space exploration initiative: getting to the moon by 2015 an · 2018. 1. 23. · space exploration...

April 21st 2006 Property of the Jamestown Group LLC i.F.

1

Space Exploration Initiative:

Getting to the Moon by 2015 An Equal Budget / Higher

Payback AlternativeAssuring the Realization of the President’s Goal by 2015

AND US Technology Leadership on the Moon and In Space

Klaus P. HeissThe Jamestown Group LLC i.F.

A Division of High Frontier


2

Background of Author(s)• Amb. Hank Cooper, Former Director of “SDI” Program, Chairman

of High Frontier• High Frontier was/is instrumental on Space Missile Defense and

Uses of Space• Chris Vizas, Telecommunications and Information Technologies,

Co-founder of Orion Satellite Systems in 1980’s etc.• Klaus P. Heiss, Director of High Frontier

– instrumental in the 1971/2 Space Shuttle Decision (see Heppenheimer on the Space Shuttle Decision and Dr. Steven Dick, current NASA Historian)

– First to testify with Wernher von Braun and Frank Borman on STS to Senate and Congress

– Raised $1.3 Billion in early 1980’s on “Green Shuttle” and Commercial Titans (SpaceTran Corp. – FedEx and Prudential Insurance Co)

• Article on Space Shuttle/NASA “Road to Disaster” attached


3

The Jamestown Group i.F.

• Following/Reviving Historic Principles and “Path to Success” of the American Experience

• A Group of Individuals and Companies dedicated to the Economic Exploration of the Moon and Space

• With Private Property and Free Markets• Precedent in Space: ComSat/IntelSat

Moon Base ConferencesWeb Sites

• www.HighFrontier.org• www.MoonBase-usa.org• www.JamestownOnTheMoon.org


5

Moon Base 2015+


6

Current NASA Approach• “Big Stick with Gonads”: Prescription for Disaster

– Kills Space Shuttle Derivative Technologies: assertions to the contrary are a joke

– “Ketch-up” Launch Vehicle Failure Scenarios (see recent Titan Loss at WTR)

– Technical Design and Development Disasters “build-in”: severe underestimate of costs and risks

– “Re-inventing” Apollo for Billions of Dollars, taking TWICE as long (12 years vs. 6 years) and ending up with LESS (e.g. higher risks, see above)


7

Current NASA Approach (cont)• No New Technology (MDG’s own words!)• No investments into RDT&E for USES of

the Moon – sciences, applications, exploration (Solid sticks ain’t exploration)

• Launch “solutions” before any ideas as to Mission(s) requirements/activities(?!)

• “Mars” driven LV Decision (CaLV “Heavy”): Earliest Mars Mission 2032 – with PLENTY of time to develop in 2020’s


8

Needed:• A Concentrated 2010 -2020 Moon Exploration

and Development effort• Invest in Uses and Applications – not in “re-

inventing the wheel” (Apollo) Launch Vehicle efforts

• “Liberate” $3 to $10 Billion in LV development funds and invest these in RDT&E for Lunar Test Beds and Applications

• Define a “Pathbreaking” Science/Astronomy Mission on/for the Moon


9

The Atlas V Growth “Equal Budget” Alternative


10

The Atlas V Growth “Equal Budget” Alternative (cont.)


11


12

FFP Space Transportation Alternative

• FFP contract on RDT&E and Cost/Launch– Between Jamestown Group and Supplier– Between Jamestown Group and USG/NASA

including ~ 20% Risk and Management premium

– 2006 – 2020+ period• Balance Sheet “Equity” Requirement:

~ $10 Billion• Negative Cash Flow: ~ $3 Billion


13

Put “Savings” into Applications: A Moon Development Decade

A “Pathbreaker” Mission:

A Cosmic Ray Water Observatory on the Moon 2010-2019

RDT&E of all Critical Moon Applications Technology Prospects


14

Water reservoir

Cherenkov light detectors

Moon surface

depth =∼10m

side >≈ 10m

Lunar facility for HE gamma rays and HE Cosmic Rays(surface > ∼100m2 modules)


15

5÷10 m

∼100 m

Direction and ionization measurements

Electromagnetic calorimeter

Hadronic calorimeter

5÷10 m

Lunar facility for HE Gamma Rays and HE Cosmic Rays(several ∼100m2 modules)


16

Where the Water/Hydrogen is• The permanently dark

regions around the south pole have the radar reflectance properties of ice, rather than the ground-up rock powder characteristic of the rest of the Moon's surface.

• Data taken on orbits outside these south polar regions and at the north pole do not show this ice signature.


17

Earth Launch Mass vsLunar Mining Mass/Volume

20 Saturn Vs= Mass of Lunar Regolith of 1 Football Field to 1 ft depth


18

Advanced Lunar Projects and Systems (“ALPS”)

• Pre-deployed Solar and Nuclear Energy Capacities for Start-up 2010+

• “in-situ” Regolith Processing 2010+• “in-situ” Solar Cell Production 2012+• “in-situ” Energy Production 2014+• “in-situ” Wireless Energy Transmission 2014+• “in-situ” Water Production 2012+• Com/Nav infrastructure 2010+• Manned Lunar Landings: 2015+


19

Private Sector Opportunities:Synergistic Investments

• The “Attila the Hun” Billionaire Cosmic Ray Observatory (~$1 Billion – why not?! – see Keck Observatory)

• A $1 Billion “Off-shore Oil Rig on the Moon” – why not? (funds ALL energy related RDT&E – exclusive of launch costs)

• A Digital Heritage Archive “Alexandria” on the Moon – why not? (Compete between Bill Gates and Google - give them one month to commit)


20

USG/NASA Role with Industry• NASA/USG:

– Launches any and all payloads for $1.- per launch – 2008 – 2020 (- 2030?);

– Assumes any and all “third party risks”;• Industry/International “Jamestown” Partners:

– “in-situ” Lunar Resources Technologies/Payloads (water, oxygen, hydrogen, Fe, Al, … 3He)

– Energy (Solar/Nuclear) prototype/operational Payloads– Com/Nav Payloads– Data Archive(s)

• Foundations/NSF/International:– Cosmic Ray Water Observatory


21

Strategic Locations of the Moon

about 40 “Rim Lots” along “Red Horizon Line”

South Pole Region~ 1,270 Lots, hydrogen, water(?)

North Pole Region~ 1,270 Lots, hydrogen(?), water(?)

High Illumination Zones (Crater rims)

Low Illumination Zones (Crater floors)

Lunar Rim Zones~ 6,280 Lots or 3,140 Antipodal Pairs


22

Energy Potential of Rim ZonesAntipodal Pairs Only

• 3,140 Antipodal Pairs– Each pair ~ 14.6 GWe at 5% Cell Efficiency– ~ 100% Illumination Assurance

• Total Rim Energy Potential~ 50 Tera Watts electric!

• Based on Technology demonstrated in proposed RDT&E Program 2006-2015the “Cosmic Ray Water Observatory”

• RDT&E projects: see Memorandum


23

Conclusions• NASA should be redirected by Presidential Directive to “conquer the Moon”

by 2015 as outlined in this “Equal Budget/Higher Payback/Lower Risk Alternative

• Define 2010 to 2019 as the “Decade of the Moon”• Continue the CEV – but dump the “Sticks”• Procure HLLVs under FFP contracts (DDT&E and Launches)• Significant Private and International Participation in HLLVs and Lunar

Applications is likely• Implement a “Pathbreaking” Mission: the Cosmic Ray Water Observatory• Thereby MOST the RDT&E Technology Developments needed for the

Economic and Strategic Uses of the Moon are assured• Return Man to the Moon by 2015• Follow “Jamestown” to the Moon and beyond

• The Time to Act is NOW


24

Conclusions (cont.)

• It’s a Race – not a Sleep-Walk– Russia 2015– China 2017 (and dissimulating as of late)– India 2017 (?!)– Japan on Lunar Solar Energy

• Technology 2015• Deployment of 10GWe Plant 2025

– Liechtenstein: who knows? – by the looks of it before current NASA walking pathways


25

Conclusions (cont.)• Moon is “Rock of Gibraltar” AND “Hawaii” all in

one• Who develops/controls the Moon controls

– Cis-Lunar Space, – the Communications/ Information Sectors and– the Energy Sectors

• To assure Free Markets Private Sector has to be mobilized NOW in Lunar Enterprise – through/with Non-Aerospace Companies/Entities


26

The Time to Act is NOWQ.E.D.

(Quod Ego Dixit)

Klausewitz

space exploration initiative: getting to the moon by 2015 an · 2018. 1. 23. · space exploration...

Documents