Space/Science — HabitableZone

Space/Science » in reply to Re: Mars, moon or NEO?

Re: Mars, moon or NEO?
p — (archived)

Sorry Geoff for calling you Kieth by mistake.
I disagree with your premise that a lunar mission is less expensive than a NEO mission.

Lunar requires delta V to land and delta V to takeoff
Nearby NEO delta V is just slightly above Lunar delta V - no landing & takeoff
Net is maybe +2 Km/sec for moon missions which means much less payload needed to LEO for the NEO mission
Less payload is less launches and less money

Lunar requires development of a lander/return vehicle
Development of a rover
R&D is not cheap these days - guess what Boeing spends on a new airplane

NEO could use a modified ISS module with lots of extra consumables, no fancy recycling - KISS
BOTH missions could add living space via inflatables

Lunar missions beyond 14 days require a TBD power source
Both missions would greatly benifit from nukes as a power source and as a propulsive mechanism, especially Lunar for power (night) and the NEO for propulsion (quicker trip times)

-p

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (46 posts)