Ah jeez. That's what I get for commenting right after rolling out of bed.
> ... the most difficult challenges have to do with maintaining life support long term. The Moon isn't a bad place for that.
The moon is a bad place for that because now you have to carry all that extra fuel for landing/etc. Low earth orbit is just fine for figuring out life support as has been done on the ISS already. Why do it again in some place there's no reason to go to? There's no nitrogen available on the moon.
Low earth orbit is just fine for figuring out life support as has been done on the ISS already.
Entirely false. On the Moon, we can exploit in-situ resources for life support. Regolith can be used for radiation shielding and the extraction of oxygen. We can even harvest water in certain locations. Crops can be grown using hydroponics. Doing these things while maintaining a spaceport on another world isn't going to be nothing. Getting experience doing ground based operations is going to be valuable. It's not just "dust." It's probably literally tens of thousands of things we will have to learn through hard won experience.
Ground-based operations. Better to get the experience where help is only 3 days away.
> The moon is a bad place for that because now you have to carry all that extra fuel for landing/etc.
I think that might be outweighed by the fact that the transit time is a few days compared to months, and launch windows are plentiful. It's better to test with all the benefits we can initially, IMO, as failure has such a high cost (in all aspects. How long do you think it would take for the public to get over their distaste of manned missions or colinization efforts after a big failure?).
ECLSS designs for a moon base would be very, very different from the ISS, there's no "we've already figured out life support" in LEO. The ISS is frequently restocked with consumables, which is less of an option for a moon base and not an option for Mars base, requiring an entirely different top-down design.
Ah jeez. That's what I get for commenting right after rolling out of bed.
> ... the most difficult challenges have to do with maintaining life support long term. The Moon isn't a bad place for that.
The moon is a bad place for that because now you have to carry all that extra fuel for landing/etc. Low earth orbit is just fine for figuring out life support as has been done on the ISS already. Why do it again in some place there's no reason to go to? There's no nitrogen available on the moon.
The dust thing is applicable but minor.