Re:NASA’s bet on Starship for the Moon
by actinium226 on Friday April 23, 2021 @12:54PM
(#26916669)
> Also, the stupid polar orbit around the moon isn't necessary if you have moon starlink (no comm loss on dark side). This saves energy otherwise needed for inclination changes.
What? Gateway is planned to be in a Halo orbit at L1. Getting to the lunar poles is actually cheaper from L1 than directly getting there Apollo style, and the poles are of interest for exploration due to areas of permanent sunlight (for power) and permanent shade (for potential ice).
Moon starlink? For comms you just need one or two satellites at L2. The Chinese already have one there. And it's not the dark side, it's the far side.
Goram people being wrong on the internet making me correct them grumble grumble.
Getting to the lunar poles from Earth through Gateway is a diversion that takes more energy than going direct.
> Gateway is planned to be in a Halo orbit at L1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Gateway#Orbit_and_operat...
Re:NASA’s bet on Starship for the Moon
by Armisael16 on Friday April 23, 2021 @02:06PM
(#26917436)
> What? Gateway is planned to be in a Halo orbit at L1.
Can you provide a source for this? I’m not seeing anything that says gateway is ever expected to even get particularly close to L1.
Gateway is smaller, doesn't have two airlocks, etc. If you want to build a station in LLO, just build it from a few starship hulls.
Also, the stupid polar orbit around the moon isn't necessary if you have moon starlink (no comm loss on dark side). This saves energy otherwise needed for inclination changes.