base

When NASA still did not know how Orion’s journey was going to go within the framework of the Artemis II mission (it left on April 1 and returned successfully ten days later), the North American space agency presented its “Ignition” project with an ambitious objective: to establish a permanent base at the lunar South Pole. He approach To achieve this, it requires spending 20 billion dollars in seven years and carrying out 81 launches. It is not only a roadmap, but also a wish list for the industry and international partners where it identifies the technological gaps that must be closed to convert one-time lunar exploration into permanent human presence. NASA’s plan. The strategy to set up a base on the moon is divided into three clear stages and is iterative: Phase 1 focuses on demonstrating that it can be reached reliably, validating the landing sites and carrying the first astronauts. The limit of four tons per trip will be reached. There are 25 launches and 21 moon landings planned. Phase 2 aims to establish initial infrastructure, manned missions every six months, and increase payload capacity to 60 tons. With 27 launches and 24 moon landings. Phase 3 already aims for continuous human presence, having the capacity to move 150 tons of cargo and prepare the lunar territory. With 29 launches and 28 moon landings. Why is it important. To begin with, because the South Pole of the moon allows access to frozen volatiles (mainly water ice) in permanently shadowed regions, which could enable the use of in-situ resources, an essential step for spatial autonomy. But although the lunar base is an achievement for humanity per se, we must not lose sight of the fact that NASA does it with another objective in mind: Mars. The moon is their testing ground. In fact, this base on the moon will be a testing laboratory for seven critical areas before establishing a human base there: nuclear reactors that operate in space, operating without constant help from Earth, understanding how long missions affect the human body, creating space supply chains, protecting against abrasive dust, avoiding contaminating other worlds, and designing systems that serve both the Moon and Mars. On the other hand, with the moon NASA intends to open a market where private industry assumes some services, reducing costs for the North American organization (and therefore, for citizens). Context. Unlike the Apollo missions, which landed in equatorial areas, there is now interest in landing and settling at the lunar south pole as it offers a unique strategic duality: craters that never see sunlight (and may have water ice) next to mountains that almost always have sunlight (for solar panels). Having access to energy and frozen volatiles scientifically, strategically and economically justifies the site selection. But working there is extremely difficult. The terrain is rugged, there are high mountains and deep craters, and there are extreme thermal and lighting challenges. The Sun remains low on the horizon, creating long shadows that make solar energy generation difficult and subject equipment to periods of extreme cold. For the astronaut team it will be hard: You will have problems seeing dangers and doing basic tasks, because the human eye does not adapt quickly between extreme light and total darkness and you will also have to access those pronounced craters for ice. What NASA needs. The document identifies functional gaps that the industry must help close, classified into six subsystems: Robotics: robots that unload and move cargo weighing hundreds of kilos, that are controlled from Earth, and that work near astronauts without danger. Communications: fast connections (over 500 Mbps) between the Moon and Earth, allowing lunar equipment to communicate with each other, and lunar GPS. Logistics: systems to connect pressurized modules and transfer water, oxygen and cargo. Housing: habitats that function from days to months, with gym and medical systems so that astronauts do not weaken, garbage management, and that survive voids between missions. Transport: small rovers to explore, large rovers (at 10 km/h) manned and autonomous, which work both in light areas and in dark craters. Energy: generate and store 5 kilowatts withstanding more than 5 days of total darkness, distribute electricity between equipment. How are they going to do it?. Essentially they will follow two strategies: Previous tests with commercial robotic missions before risking human lives. Although the technologies exist on Earth, they work differently on the Moon, so they need to fly to space to validate them for debugging. An example: from the manned flyby of Artemis II to the surface landing on the moon there will be an intermediate mission in 2027. Astronauts will test docking, life support systems and communications with commercial lunar landers from SpaceX and Blue Origin, but in low Earth orbit, where rescue is still possible. There will be interoperability. With common standards that allow systems from different providers to work together. Collaborative development of standards for power, coupling and communications will enable effective partnerships. NASA is seeking partners for nine critical areas: habitats, cargo transportation, small robots, large rovers, mapping lunar resources, sample storage, and advanced navigation. Yesyes, but. The mission is ambitious, essential for space colonization and the schedule is tight, but it also faces three main threats. For starters, basic information about the moon is still lacking. We do not know the accessibility of features of interest, such as rocks or craters, or how lunar dust behaves or something as essential as where exactly the ice is. On the other hand, politics kills space projects: according to the Planetary Society To date, they have already spent 107 billion dollars, largely due to the continuous changes in the programs carried out by the different administrations. Finally, it is worth remembering that this is a race. China and Russia also want put a nuclear base at the South Pole and whoever gets there first will decide the rules. That pressure to go against the clock can cause NASA to accelerate and make the mistake that the plan wants … Read more