By-Pass the Moon?

From: Matt Gallimore

> - Sizable equipment could land without the challenge required of
landing large equipment on the moon or Mars.
> - Likewise, escape velocity would not be a huge obstable.

Oh, certainly. I'd agree that even as large an asteroid as Ceres is
much better than Mars or even the moon from a gravity well perspective.
I'm only questioning the logic of passing up the NEOs to go immediately
to Ceres. It seems to proceed from an assumption that "bigger is
better", when I think High Frontier logic points in the opposite
direction.

> - Weak gravity would allow equipment to remain in position to the
working surface without elaborate engineering.

I hope that might be the case for any asteroid. (OK, I guess I've
speculated about using asteroids the size of apartment buildings, and I
suppose the gravity from them would be undetectable without sensitive
equipment.) I think it would always be the case that on an asteroid if
you were to put something down, it would stay put. The only question
would be how significant a disturbance you could have without the object
being dislodged.

But on re-reading your point, I'm now wondering if you're talking about
such things as having to use a network of strap-down cables in order to
make a drill or tunneling machine bear down on the surface. I don't
know; such might be required at Ceres as well.

> - Gravity would prevent some mined material from becoming ejecta (and
thus an orbiting projectile)

This strikes me more as an issue to be solved procedurally than by
changing where we mine.

> - Supplies or processed materials could be piled for storage without
always needing special containers or binding methods.

I'm hoping this won't be a problem even on much more modest asteroids.

> - Some metallurgical and manufacturing processes may need gravity.
> - If the last point is true, then, by not needing to design for spin
gravity, the equipment design is simpler.

Yes, but here's the kicker: I'm willing to bet people are going to be
involved in this process. I don't see encouraging signs that AI will
enable a completely automated mining facility in any foreseeable future,
and, unlike Luna, this will be too far out to permit teleoperation from
Earth. So I think we're talking crews, and of necessity duty tours
lasting several years minimum. That means we must maintain crew health,
and the best method we know for ensuring that is rotating structures.
If we're already doing that for the crew, then it's little extra
engineering to also do it for some or nearly all of the industrial
processes.

Regards,

Mike Combs