Timeline for Embedding foundations from low lunar orbit?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 27, 2023 at 13:38 | comment | added | Nuclear Hoagie | @LorenPechtel Agree we could get a system with low accuracy but decent precision. As long as we only care where the pylons relative to each other, it might be OK, but we still won't be able to put it anywhere particularly specific like a crater rim. | |
| Oct 27, 2023 at 4:23 | comment | added | uhoh | @RussellMcMahon The "& co" is fine, but I'd think twice about what an Elon Musk with guided missiles might be like :-) | |
| Oct 27, 2023 at 3:25 | comment | added | Loren Pechtel | Could be done. Deploy all the pylons in one batch, they have members that push them into the right arrangement. (Remember, they're in freefall, such a structure need not be strong. I'm thinking perhaps some inflatable tubing, pressure providing the strength.) | |
| Oct 26, 2023 at 21:52 | comment | added | Mark | @NuclearHoagie, stabilizing cables for a mast antenna. Sure, the math becomes a whole lot prettier if the anchors are equally spaced, but as long as they aren't clustered too close together, it doesn't really matter where they are. | |
| Oct 26, 2023 at 21:04 | comment | added | David S | @jkztd Another important factor is that dramatically changing the weight of the vehicle during a de-orbit maneuver adds immense complexity to the de-orbit. | |
| Oct 26, 2023 at 11:54 | comment | added | Russell McMahon | Stakes could easily be guided. Get Elon and co to provide some :-) | |
| Oct 25, 2023 at 21:25 | comment | added | uhoh | @jkztd actually if there was a bit of an atmosphere, I wonder if the flying stakes could have a camera in the nose and moveable tail fins for guidance and potentially improve their accuracy over dead drop in vacuum. You'd probably want a fairly low pressure atmosphere for this so that the effects of changing crosswinds weren't too large. Just a thought. | |
| Oct 25, 2023 at 21:04 | comment | added | user19132 | I get your point, I thought it was doable on a body with no atmosphere, unlike for instance on Mars where atmosphere would make trajectory unpredictable. | |
| Oct 25, 2023 at 20:49 | comment | added | Nuclear Hoagie | @jkztd I could see it working for a single pylon that you don't need to land precisely. But I have a hard time thinking of an application where you'd want the pylons 500m apart, but would be equally fine with them being 1000m apart or right on top of each other. We're talking about variability on the same scale as the structure being built. | |
| Oct 25, 2023 at 20:36 | comment | added | user19132 | this would be like having two landings in one, it would have to be accurate two times regarding landing spot. Dispersion of the pylons could be avantageous in this context imo. | |
| Oct 25, 2023 at 20:17 | history | answered | Nuclear Hoagie | CC BY-SA 4.0 |