Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by takyon on Thursday June 30 2016, @10:22PM   Printer-friendly
from the space-rig dept.

Dubbed the "Cislunar 1,000 Vision," an initiative outlined by American launch provider ULA (United Launch Alliance) foresees a self-sustaining economy that supports 1,000 people living and working in Earth-moon space roughly 30 years from now. The basic outline is to develop re-fueling capability in Earth-moon space, perhaps by propellant made using water extracted from the moon or asteroids. This, in turn, will make it more economically feasible to get to destinations more distant. From the article:

For example, a rocket could carry just enough fuel to get to low Earth orbit and then refuel its upper stage in space to get a payload to the much more distant geosynchronous transfer orbit.

"I can potentially do that whole mission cheaper if I can get propellant cheap enough in low Earth orbit," Sowers said. George Sowers is vice president of advanced programs for Colorado-based ULA.

The concept stems from an analysis and ongoing technical work by ULA involving a souped-up Centaur rocket stage called ACES (Advanced Cryogenic Evolved Stage), a tanker called XEUS, and a "kit" that augments an ACES stage, allowing the vehicle to land horizontally on the lunar surface and to be stocked with moon-mined fuel for transport.

Sowers continues:

ULA will solicit proposals for ACES' upper-stage engines, tapping the technologies of aerospace companies such as Aerojet Rocketdyne, XCOR Aerospace and Blue Origin. And the U.S. Air Force is supporting some ACES work under rocket propulsion system contracts, Sowers said.

"There's a lot of activity ongoing," he said, "and we're designing a Vulcan booster to accommodate the ACES upper stage."

Vulcan is ULA's next-generation launch system. [Vulcan Rocket: ULA Unveils New Modular Launch System (Video)]

"Once we have ACES flying, sometime in the early to mid-2020s, we would be in a position to utilize space-provided propellant," Sowers said.

[...] "For the most part, the only potential customers for space-based fuel have been space agencies. But their timelines keep shifting, their budgets keep getting reappropriated and the political will to enable this kind of activity 'gets bogged down in bureaucratic zombie zones,' [mining technologies and robotics provider Dale] Boucher said. [,,,] "the ULA plan enables commercialization in deeper space and provides risk reductions for space-agency-sponsored missions."

Franchises anyone?

Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Thursday June 30 2016, @11:06PM

    by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Thursday June 30 2016, @11:06PM (#368194)

    It's interesting to talk about these kind of plans, and nothing will ever happen if no-one makes plans, but I can't see what people's motivations might be for going to space.
    My ancestors colonised the country I live in because they were tenet farmers at home, there was no prospect of life improving for them, and the new land offered a better life.
    I guess if there was somewhere to go in space, where a better life could be make, then people would move, otherwise these guys are just refuelling rockets for the sake of refuelling rockets.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Friday July 01 2016, @08:56PM

    by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Friday July 01 2016, @08:56PM (#368628)

    There are other reasons, political and religious, e.g. Those reasons won't survive the first generation unchanged, but they can motivate the originals, and the next generation will have it's own reasons.

    That said, I don't think we know enough about closed ecosystems to make this work yet. So I didn't bother to read the proposal, but I trust they're planning on burying the lunar base to protect it from radiation. In space one might imagine an electromagnet diverting charged particles, but on the lunar surface it seems to me that burying the base would be a better solution. (IIRC, the original O'Neil wheel envisioned importing soil from the moon to act as a radiation shield.)

    Put not your faith in princes.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 01 2016, @10:40PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 01 2016, @10:40PM (#368668)

    How about going into space to have some new mix of a gift economy, or improved subsistence economy, or a better planned economy, or a universal basic income supported by robotics (like in Marshall Brain's Manna book with the "Australia Project")? Then there might be some good reasons to move into space to be part of that. See also James P. Hogan's sci-fi writings. Too bad so many people can just think about expanding the current neoliberal economic model into space.