Talk-Polywell.org

http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/11/nasaspaceflight.html

Interesting...probably too good to be true.


http://www.newspacewatch.com/articles/m ... oject.html


Doesn't seem to indicate how they plan on making back their investment.

Golden Spike Co. may announce private lunar expedition at December 6 event



http://www.examiner.com/article/golden- ... b_articles


The space blog Parabolic Arc posted on Dec 1, 2012 that a mysterious space enterprise, called the Golden Spike Company, is going to make an announcement about its future plans at a press conference at the National Press Club on December 6. Golden Spike is reported to be the commercial space company that plans to undertake a private expedition to the moon by 2020.

Coincidentally, December 6 is the day before the 40th anniversary of the launch of the last manned mission to the moon, which took place at 12:33 AM EST in Dec 7, 1972.

It will be interesting to hear what is the business case for going to the Moon. Certainly there is the technology and the will to do it. For a commercial enterprise one needs to turn a profit and I just don't see it. Maybe this is a new take on the reality TV market or some such. In any case, an announcement that there will be an announcement is a little premature for news.

Alan Stern is involved with it from what I hear.

Ah, so they're going hunting for Yttrium.

More power to them, though one would have thought robotic missions would be first.

Hey, neat.

I wonder where they will land and where they might setup a permanent base?

Ring one or both poles with electrical wires and solar collectors. Say around 80 to 85 degrees north or south. Build your base nearby at the same latitude. Now mine the ice. You have 24/7 power, and water for fuel, food and to drink.

He who controls the spice...er....ice controls the solar system! Low gravity so you don't have to move water from Earth. Good schools. A frontier can do spirit. Tax breaks from the...uh...hell, the laws are a bit vague aren't they? Well, possession is 9/10ths right? Maybe that's the reason to go. Get possession. You don't know what the future will hold. Worry about the details later.

I'll bet China is already working towards this.

Hey, if a Govt moves battleships into space, who will it fall under, Navy or Air Force or a new dept?

I think house Exxon, under its new CEO Paul Atreides, should relocate to the moon.

I doubt they'll choose a place to settle until they find a deposit of Neobium or Yttrium they want to mine. I recall reading about Moon Ex back when I was involved in a Lunar X-Prize competitor. I'm pretty sure they do intend to use robotic missions to search for precious and scarce metals and mine them.

USAF and US Navy have long been at odds as to who gets the space ships and they both have credible claims. USAF has the expertise in aerospace but the NAVY has what's left over from JIMO's Prometheus reactor and more experience with mobile fission reactors than the rest of the planet combined, as well as the necessary command structure and experience in managing groups of men at sea--the closest experience we have to managing groups in space. It seems to me a toss up who will get the spacecraft if indeed either of them do. They might well both get them.

Unfortunately I still don't see a business case for mining the moon and bringing stuff back. I'd be very surprised if anyone had actually put serious money into this, meaning tens of millions of dollars.

Oh, you're probably right.

Still, it would be fun to see a mad dash race. And having all that ice and sunlight would be useful.

There are no sure fire profitable plans that I'm aware of but here's what I see as a possible profitable path.

Tourism. Offer stays on the moon with a bit of pressurized rover
"exploration." After you have the initial round of adventurers taken care of, go for the most exclusive resort in human history. Not just a series of pressurized habitats but an actual resort, Dubai style. Complete with five star restaurants, masseuses, consorts, and anything else a multimillionaire on the moon needs to feel pampered.

If you can make a profit doing this, you've learned how to live long term on the moon and do construction in microgravity. You've probably done your fair share of mining and you certainly have some kind of cheap efficient space tug.

So build radio, infrared, and any other spectrum you can manage telescopes. Rent out time on them to scientists looking for scope time. Maybe NASA might want to talk to you about extending the DSN. Make sure you have asteroid tracking capability.

Locate and mine earth crossing asteroids. Volatiles, thorium, uranium, precious metals. Offer to boost their orbits as you're dismantling them. That'd be worth something to the international community. (Maybe) Save the gold.

You're not making any money if you're importing much from earth so you've probably developed quite the high tech manufacturing capability. When NASA or the ESA wants to send a probe to Mars or somewhere else, you can probably beat any earth-bound contractor with automated manufacturing and can certainly launch the probe for a fraction of what any earth-bound launch facility could. I'm sure members of congress, NASA, and the military will keep launch services busy with their publicly funded vacations, oops, I mean fact-finding tours.

Banking. You've got gold, offer banking services, mostly to countries at first, expand as you can. It's also your best defense. The threat of 100 tons of gold coming down in 1 ounce packages all over africa and asia is much bigger threat than anything short of a dinosaur killer. I bet the elite would rather face an asteroid than that level of financial disruption.

The real problem is that our current financial system is based on an ever increasing monetary supply. That puts any kind of long term investment at a serious disadvantage. Between that and the increasing weight of our welfare state, we have some dark times ahead. I'm hopeful though that once we're done with the current system, we'll see that leaving was much less disruptive than anyone thought.

It would be easier if we had a party that could make a competent counter-argument but we have no such party so we'll have to make due without one.

Blankbeard wrote:It would be easier if we had a party that could make a competent counter-argument but we have no such party so we'll have to make due without one.

Oh we've hashed over the details of these things long ago. It's pretty common knowledge that none of what you're talking about is economically feasible. It's also pretty obvious you're new to the whole alt space issue and that's why you make these sorts of freshman mistakes. What is surprising is you're so impatient to demonstrate so clearly the depth of your ego and ignorance.

To go round trip to the Moon requires at a minimum, 2 Falcon 9 launches with Dragons and as yet undesigned lunar landers. That's a $120M dollar investment for 3 or 4 people to be in space for a couple weeks. No private company is going to front quite literally, tens of trillions of dollars to build a hotel on the Moon that no more than 100 people could ever possibly afford to use. Therefore, all talk of Lunar Hotels is talk from ignorance, by people who sound more foolish the longer they stroke themselves with their verbal masterbation.

By contrast, the report here is that Alan Stern is involved which means Moon Express:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_Express

MoonX has very specific goals as you'll see, and they do not include a hotel, banking, or any such other stuff that all absolutely REQUIRES a space transport system many orders magnitude cheaper than what rockets of any kind can ever deliver. It is not a good bet that MoonX will ever have the kinds of money necessary to even deliver the robots to the Moon needed to identify the proper ore samples, but that is their first step.

Not hotels. . .

Maybe they'll try to impress that they intend to use a sling to launch their mined and refined materials but when it comes right down to it, there is no business case for mining in space yet and there will not be until we can move beyond propellant based propulsion.

Blankbeard wrote:There are no sure fire profitable plans that I'm aware of but here's what I see as a possible profitable path.


Banking. You've got gold, offer banking services, mostly to countries at first, expand as you can.

Well...if you wish you could consider this idea:

viewtopic.php?t=3383&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

I proposed it with Mars in mine, but wouldn't be surprised if some version of it happened on the Moon first. Basically it is Cayman Islands in space. The beauty of it is that "Tourism", "pay-per view", even mining could be done up front with the tax shelter idea more hidden.

From the 1st posted link:

Golden Spike is also reported to have reserve a launch of the SpaceX Falcon Heavy at a cost of $120 million. The Falcon Heavy is capable of lofting 54 metric tons to low Earth orbit.

The cost of each manned lunar expedition is pegged at $2 billion.

If Musk succeeds in making the Falcon Heavy reusable how much of a cost reduction will occur? Easily 10X reduction in launch costs.

GIThruster wrote: Oh we've hashed over the details of these things long ago. It's pretty common knowledge that none of what you're talking about is economically feasible. It's also pretty obvious you're new to the whole alt space issue and that's why you make these sorts of freshman mistakes. What is surprising is you're so impatient to demonstrate so clearly the depth of your ego and ignorance.

You are a clown and this is the last of my time I'll waste on you. Luckily, there are plenty of decent people to converse with here.

GIThruster wrote: To go round trip to the Moon requires at a minimum, 2 Falcon 9 launches with Dragons and as yet undesigned lunar landers. That's a $120M dollar investment for 3 or 4 people to be in space for a couple weeks. No private company is going to front quite literally, tens of trillions of dollars to build a hotel on the Moon that no more than 100 people could ever possibly afford to use. Therefore, all talk of Lunar Hotels is talk from ignorance, by people who sound more foolish the longer they stroke themselves with their verbal masterbation.

Again with the personal attacks. There's no need to be hostile, I'm sure you're a valued human being. Use your inside voice and your kind words and people will like you.

And yes, I'm aware that any plan to utilize space faces extreme hurdles. We have no space infrastructure. Until we have some, using space for anything is hard. It's the classic chicken and egg problem. Luckily, we have people who are willing to take risks because they see the ability to profit (and probably a bit of humanitarian altruism as well)

Hey, space hotels!

http://www.spaceislandgroup.com/sig-vision.html

And these guys want to offer circumlunar vacations from both sides of the atlantic.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... ntrip.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/artic ... -100m.html

More here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_tourism

So, the idea is not quite as crazy as you'd like it to be.

Besides, who exactly do you think you are? You've demonstrated no ability in any relevant field be it scientific or financial. You're not an authority on anything. You're a forum poster. And that's all you're going to be treated as.

GIThruster wrote: By contrast, the report here is that Alan Stern is involved which means Moon Express:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_Express

MoonX has very specific goals as you'll see, and they do not include a hotel, banking, or any such other stuff that all absolutely REQUIRES a space transport system many orders magnitude cheaper than what rockets of any kind can ever deliver. It is not a good bet that MoonX will ever have the kinds of money necessary to even deliver the robots to the Moon needed to identify the proper ore samples, but that is their first step.

I wish them all the luck in the world. They'll have to develop the sort of infrastructure I mentioned in order to succeed. But let's look at what you wrote and what they'll face. First off,

banking, or any such other stuff that all absolutely REQUIRES a space transport system

Why would banking require a space transport system of any note? You are aware modern banking is done electronically, right? You need a vault, assets, an internet connection, and a combination of reputation and discounts sufficient to attract customers. If you can build a moon base, you have or can mine for the first three. Even if you use asteroids, why do you think you'd need a transport system

many orders magnitude cheaper than what rockets of any kind can ever deliver.

NASA disagrees with you.
http://kiss.caltech.edu/study/asteroid/ ... report.pdf

Doable! Very hard. Extremely risky. Would the same people who'd pay for a trip around the moon pay for a week on its surface? Would people trust a bank on the moon? I don't know. Neither do you, snide remarks not withstanding.

So what about rare earth mining on the moon? You've annointed that as plausible but is it? This isn't a primary source but it's good enough for the puppet show I'm having to run for you.

http://rareearthelements.us/lunar_kreep

Now, I suspect you don't actually understand what the phrase "order of magnitude" means, but let me see if you get this. Here on earth, to get one ton of neodymium, you need to process about 117 tons of stuff. The rich rocks of the moon, to get that same one ton, you need to process around 7960 tons. And that may be a vast underestimate. You may be looking at 4 to 6 orders of magnitude difference. That is, the true multiplication factor could be somewhere between one thousand and one million times!

Two points I'm going to make. One, in acquiring that one ton of rare earth, they're going to end up processing ton after ton of things that can't be shipped back to earth at a profit. Iron, aluminum, silver, gold, copper, thorium, silicon compounds, uranium. Do you think they'll just simply throw all of that into the slag heap? Or do you think they might just use those materials on site to lower expensive imports from earth?

Second, how on earth do you think a scheme that requires refined materials be sent back to earth is going to be more practical than a scheme that uses them in situ? People are the most expensive cargo but they're also the one you can charge through the nose for. Wait, don't answer that. Not that you will but I doubt if you'd have an interesting reply.

GIThruster wrote: Not hotels. . .

You know, it's just an idea. Based on the observation that Luxury, Novelty, and Entertainment are three things people will consistently pay through the nose for. Maybe you're right. Maybe the people who are looking to build stations for tourists have it all wrong. Maybe no one will pay to spend time on the moon. But that's no more than your opinion.

GIThruster wrote: Maybe they'll try to impress that they intend to use a sling to launch their mined and refined materials but when it comes right down to it, there is no business case for mining in space yet and there will not be until we can move beyond propellant based propulsion.

NASA commissioned a study that disagrees with you. Could it be wrong? Sure.

No one is going to wait for a propellentless technology that still hasn't produced a reliable, robust set-up that any physicist can reproduce (and they have not done this yet) I'd love it if something like this came about, but real space exploration can't wait.

Well, I hope you enjoyed baiting me. I have to say I think I prefer Diogenes to you as a troll. He's at least funny when he tries to reason. You're just a broken record of personal attacks and nonsense.

williatw wrote: Well...if you wish you could consider this idea:

viewtopic.php?t=3383&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

We're on the same page (and you got there first) Details vary but I don't think any of us are doing this for a living.

williatw wrote: I proposed it with Mars in mine, but wouldn't be surprised if some version of it happened on the Moon first. Basically it is Cayman Islands in space. The beauty of it is that "Tourism", "pay-per view", even mining could be done up front with the tax shelter idea more hidden.

Maybe it's just the goody-two-shoes in me, but I cringe at the notion of setting up a tax shelter. I'd prefer competitive states who are in the business of banking, hopefully with a healthy respect for their citizens. If these banks don't recognize the right of foreign nations to tax their deposits, so much the better.

I think the most stable long term situation is one where Luna is considered a member of human society in good standing. In the beginning, there's going to be a huge amount of resistance to the idea of an off-planet sovereign entity. Loans are a way to build friends and relationships. Once 1 or 2 percent of the global economy is business with Luna and the stability of the 3rd world is dependent on trade and loans from the moon, you're going to be in a position of de facto recognition no matter what the IRS wants.

williatw wrote: From the 1st posted link:

Golden Spike is also reported to have reserve a launch of the SpaceX Falcon Heavy at a cost of $120 million. The Falcon Heavy is capable of lofting 54 metric tons to low Earth orbit.

The cost of each manned lunar expedition is pegged at $2 billion.

If Musk succeeds in making the Falcon Heavy reusable how much of a cost reduction will occur? Easily 10X reduction in launch costs.

Lower launch costs can only help.

I still think that long term, the only cargo valuable enough to move off earth is a human being. Anything else space needs is going to have to be done in space or we're sunk.

More inspiration to sit down and run some more numbers. I'm willing to bet a full on moon base/hotel will be far less than 100 billion, probably less than 10, if you do it right. SpaceX has proven that giant fireworks can cost much much less than people previously thought. When someone gets their head wrapped around things right, they'll realize the rest of space shouldn't cost so much either.

There are multiple governments and universities and other entities that would be willing to pay 100 million per person to go to the moon, and I don't think that price is unreasonable with the right infrastructure.

Is still all boils down to one thing, LOW COST TO LOW EARTH ORBIT. once we get that everything else is just numbers.