Now we know that there’s water on Luna.
We even know that there’s quite a lot, even though it is scattered around in thin amounts.
The remaining question is how to concentrate it without expending more energy than can be harvested from its presence; harvested as propellants for Earth orbit return flights, or for Mars and elsewhere, or to supply the Loonies with fuel, water and oxygen.

I say Earth orbital, because it has occurred to me that there should be two fundamental types of space vehicles:
A. Atmosphere penetrators
B. Space vehicles
Think about that.

A vehicle that will travel only in hard vacuum between destinations near space objects is a completely different design than one that has to shoulder its way through atmospheric gases at high Mach numbers… or it darn well should be!
The corollary is that there must be space “harbors” established in orbit around destinations, where the people and cargo can be transferred quickly, comfortably and efficiently between specialized vehicle types.
It seems equally obvious that these “stations” will be “harbors” in the traditional sense.
They will be equipped and “personned” to provide traditional harbor functions, including cargo and passenger handling, maintenance and repair of vehicles and equipment, warehousing and spares stockpiling, personnel housing, training and recreational capabilities, tourist accommodations and communications facilities…etc.
But NASA is still insisting on building vehicles that do both jobs by shedding very expensive components that are used once and then thrown away.
NASA will, quite predictably protest that such ideas are completely out of touch with the meager funding NASA is receiving, and in that they are quite right.
Such facilities will be commercial enterprises, expected to generate profits and become self-sustaining.
Following the logic I’ve stated, it seems obvious that what we need is space harbors at say, GEO (fixed relative to Earth, to standardize the trip ephemerides like airline routes) and then transfer the valuable contents arriving at or departing Earth, in modules compatible with both flight conditions. and that plug in to (dock with) the next stage quickly and easily.
It even occurs to me that Buzz’s idea for a Phobos station is an example of a ready made docking site, and his Mars Cyclers are the ideal spacecraft concept to employ these principles.
But even that can be improved … what would be the energy requirement for transferring Phobos to a Martian geostationary orbital location?
I’m imagining an electromagnetic cannon that would boost Phobos material and impart momentum change in a direction that would slowly but surely move Phobos to the desired orbital location, over a selected Mars equatorial position.
The “cannon” would be powered either by nuclear power or solar panels, or a combination.
That might be a decades long task, but so what?
Are we in such a hurry?
It can be totally automated, with the design of the robot that gathers the material and loads the cannon container being the most challenging task.
The cannon would use a container to hold Phobos materials, with the container stopped at the cannon exit as its contents are ejected, creating the incremental change in Phobos’ momentum that will eventually bring it to a fixed location over a Martian equatorial surface station.
And the kinetic energy of the container can be “harvested” as it approaches the exit by reverse magnetic induction.
Because the ejected mass would greatly exceed the mass of the container, the net momentum change would be as programmed.
Then once the Phobos station is in place, it can be a space station for a Martian space elevator !
There will be a choice, whether to move Phobos to the upper end of the space elevator (“geo” synchronous), or make it a way station.
Should be easier to construct than an Earth space elevator.
Mars gravity is .36 Earth’s … and its rotation time close to
Earth’s, so its geosynchronous altitude will be considerably lower, and the elevator climbing energy and cable strength requirements will be quite considerably less.
Might even be able to employ the silica in Phobos’ materials, instead of the carbon filaments needed for Earth’s elevator.
Am I right? More thought required here.
My goodness!
This flow of ideas is getting to be pretty ambitious, I’d say!
But tell me where I’ve exceeded reasonable bounds?

Comments? Corrections?

Bill
==========
PS: How about this as a class project next semester?
PPS: I can see a few story plots in all this!
PPPS: I’ll also cite my previous paper: “A Road Map to Successful Lunar Access

This is brilliant … whether you are Liberal or Conservative.
I feel educated on the subject of iconography after watching it.
Bill
============

On Sep 9, 2009, at 6:56 AM, Martin Harris

This video is a superb examination of “branding”.
Worth your time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdtqtfXdR-c