Orbital Ports & Lunar Freighters (Animated)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 сен 2024
- Solving the Earth - Moon supply chain constraint with infrastructure. Animated moon base space stuff.
Patreon: / lunardevelopment
My book: www.amazon.com...
(I'll mail Patreon members a signed copy!)
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @anthrofuturism
My Social medias: linktr.ee/ianlong
Written, Produced & Narrated by Ian Long
Music Credits:
The Intangible - Encyclopedia of Frozen Dreams
Stellardrone - Breathe In The Light
The Full Version (ALL PARTS) of this series is out now! ruclips.net/video/8N8aXGoLrn0/видео.html
I admire how he didn't even stretch the video to 10 min to milk ad revenue. This channel is so underrated.
Jep just like the series "For all Mankind"
Concept and 3d work resembling actual infrastructure and logistics? What is this madness?
I was inspired by @paulchadeisson5891 works. I'm not nearly as good but maybe one day.
@@Anthrofuturism how about using lunar manufacturing to supply the construction of Earth Luna cycler platforms so that Starship doesn't have to do the whole trip just Ion Propulsion station keeping with heavy freight & passenger ferry work?
@@Astroponicist yeah there's a few ways to slice this up but ultimately you're gonna need to land the freight on the lunar surface so imagine if a lunar cycler could also land on the surface... That's basically the freighter. The reason you want to cut starship out early is it has a lot of baggage devoted to aerodynamics. If you could strip off the nose cone and control surfaces etc as soon as it gets past the atmosphere you'd save a lot of mass/fuel/$ and that's also basically the freighter. So the transfer point is put as close to the atmosphere as possible, the orbital port. (Still high Leo though to reduce station keeping drag.)
Landing on the mass driver should happen while the mass driver is moving, matching the freighter horizontal speed. The freighter in that case would need only to cancel out it's vertical speed, just as it would do while landing normally. That would save a lot of propellant.
Yeah that's a good point especially with how much of a dangerous nuisance horizontal velocity tends to be
I don't think that's feasible. You'd need some way to precisely lock yourself down to the maglev train. Just seems like too much to go wrong to me. Launching is fine, landing is harder.
Landing on a moving target is both difficult and dangerous. If one of these landings go wrong and damage the mass driver, it could put the entire colony is jeopardy.
Don't think I didn't see that fallout statue. Great work as always!
:)
These kinds of videos are incredible. While space is clouded by commercial and political barriers, it is important to set and understand what we should be aiming for as a species that best aligns with our interests; especially when living on other planetary bodies would essentially guarantee our permanent survival as a species. Thank you so much for making this kind of content and for making it such high quality . Keep it up!!!
Of course and thank you for the comment!
I wonder if you could land spacecraft on a moving maglev platform on the moon, allowing horizontal velocity to be killed off without requiring fuel - 6:25
Yeah I mean that's sorta like a more stable aircraft carrier so that's actually a good idea considering how much of a nuisance the horizontal velocity tends to be.
Love your videos, don't let youtube's algorithm discourage you too much 🙂
Thanks I appreciate it
I love the idea of a skeleton steel ship just attaching TEU shipping containers to its stick frame from a rocket ship and then landing on Luna only to release the clamps and fly back up immediately to go back to Earth for another load.
Mass to LEO measured in TEU is the future I dream about
Ships must leave Luna with new cargo as well. We need to think of lunar exports from the day one. Only with exports lunar economy can be viable. The obvious and fairly straight forward lunar export article is water ice, proppelants. Bulk mass like steel is the next thing
@@bergonius there is absolutely nothing that will be worth exporting from the moon in the next century
@@MemeMan_MEMESQUAD It requires less proppelant to send stuff to LEO from the Moon than from Earth. And we require a lot of stuff in LEO even right now, namely - propellant. NASA is spending 3 billion dollars for a Moon landerm which requires up to 10 starship launches per trip to the Moon, all for the propellant. If we theoretically could bring that propellant from the moon for less than 3 billions, it's a potential lunar export.
Moreover, if we had a mass driver on the Moon, the economics of bringing stuff from the lunar surface turns on it's head. We will be able to send a huge amount of mass to LEO for the price of electricity.
@@bergonius basically costs induced by the lack of air, labor, and global supply chain on the moon would need to be compensated for by the savings gained from using one Starship from Luna instead of 10 full stacks from Earth. Someday those lines will cross but not for a very long time
This is the future I want to see.
Me too
Extremely underrated channel. Major kudos for taking the time and effort to think out all the logistics AND also animate them!
This is the way to realistically make humanity a spacefaring species.
Landing the freighter in a nearby small crater would help to contain any ejecta or accidents. with a port facility connected to a subsurface tunnel leading directly to an industrial area would reduce distances. at the other end extensive warehouses made from steel quonset huts assembled on the surface & buried in regolith tailings would be fast to install. they could be trimmed in gabion retaining walls with some of them heated but open on one end to facilitate inexpensive protection from radiation, & micrometeorites while avoiding the expense of airlock doors, & full life support for simple warehousing space. Great animations by the way. (but you messed up by not putting the gabion retaining walls to trim up the outside of the quonset huts. 🚀🙂
Good ideas!
@@Anthrofuturism thanks.
Thanks!
Thank you!!
Unfortunately the Ironlev technology is basically going to brake itself with eddy currents at over 100kph seeds. That is the biggest downside and why this type of system is used as brakes on roller coasters.
Yes, having a ferry between lunar and leo should always be a plan in order to keep a sustainable lunar economy. I believe there should be a similiar method between Earth and Mars. Keep up the good work.
Damn I'm glad I found this channel
Please keep this series going, it’s really good
That station crane working is 0g was funnier than it should've been
Brilliant system!
I know tons of people just say it a lot to tons of other youtubers, but I cannot understand why you only have 5.54 k subscribers. The animations and editing are great and the video itself both entertaining and interesting!
(Also, anyone that agrees, double check you're subscribed, I watched some of Anthro's videos before and forgot, make sure you don't)
Also the video only has 320 likes?!?! On a good video like this with 2k+ views, that is just weird.
What a gem this channel is. Keep it up, man! 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
Thank you I will :) 👍
thanks for showing us the technicial dream-story of lunas future
Thank goodness I didn't watch the video before this until this one was already published. The brilliant way you closed it out I HAD to watch this one immediately after.
:) thanks lol
Rethink the orbital port to be able to receive and distribute cargo coming the other way - from Luna. Lunar-sourced water ice or propellant will be a valuable resource on the orbit once orbital refilling is there.
Totally. There's a lot you can do with a platform like this. What's showed here is the early stage and it makes sense as an answer to an early problem, but it will likely mature as more and more capabilities are built into and off of it. I will do a deep dive video on the port and what extra stuff you can do with it as well as the mass driver and freighter alternatives- a fuel tanker, a pressurized passenger ship, a construction drone carrier etc.
I enjoy this channel immensely.
Unmanned and/or remotely controlled transport ship, powered by a uranium gas ultra-hot fission reactor rocket, able to generate the ∆v to achieve highly eccentric translunar orbits, programmed to drop the payload at the point of its perigree with the moon where the cargo can be intercepted and secured by similar docking & logistics ships stationed in LLO (perhaps with some sort of hypergolic RCS controlled "space dolly" utilized in the process to give some extra control over the payload package), can be slowed down by reverse thrust on approach and/or return since there's no crew to worry about irradiating, used solely as a high-speed logistical pipeline from LEO to LLO, possibly even getting astronauts' materials/equipment/belongings to the moon before they arrive themselves but launching at the same time.
This is fucking amazing.
Completely agree, Starship should be specialized for transport from surface to leo, and a dedicated ferry system from leo to luna orbit, this will provide a nice forcing function for translunar propulsion technology that is better than what we currently have, aka nuclear reactors, magnetohydrodynamic thrusters and generators. Especially the closed loop variants which can then power advanced ion drives for ultra fuel efficiency.
Precisely
Great work
love your channel, those are some great animations you did
Thank you!
Great!
So does anthrofuturism have a meaning behind it? Like did you specifically name your channel that because you want a human centered solar-system future (based) or just because it sounds cool (also based)?
Yeah the former. Although at this point it might as well be lunar development project or something, but when I first started making videos I also covered topics like the future of energy with more historical context, so I wanted a more broad/general name so I felt I had more freedom to cover more topics. I might branch out again in the future, but for now: The Moon. Thanks for asking.
awesome man. keep em comin!
Not going to lie if we had a rail gun to shoot the supply up to the orbit would definitely lower the cost the traditional rocket this is a late game design but none the less the moon would definitely benefit the most. Any thoughts?
infrastructure will totally lower launch costs but it really depends on how marginal that is by a certain point. If you have to eminent domain $4 billion worth of farmland to build a mass driver on Earth and it only lowers launch costs by $10 is it worth it? But there's a lot more low hanging fruit people don't think about, little things like manufacturing fuel near your launch site and piping it to your rockets rather than trucking it in on a pressurized tanker will go far to reduce costs early on and by the time we can conceive of building a rail gun launch costs might be so low it may not be worth it simply in land cost never mind build and maintenance. However this is just speculation and only time will tell but if it makes economic sense then heck yeah lets do it! (also space elevator might make it obsolete earlier considering that's on the same level of mega-project).
I'd bet on a Skyhook rather than a space elevator on Earth
Yes a space elevator would be a better how ever like you said it only will be build if it make economic sense but also depends which technology is better to place on earth some other plants wouldn’t make sense to but an elevator but a rail gun would make sense by material and cost/long time use only time will tell how ever both will have a use Maybe both of them will be used on earth but someone will only be used on different planets
Take my comment of endorsement for your labours. I would give some money, if I wouldn’t be figuring out all this “stop being broke” thing now.
To build bigger ships there has to be several orbital shipbuilding yards anyway and with robotics this should not be really hard to accomplish. Something like the in Startrak.
What would a colony on the Moon do ?
Ur mom
@@Anthrofuturism A perfectly valid question. You don't have to answer with a juvenile response. You are obviously a deficient specifman of the human race. You have lost a subscriber and earned a thumbs down but I will watch future videos and offer up some tasty comments if you slip up. No pressure.
You could conceivably have the landing pad as far away as you want. Build a maglev train to transport the containers over several miles to the base. Maglev, because dust contamination on the tracks would wear out conventional RR wheels very quickly. However, I'm curious how well a maglev would work in an environment with highly ferrous dust. 🧐 Your nuclear rocket idea could work, and you wouldn't have to concern yourself too much with people being injured by radiation or accidents because all landing and taking off is miles away.
You would need to refuel the freighter occasionally - the RCS thrusters would use a lot of fuel in the rendevous (or maybe I just suck at Kerbal Space Program? 😂)
Those 1500 people would also be busy constantly. Multiple airtight facilities that size would require an astonishing amount of maintenance. Not to mention housekeepers, electricians, cooks, mechanics, plus people to run the non-automated parts of the manufacturing facilities and more electricians, plumbers, and mechanics to maintain the robots. You'll have to transport a lot of grease and oils, rubber and spare parts for the machines. They would also have to be made to be repaired locally instead of shipping parts in from earth (a skill we seem to have lost in the last 50 years or so). All in all, a monumental task that the right group of engineers would give their left nut to be part of.
How about a lunar cycler that uses gravity assists. Potential using similar thrusters to the pyche mission
for viewer engagement
Thanks!
You don't need a space port to transfer containers from a ship to another, in space is no gravity so cranes are obsolete, you can move large payloads with a small robotic arm and you don't need even that, after all the Apollo capsule grabbed the large lunar lander by itself, like a space tug, a better question is what will be the best transfer method from LEO to the moon surface, that wouldn't be solar ionic propulsion because it could only work from LEO to the moon orbit, a better solution would be a rotating skyhook you put that system on the spacecraft that fly in the moon to earth trajectory and when it fly above the lunar base you decelerate the payload directly to the moon surface.
This isn't a crane, it's a set of small robotic arms on a powered scaffolding. Skyhooks are megaprojects needing a counterweight and even if we could do it tomorrow the company that put one up would be sued into oblivion by constellation operators.
@@Anthrofuturism I still don't see the point of such massive loading and unloading system, also skyhook don't need to operate necessary into LEO, you can imagine putting one in a starship cargo bay sending to make a fly-by exactly above a lunar base, and decelerating a container near lunar surface, you don't even need to stop into lunar orbits or using a dedicated lunar lander (only small thruster attached on a landing container), and about the mass it's the cable that it's reusable and stay attached to the starship and the starship itself that is the reaction mass, with some care both can use the momentum of the decelerating payload to return to earth and be reused for another payload, you don't even need to return to LEO, the whole system would stay in a moon cycler orbits and be used every 28 days for another payload deceleration. You can imagine multiple such cyclers that can land in each day a payload, with 28 of them you can have a continuous system that can land a container each day the whole year.
@@Anthrofuturism I don't addressed two of your objections in my last message, you don't need a huge investment to make a working skyhook, if you make the calculations for a 25 tons container you need something like 100 tons cable(with absolutely the strongest materials that we have) and whole thing can fit in a single starship cargo bay, also the satellite constellations operators cannot object if don't interfere with their activities, if you put the payloads on a slightly higher orbit than they operate (let says 800 km circular orbit and the transfer vehicles are in a eccentric transfer orbit between moon and earth with 900 km perigee , and if it have 100 km cable attached, then everything that is lower than that cannot be in any risk, it would be like picking a cherry from the top of a wedding cake without touching the lower layers.
It's peak
So mass driver to get the transport ship off the moon, it would still need to refuel to escape earth orbit to return to the moon after picking up payload right?
If we had a mass driver on the moon, it's safe to assume we already have at least some in-SITU propellant generation capability as well. It's much more economical if we refuel the transport on the moon. And if that's true, what stops us from sending a full load of fuel back to the orbital port to supply the Earth orbit with propellant for refuelling other ships? That's a foundation for a early cislunar economy.
@@bergonius ah, smart!
@@bergonius If the steel skeleton cis lunar freighters were sent back to earth empty (of payload) then as per the Tsiolkovsky's rocket equation they would need far less fuel to brake into LEO then if they were returning with return payload, that said they would not have full tanks. To carry larger payloads back from LEO to the lunar surface they would need to have their tanks topped off. I still need to work out what the math for something like this would look like, but its an intriguing possibility.
@@eamonminges1541 you can use aerobraking coming from the moon to LEO. You'd need fuel to circularize and to perform rendezvous, that's it.
Another great video 🙌🏼
Thank you🙌
Has any organization/company approached you yet to make your videos a reality?
Where is the energy coming from, to move from a stable earth-orbit to the moon, stop at the moon and land. Normally that would cost at least 4500 m/s deltaV. And then what about the energy needed when coming from the moon towards earth to stop at an orbit around the earth. Maybe play a bit KSP to get some feel of that. The high number of orbital refuel flights for Starship are not for nothing.
For the rest I like the animations and narrative!
A huge amount of starships need for refuelling is due to the rocket equation. When you pare down a rocket that needs to endure multiple g's, aerodynamic pressure and all sorts of other crap down to a skeleton frame with thrusters, you nuke a huge amount of dry mass. You would still need to fuel the vehicle in orbit of course but much much less.
Quick question. Does going for Systems and/or Industrial Engineering while continuing to pursue Design Engineering on the job in my current position as a structural steel detailer sound like a good way to at least get to work for the same sorts of people spearheading these efforts in a decade or twos time?
I suspect nearly everything will be done with rovers and bots likely teleoperated by people who know what they're doing so I think mechatronics / manufacturing engineering might be closer, but as this industry doesn't exist I can't honestly say (Take with grain of salt). Welding through a remote might become an entirely new kind of skillset very much like drone operators now.
What's the propulsion for the freighter, chemical hydrolox engines?
Whatever makes the most sense to the engineers designing it. Probably something like hydrolox yeah
@@Anthrofuturism I wonder if something like a nuclear-electric space tug to travel between earth and moon orbit more efficiently could make sense.
Btw, what software do you use to create your animations? Blender? They look really good.
@@g.f.martianshipyards9328 yes blender and a nuclear rocket would be fast and that's great but cargo can move slow and be cheap. The issue with open cycle gas core engines is the uranium is expensive and limited so those super high efficiencies only make sense over very long distances, deep space missions but also just go Mars and stuff. Between the earth and moon you can go slow and use whatever is abundant.
This looks possible by 2080 😊
Hopefully!
am I tripping or is this the dude from h9emath? Anyway, question: Is a lunar orbital station really needed if u can just have a surface station? Considering what is going on, I wonder if we will see another station like ISS or if all those experiments are possible on a surface level on the moon. Also thinking.. wouldn't they prioritize a lunar operation rather than a ISS thing?
Please fix your audio recording high pitch hissing
@@kwcnasa it's been fixed in newer videos
I really like the concept.
Unfortunately your delta_v calculation is completely off.
You forgot all the energy needed to slow down your freighter when it comes back from the moon to earth.
Add a heatshield to your freighter to minimize wasting all the propellant just to slow down at earth. Propellant you loaded on the moon to get stuff back on the moon.
the lunar geology is significantly different than that of Earth. I was watching a video on the Wyoming Land Slide & realized that construction on Luna will need to carefully consider many of the same issues but in the light of these geologic differences. ruclips.net/video/SSXkLLFnvFw/видео.html
Yeah this is why I'm not super optimistic about lunar crater construction. Not that it's impossible, but I don't think it'll be easier than digging a hole in more stable regoliths. I think regolith-rock slides will be a common and dangerous issue to contend with. Even the Apollo astronauts had to be careful in this regard.
@@Anthrofuturism I don't think that crater construction is completely out of the picture. for one that kind of construction has been successfully done for centuries with significant improvements in the last few decades. second experienced trade workers are vastly under estimated, & under represented in science endeavors. Luna is an excellent example where we will need the input from people with lots of heavy industry experience, & not just the managers but the folks running the heavy machinery.
@@Astroponicist right. Again not saying it's impossible but probably not as easy as one would think because of the geology.
Up
Up²
6:54 I was thinking them empty containers should be drivable by you but it could also do it by itself self but it should have a human on board just for thing like space rock probably hit it by accident and that you can report and go out to fix the issue or something like the empty container have an issue connecting to the space dock and the human can take over and manually do and the person can live on the moon base and the person have shift with other ppl just to not let one person do it like a team of space dockers
question:
What uses do you for lunar development beyond tourism? The first thing i can think of is superconducting computer as the environment at the bottom of a lunar crater would make the need for cooling minimal but i can't really think of anything else other than that that.
Creating satellite, building rocket ships, that's all I could think of.