Physics, budgets, and Scotty

I published this piece over at LinkedIn as an “article”. Re-posting here.

“I canna’ change the laws of physics, Captain!” -Scotty, Chief Engineer in Star Trek

You have all seen it, the news about NASA. The layoffs, the plans for budget cuts to science, technology and R&D, and to cancel the SLS and Orion projects after a first crew steps foot on the Moon. That last step requires a SpaceX Lunar Starship, but we will come back to that. I can hear the Captain, in a bind, speaking over the intercom. The reply, a comforting voice, even when saying no, hollering about how you “canna’ change the laws of physics, Captain!”

At first glance, an interested observer, as in someone who is compelled to look at the scene of the car crash, would see NASA’s budget to date. Then it’s easy enough to mark off what would need new numbers in three steps, (1) the items cut as soon as 2026, (2) the items carried through a first crew landing on the Moon, and (3) the new items for what comes after, lunar operations using commercially acquired services. In the last step,  NASA does not own the launcher or spacecraft that carries astronauts. Instead, it acquires the use of these as a service, much as it does already for getting cargo and crew to the International Space Station.

It may appear simple to fill in some swags for each of these three steps, for each item, each row, for columns from 2026 through, say, ten years out. It is not. First, we have to get past those annoying laws of physics.

Fortunately, I learned as a child that a hyperspanner can fix almost anything. Other tools we will need to gather include:

• A new lunar crew spacecraft: If the Orion project is canceled after the first crew landing on the Moon, we need a new lunar crew spacecraft. This should be commercial, not “cost-plus.” Its functionality would be similar to Orion, for much less cost. (In theory.) This spacecraft (and an associated stage) must have sufficient delta-v (here comes the physics) to go from low Earth orbit to lunar orbit and back again. (Notice I skipped a step, returning the crew to Earth. But we will come back to that.)
  • The SpaceX Lunar Starship, contrary to popular belief, cannot perform this prior task. The Lunar Starship, under a NASA contract, can travel from Earth to low Earth orbit and, when refueled by tankers from Earth, to Lunar orbit. It can then go from lunar orbit to land on the Moon and take off again, back to lunar orbit. But, it cannot leave lunar orbit back to Earth, for lack of propellant.

This is a key item, the new commercial, more affordable lunar crew spacecraft that does what the current expensive Orion is supposed to do (at least twice in this future.) As this is really about taking crew from Earth, to Earth orbit, and from there to lunar orbit, this is also about a rocket. Currently, based solely on physics, there is no rocket, except for the SLS, which will also cease operations after a first crewed lunar landing, that can perform this task. So, to avoid being overly prescriptive, we could set aside the hyperspanner—this time, we’ll go for a more flexible sonic driver. After all, NASA already has two means of getting to low Earth orbit, with launch escape systems – the Boeing Starliner and the SpaceX Dragon.

• Better – a  means for crew to leave Earth orbit for lunar orbit. This is to meet up with either a SpaceX (Starship) or a Blue Origin (Blue Moon) lander.
  • Here comes the physics again. A Lunar Starship that returns crew to lunar orbit, to that new spacecraft that has the delta-v to leave back to Earth (to Earth orbit, or direct to land on Earth) has now been depleted. It lacks the propellant to do anything else, in effect being an expendable Starship. This is not a formula for affordability. Though we can see what if, for a while, this dog will hunt. For now, so much for reuse. In-situ resource utilization won’t work here, as the Starships methane can not be produced on the Moon. This was a design decision by SpaceX, as Starships are about Mars, where carbon from CO2 in the atmosphere, and hydrogen from water (H2O) in the soil can be recombined to make methane (CH4) and oxygen (O2). Starship tankers are also unlikely to add up, as getting to lunar orbit would leave them with little propellant to share, creating expendable Starship tankers. The physics, agg.
  • A Blue Moon lander could do the trick, as it can be refueled on the Moon sufficiently, if not immediately, to turn into a bus from lunar orbit to the surface of the Moon and back again.

This leads us back to where all this was going some decades ago – a need to live off the land. In the original, now vintage, NASA plan circa 2005, an initial lander used hydrogen and oxygen, with the expectation that these could be produced one day from water in the Moon’s regolith. This placeholder technology line must be added soon into any calculations, as it is unlikely to happen overnight. Scotty may have been a miracle worker, but still, he needed some time to get the warp core going again. The second key placeholder then, is ISRU.

• In-situ resource utilization (ISRU) plant: A system of excavators, processors, tanks, and other equipment, robotic at least (humans perhaps), that creates liquid hydrogen and oxygen with which to refuel a lunar lander.

Adding all these still leaves gaps. Why go to the trouble of gluing all this together? Because critical parts of NASA must survive these troubling times. The worst of times. It’s time to find the loopholes. Here, we need another tool—a way to assemble all the isolinear chips in a new order, including Mars, low Earth orbit, the Moon, and projects that are coming and going.

NASA (formally) intended for a Lunar Starship to be a lander. Much like in Apollo, it is a place crew transfers into to land on the Moon, and not much thought comes after that when they return to their ride back home in Lunar orbit. Like the Apollo “LEM,” the Starship would be discarded. For the price tag, no matter the scale or that it was a design focused on Mars, this was too attractive to pass up. Who cares if the cheap Starship is tossed.

Still, to make matters more competitive and have a backup, a second lander was later funded by NASA. The Blue Origin “Blue Moon” lander would be refillable on the Moon, and so reusable. Given its smaller scale, this might also be accomplished with tankers from Earth (Blue’s near-term plan.) The Blue Moon lunar lander would become a shuttle-bus, from lunar orbit, to the lunar surface, and back again many times. (Reliability, well, we must come back to that. The cold of space does wonders for hardware.)

Up to here, this simplifies an outlook ten years out to only two new elements, (1) a ride from low Earth orbit to lunar orbit, and (2) an ISRU plant on the Moon. But what else is needed before gluing all this together in rows and columns?

For one, rather than think of the SpaceX Lunar Starship lander as a lander in competition with the Blue Origin Blue Moon lunar lander, reorient this all as cooperation. After the first use of Starships to land crew on the Moon, use these exclusively to land outposts—stations if you will. Fully outfitted on Earth, the expansive quarters await the arrival of NASA and other crews using Blue Moon lunar buses.

This also frees up Starships for what they are intended—Mars. What NASA learns about ISRU on the Moon should have some, if not directly applicable technology for Mars. The human processes attacking one problem should serve as a starting point to move on to the next.

Yet another element plays well here too—refueling. The new item, the leg connecting low Earth orbit to lunar orbit, can be accomplished with refueling. This balance of trade involves developing new rockets, breaking up elements for rendezvous and reassembly in Earth orbit, or launching assembled but empty elements to low Earth orbit. As Starships are already charting a path for refueling, and Blue Origin plans do the same (on a smaller scale), a first-order option would look to refuel. The leg connecting Earth orbit to lunar orbit, in its most basic version, would allow new businesses to dock at a Starship depot in space, refuel, and then provide services to others, such as NASA. This also encourages the low Earth orbit up and coming economy. These are lines that will be “off-books” and not on NASA’s budget chart. The ultimate loophole.

More importantly, much NASA R&D and space technology development can survive the long NASA night. The tasks funded in these new items (rows) focused on low Earth orbit, the lunar back-and-forth leg, and Mars can hold within them R&D by other means.

Now, off to see about those laws of physics. Loopholes and all.