"Moon Base Alpha, minimum requirements" Topic

Well setting up a lunar base…Space 1999 took a stab at it, but we have learned much since then…like hippies smell terrible and they complain way too much…as well as the vast technology jumps we have made.

So strictly on a science basis, and that includes personnel health science…recreation included…gotta be happy to be healthy right?

What would be the bare minimum or primary systems would be required for long term survivability?

Taking a quick stroll around the web I found quite few references:

Location, location, and location…where there is resource water/ice we would need to be near as possible

Money…the stuff that makes the other stuff possible…exotic elements like helium-3 would pay for the project in measure and form

people…how to live with the upfront issues…high-energy Ultra-Violet radiation and energetic particles, air, food, gravity, extreme diurnal temperature variations, etc.

habitat…deep tubes, subsurface with a coating of iron-glass, or other variation of getting out of sight and micro-rocks

energy…solar is free and available, chemical exchange would be required to breathe/drink/eat/purify, and other safer types

structure…one would assume that many many smaller sections, each with sealed cross sections to allow for protective measures/security/and balance…many pods, tubes, blocks, and other sections with special purpose but with some common elements where people thrive…some aqua culture, algae scrubbers, full spectrum light, comms consoles/interface

**********************

So what of the original Alpha picture would still be available today? Our computers are light years ahead of the big boxes too be sure and given another 15-20yrs we should have experienced several major upgrades…so the command module picture if still that size a general shape would be a super computer with holographic interface…most likely with electronic paper picture and so much more.

I am thinking that since the gravity will be an issue then there will have to be exercise rooms with water for swimming or varying levels of pressure for resistance…daily use, 2-3 times a day for 15-30mins each time to maintain tone, function, and form. The walking around issue could be improved with weighted or resistance suits to increase strength and endurance.

Lots of small healthy tasty fresh foods available growing all over the station to allow for comfort as well as a measure of well being.

There would need to be a great deal of focus on schedules and balance of work with play to maintain mental/emotional health. Most likely with the advancements in computers and tech the schedule would be easy, anywhere you would be would be the right place to be…conduct your business/work and then move on…lots of overlap and redundant protocols.

Thoughts?

The International Space Station might give you some answers, including the order in which modules were assembled, what the crew does, etc.: link

For example, under "Crew schedule": "A typical day for the crew begins with a wake-up at 06:00, followed by post-sleep activities and a morning inspection of the station. The crew then eats breakfast and takes part in a daily planning conference with Mission Control before starting work at around 08:10. The first scheduled exercise of the day follows, after which the crew continues work until 13:05. Following a one-hour lunch break, the afternoon consists of more exercise and work before the crew carries out its pre-sleep activities beginning at 19:30, including dinner and a crew conference. The scheduled sleep period begins at 21:30. In general, the crew works 10 hours per day on a weekday, and 5 hours on Saturdays, with the rest of the time their own for relaxation, games or work catch-up."

I wonder how often colonists would be able to rotate back to Earth?

Moon Base Alpha woiuld, of course, have a lot more room, at least when complete. More space and lots of greenery would help mitigate any feelings of claustrophobiam, for example.

Antarctic bases would give more ideas. Also the movie "Outland."

Screening the colonists for suitability would be critical. Otherwise, you might have people contracting the dreaded Moon Madness!

I grew up on the Wiley Ley books in the fifties and built all the Monogram models as a kid, but the reality bites. The cost of getting there in numbers is prohibitive given current economics.

We're always underestimating cost and time. At the shuttle rollout for the Enterprise, the NASA speaker waxed on about how we'd have a fleet of twenty and a launch every two weeks. The shuttle--our pride and joy--looks more and more like the old description of the C-119: five million nuts and bolts flying in close formation. So any cost estimates should be tripled and time at least doubled.

As for requirements, the USAF has run a base at Thule, Greenland since at least the early fifties (my Dad went there a lot in B36s--thank God I never got sent there). Since it's an operational base, rather than a research base, it might be a better model than Antarctica (although Ant. is a better model for behavioral problems). OTOH, recent events down Gulf of Mexico way will probably lead to a lot of articles about Gulf Coast offshore oil rigs. They might give us some clues.

Unless we send anorexic supermodels trained to be engineers, I'm not sure we can afford to lift the required mass.

Those will be perfect, if they are outfitted in form-fitting clothing, to help maintain the morale of their male counterparts.

Perhaps we can hire some jockey-sized astronauts as well, since they are fairly compact, and lightweight too.

I did a year in the high cold with a self supporting station, which has recently been shut down

picture

here is our 1,350' tower being blown up yesterday :( YouTube link

the old snow cat picture

back yard picture

the punishment pit picture

Anyway…it was always ugly cold, we processed our own water/heat/power/sewage/etc., we had a long building with wings/pods, and during most of the year it looked like Jack would be chasing the Thing around the corner…so the routine is quite familiar, but the difference is night and day compared to what being on the moon would be..

I don't think a large long-term moon base is ever going to be an option. Even mining would be done pretty much as automated as possible (which would be very nearly 100%).

If there was a base, and it was long-term, then it would need to have at least one very large space. Possibly combined with a farm of sorts, but needed to allow people to get rid of the claustrophobic feelings and relax.

Underground would be easiest, giving protection from rays and meteorites.

Windows on any surface parts would have to cover during the day. It would be far easier than trying to screen the sun. At night they would give a decent view, especially as the base would almost certainly by earth-side.

People would need to rotate back constantly. Exercise is no substitute for gravity.

Living there sounds like Hell.

If you haven't seen the film "Moon", I would recommend it. The base in the film is almost 100% automated, including the mining machines. There are many redundancies built into the base as well, which makes sense.

"People would need to rotate back constantly. Exercise is no substitute for gravity."

Rotation would be key if the gravity issue could not be resolved…magnetic plating, ultra thin metal mesh form fitting clothes, etc. to bring some measure of gravity.

Perhaps…if the pods were within tubes with rings with that enclosed within a liquid module, and this allowed for rotation. It would be like being in space…but it may just be easier to have a couple space stations and rotate personnel…luna, station, Earth, etc.

As for it being like Hell…I guess that would have to be measured on your version of Hell.

I would go in a second. Being in the station, pods, etc. would be like being anywhere else, indoors. Light, water, food, TVs, computers, work, play, etc..

Within reason there would be gardens strung throughout the whole of the base, lots of interesting work, potential for high science advancements, etc. Hardly Hell in my book, but again it is a measure of tolerances and expectations.

Low gee is a , but centrifuges should sort that out. Either big ones holding entire habs or just small ones people climb into for a 2.5gee workout every day. Windows can be arranged with periscope-style piping or fibre optics. Similar optical illusions can create an outdoors feel in a small environment (like a holodeck). Rapid prototyping equipment plus a small chemical factory should help take care of basic equipment needs.

Economy – forget Helium 3, oxygen, water and propellant delivered to low Earth orbit will be the primary lunar export, along with dirt for shielding and later on structural elements. Tourism would be a significant factor. Two billionaires have already shelled out for a trip around the moon on a stripped-down Soyuz/Fregat combo.

A skyhook made of Kevlar or similar strong material would be able to deposit and extract cargo to and from the lunar surface with zero propellant usage and no stages discarded. This would really open up the moon to exploration as it would cut costs to about a quarter and make bulk cargo exportation far more competitive than Earth-launched. Food could even be grown on the moon and shipped to Earth (assuming carbon and nitrogen could be found in sufficient quantities – oxygen is abundant and hydrogen is available in certain spots).

A lunar base looks like it would be primarily commercial. Bigelow has one planned, and if his Skywalker station is a success then there is no reason to doubt a lunar base would be next. Future advances like Polywell fusion would likely hasten the development.

Commercial has the potential to really open up space. The Skywalker station will require some enormous rate of rocket launches to supply, up to twenty-four per year which will really drive costs down.

For power, I would respectfully suggest that nuclear is the way to go – especially if you can figure out the fusion problem

First of all…the concept of 'Moonbase Alpha' seems to be a 'contradiction/oxymoron' in itself. From the Wright Brothers to Apollo 11 was roughly 63 years, but less than a decade after Mercury. In the '60-70's's, we saw the '80's and 90's as being 'the future…From 2001:A space Odyssey (1968) to Lost In Space (October 1997) to Sept 13, 1999 (Moonbase Alpha)…but after Apollo, things S-L-O-W-E-D down in SOME critical areas!

I submit a more 'practical' timeline via:
space2099.tv

Moonbase Alpha and Clavius Moonbase are very similar in design, with the majority of the facility subsurface. The surface parts are made with 'lunar-concrete'…(which has been tested on earth)…and FUSING Lunar soil into blocks/bricks..which are then sealed together…would not only provide good shelter, but release needed water/oxygen etc at same time and with solar furnaces, power, (at least two weeks at a time) would not be an issue.

What IS needed is the WILL to do it, without just 'throwing money AT it'…as has been done before. The tech to get us to the moon is one of our finest achievements, but was NEVER intended to be 'sustainable' and the shuttle program, while great in concept, was like a 'mouse' built to government/military specifications…turning it into an 'elephant' we could not feed nor maintain and that could not be all things to all people.

While the type of personal 'entrepanureal?' spirit shown in 'Rocket Ship Galleo' might not be possible with over-regulation as it is now…getting a corporate/multi-corporate group like those that did the Spaceship 1/White Knight etc…to do something like an 'Eagle' and a 'Moonbase'…(possibly at south pole or north pole where water is at in shadowed craters and solar arrays can be mounted on crater walls for 365 day power….would be a start.

and as far as the 'gravity issue', 1/6th lunar gravity is better than 'micro-gravity' and exercise would still be important (till artificial grav or equivalent) could be done…but if anyone has ridden in the 'corral' (sorta like a carosel you stand up in) at the fairgrounds amusement rides…It would not take up THAT much space to mount something similar in a subsurface 'gym' where folks could exercise while UNDER 'earth gravity'…for shorter periods than they need now….and possibly avoid bone/muscle issues.

There may also be medical/pharmaceutical products in the near future that will help prevent or slow any bone loss etc…

Right now….I don't think ANYBODY has a 'clear vision' of what/where the space program is/should be/what it should be…other than tourists and some scientists and businessmen…and maybe they should be the ones 'setting the trend?'

Slish
Sgt DWW-btod

Peoeple.

1. The moon has gravity, and exercise is much less of a priority than it would be in deep space, where the complete lack of gravity (well, it isn't completely, but I don't want to go into the technicalities of microgravity)

2. Even with automation, there are going to be people who insist upon going regardless of the viability (Burt Rutan, Sir Richard Branson, both Silicon Valley Peters, Sebastian Thrun, etc.), and to say that it will never be a viability is to make the same mistake that people in the 1890s through 1920s made about mass air travel. Technology does not usually advance along a linear track, but an exponential one (even if the exponent happens to be below one for a while, making it look like it is linear), and even the exponent has been shown to increase across time.

3. There is about everything that we need on the Moon to support us once we got there (save food stocks, which could be made to be self-sustaining as well, especially considering the increasing likelihood of in-vitro meat stuffs. And, we have yet to do any experiments on how vegetation would grow in 1/6G

4. Space-X, The Chinese, India, Virgin Galactic, Lockheed, Boeing… All of these groups have moon programs currently under way. The Soviets have one on the back burner, but they have several potential offerings to such a program in lifting intermediate vehicles to high orbit (currently having the only vehicle to lift a man to high orbit), and NASA Ames has several programs to deal with habitat issues.

5.DWW is right, there are no less than 50 programs dealing with bone loss issues underway at places like Searle, Merck, Bayer, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Squib, Eli Lilly, Procter & Gamble, Tanaka (I know that more than one Japanese program is under way too, as they have plans for their own space program eventually, but plan to buy commercial Single-Stage-to-Orbit vehicles when they become available. Until then, they do research on issues that affect humans in space… Rather a far-view approach that may take us flat footed when they get into space), and Roche to name but the few I have read about on JSTOR). Current research is aimed at Osteoporosis, keeping in mind potential applications to the space program (many of these drugs will be doing field trials on the ISS in 2011 through 2013).

Once we get a viable commercial industry in space (and there are nanotechnologies that can only be constructed in zero-G that could make a space-race in the late teens almost certain in order to build peta-bit microprocessors and memory chips with a density of around 1 gigabit per mcrometerČ… Technically, that is probably a conservative estimate as HP is saying they can reach that with Memristor technology in three years… Anyway, back to the main point. Once there are reliable commercial transportation systems to beyond low orbit, then it will make it much easier for others to license that technology and improve upon it with greater ease.

Plus, there are companies like Bigelow Aerospace who have tested a Low-Earth-Orbit habitat (1/4 size of their planned final version) that can be used as a way station to further destinations (such as construction in space of vehicles to take people to the moon and beyond and operate as re-fueling stations, eventually getting their fuel from the moon rather than the Earth to save money (it is about 1/4 the cost to sent a similar weight from the moon to orbit than it is to lift it out of our gravity well)… And, Space Adventures is currently working with the Soviets on a program to do Orbital visits to the Moon and eventual landing and return missions…

Odds are likely (and I say this in every one of these threads), that any National program to go to the moon will be met by a parking valet from Virgin Galactic, Bigelow, SPace-X, or Space Adventures (or, all of them will have big signs, seen from orbit "Cheapest parking on the moon here! We watch your vehicle for you and clean the windows, no extra charge… Need more fuel, Cheapest prices on LOX and Liquid Hydrogen, or, you can get Hydrazine at rock bottom prices!"

BTW, on a side-note…. If any of you don't have an iPad yet… It ROCKS for basic web-surfing and posting… This post was made from my iPad and it was easier to navigate and do everything but type (and typing isn't that much harder) than it is with my laptop or desktop machine, and, with the bluetooth, I can have the screen displayed on the 30" desktop (or wall mount) and use the iPad as a simple control for the larger screen.

I am working on a stylus device that will allow CAD to be controlled from the iPad… That will make it so freaking easy to work in CAD, the iPad will be a combination mouse-pointing device, and graphic's tablet.

This info comes from NASA Ames

Oh, and none of what I said takes into account changes in human physiology that may make deep space much less dangerous, such as nanites patrolling our blood stream that can carry extra chemicals, gasses, etc. or block up pores (and cause the liquid covering our eyes to become a viscous gel) in our skin to create an airtight seal in the case of exposure to a hard vacuum (These same nanites could patrol for cells damaged by radiation as well, either repairing them or removing them)

Space-based computers are not and never will be state of the art. The smaller the transistors are, the quicker cosmic radiation turns them into swiss cheese. The 2000-vintage IBM Thinkpads they use on ISS have to be replaced every 6 months, and everything – EVERYTHING – has to be certified to be used in space, which is a lengthy, expensive process (eg if your Bluetooth interferes with the gyro system). So no iPads in space. When they get to streamlining rules and so on, perhaps you can carry something a couple of years behind current tech (or take something to run for a few weeks and break), but otherwise no.

Lampyridae…Latin for "look at my butt" :) picture

That is interesting stuff, makes some sense in regards to any damage would affect smaller items with more impact. Though, as I have been in the electronics technology career field since 1983 I have seen some seriously shielded equipment…smaller would be easier to protect for the same reason it would be damaged by less.

But it is certainly as aspect that would have to be dealt with to be sure.

Thanks all, good points.