Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by riffraff 3832 days ago
being harder does not make it 'better' (itself a loaded word). The moon Lansing might nave been inspirational but had limited practical consequences, cheap rockets are a huge enabler for ton of things.
2 comments

Earth is heavy. Lifting cargo in space from Earth is expensive due to gravity. Numbers:

Earth escape velocity: 11,000 m/s, energy to propel 1kg to escape velocity: 60MJ.

Moon escape velocity: 2,400 m/s, energy to propel 1kg to escape velocity: 3MJ.

Moon based interplanetary travel is 20 times more efficient than Earth based interplanetary travel. A robotized Moon base would make economic interplanetary travel a whole lot cheaper. Step 1 for a Moon base is landing on the Moon, so I wouldn't dismiss Apollo just yet. Perhaps they were 100 years ahead of the times, but their heart [and mind!] was in the right place.

Hey man, I think you're off base here.

The problem is that the Moon does not have significant resources, so you can't really make anything on the Moon and then launch it from there. It may be possible to make some propellants, but not much else. As a refueling station, it could be a good idea. But for anything other than fuel, the Moon doesn't really work out as you have to lift it from LEO first. Entering Space by Robert Zubrin has more detailed technical arguments about this.

It's my understanding that there are irons and titanium ores on the moon as well, though I do not know in what quantities.
Being early is the same as being wrong in aerospace just as it is for VC (i.e. Northrop YB-49, Boeing 2707, Lockheed D-21). While the Apollo program was an impressive flags and footsteps mission, it did not pave the way to a future lunar base. The Apollo astronauts were lucky to get back alive (, if you've ever looked at how many single points of failure there were on the LEM and CM, you know what I mean).
Exactly! The Burj Dubai is an impressive landmark to construction, and so are the Pyramids of Giza. But one took 40K manual laborers and decades of work, and the other took a crew of thousands and a couple of years. There are more things at play than whether something is possible. As the OP noted, what SpaceX is attempting is sustainability and that, as any investor knows, is the secret sauce in long term success.