Skip to main content
Commonmark migration
Source Link

An excerpt taken from the Wikipedia page on LOP-G says space-experts have criticized it:

The Deep Space Gateway has received criticisms [...] for lacking a proper scientific goal.

 

Former NASA Astronaut Terry Virts [wrote] that the Deep Space Gateway would "shackle human exploration, not enable it" [...] and that he cannot envision a new technology that would be developed or validated by building another modular space station.

 

Mars Society founder Robert Zubrin [...] called the Deep Space Gateway "NASA's worst plan yet" in an article on the National Review. Robert went on to say "We do not need a lunar-orbiting station to go to the Moon. We do not need such a station to go to Mars. We do not need it to go to near-Earth asteroids. We do not need it to go anywhere. Robert also stated that "If the goal is to build a Moon base, it should be built on the surface of the Moon."

 

Retired aerospace engineer Gerald Black stated that the "LOP-G is useless for supporting human return to the lunar surface and a lunar base." He added that it is not even planned to be used as a rocket fuel depot and that stopping at LOP-G on the way to or from the Moon would serve no useful purpose and it would actually waste rocket fuel.

 

Pei Zhaoyu, deputy director of the Lunar Exploration and Space Program Center of the China National Space Administration, concludes that, from a cost-benefit standpoint, the gateway would have "lost cost-effectiveness." Also, Pei said the Chinese plan to focus on a research station on the surface.


My question to the community is, what could a rectilinear halo orbit around the moon potentially gain for us, especially if refueling isn't planned to occur at that location? It's clearly not being used as a Mars staging point if there's no fuel depot, and it seems to not have much utility other than studying Lunar orbit, and possibly studying the lunar surface...

  • Does anyone have more in-depth plans on what the actual mission is?
  • Why, as the Chinese stated, do we not build something on the surface?
  • What, if anything, can we learn that the Apollo programs missed and that the James-Webb Telescope might miss as well?

An excerpt taken from the Wikipedia page on LOP-G says space-experts have criticized it:

The Deep Space Gateway has received criticisms [...] for lacking a proper scientific goal.

 

Former NASA Astronaut Terry Virts [wrote] that the Deep Space Gateway would "shackle human exploration, not enable it" [...] and that he cannot envision a new technology that would be developed or validated by building another modular space station.

 

Mars Society founder Robert Zubrin [...] called the Deep Space Gateway "NASA's worst plan yet" in an article on the National Review. Robert went on to say "We do not need a lunar-orbiting station to go to the Moon. We do not need such a station to go to Mars. We do not need it to go to near-Earth asteroids. We do not need it to go anywhere. Robert also stated that "If the goal is to build a Moon base, it should be built on the surface of the Moon."

 

Retired aerospace engineer Gerald Black stated that the "LOP-G is useless for supporting human return to the lunar surface and a lunar base." He added that it is not even planned to be used as a rocket fuel depot and that stopping at LOP-G on the way to or from the Moon would serve no useful purpose and it would actually waste rocket fuel.

 

Pei Zhaoyu, deputy director of the Lunar Exploration and Space Program Center of the China National Space Administration, concludes that, from a cost-benefit standpoint, the gateway would have "lost cost-effectiveness." Also, Pei said the Chinese plan to focus on a research station on the surface.


My question to the community is, what could a rectilinear halo orbit around the moon potentially gain for us, especially if refueling isn't planned to occur at that location? It's clearly not being used as a Mars staging point if there's no fuel depot, and it seems to not have much utility other than studying Lunar orbit, and possibly studying the lunar surface...

  • Does anyone have more in-depth plans on what the actual mission is?
  • Why, as the Chinese stated, do we not build something on the surface?
  • What, if anything, can we learn that the Apollo programs missed and that the James-Webb Telescope might miss as well?

An excerpt taken from the Wikipedia page on LOP-G says space-experts have criticized it:

The Deep Space Gateway has received criticisms [...] for lacking a proper scientific goal.

Former NASA Astronaut Terry Virts [wrote] that the Deep Space Gateway would "shackle human exploration, not enable it" [...] and that he cannot envision a new technology that would be developed or validated by building another modular space station.

Mars Society founder Robert Zubrin [...] called the Deep Space Gateway "NASA's worst plan yet" in an article on the National Review. Robert went on to say "We do not need a lunar-orbiting station to go to the Moon. We do not need such a station to go to Mars. We do not need it to go to near-Earth asteroids. We do not need it to go anywhere. Robert also stated that "If the goal is to build a Moon base, it should be built on the surface of the Moon."

Retired aerospace engineer Gerald Black stated that the "LOP-G is useless for supporting human return to the lunar surface and a lunar base." He added that it is not even planned to be used as a rocket fuel depot and that stopping at LOP-G on the way to or from the Moon would serve no useful purpose and it would actually waste rocket fuel.

Pei Zhaoyu, deputy director of the Lunar Exploration and Space Program Center of the China National Space Administration, concludes that, from a cost-benefit standpoint, the gateway would have "lost cost-effectiveness." Also, Pei said the Chinese plan to focus on a research station on the surface.


My question to the community is, what could a rectilinear halo orbit around the moon potentially gain for us, especially if refueling isn't planned to occur at that location? It's clearly not being used as a Mars staging point if there's no fuel depot, and it seems to not have much utility other than studying Lunar orbit, and possibly studying the lunar surface...

  • Does anyone have more in-depth plans on what the actual mission is?
  • Why, as the Chinese stated, do we not build something on the surface?
  • What, if anything, can we learn that the Apollo programs missed and that the James-Webb Telescope might miss as well?
Notice removed Current answers are outdated by CommunityBot
Bounty Ended with mothman's answer chosen by CommunityBot
Notice added Current answers are outdated by uhoh
Bounty Started worth 100 reputation by uhoh
Tweeted twitter.com/StackSpaceExp/status/1032100890067574784
deleted 4 characters in body
Source Link
Magic Octopus Urn
  • 9.5k
  • 3
  • 32
  • 83

An excerpt taken from the Wikipedia page on LOP-G says space-experts have criticized it:

The Deep Space Gateway has received criticisms [...] for lacking a proper scientific goal.

Former NASA Astronaut Terry Virts [wrote] that the Deep Space Gateway would "shackle human exploration, not enable it" [...] and that he cannot envision a new technology that would be developed or validated by building another modular space station.

Mars Society founder Robert Zubrin [...] called the Deep Space Gateway "NASA's worst plan yet" in an article on the National Review. Robert went on to say "We do not need a lunar-orbiting station to go to the Moon. We do not need such a station to go to Mars. We do not need it to go to near-Earth asteroids. We do not need it to go anywhere. Robert also stated that "If the goal is to build a Moon base, it should be built on the surface of the Moon."

Retired aerospace engineer Gerald Black stated that the "LOP-G is useless for supporting human return to the lunar surface and a lunar base." He added that it is not even planned to be used as a rocket fuel depot and that stopping at LOP-G on the way to or from the Moon would serve no useful purpose and it would actually waste rocket fuel.

Pei Zhaoyu, deputy director of the Lunar Exploration and Space Program Center of the China National Space Administration, concludes that, from a cost-benefit standpoint, the gateway would have "lost cost-effectiveness." Also, Pei said the Chinese plan to focus on a research station on the surface.


My question to the community is, what could a rectilinear halo orbit around the moon potentially gain for us, especially if refueling isn't planned to occur at that location? It's clearly not being used as a Mars staging point if there's no fuel depot, and it seems to not have much utility other than studying Lunar orbit, and possibly studying the lunar surface...

  • Does anyone have more in-depth plans on what the actual mission is?
  • Why, as the Chinese are stated, do we not build something on the surface?
  • What, if anything, can we learn that the Apollo programs missed and that the James-Webb Telescope might miss as well?

An excerpt taken from the Wikipedia page on LOP-G says space-experts have criticized it:

The Deep Space Gateway has received criticisms [...] for lacking a proper scientific goal.

Former NASA Astronaut Terry Virts [wrote] that the Deep Space Gateway would "shackle human exploration, not enable it" [...] and that he cannot envision a new technology that would be developed or validated by building another modular space station.

Mars Society founder Robert Zubrin [...] called the Deep Space Gateway "NASA's worst plan yet" in an article on the National Review. Robert went on to say "We do not need a lunar-orbiting station to go to the Moon. We do not need such a station to go to Mars. We do not need it to go to near-Earth asteroids. We do not need it to go anywhere. Robert also stated that "If the goal is to build a Moon base, it should be built on the surface of the Moon."

Retired aerospace engineer Gerald Black stated that the "LOP-G is useless for supporting human return to the lunar surface and a lunar base." He added that it is not even planned to be used as a rocket fuel depot and that stopping at LOP-G on the way to or from the Moon would serve no useful purpose and it would actually waste rocket fuel.

Pei Zhaoyu, deputy director of the Lunar Exploration and Space Program Center of the China National Space Administration, concludes that, from a cost-benefit standpoint, the gateway would have "lost cost-effectiveness." Also, Pei said the Chinese plan to focus on a research station on the surface.


My question to the community is, what could a rectilinear halo orbit around the moon potentially gain for us, especially if refueling isn't planned to occur at that location? It's clearly not being used as a Mars staging point if there's no fuel depot, and it seems to not have much utility other than studying Lunar orbit, and possibly studying the lunar surface...

  • Does anyone have more in-depth plans on what the actual mission is?
  • Why, as the Chinese are stated, do we not build something on the surface?
  • What, if anything, can we learn that the Apollo programs missed and that the James-Webb Telescope might miss as well?

An excerpt taken from the Wikipedia page on LOP-G says space-experts have criticized it:

The Deep Space Gateway has received criticisms [...] for lacking a proper scientific goal.

Former NASA Astronaut Terry Virts [wrote] that the Deep Space Gateway would "shackle human exploration, not enable it" [...] and that he cannot envision a new technology that would be developed or validated by building another modular space station.

Mars Society founder Robert Zubrin [...] called the Deep Space Gateway "NASA's worst plan yet" in an article on the National Review. Robert went on to say "We do not need a lunar-orbiting station to go to the Moon. We do not need such a station to go to Mars. We do not need it to go to near-Earth asteroids. We do not need it to go anywhere. Robert also stated that "If the goal is to build a Moon base, it should be built on the surface of the Moon."

Retired aerospace engineer Gerald Black stated that the "LOP-G is useless for supporting human return to the lunar surface and a lunar base." He added that it is not even planned to be used as a rocket fuel depot and that stopping at LOP-G on the way to or from the Moon would serve no useful purpose and it would actually waste rocket fuel.

Pei Zhaoyu, deputy director of the Lunar Exploration and Space Program Center of the China National Space Administration, concludes that, from a cost-benefit standpoint, the gateway would have "lost cost-effectiveness." Also, Pei said the Chinese plan to focus on a research station on the surface.


My question to the community is, what could a rectilinear halo orbit around the moon potentially gain for us, especially if refueling isn't planned to occur at that location? It's clearly not being used as a Mars staging point if there's no fuel depot, and it seems to not have much utility other than studying Lunar orbit, and possibly studying the lunar surface...

  • Does anyone have more in-depth plans on what the actual mission is?
  • Why, as the Chinese stated, do we not build something on the surface?
  • What, if anything, can we learn that the Apollo programs missed and that the James-Webb Telescope might miss as well?
edited title
Link
uhoh
  • 151k
  • 56
  • 505
  • 1.6k

Why are we (USA)is the US building a Lunar Orbital Platform-Gateway (LOP-G)?

Source Link
Magic Octopus Urn
  • 9.5k
  • 3
  • 32
  • 83
Loading