Документ взят из кэша поисковой машины. Адрес оригинального документа : http://selena.sai.msu.ru/Symposium/future.doc Дата изменения: Mon Oct 6 18:10:16 2008 Дата индексирования: Thu Feb 27 20:19:26 2014 Кодировка: Поисковые слова: п п п п п п п п п п п п п п п п п п п п п п

ON THE FUTURE OF LUNAR DEVELOPMENT

H.H.Koelle, Aerospace Institute Technical University Berlin, Germany.

1.Introduction

Spaceflight can be considered as a natural, an essential and a logical
step of the evolution of the human species. Exploring space, learning to
live and work in space, and using its natural resources, will improve the
quality of life on Earth and last-not-least enhance the survival chances of
our civilization!

Automatic space vehicles are extremely useful in many applications;
quite often they are essential. They have now been in operation for more
than a decade in near Earth space as well as in interplanetary space; some
have even left the solar system. There is no question that they will also
be used heavily in the future. However, it must be realized that robots
have advantages and limitations. In many cases they must be supplemented by
human skills. For many decades in the past, astronauts and cosmonauts have
demonstrated their usefulness in laboratories in orbits about the Earth and
in exploring the Moon. However, the space activities we are privileged to
witness during the present phase of human development, is just the
beginning of mastering a new dimension. It must and will go on - the
question to answer is only when and how. Options have to be defined,
optimised and communicated to the decision makers in order to be ready for
when the time comes to take new decisions 3,5,7,9,11,12,22,23.

2. Objectives and Ground rules

No later than after the expected completion of the International Space
Station (ISS) the question will have to be answered: SHOULD WE STOP HUMAN
EXPLORATION OF SPACE OR WHAT IS NEXT? It appears unlikely that the human
exploration of space will be discontinued, because the evolution will not
end 11, 12. A logical choice would be returning to the Moon and to
establish an International Lunar Laboratory (ILL).

In so doing, the following objectives would be -at least partially -
achieved 9, 16, 17:
1. Provide a science laboratory in the unique environment of the Moon for
experiments that cannot be conducted on Earth.
2. Improve our knowledge of the Moon and its resources.
3. Improve the understanding of our own planet.
4. Improve our understanding of our solar system and the Universe.
5. Stimulate the development of advanced technology on Earth.
6. Establish the first extraterrestrial human settlement as an initial step
for expanding human activities in our solar system beyond our home planet.
7. Produce marketable services and products on the Moon for
extraterrestrial or terrestrial use.
8. Demonstrate the potential growth beyond the Earth.
9. Provide a survival shelter in case of global or cosmic catastrophes.
10. Provide reliable space transportation systems to the Moon.

An adequate sized lunar facility, also providing commercial
opportunities and growth potential, seems to be an attractive and
affordable option for the first half of the 21st century. A detailed model
of such a lunar laboratory has the following main characteristics.

Ground rules and representative assumptions for lunar base studies:

1. - This initial lunar installation and the space transportation
system supporting this lunar enterprise are government owned. They are
financed by public funds through budget allocations of one or several
national space agencies. This assumption excludes financing costs and a
general profit. However, standard profits for the contractors delivering
the hardware and services required, are included. - Leasing of some
research facilities to commercial users during the later operational years
are envisioned and will reduce the burden on the taxpayers accordingly.

2. - The fully reusable space transportation system serving the lunar
installation is designed for growth. It could also be employed in other
space projects requiring flights to the low Earth orbit, to the
geostationary orbit or other extraterrestrial destinations. It is assumed
that the lunar logistics activities require initially most of the available
launch capacity and thus accepts the development burden. This is an
assumption leading to conservative cost estimates! Additional uses of the
space transportation system will lead to considerable savings to the lunar
program. This, as always, is a choice of either a limited investment and
high operation cost or vice versa, offering in addition growth potential.

3. - The first control variable for sizing these science oriented
lunar facilities is the number of laboratory spaces to be provided for
experimenters involved in public and commercial research and development
activities on the lunar surface. - This parameter starts out with only few
working places in the early years growing to about 45, equivalent to 45% of
all persons on the Moon, in the 30th year of the life-cycle in the selected
scenario.

4.- The second control variable of operating a lunar base is the
length of the duty cycle per crew member. It impacts heavily the launch
rate of the passenger vehicle serving the lunar facility and thus system
cost. The average duty cycle for lunar crew members in this science
oriented enterprise is planned to be about nine months. An average duty
cycle of six months would increase the passenger transportation cost
markedly, but is within the capabilities of the space transportation system
proposed, if required.

5. - The third control variable for sizing lunar facilities is the
mass of lunar products to be produced annually. - Typically, the production
begins in the first year of the life-cycle processing lunar soil at a rate
of about 20 metric tons per day growing to about 50 t per day in due
course, producing lunar oxygen and some construction materials. The
production activity becomes more effective during the life-cycle by
increasing utilization rates of the lunar soil input, which grows in this
model run from 1.5 percent initially to about 2.5 percent in the 30th year
of the operational life-cycle.

6. - Facilities are sized allowing the production of nearly all the
oxygen propellants for the lunar landing and launch vehicle (LUBUS) on the
Moon. The return propellants of the HLLV payload stage will use Earth
propellants to be onboard at launch for reasons for crew safety instead
using lunar oxygen, but also in the interest of overall economy. Some
liquid oxygen may also to be imported during the first years by tanker
flights from the Earth to the lunar orbit service station (LUO-SOC), in
case the production of lunar oxygen will not cover all of the requirements
in the first two or three years. This assumption is a compromise, adopted
with the intent to increase crew safety, not to overload the production
facilities, to keep the operation as simple as possible and to keep the
cost down.

7.- Hydrogen propellants are delivered from the Earth by the HLLV
throughout the entire life-cycle to lunar orbit for refuelling the lunar
launch- and landing vehicles(LUBUS) at the lunar orbit space operations
centre(LUO-SOC). This is practical and cost-effective as has been found in
the system analysis.

8. A space operations facility (LUO-SOC) is employed in lunar orbit
for storage of propellants, transfer of cargo and passengers. This space
based facility is a modified second stage of the heavy lift launch
vehicle(HLLV). It is prepared for its mission in LEO, transferred to LUO by
its own propulsion, and will be operational before the first lunar crew
arrives at the lunar base site.

3. Typical Lunar Laboratory performance

A typical lunar laboratory based on the ground rules listed above that
is to be established in the first half of the 21st century may have the
following attributes and/or performance characteristics:
Duration of development period 10 years
Duration of operational life cycle 30 years
Average crew duty cycle 0.75 years
Number of lunar crew members 20 to 100
Accumulative number of lunar labour-years 2,000
Mass of lunar facilities & equipment at end of LC 1,000 t
Average annual imports 88 t
Average annual output mass of lunar products 450 t

The cost of such an enterprise supported by public funds is summarized
in the next table. The total program costs add up to 74 billion (1999) U.S.
dollar in a 40 year period, less than 2 B $ p.a., and is broken down in
table below!

Cost summary of a Lunar Laboratory with a 10 year development phase
and a 30 year operational life-cycle - (million 1999 $ at 0.2 million $ per
man-year) :
Development & test of lunar facilities-10 year: 9,340
Dev.& test of space transportation system-10year: 18,923
Subtotal development & test - 10 year: 28,263
Sustained engineering STS - 30 year: 4,146
Production of space transportation system(STS): 9,911
Operation of space transportation system(STS): 6,620
Operation lunar facilities: 24,690
Subtotal operations - 30 years operational LC: 45,377
Total Lunar Laboratory System - 40 year life-cycle: 73,630
Specific cost per lunar labour year 38

It is important to notice that these investments for a first lunar
laboratory would not be required in the next few years! They would have to
be budgeted beginning about ten years from now, with the peak after year
2010. By then, the military expenditures are expected to come down by more
than these amounts. This assumption is based on the presently expected
geopolitical trends in the foreseeable future.

While there will be an unavoidable peak during the development phase,
there is a major decline of annual cost after initial beneficial occupancy
of the lunar laboratory. This public financial burden can be further
reduced by leasing laboratory spaces on the Moon to interested commercial
enterprises and also by selling lunar products at the amount of about 100
tons p.a. to the interested companies or persons. This commercial potential
could amount to several hundred million dollars per annum.

In case the lunar space transportation system or elements of it are
also employed in other space missions, e.g. planetary exploration, the
development burden of the lunar space transportation system for the lunar
base will be reduced by 1/3 to 1/2.




4. Conclusions based on results of recent lunar base studies

In the process of analysing and evaluating alternative plans for the
next phase of lunar development, several options have been investigated by
means of detailed simulation models. These have resulted in annual
estimates of the most important system parameters and the system behaviour
as a whole. The governing consideration in this analysis can be formulated
as follows:
"The primary objective in the process of the evolution of the human
species is to develop the access to extraterrestrial resources, beginning
with the Moon, to learn to live and work in space, use the resources
available and last not least, to establish the first extraterrestrial human
settlement."

A representative lunar laboratory development, modestly extending the
present state-of-the-art, has been analysed in some detail to obtain a
general overview of the costs and benefits involved. A typical scenario
would be a go-ahead in the year 2005, a development phase from 2006 to 2015
and beneficial occupancy in 2016 with a 30-year operational life-cycle. A
science and technical development oriented lunar base would start out with
a crew of less than 20 people. The lunar population would reach a level of
about 50 after ten and 100 after 30 years. Various services are offered to
users on Earth and pilot plants would experiment with the manufacturing of
lunar products. It could be downsized at any time in the operational phase
if the expected benefits are not achieved, or upgraded if new developments
require such action.

The development and operation of a modest lunar base could be realized
in a 40-year period for less than 80 billion (1999) US dollars, if planned
carefully and managed by a competent organization. The peak demands of
public funds would reach about seven billion dollars annually at the end of
the development phase, an amount that is less than one percent of current
global military expenditures. The average annual cost over the 40-year life-
cycle would be less than two billion dollar, which is merely one percent of
the present annual military expenditures of the United States. Form this
viewpoint it appears economically feasible even on a national scale, at
least for the United States of America.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. There is no quick and dirty or cheap solution to return to the Moon
soon and to accomplish a meaningful activity of lunar exploration to
achieve the defined objectives. Establishing a small lunar outpost with a
few people and for a limited time does not appear to be an attractive
proposition due to its poor cost-effectiveness (> 1 B $ per lunar labour-
year) and the high risks involved. Even for the smallest outpost, total
expenditures cannot be held below 50 Billion dollars and moreover, most
investments would have to go into an infrastructure that is poorly used.
2. Based on present insights and extending modestly the present state-
of-the-art, it is possible to develop technically feasible and attractive
concepts of returning to the Moon in order to establish semi-permanent or
permanent lunar facilities. This would allow the continuation of lunar
exploration early in the 21st century at affordable expenditures and an
acceptable risk.
3. The required investments appear feasible and affordable if seen in
perspective. The big hurdle of a decision to enter a new phase of lunar
development is the sizable up-front investment requiring an average of
about $ 4 billion (1999) and peaks of up to $ 7 billion for a ten-year
period. This investment can not come from private sources, it would
probably require the efforts of a group of national governments interested
in the exploration and utilization of extraterrestrial resources for the
benefit of the present and future generations.
4. It appears quite possible that - after an initial phase - the
annual burden to the public for maintaining the operation of this type of a
lunar base can - by partially commercialising lunar activities - be held to
about one billion dollar which makes this option a very attractive
proposition. It would open the door to a development leading to space based
solar and/or nuclear energy delivered to the users on Earth and in space.
5. Thus, it is recommended to re-open the discussion of returning to
the Moon at the time the International Space Station (ISS) is nearly
completed, or even before. After a few years of discussion at the
international level an agreement among the participating nations should be
possible by the year 2005. Development could begin by 2006 and beneficial
occupancy of an initial lunar base should then be possible by the year
2016. This planning effort should include the option to continue this line
of exploring and utilizing extraterrestrial resources by expeditions to the
planet Mars involving human crews.

REFERENCES

1. H.H.Koelle, B.Johenning: "Lunar Base Simulation", Aerospace Institute,
Technical University Berlin, Report ILR Mitt.115(1982), Nov 1,1982, 205 pp.
2. H.H.Koelle: "A Permanent Lunar Base - Alternatives and Choices", SPACE
POLICY, vol.2, no.1, Feb.1986, pp.52-59
3. The Report of the National Commission on Space: "Pioneering the Space
Frontier", Bantam Books, May 1986
4. H.H.Koelle, U.Apel et al.: "Comparison of Alternative Strategies of
Return-to-the Moon- CASTOR", J.British Interplanetary Society, vol.39,
no.6, June 1986, pp.243-255
5. S.K.Ride: "Leadership and America's Future in Space", A Report to the
NASA Administrator, August 1987
6. B.B.Roberts: "Mission Analysis and Phased Development of a Lunar Base",
ACTA ASTRONAUTICA, vol.17, no.7, pp 739-750, 1988
7. Office of Exploration, NASA, Annual Report to the Administrator: "Beyond
Earth's Boundaries", 1988
8. J.C.Seltzer: "A Lunar Bibliography", JSC 22873 (Rev.A), Nov.1989
9. IAA: "The Case for an International Lunar Base", ACTA ASTRONAUTICA,
vol.17,no.5,May 1988, p.463-490, Final version as a special report of the
International Academy of Astronautics, Paris, 1990, 64 pp.
10. H.H.Koelle.B. Johenning: "A Multi-Vehicle Space Carrier Fleet Cost
Model for a Multi-Mission Scenario", Aerospace Institute, Technical
University Berlin, Report ILR Mitt.240(1990), May 1,1990, 99 pp.
11. Thomas P.Stafford and the Synthesis Group: "America At The Threshold",
The White House, USA, May 3,1991
12. European Space Agency: "Mission to the Moon", ESA SP-1150,June 1992
13.H.H.Koelle, B.Johenning: "Cost Estimates for Lunar Products and their
Respective Commercial Prices", ACTA ASTRONAUTICA, vol.32, no.3, pp.227-237,
March1994
14. European Space Agency: "Towards a World Strategy for the Exploration
and Utilisation of Our Natural Satellite, International Lunar Workshop,
May/June 1994
15. H.H.Koelle: "Political, Economical and Technical Forces Controlling
Lunar Development", Preprint IAA-95-IAA.3.1.02, 46th IAF Congress,
Oct.3,1995, Oslo
16. AIAA Subcommittee on Lunar Development: "Lunar Base Quarterly", nos.1
through 4,1994,1995,1996 and nos. 1 and 2,1997
17. IAA Subcommittee on Lunar Development (H.H.Koelle, Chairman):
"Prospects and Blueprints for Lunar Development", 200 pages, January 1997
INTRERNET:http://vulcain.fb12.TU-berlin.de/ILR/personen/hh_koelle.html,
18. H.H.Koelle: "The Lunar Laboratory - An attractive Option for the next
Phase of Lunar Development", Model 3.0 - March 1996, Aerospace Institute,
technical University Berlin, ILR Mitt.303, March 15,1996, 27p.
19. Peter Eckart: "Parametric Model of a Lunar Base for Mass and Cost
Estimates", Herbert Utz Verlag, Muenchen, 1996, 234 p.
20. H.H.Koelle: "Comparison of Future Launch Vehicle Concepts for Cargo
Transportation to Low Earth Orbit and Lunar Destinations", Aerospace
Institute, technical University Berlin, ILR Mitt.314(1997), 39 pp.
21. H.H.Koelle: "A Representative Concept of an Initial Lunar Base - (Model
4.0- May 1997), Aerospace Institute, technical University Berlin, ILR
318(1997), 1.5.97, 51 pp.
22. The International Academy of Astronautics 5th Cosmic Study (H.H.Koelle,
D.Stehenson-eds.): "Preparing For A 21st Century Programme of Integrated,
Lunar and Martian Exploration And Development", IAF Congress, Amsterdam,
1999.
Executive Summary: http://vulcain.fb12.tu-berlin.de/Koelle/CS51/CS51.html
Full Report:http://vulcain.fb12.tu-berlin.de/Koelle/CS52/CS52.html.
23. H.H.Koelle: "Analysis of performance, cost and sensivity of a reusable
heavy lift multi-mission space transportation system using lunar
propellants", Aerospace Institute ,TU Berlin, ILR Mitt.335(1999).