Lunar Orbit Station?

Concerning this return to the Moon project: would there be any
advantage of a waystation in lunar orbit? I mean, going beyond
LOR-style missions to having a place to receive crews headed for the
surface. Perhaps ascent craft could be dismantled in orbit to
reassemble into an orbital platform? Or maybe the orbital platform
could act as a fueling station for reusable landing craft?

I would think that a precursor to landing on Mars would be a sizeable
station orbiting above the test landing areas. Leaving as much of your
junk in orbit made sense during Apollo, so wouldn't having more
equipment in orbit be helpful on this go-round?

(TVDad Jim) wrote in
om:

Concerning this return to the Moon project: would there be any
advantage of a waystation in lunar orbit? I mean, going beyond
LOR-style missions to having a place to receive crews headed for the
surface. Perhaps ascent craft could be dismantled in orbit to
reassemble into an orbital platform? Or maybe the orbital platform
could act as a fueling station for reusable landing craft?

A waystation in low lunar orbit makes little sense; such orbits are short-
lived due to irregularities (mascons) in the lunar gravitational field, and
would require considerable propellant to maintain. A waystation in Earth-
Moon L1 would make more sense.


--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

"Jorge R. Frank" wrote in message

A waystation in low lunar orbit makes little sense; such orbits are short-
lived due to irregularities (mascons) in the lunar gravitational field, and
would require considerable propellant to maintain. A waystation in Earth-
Moon L1 would make more sense.


But, *what* would it *do*?

In message , Jorge R. Frank
writes
(TVDad Jim) wrote in
. com:

Concerning this return to the Moon project: would there be any
advantage of a waystation in lunar orbit? I mean, going beyond
LOR-style missions to having a place to receive crews headed for the
surface. Perhaps ascent craft could be dismantled in orbit to
reassemble into an orbital platform? Or maybe the orbital platform
could act as a fueling station for reusable landing craft?

A waystation in low lunar orbit makes little sense; such orbits are short-
lived due to irregularities (mascons) in the lunar gravitational field, and
would require considerable propellant to maintain. A waystation in Earth-
Moon L1 would make more sense.


There's one in Arthur Clarke's "A Fall of Moondust" but I've never seen
the point. It isn't a stable position, so you're still going to need
fuel for station-keeping, and the only way it would seem to have an
advantage is if you have a specialised space-to-surface vehicle as part
of the Moon base system.
Even then, wouldn't a way station in LEO make more sense, protected from
solar flares?
--
Rabbit arithmetic - 1 plus 1 equals 10
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.

Jonathan Silverlight wrote:


There's one in Arthur Clarke's "A Fall of Moondust" but I've never
seen the point. It isn't a stable position, so you're still going to
need fuel for station-keeping, and the only way it would seem to have
an advantage is if you have a specialised space-to-surface vehicle as
part of the Moon base system.
Even then, wouldn't a way station in LEO make more sense, protected
from solar flares?


You mean _GEO_ I take it. For pure grandeur of concept, that ring around
the moon in the movie Starship Troopers is hard to beat- it makes no
sense...but it looks really cool. I assume it's held in place by guy
wires leading down to the surface with elevators going up and down them
as the Moon is mined for materials.

Pat

There is some logic to having a station in low lunar orbit. If staffed it
would provide a manned lunar presence with out having to actually land. If
unocuppied it t would give the astonauts a safe haven in case of emrgency.
The problem is cost for the same amount of money one could develop a landing
technology and create an abort to lunar surface option.

One possibilty that would make sense is to have crew habitiats sent ahead of
the crew. A habitat lands automatically on the lunar surface. A second,
spare, habitiat stays in lunar orbit, becoming your space station. If
disaster strikes the crew has the option to enter lunar orbit to access the
remaining habitiat. Should the LEM not fire up for the return trip you
could de-orbit the habitiat and use it for life support while a rescue is
thought out. If the mission goes well the orbiting habitat is de-orbited
and sent to the next landing site ahead of the next crew. A new "spare" is
placed in lunar orbit prior to the crew's departure.



"Jonathan Silverlight" wrote
in message ...
In message , Jorge R. Frank
writes
(TVDad Jim) wrote in
. com:

Concerning this return to the Moon project: would there be any
advantage of a waystation in lunar orbit? I mean, going beyond
LOR-style missions to having a place to receive crews headed for the
surface. Perhaps ascent craft could be dismantled in orbit to
reassemble into an orbital platform? Or maybe the orbital platform
could act as a fueling station for reusable landing craft?

A waystation in low lunar orbit makes little sense; such orbits are
short-
lived due to irregularities (mascons) in the lunar gravitational field,
and
would require considerable propellant to maintain. A waystation in Earth-
Moon L1 would make more sense.


There's one in Arthur Clarke's "A Fall of Moondust" but I've never seen
the point. It isn't a stable position, so you're still going to need
fuel for station-keeping, and the only way it would seem to have an
advantage is if you have a specialised space-to-surface vehicle as part
of the Moon base system.
Even then, wouldn't a way station in LEO make more sense, protected from
solar flares?
--
Rabbit arithmetic - 1 plus 1 equals 10
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 14:56:13 GMT, "GMW" wrote:

One possibilty that would make sense is to have crew habitiats sent ahead of
the crew. A habitat lands automatically on the lunar surface. A second,
spare, habitiat stays in lunar orbit, becoming your space station. If
disaster strikes the crew has the option to enter lunar orbit to access the
remaining habitiat.

I don't mean to be a smartass, but I can't help but imagine a crew of
gerbils

Dale

Dale wrote:

I don't mean to be a smartass, but I can't help but imagine a crew of
gerbils




Asstrogerbils? No, lets not go there.

pat

Jonathan Silverlight
wrote in :

In message , Jorge R. Frank
writes
(TVDad Jim) wrote in
.com:

Concerning this return to the Moon project: would there be any
advantage of a waystation in lunar orbit? I mean, going beyond
LOR-style missions to having a place to receive crews headed for the
surface. Perhaps ascent craft could be dismantled in orbit to
reassemble into an orbital platform? Or maybe the orbital platform
could act as a fueling station for reusable landing craft?

A waystation in low lunar orbit makes little sense; such orbits are
short- lived due to irregularities (mascons) in the lunar
gravitational field, and would require considerable propellant to
maintain. A waystation in Earth- Moon L1 would make more sense.


There's one in Arthur Clarke's "A Fall of Moondust" but I've never
seen the point. It isn't a stable position, so you're still going to
need fuel for station-keeping,

Not nearly as much as in low lunar orbit.

and the only way it would seem to have
an advantage is if you have a specialised space-to-surface vehicle as
part of the Moon base system.

You can make your LM reusable, and leave it there between flights so you
don't have to spend as much propellant hauling it around.

--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...


Dale wrote:

I don't mean to be a smartass, but I can't help but imagine a crew of
gerbils




Asstrogerbils? No, lets not go there.

I think you mean let's not go Gere.



pat