A Suggested Program of Space Settlement]

Subject: [Starship_Forum] A Suggested Program of Space Settlement
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 11:03:00 +0000
From: PT Galt
Reply-To: Starship_Forum@yahoogroups.com
To: Starship_Forum@yahoogroups.com

A Suggested Chronology of Space Settlement

I. LEO (Low Earth Orbit) Operations

This is the stage we are presently in. Privatized, semi-privatized,
and government-funded space assets provide a high-value, massless
product--information (the satellite industry). The first major for-
profit human space exploration is tourism (Dennis Tito's trip to the
International Space Station). Unless forcibly prevented by
government, a space tourism industry offering sub-orbital trips for
about $10,000 or so should spring up in the near future.

Once such an industry exists, there will be incentive to develop
longer, orbital missions and then destinations to visit: relatively
small space stations/hotels in LEO. Ideally, these first stations
would have rotational gravity and be created with a single launch
apiece (no in-orbit assembly as with the ISS boondoggle).

One approach is the Neuffer Ring, featured prominently in Victor
Koman's magnificent work _Kings of the High Frontier_ (a novel that
portrays, in a powerfully gripping story, how freedom-loving space
pioneers could overcome government resistance to space settlement).
The Neuffer Ring is a torus of joined spherical tanks, resembling a
pearl bracelet. The tanks contain fuel, supplies, and acceleration
couches for the crew. Non-toxic fuel would be necessary, as the crew
would move into the tanks once the station was in orbit. Decks of
mesh grating would be installed in the tanks. These would form the
basic structure of floors and walls without interfering significantly
with the flow of fuel during the ascent. Opaque materials such as
foam or plastic sheeting would be installed by the crew to turn the
tanks into "home."

Another approach would be to launch light, unfolding structures like
Hoberman spheres, or an inflatable toroidal form that would be filled
(inflated) with a light but strong foam in orbit. Once the structure
solidified, astronauts could move in with the non-structural
components of a space settlement. It should be possible to design an
inflatable form that would include plumbing (foam-inflatable "sub-
pipes" within the main toroidal "pipe"), and perhaps electric and
fiber-optic wiring (depending on weight, available space in the
launch capsule, and "fold-up-ability" for the launch phase). Either
of these approaches should be quicker, cheaper, and provide a far
better space station than the "bolted-together tomato can" approach
used for ISSA--which is useful for spreading pork-barrel projects
through numerous Congressional districts and foreign nations, but
quite absurd and inefficient as a means of constructing a space
station.

Yet another approach would involve using tethers to suspend large
vessels such as external fuel tanks or rocket stages from a central
docking hub and set them in motion. If NASA had attatched small
boosters to its Space Shuttle Main Tanks and kicked them into orbit
instead of throwing them away in fireballs over the Indian Ocean, it
would now have more than enough habitable volume in orbit for a
number of good-sized space stations. I don't know exactly how much
one of those SSMT's weighs, but with launch cost to LEO at about
$10,000 a pound (if I recall correctly), it's a colossal waste only a
government could make, over and over again, for 20 years.

Perhaps a cunning space entrepreneur might design a fairly cheap
unmanned rocket especially to intercept discarded SSMT's and boost
them into orbit for later assembly into a space station. Such a
salvage operation might be doable with a capital investment
comparable to those of maritime salvage/exploration companies.
Consider the costs of their multimillion dollar research ships, high-
tech sensing equipment, deep-sea sumbersibles (which, in terms of
life-support and instrumentation, are basically manned spacecraft
with propellers instead of rocket thrusters), etc. If the government
decided to play "hardball" and threaten violence, the entrepreneur
would have a supply of tank-shaped potential meteorites to use as
deterrence.

Once the first space stations are built, microgravity manufacturing,
data-/tax-/electronic banking privacy havens, and other high-value,
low/no-mass products and services can be offered. Combined with
space tourism, these provide a firm basis for investment and profits
in LEO settlements.

Another source of revenue for early space settlement companies will
be "spinoff" technologies. The inflatable-foam construction
technique, for example, may be workable on Earth as a means for
creating "instant houses" that can be set up quickly and more cheaply
than conventional manufactured homes. Even if some variant of
the "tomato can" method is used, the R&D used to develop the "tomato
cans" could be applied to making zero-maintainence, super energy-
efficient, environmentally-benign housing (or "climate-controlling
vessels," to use the term preferred by Buckminster Fuller for his
advanced housing concepts).

An essential requirement for any space settlement will be a closed-
cycle, solar-powered life-support system. Applied on Earth, CS life-
support technologies could be used to eliminate industrial pollution,
expensive and inefficient municipal (gov't) waste-treatment/sewage
systems, etc. For a good example of such a system, see
http://www.livingmachines.com.

II. ON TO MARS AND THE ASTEROIDS

By the time the first private space stations are built and operating
profitably in LEO, the greatest governmental obstacles will probably
have been overcome (see _Kings of the High Frontier_). The first
reusable tourist ships (i.e. not a one-time shot like Tito's trip)
will likely mobilize the dreams of the large segment of
industrialized humanity that hopes to see space for themselves. The
space companies will have what amounts to an instant voting bloc.

Creating and servicing the space stations will build the experience
and technical know-how (a growing astronaut corps, closed-cycle life-
support, etc.) necessary to reach deep space. Market competition to
reduce launch costs will spur the development of cheaper, more
advanced spacecraft, along with a demand for materials originating in
space. The cost of lifting manufacturing materials and "volatiles"
(oxygen, water, etc.) from Earth will make Near Earth Objects
(asteroids) and Mars attractive and economically feasable for
settlement.

Robert Zubrin's "Mars Direct" program, explained in detail in his
book _The Case For Mars_ could create a program of Martian
exploration and settlement for as little as $5 billion (or $20-30
billion as a NASA project--still cheap in gov't terms) using
presently available technology such as Russian Energiya rockets,
modified Space Shuttle boosters, enines, and tanks, or even re-
engineered Saturn V's.

This low price assumes a fully-private enterprise without the "cost-
plus-percentage" system that encourages government-subsidized
aerospace firms to pad their budgets as much as possible. Another
example of the inefficiency of government space is the odd fact that
missions are launched from Florida, but controlled from Houston,
Texas. Why? President Kennedy needed the support of the Texas
Congressional delegation. A glance at the list of contractors for
any major NASA project (such as the now-dead Venture Star, or the
International Space Station) shows the vast, complicated divvying-up
of the project to numerous different companies in different states
(and foreign nations) needed to build the necessary Congressional and
employee-union support--with further complicated layers of
bureaucracy necessary to integrate the resulting designed-by-
committee components into a single space vehicle able to get off the
ground. A fully-private company could operate as a single,
integrated, streamlined operation.

The Mars Direct program involves sending an unmanned ship carrying a
supply of hydrogen, an Earth Return Vehicle, a small (100 kW) nuclear
reactor and a tele-operable methane-fueled light truck, a chemical
processing plant with a set of compressors, and some scientific
rovers to Mars on a ballistic trajectory. After the ship lands, the
truck rolls down the ramp with the reactor in the back. It drives a
safe distance away from the ship, leaving a power cable umbilicus
connecting the reactor to the ship, and sets up the reactor. The
reactor powers up and starts a chemical reaction of the hydrogen with
Martian CO2 to fill the ERV's tanks with methane-oxygen fuel. In 6
months, the chemical plant has used the 6 tons of hydrogen feedstock
into 108 tons of methane and oxygen, enough to fuel the ERV's return
flight, and 12 extra tons to fuel combustion-powered ground vehicles
(such as the truck) for exploring the Martian surface. Remotely-
controlled rovers explore the surrounding area for a suitable nearby
landing site and set up a transponder to guide the human explorers to
their new base.

At the next launch window, two more ships are launched: the first
carries another ERV bound for another promising exploration site.
The second carries a crew of 4 and a Habitation Module bound for the
first site.

After launch to Mars, the hab module separates from the upper stage,
remaining linked to it by a tether. The pilot sets the ship and
tether rotating, providing spin-gravity for the trip to Mars. 180
days later, the hab cuts the tether and aerobrakes into Mars orbit.
It then lands on the robotically-surveyed, transponder-marked site.

In the event of a mishap, the crew has 3 backup options: their ship
comes with a fueled, pressurized rover with a 1000 km range, so they
can get to their base by driving overland if they miss. If they land
over 1000 km away from their intended base, the second ERV--which was
launched on a slower trajectory--arrives and can be maneuvered to
land near them. The crew has 3 years' worth of supplies, so they
could even wait for a third ERV to be sent from Earth if necessary.

With a successful landing, they have a fully-fueled return craft,
their rover, the truck, the nuclear reactor, and plenty of equipment
and time to explore Mars. The second ERV lands at a chosen site
about 800 km away from the first. It will be used for the second
crew, which will be accompanied by a third ERV for the next crew, and
so on.

Each crew will spend 500 days exploring Mars, prospecting for water
and minerals, experimenting with Martian greenhouses, etc. before
climbing into their ERV for the return trip. They'll leave behind
the truck, the rover, and the reactor. The result: a chain of
exploration bases located within safe rover-range of each other,
waiting to be used by the permanent colonists who will eventually
follow the explorers.

The basic infrastructure of habs, ERV's and heavy-lift boosters could
also be adapted to exploring NEO's and the Moon. Revenues for the
venture could come from a number of sources. A line of model and toy
ships, habs, trucks, rovers, action-figures, T-shirts, lunchboxes,
etc. Advertizing slots on the live feed from the first Mars landing
ought to at least pull in Super Bowl rates, if not more. Selling ad-
space on the feed, or selling rights to air the feed and clips
therefrom to news organizations should reap considerable funds. The
returning cargoes of Martian soil and rock (or lunar soil and rock
from a lunar mission) will be immensely valuable because of their
rarity on Earth. Research departments and even well-heeled
collectors would provide a lucrative market for "plain ol' rocks."

Hydrocarbons, volatiles, and metals would be profitable commodities
in the space stations, being much cheaper in delta-V terms than their
terrestrial equivalents. Martian and Near Earth Object real estate
speculation is another possible source of revenues. How much would
companies like Pepsi or Nike be willing to pay to put their logos on
the hab, to be seen in the background of the Most Watched Television
Broadcast Ever--the "Neil Armstrong moment" of the first human
setting foot on Mars?

By launching boosters into Low Earth Orbit and attatching them to a
Neuffer Ring-type space station, they could be used to boost it into
a "free-return trajectory" between Earth and Mars. The FRT is an
orbit that regularly brings the station close to Earth and Mars in
turn. It, and others like it, would serve as an orbiting escalator
between the planets. Ships launching from Earth or Mars could
rendevous with the station, exchanging colonists for returning cargo,
forming the first real Earth-Mars trade route. This would make it
possible to reach Mars from Earth and vice versa at far less delta-V
cost by letting celestial mechanics pay most of the freight.

This can all be done using ordinary chemical rockets. Nuclear-
thermal, ion-drive, magsail, and other more advanced propulsion
systems would be developed in the context of an already-operational
space economy, shortening travel times for humans and leaving the
tried-and-true FRT system available for minimum delta-V shipment of
non-perishable cargo.

The main obstacle to the Mars Direct program is its requirement to
launch nuclear reactors into space. The political opposition to this
will no doubt be immense, considering the political impossibility of
building new reactors on Earth with the most elaborate containment
facilities. Putting a nuclear reactor on giant Roman candle and
lighting it off will not be welcome in a political environment
anything like today's. Nor would governments be happy about the
notion of powerful rockets and nuclear payloads in private hands.
This alone may make it necessary to explore and settle NEO's first
using solar cells for power until a source of fissionable material
can be found in space for a fully space-based nuclear power industry,
or large-scale orbital solar panels (or some other exotic energy
technology) built and sent to Mars to provide energy in place of the
nuclear reactors.

III JUPITER AND BEYOND

The availability of nuclear power in space opens the way to nuclear-
thermal, fusion-pulse, magnetic-sail, laser-powered lightsail, and
other high-velocity options that put Jupiter and the rest of the
outer Solar System within reach. In the decades necessary to reach
this point, genetics, robotics, nanotechnology, and machine
intelligence will advance to the point that space exploration plans
based on current technology and the current human form will become
obsolete. The changes promised by such technologies are so vast that
predicting their results from our perspective is like Neandertals
imagining how their tribe's barter of flint spearpoints could evolve
into the global market for computer software. Whether anything
resembling "the State" could continue to exist and plague our future
selves is anyone's guess.

P.T. Galt