balance thing? It kind of seems a bit like half-way between Phoenix and San Diego . . . only there's at least some lizards, horned toads & cacti there . . .
.

This seems confusing to me. With the very little understanding I have about orbital mechanics, it seems counter-intuitive to put a base in between Earth & the Moon; if you look at how they get landers or orbiters out to their targets, you can get an idea of what Im talking about.

Here's the Rosetta craft getting out to its Asteroid.



Anything that is going outside low Earth Orbit is using the Earth's gravitational field to slingshot out, so stopping mid-way, or in between their target destination seems counterintuitive. Although Im just basing this off the headline, maybe someone else can explain how it makes sense.

a reply to: boncho

Part of me thinks . . . at least wonders . . .

if that location would be more STABLE with less artificial adjustments needed to maintain a stationary position???

i.e. neither the earth's nor the moon's gravity would be constantly degrading it toward crashing into one or the other eventually. Though I wonder if they could get it precisely enough located . . . and would every new attached module alter that precision?

I wonder about the inclination they are gonna put the station since the moon has a inclination of 5.14 degrees.

Most efficient would be to put it in a 5.14 degrees orbit around earth so vessels leaving from the station or the moon for rendevous would be using the least amount of fuel.

a reply to: BO XIAN

Part of me thinks . . . at least wonders . . . if that location would be more STABLE with less artificial adjustments needed to maintain a stationary position??? i.e. neither the earth's nor the moon's gravity would be constantly degrading it toward crashing into one or the other eventually.

Yeah, Im sure it would be in that respect. Although they are pretty good at finding the sweet spots with the current junk floating around relatively close to Earth.

My concern or question is more based around the laws of motion. Apollo ships travelled 11.08km/s or 24,791 MPH on the return flight from the moon.

So maybe Im just ignorant to the exact positioning relative to gravitational effects of Moon & Earth, in relation to the proposed station, but it sounds like a ship or craft that's stopping to use the "halfway house" would have to slow down. Which means they'd burn fuel to do it, and once ready to disembark again, they'd need to accelerate this time without the aide of whatever gravitational effect they used to get there (slingshot).

So that's what I meant anyway. Not so much about the base and how it manages, but how the visiting craft manage to stop and go again, in an environment where it's only feasible to do very calculated burns, the least amount possible, and utilize gravitational forces from planetary objects, as much as possible.

a reply to: BO XIAN


It relates to the Lagrangian point.

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: Kashai

Right.

But could you elaborate on the implications . . . . for us laymen?

a reply to: BO XIAN




In this case between the orbits of Earth and the Moon the gravity of the two objects cancel out forming and area where objects such as satellites in remain in position with very little if any need for the vessel to use fuel to maintain that position.

From the above link...

Earth–Moon

Earth–Moon L1 allows comparatively easy access to Lunar and Earth orbits with minimal change in velocity and this has as an advantage to position a half-way manned space station intended to help transport cargo and personnel to the Moon and back.

Earth–Moon L2 would be a good location for a communications satellite covering the Moon's far side and would be "an ideal location" for a propellant depot as part of the proposed depot-based space transportation architecture.

This would be a first step towards easier access to the Moon and it is really a good idea.

The real question would be, what about 'flat earth' people?
Will they come up with a new theory when we commercialize space (for the rich..) ?

a reply to: odzeandennz


We are running out of mineral resources and as well is the potential of Helium 3 with respect to Fusion technology.

With respect to the long run we could be looking at the first efforts towards colonization of our solar system.


As far as if this will actually done in 10 years not really certain but it makes sense.

With access to our solar systems resources mankind in general should flourish.

a reply to: Kashai

It will be interesting to see how much

our tendencies and urges to flourish

will overcome

our tendencies to suicidally self-destruct.

a reply to: odzeandennz

I was shocked this past week when a very bright engineer Bro sounded like he was giving the flat earth nonsense a sympathetic hearing.

Sigh.

a reply to: BO XIAN


After WW 2 the Unite States of America was in the reality of the time the only industrialized Nation with its Economic Infrastructure left intact. What was then known as the Marshal Plan was implemented. In essence the resources of pretty much all the countries of the world were sent to the US for processing.

We know this as the 50"s where the US economically flourished.

The question of what it would mean if Mankind were afforded with near unlimited mineral resources in comparison, should result in a similar Economic Boom.

But on a scale that would be World Wide.

That sounds exceedingly plausible, to me.

That is, IF the oligarchy WANTS the USA to flourish.

. . . or our current culture to flourish.

. . . or our current politico, economic, social system to flourish.

Whereas all available evidence is that they are getting ready to pull the plug on it to crash it down to ashes around our ankles . . . to enable easier and quicker establishment of their NWO on top of our ashes.

It seems to me--that THAT is the major risk and threat to this space center being established. Sadly.

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: BO XIAN

After WW 2 the Unite States of America was in the reality of the time the only industrialized Nation with its Economic Infrastructure left intact. What was then known as the Marshal Plan was implemented. In essence the resources of pretty much all the countries of the world were sent to the US for processing.

We know this as the 50"s where the US economically flourished.

The question of what it would mean if Mankind were afforded with near unlimited mineral resources in comparison, should result in a similar Economic Boom.

But on a scale that would be World Wide.

a reply to: BO XIAN

This should have been done a decade ago.; We need to get on the ball! I say lets go, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

In 10 years they have to have anti-gravity figured out by then. They should build a base on the Moon at the same time.

originally posted by: TheBulk
This should have been done a decade ago.; We need to get on the ball! I say lets go, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

If there was any money in it, it would have been done a long time ago.

Isn't there a LaGrange Point satellite in the works now?

a reply to: BO XIAN


Actually in relation to such a project increasing human population would be ideal.


The amount of mineral wealth available in our Solar System is actually well beyond the idea of trillions of tons of raw materials, by a "long shot".

Imagine finding and turning an asteroid that is 80% platinum and about the sixe of Texas, USA.

Consider one that is 100% Iron the size of Florida, USA.

Just to name a few.

a reply to: Blue Shift


Actually several the link I provided makes that clear.

a reply to: Kashai

Oh, I think your points are reasonable ones and well made.

given various givens.

I'm just skeptical that those givens are going to remain remotely operant, in-force.

The oligarchy is allergic to large populations.

1. The critters have convinced them that the planet and mankind cannot survive with a large population.

2. They CERTAINLY know that a large population is MUCH harder to totally control AND TO REMAIN in tyrannical power over.

We shall see.

I just think the trend curves to prevent/preclude such a construction are sooner and more powerful than the ones to build it.

I hope I'm wrong.