Are flights to the moon resumed? Pros and cons

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

The American Apollo lunar program, like the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), which was in charge of it, appeared during the space race: the USA and the USSR tried to overtake each other outside the planet. The Soviet Union was the first to send into orbit an artificial Earth satellite (Sputnik-1), an animal (Laika the dog), a man (Yuri Gagarin), a woman (Valentina Tereshkova), Alexei Leonov was the first to enter open space, the Luna-2 station and For the first time in history, Venera-3 flew where it was clear.

The accomplishments of the Americans were more modest. The Mariner-2 and Mariner-4 stations flew in good order, respectively, past Venus and Mars, and the manned spacecraft Gemini-8 for the first time managed to dock to another vehicle in orbit. But Gagarin's smile overshadowed these successes. There was only one thing left - to be the first to send people to the moon.

Back in May 1961, a month and a half after Gagarin's flight, US President John F. Kennedy told Congress that by the end of the decade, American astronauts should land on the surface of our satellite. The Apollo was generous. In the best years, NASA spending exceeded 4% of the federal budget, and 400 thousand people worked on the lunar program. It turned out: on July 20, 1969, Neil Armstrong broadcast his famous words about a small step for a person and a huge leap for humanity.

The Americans sent several more Apolloes to the moon, but already in 1972, US President Richard Nixon curtailed the program. The money was more needed for the military campaign in Vietnam, there were protests at home against this war and for civil rights - people had no time for space, there was an economic recession on the nose, there was a detente in relations with the USSR, and most importantly, it was generally there is no need. Other countries were not eager to go there either.

The head of the automatic and manned programs of the European Space Agency (ESA) David Parker recalled that a similar story happened with Antarctica. At first, everyone raced to the South Pole, and when the job was done, no one returned there for half a century. Only then did people begin to equip research bases on the mainland. The same will happen with the Moon.

Why come back

50 years ago, the Americans flew to the moon mainly to simply visit and show their strength. Even in those days, people did not really support the program, albeit a bold, but expensive and almost devoid of practical sense (and still rejoiced when the Apollo reached its goal). Now public opinion is also not on the side of NASA. A 2018 poll found that 44% of Americans do not consider returning to the moon important - let the agency better study the climate and asteroids that threaten the Earth.

NASA has something to respond to critics.

Manned flights to the moon are needed to prepare an expedition to Mars. As on Mars, the Moon has weak gravity, there is nothing to breathe, nothing protects against cosmic radiation. It is impossible to fully recreate these conditions on Earth, and our satellite, to which it takes only three days to fly, is the nearest suitable test site. The technology developed for the lunar program will come in handy when traveling to a neighboring planet. In addition, because of the weak gravity from the moon, it is easier for rockets to take off. This argument is supported by US President Donald Trump and NASA head Jim Bridenstine. True, according to a 2018 survey, among the priorities of US residents, a manned mission to Mars takes the penultimate place - before a manned mission to the Moon.

The flight to Mars still seems to be the same whim as the Apollo program. Probably, the first astronauts will simply walk on the surface, pick up cobblestones, sand for scientists and fly back. But in the future, this and other planets, and the Moon, may become new homes for people. Mars will never be as good for life as Earth today, but it won't have to be speculated about if Earth as we know it disappears. In the history of the planet there have been catastrophes that have destroyed almost all the inhabitants of land and sea. A collision with a comet or other large celestial body is an extremely rare event, but if something happens, we cannot prevent it with existing technologies. This is the argument that SpaceX founder Elon Musk makes especially of.

Critics of manned missions believe that it is easier, cheaper and safer to send robots to other worlds. NASA recalls that this argument was discussed in the media back in the 1960s, but, according to agency experts, even in bulky spacesuits, people are more skillful than machines, which gives an advantage. A recent example is the InSight probe. Having landed on Mars at the end of 2018, InSight began to drill into the rock, but the rock does not lend itself: it is too hard. Engineers have tried to press down on the drill with a mechanical hand, but this has not worked so far. And in 1972, astronauts Harrison Schmitt and Eugene Cernan repaired the rover with duct tape while standing in the moon dust and continued. True, the breakdown happened due to Cernan's negligence. Robots, on the other hand, remain vigilant.

There are also mundane arguments in favor of the new lunar program. Thanks to Apollo, useful everyday technologies have appeared: shoes for athletes, fire-resistant clothing for rescuers, solar panels, heart rate sensors. The new lunar program will create new jobs (critics will say: “It will just keep those left after Apollo) and will become an engine of economic growth, help establish international cooperation, and inspired children and teenagers will want to become scientists and engineers. any large, impressive project, including in space, but without astronauts.

How to get to the moon

Roscosmos, ESA, China National Space Administration (CNSA) intend to send people to the moon, but they all call vague terms. In the United States, back in 1989, President George W. Bush suggested starting a new lunar program. Under his son George W. Bush, NASA developed a new manned spacecraft and rocket, including a return to the moon in 2020. But the project was almost completely curtailed by the Barack Obama administration when it became clear that it would not be completed on time.

Once again, Americans began to think about the Moon in 2017, when Donald Trump signed the First Space Directive concerning US plans outside the Earth. At first, the return to the moon was scheduled for 2028, but in March 2019, Vice President Mike Pence announced the postponement: now NASA should be in time by 2024.

The new American program is called "Artemis" - in honor of the sister of Apollo from ancient myths, the cruel maiden who was the goddess of the hunt, wildlife, chastity and the moon. The female name also reminds of one of the tasks set - for the first time a woman must step on the surface of the Earth's satellite. There are three main goals: to return, to equip a permanent base and to develop technologies for a flight to Mars.

The main difference between Artemis and Apollo is the permanent infrastructure for future missions. First, NASA wants to assemble the Gateway station, similar to the ISS, but smaller (40 tons versus more than 400 tons), which will fly in a highly elongated orbit, now approaching, then moving away from the Moon. "Gates" will serve as a staging post on the way to the Moon and back to Earth, and later - to Mars or asteroids. By moving the station from one orbit to another, it will be possible to choose a landing site on the Moon. Astronauts will be able to spend up to three months in it.

Like the ISS, the new station will have a modular design. Due to the tight deadlines before the first landing on the surface of the satellite, the "Gate" will be ready in the minimum configuration: a block with a propulsion system and a crew compartment. Additional blocks will be delivered from Earth by 2028. One of the projects also includes a Russian multipurpose compartment for attaching other modules. In addition to Roskosmos, ESA, the Japanese Aerospace Research Agency (JAXA), the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) and private companies want to build the station together with NASA.

To reach the Gateway and the Moon, NASA is working with Boeing and other companies to develop a new super-heavy rocket called the Space Launch System (SLS). The test launch was supposed to take place back in 2017, but it was postponed several times, and now it is scheduled for the second half of 2021. Initially, the project was allocated about $ 11 billion, but the costs have already exceeded this amount. NASA said that only SLS is capable of carrying a spacecraft with astronauts and cargo so far, but in April 2019, Jim Bridenstine for the first time admitted that SpaceX's modified Falcon Heavy rocket could be used for at least some of the flights. In recent NASA brochures on the return to the moon, an unnamed "commercial rocket" is casually mentioned.

The spacecraft the astronauts will fly on is doing better. The first unmanned test flight of the four-seat Orion took place in December 2014, successfully tested the emergency system last summer, and another unmanned launch was planned for June 2020, this time around the Moon. It was also moved to the second half of 2021.

Finally, when Orion flies to Gateway in 2024 on SLS, astronauts will need to somehow get into low orbit, from there get to the Moon and return to the station. NASA does not yet have a command and descent module like those in Apollo. In April 2020 alone, the agency selected three contractors. SpaceX, Blue Origin and Dynetics received a total of $ 967 million and ten months to build their demonstration modules. After that, the agency will choose the best one - on it and fly to the moon.

Under the terms of the competition, private companies will have to pay at least 20% of the total cost of their project. This will reduce spending on Artemis, and the amount is growing: in June 2019, Jim Bridenstein talked about $ 20-30 billion over five years (Apollo, adjusted for inflation, cost $ 264 billion), and soon said that he hoped to cut spending at the expense of partners to less than $ 20 billion. The NASA budget is approved by Parliament, and Congressmen are also hesitant about returning to the Moon, like the rest of the Americans.

What will happen after 2024

Even if NASA manages to send astronauts to the moon's south pole in 2024 (water ice was found in the craters of this region, which is needed for life support systems and fuel production), this mission will not achieve the goals outlined by the White House. People will simply visit the satellite, as the Apollo crews once did, and a "long-term presence" on and around the moon should still only be established by 2028.

Along with each expedition, the satellite will receive equipment for studying surface conditions, scientific research, geological exploration, and later - extraction, processing of resources, construction: orbital probes, all-terrain robots, etc. But what exactly NASA wants to build on the moon is unknown even in general terms.

On the other hand, many difficulties are already known that hinder the creation of a permanent base. The moon has no atmosphere and no magnetic field. That people will suffocate without spacesuits is half the trouble: nothing will protect them from radiation and temperature changes of hundreds of degrees; asteroids will not slow down or burn from friction, and therefore can damage equipment; light is not scattered, because of this, optical illusions will arise.

Another problem is moon dust, pervasive and sharp: tiny particles sticking to equipment and spacesuits scratch glass and lead to breakdowns, and when astronauts undress, get into their eyes and lungs, they cause itching, and over time, possibly more serious health problems. Finally, a day on the Moon lasts 28 days (which is why we always see only one side: the satellite makes a revolution around the Earth in the same amount of time), and the human body is not used to this.

The ESA lunar village project takes these conditions into account. The Europeans want to send modules, next to which tents will be inflated on the surface, and the robots will print something like an Eskimo igloo around these tents, not from the snow, but from the ground. The upper layer will protect from meteoroids and radiation, the module will be divided by sealed partitions so that dust does not get inside, and the lighting can be made so as not to interfere with biological rhythms. The catch is that this is just a concept without detailed calculations and deadlines. With the Russian station, the opposite is true: the first elements of the lunar base should be deployed from 2025 to 2035, and construction will be completed after 2035, but what it will look like is unknown.

However, with or without a base, people will return to the moon. Perhaps this was the main calculation of the Donald Trump administration when the deadline was postponed to 2024: there is so little time left that you cannot just cancel Artemis. It is possible and necessary to argue whether the goals of the return are justified, to criticize the inflated costs, but no one predicts how the new lunar program will turn out. People have not yet tried to settle on another celestial body - and this will be an epoch-making event that will happen before our eyes.