ASI W9800177r1.0
#88 September 1995
Section 6.9.3.2.088.of the Artemis Data Book
A block from my home is a wetlands area. Wetlands areas, you see, are vital places teeming with animal and plant life, and purifying the waters which run into the rivers and fill the lakes. Swamps, on the other hand, are places where swarms of mosquitos drive away even those foolish enough to venture out into the muck and cattails. Same place! Just a matter of perception and understanding.
Earlier this Spring the old swamp caught on fire. What a blaze those cattails and long buffalo grass made, with flames shooting into the air 50 or 60 feet high! What had been a cathedral of dead grasses was reduced to a charred plain of some 10 acres, where nary a red-winged black bird could perch, and the muskrat mounds were exposed for the benefit of any hawk that cared to circle.
Now it's different! A lush carpet of new grasses has hidden the muskrats again, the mosquitoes are out in force, and the cattails and buffalo grass are strutting their stuff. I don't weep for the old growth because I've left that behind. I've got a better view of what's in that wetlands than I had before.
For those of us '60s kids the glory days of Apollo are the cathedral of grass. We miss the excitement, the international spotlight, and the push of heroes into the unknown. That was when space was teeming with life. Come to think of it, that's when we were teaming with life. Those who get trapped in nostalgia are impatient for the excitement and rapid pace of progress of those days. For many the Shuttle Missions don't fire the imagination much more than a visit to the local airport (even though their launches are a matter of grand spectacle). Those watching NASA are filled with pessimism because outlying annual budgets are projected to fall from around the present day $15 billion to $11 billion. Twenty thousand may be laid off.
Some may think that Dan Goldin has been out trying to smoke, and has in fact set fire to, the swamp that many feel NASA has become. In panic, some of us red-winged space buffs are sure there will be nowhere for our dreams of space settlement to perch.
This time of waiting for the new generation of technology that will at last provide cheap access to space is frustrating and difficult. The infrastructure of the old and inefficient must be burned away so that the new can flourish.
The seeds are all planted and beginning to sprout in the ashes of the old swamp. We have learned much and developed better tools for the demands of space settlement in the next millennium over the last 25 years. But we are on the brink out a new outbreak of growth and development.
The new driver for cheap routine access to space will be commercial telecommunications demands. The new global satellite telecommunications networks will change again the shape and feel of the world. Arthur C. Clarke in "How the World Was One" predicted the end of the distinction between the local and long distance telephone call around the turn of the millennium. He will be correct. When I was young we thought it was terrific to get live television pictures from Europe. Personally affordable telecommunications will permit people-to-people connections on a scale familiar to Americans in their national market since World War II, but still uncommon most everywhere on the globe outside the G-7 nations. Only the most politically repressive nations will resist this sweeping change but they will fail too against the unstoppable onslaught of teenagers demanding to tie up the phone lines!
Small telecommunication satellites launched for a million dollars are
demanded by the
This means changing our way of thinking and planning about space. This
means the community of interest in space development and settlement can
no
longer watch NASA critically from afar, or passively from within, even
as it is
being slashed to insignificance. This community must understand the new
conditions and opportunities, plan, and act.
Let me give you one small example. The Discovery Mission series is
NASA's shining example of "smarter, cheaper, faster." Having participated
in a
Discovery Mission proposal team recently, I was initially excited
to think for just $150 million (not including launch costs) we might
land on
the Moon with our proposal. Well, our Interlune I proposal
didn't
make the cut along with 26 others, and the winning 28th entry, Lunar
Prospector, did make the cut with a $ 59 million budget including
the launch cost! Its
fate in Congress, however, is still unclear. Many of these proposals cost
a
half million to a million dollars to prepare. Their design teams would
produce a unique platform of instrumentation and get a one-shot
opportunity to explore something in the solar system.
I think the Discovery program, even though it is billed as smarter,
cheaper, and faster, is still part of the old buffalo grass that needs
to be
consumed in the budgetary fire.
If a ton can be sent out of near earth space in 2005 for a launch cost
of $15 to $20 million, then many more opportunities to do so will be
possible. The number of potential players in the solar system
exploration game
will markedly increase. Large corporations and many nations like Korea,
Taiwan, Singapore, Brazil, Argentina, South Africa, and Mexico could,
by
teaming their universities, commercial interests, and governments,
afford
such launch costs. Such prestige missions would broaden the base of
people
directly involved in the community of exploration!
Potential members of the lunar exploration club, for example, would be
greatly expanded beyond the Russian, U.S., and Japanese. There is a
lot of Moon to explore and a lot of lunar missions needed which are
focused on
in situ [on-site] resource utilization, astronomy, and in situ
demonstration of telerobotic and autonomous robotic activity. What no
longer makes
sense is to spend so much design effort on unique packages. What no
longer makes
sense is the fierce competition for the once-in-a-career opportunity to
get
$200 million.
What is needed now is not a design effort that will result in the sale
of one Rolls Royce or Mercedes, but rather a design and market effort
that produces many Chevies or Toyotas. Orbital platforms and robotic
rovers that can house diversified instrumentation will be common and
therefore
should be designed for volume production. With lowered unit costs for
platforms and instrumentation costing no more than the launch, a
robotic mission to the surface of the Moon should be possible for $30 to
$40
million. With a similar strategy, orbiters to Venus or Mercury or Mars
should
also be possible for a similar range of cost.
The economic potential for many such missions is there when reusable
rocket technology arrives. Since that day will come around the
millennium
this calls for new collaborative strategies for teams that would
otherwise
be in deadly competition for the "one big score." The political
support that
can be mustered by five teams in five different nations for $30 million
is
more probable than one team getting $150 million anywhere.
JPL's New Millennium program is dead on target with its focus on
microelectronics, micro-devices, and new composite materials. The
Microdevices Laboratory at JPL's Center for Space Microelectronics hopes
for the development of probes and sensor packages that break through the
200
kilogram barrier as the measure of maturity of the first generation of
their efforts. With proper support they think this first generation
could be
ready in five years but look at 2010 as the target. They hope to break
the 20
pound barrier as the measure of maturity of second generation spacecraft
by
2020. I'm hoping for the five-years estimate. By that time, my
teenager may
well be gone and I'll definitely be in the commercial market for a
"smart"
lawnmower.
These odds really favor the builder of the "Chevrolet" or "Toyota"
platform. A "Chevy" lunar robotic rover package would provide a larger
international market opportunity for a space engineering firm than just
the hope of
one big U.S., Russian, or Japanese mission. Each
national or corporate team will want its own stamp on such missions, of
course with
specialized instrumentation. The planning windows for such platforms
is now in anticipation of the arrival of the reusable rockets in
2002-2005.
Research communities focusing on Venus, Mercury, the Moon, Mars,
and the asteroids should each generate tens of such explorations
missions!
The drop in prices for launch cost and platform and the drop in price in
global telecommunications should mean that tens of nations can afford to
be
players instead of just four or five.
If the U.S. brings its economic house in order it will again be
prepared to expand its investments in space at about the same time the
rest of the
world can afford to go. In the U.S. we have wasted a generation that
could
have resulted in a manned lunar base. We will have to be content to
watch
the burning of the old NASA swamp and enjoy the growth of the new
wetlands of commercial space telecommunications and the beginning space
resource
utilization. We will see the dependence on U.S. government funds much
reduced and an international marketplace arise with diverse sources of
financing. Cheap global communication will mean a potential for
international collaboration on new space ventures that transcend the
more nationally financed and focused projects that are typical today. A
A McDonnell Douglas U.S. reusable rocket, Japanese financing, an Indian
University team,
and a Brazilian communications conglomerate may be characteristic of
the teams
that venture onto the Moon in the next decade.
These new initiatives will refine the technology needed for a permanent
return to the Moon and the opening of Mars to human habitation.
Orbiters and mobile platforms will still perform the bulk of lunar and
Martian
exploration activities even after permanent human presence has long been
achieved for the simple reason that exposure to surface radiation will
be a carefully rationed component of human existence on the Moon and
Mars.
Telerobotic exploration via polar orbiter communications links will be
the mainstay of physical survey work. Humans may repair, rebuild, and
rescue this equipment but reserve their surface exploration time to the
really
unusual and spectacular places.
These robotic explorations will also broaden the opportunities for mass
appreciation and involvement in these activities. The education and
entertainment value of these missions will be the vehicles to reach
millions of students and their taxpaying parents and arm chair
explorers.
This public base of understanding and involvement will provide the
political
support for the eventual commitment to human presence on the Moon and
Mars and expanded commercial ventures such as the Lunar Power System,
space
tourism to LEO, and 0-G and low-G sports in LEO and on the Moon,
respectively.
The tremendous growth of satellite telecommunications using cheap
reusable rockets and a boomlet in applied science and exploration
activities on
the Moon will bring us to the point of commitment to both a manned
return to
the Moon and also to the construction of the Lunar Power System.
It is the commercial opportunity for expanded clean energy supplies
that will drive the lunar enterprise, not finances dependent solely on
government sources. The payback potential of gaining the new energy will
finally
make the two-planet economy accepted by many willing to partner in this
grand and practical venture. The accelerating energy demands of the
rapidly
expanding Chinese and Indian economies will require vast new energy
infrastructure investments whose ecological consequences would not be
acceptable if
met from fossil fuel sources. These forces will be the new drivers of
the
political economy of space.
I am impatient for a manned return to the Moon in my lifetime. But I
think that this commercial and technological evolution will require
another 15
years to occur. It is the commercial drive for space resources and
global telecommunications that will give us a vibrant human presence not
only
on the Moon but make feasible and affordable the opening of Mars as
well.
Those who wish to be part of this next push have enough time to
understand the new market of opportunities and to plan and act
accordingly.
Collaboration in our attempts to understand and explore the Moon and
its resources will go much farther than undercutting and competitive
grabs
for the declining revenues available the next few years as exemplified
by
the current Discovery Mission process. Only by designing ahead for
multiple opportunities which are an order of magnitude more cost-
efficient than
prior missions will success be attained. If cost-efficient designs are
available to a wider international community of lunar and solar system
explorers
we can be sure "if you build it they will come."
Let the swamp burn.
D.A.D
[David A. Dunlop is a core member of the Lunar Reclamation Society and
Executive Director of Lunar National Agricultural Experiment Corp. -
LUNAX, P.O. Box 275, Green Bay, WI. He is also vice-president of ISDC
'98 -
Milwaukee, of whose bold plan he is a principal architect. Over the
years, Dave has been a frequent contributer of thought-provoking essays
to both
Moon Miners' Manifesto and Moon Miners' Review.]
Contents of this issue of Moon Miners' ManifestoChanging the Way We Think About the Business of Exploration and
Research
The New Political Economy of Space
Impatience
Moon Miners' Manifesto
is published 10 times a year by the
Lunar Reclamation Society
for
Artemis Society International,
several chapters of the
National Space Society,
and individual subscribers world-wide.
Home
Tour
Join!
Contents
Team
News
Catalog
Search
Comm
Copyright
© 2001 Artemis Society International, for the
contributors. All rights reserved.
Updated Thu, Feb 19, 1998.
Maintained by
ASI Web Team
<asi-web@asi.org>.
Maintained with WebSite Director.