Elon tweets that moonbase will be created in 2025

Elon Musk has tweeted that a moonbase will be created in 2025.

A SpaceX BFR with a refueling in orbit would be able to take about 100 tons to the moon. This would mean one trip could take several Bigelow inflatable space stations.

Another trip could bring heavy lunar adapted bulldozers.

Craig Davidson gave a talk in 2017 about Improving the SpaceX Mars Colonization Plans.

Make a moon capable bulldozer. Replace steel with titanium-aluminum alloy. Use electric battery technology and solar panels.

Astrobotic developed Polaris as an excavation vehicle that could serve as a robotic precursor to future human planetary colonization efforts by preparing terrain and mining ice and other volatiles.

Astrobotic is developing robotic bulldozers the size of riding mowers for the moon. They could prepare a safe landing site for NASA’s lunar outpost by surrounding it with an eight-foot high semi-circle berm to block grit kicked out by spacecraft landings from hitting nearby habitats.

A moon base with each square being about 40 feet by 40 feet would have massive smelters to process regolith to pure metals and components.

Moon Mining

A SpaceX moonbase could mine for ice for fueling satellites and other orbital operations.

SpaceX borrowing $500 million

SpaceX is seeking to borrow $500 million in the leveraged loan market, according to three people familiar with the matter. Goldman Sachs is leading the talks with potential investors this week.

171 thoughts on “Elon tweets that moonbase will be created in 2025”

  1. Is there anyone out there with that level of commitment AND money? Not SpaceX – they appear too busy with BFR and launching to even put serious thought into the design of a Mars base, and that’d have to be higher priority. I suspect ‘2025’ wasn’t even a ‘Musk time estimate’ but more likely a Musk joke – else he’d have used more than 4 characters. Though sometimes when he makes these off-the-cuff/off-the-wall tweets, it seems to make him think about how to accomplish the thing.

  2. Is there anyone out there with that level of commitment AND money? Not SpaceX – they appear too busy with BFR and launching to even put serious thought into the design of a Mars base and that’d have to be higher priority.I suspect ‘2025’ wasn’t even a ‘Musk time estimate’ but more likely a Musk joke – else he’d have used more than 4 characters. Though sometimes when he makes these off-the-cuff/off-the-wall tweets it seems to make him think about how to accomplish the thing.

  3. I want this to happen quite badly…but the time prediction …I’m skeptical. I don’t want to he though. Maybe it’s possible. The advance in technology within that time could turn out to be a huge advantage.

  4. I’m pretty sure Musk’s attitude towards this is, “We’re providing the ride there. Why should we have to do everything?

  5. I saw a tube recently that I tend to agree with that the moon could be the ultimate high ground military base. The arguments was that it is incredibly easy to defend with lasers and missiles, has spots for “24/7” solar plants for continuous power, and that the low gravity would allow an effectively unlimited supply of ‘rods from god’ soil projectiles to be launched at earth. If military strategist ever come to the same conclusion it may be the driving force for a US moon base even if Mars is obviously the better alternative for habitation.

  6. I saw a tube recently that I tend to agree with that the moon could be the ultimate high ground military base. The arguments was that it is incredibly easy to defend with lasers and missiles has spots for 24/7″” solar plants for continuous power”””” and that the low gravity would allow an effectively unlimited supply of ‘rods from god’ soil projectiles to be launched at earth. If military strategist ever come to the same conclusion it may be the driving force for a US moon base even if Mars is obviously the better alternative for habitation.”””

  7. Indeed. They do a lot already by providing a ride. Someone else also has to worry and work towards it too. My concern here is that given the fretful, very conservative attitude of possible financial backers for a lunar return and settlement (e.g. NASA), SpaceX may be landing and returning rockets to the Moon that have no other payload than themselves, a Tesla car, a dummy and a camera to proof the feat. And this way before anyone commits to send people, because the lunar base customers don’t want to impact other programs (namely SLS) or because they don’t trust the new platform to carry people. And given they are among the few that can actually pay it, nobody will go until they decide to do it. I really hope the trip of the Japanese billionaire to orbit the Moon goes really well, and servers to entice others besides NASA to do more things towards visiting the Moon again, before NASA finally decides it’s good time to do it.

  8. None of these predictions are made with any skin in the game. I would be willing to be Elon Musk any amount of money that nothing of the sort will happen by 2025.

  9. Hmmm…a base 240000miles from Earth would mean a LONG time for weapons to travel to the Earth. While we don’t have space-base radar military sats looking outward right now that doesn’t mean we couldn’t put a few up in short order and see everything the base is doing/sending. And by the same token Earth could send enough high explosives to the Lunar base to deal with the issue. Any space-based installation would be much more fragile”” than a US base/bunker…I mean it’s hard to just run away from your comfy moon bunker and not die from lack of oxygen or food”” or water; and then there’s the radiation and too much Sun for two weeks and not enough for another two weeks. No I don’t see the Moon as a good military installation. Now LEO on the other hand would offer multiple passes/day over Earthly targets with a much reduced travel time for weapons and all the benefits of gravity-assisted energy at the impact point. Geostationary on the gripping hand offers a 24hr look at your targets”” but they can see you as well…”””

  10. Indeed. They do a lot already by providing a ride.Someone else also has to worry and work towards it too.My concern here is that given the fretful very conservative attitude of possible financial backers for a lunar return and settlement (e.g. NASA) SpaceX may be landing and returning rockets to the Moon that have no other payload than themselves a Tesla car a dummy and a camera to proof the feat. And this way before anyone commits to send people because the lunar base customers don’t want to impact other programs (namely SLS) or because they don’t trust the new platform to carry people. And given they are among the few that can actually pay it nobody will go until they decide to do it.I really hope the trip of the Japanese billionaire to orbit the Moon goes really well and servers to entice others besides NASA to do more things towards visiting the Moon again before NASA finally decides it’s good time to do it.

  11. None of these predictions are made with any skin in the game. I would be willing to be Elon Musk any amount of money that nothing of the sort will happen by 2025.

  12. Man ON the moon? Would not man IN the Moon be better for shielding and meteorite protection? Why not put the balloons in a lava tunnel and use more local materials? This helps with abrasive and pervasive dust. And why yellow color? Caterpillar company? Not John Deere green? 🙂 Better reflective white, no? But then I’m not Elon Musk. It is his money, right? Or our taxes money…?

  13. I don’t think it’s that, it rather seems like nobody is seriously considering what we are going to do with the promised but believable options being currently developed (like BFR). I mean anyone seriously planning to build a lunar habitat module as of now.

  14. Did everybody decide that Zubrin’s scheme to seal a patch of ground in the dark part of a crater, beam microwaves at it from the crater rim, and hoover up the volatiles that boil off was silly/unfeasible? Seemed kinda clever to me.

  15. Hmmm…a base 240,000miles from Earth would mean a LONG time for weapons to travel to the Earth. While we don’t have space-base radar military sats looking outward right now, that doesn’t mean we couldn’t put a few up in short order and see everything the base is doing/sending. And by the same token, Earth could send enough high explosives to the Lunar base to deal with the issue. Any space-based installation would be much more “fragile” than a US base/bunker…I mean it’s hard to just run away from your comfy moon bunker and not die from lack of oxygen or food, or water; and then there’s the radiation and too much Sun for two weeks and not enough for another two weeks. No, I don’t see the Moon as a good military installation. Now, LEO, on the other hand, would offer multiple passes/day over Earthly targets with a much reduced travel time for weapons and all the benefits of gravity-assisted energy at the impact point. Geostationary, on the gripping hand, offers a 24hr look at your targets, but they can see you as well…

  16. Man ON the moon? Would not man IN the Moon be better for shielding and meteorite protection? Why not put the balloons in a lava tunnel and use more local materials? This helps with abrasive and pervasive dust.And why yellow color? Caterpillar company? Not John Deere green? 🙂 Better reflective white no?But then I’m not Elon Musk. It is his money right? Or our taxes money…?

  17. I don’t think it’s that it rather seems like nobody is seriously considering what we are going to do with the promised but believable options being currently developed (like BFR).I mean anyone seriously planning to build a lunar habitat module as of now.

  18. Did everybody decide that Zubrin’s scheme to seal a patch of ground in the dark part of a crater beam microwaves at it from the crater rim and hoover up the volatiles that boil off was silly/unfeasible? Seemed kinda clever to me.

  19. The technology is there, but the economics aren’t, so it’s a matter of a billionaire wanting prestige or love of sci-fi to push it forward. Musk is rather busy with Tesla and SpaceX, neither of which is returning much money to him yet, so we need to find another billionaire.

  20. Wasn’t he initially saying he would send people to Mars by that time? What happened to that idea? Reality? We need to focus on rotating space colonies in NEO, under the van Allen belts. Not as sexy, but a much more practical and important step in moving forward.

  21. And put a few Kilopower reactors at the base so it doesn’t have to be right at the pole to have continuous power.

  22. That’s nice. How many treaties were broken during WW1 and WW2? A treaty is only good so long as neither side sees an advantage to not following it.

  23. The technology is there but the economics aren’t so it’s a matter of a billionaire wanting prestige or love of sci-fi to push it forward. Musk is rather busy with Tesla and SpaceX neither of which is returning much money to him yet so we need to find another billionaire.

  24. Wasn’t he initially saying he would send people to Mars by that time? What happened to that idea? Reality?We need to focus on rotating space colonies in NEO under the van Allen belts. Not as sexy but a much more practical and important step in moving forward.

  25. And put a few Kilopower reactors at the base so it doesn’t have to be right at the pole to have continuous power.

  26. That’s nice. How many treaties were broken during WW1 and WW2?A treaty is only good so long as neither side sees an advantage to not following it.

  27. No reason why you can’t do both. The necessary precursor to both is the development of a fully reusable super heavy lift rocket which is what he is doing.

  28. No reason why you can’t do both. The necessary precursor to both is the development of a fully reusable super heavy lift rocket which is what he is doing.

  29. Elon Musk has tweeted that a moonbase will be created in 2025.” He also tweeted that he had buyers to take Tesla private at $420/share and that turned out to to be total bullshyte.

  30. Elon Musk has tweeted that a moonbase will be created in 2025.””He also tweeted that he had buyers to take Tesla private at $420/share and that turned out to to be total bullshyte.”””

  31. Elon is a day dreamer. He needs to figure out how he plans to get thru the Van Allen radiation belts LONG before he thinks about actually getting to the moon with humans

  32. That would be a terrible idea. The delay for coms from the moon is something like 4 seconds I think. Thats basically relegating you to state sized targeting. Throw in the fact everyone can see it, the gravity from the moon, the atmosphere of earth etc…. Not worth it.

  33. This preso is aimed more at doing serious selenology with the small-payload options that will be available in the current plan. But I’d love to see a dumber mission that simply tried to figure out how to get volatiles out cheaply, at high scale. There are definitely two tracks here: There’s the NASA version, which is aimed at making sure that SLS isn’t instantly irrelevant, but is modestly encouraging toward doing lots of small surface science missions. But then there’s this shadow effort, revolving around something less insane like Moon Direct on either FH or New Glen, with BFR lurking in the wings. NASA can’t acknowledge the shadow effort, because the congresscritters holding its leash will tell it, “Bad dog!” But I’m sure that they’re thinking real hard about it. Eventually, the SLS fantasy will collapse. I’m just sad that we’re gonna have to waste another 3-4 years pretending that everything’s OK, because that’s 3-4 years where SLS’s budget can’t go to making real large-scale spacecraft, habs, and ISRU equipment. Oh, well.

  34. Elon is a day dreamer. He needs to figure out how he plans to get thru the Van Allen radiation belts LONG before he thinks about actually getting to the moon with humans

  35. That would be a terrible idea. The delay for coms from the moon is something like 4 seconds I think. Thats basically relegating you to state sized targeting. Throw in the fact everyone can see it the gravity from the moon the atmosphere of earth etc….Not worth it.

  36. This preso is aimed more at doing serious selenology with the small-payload options that will be available in the current plan. But I’d love to see a dumber mission that simply tried to figure out how to get volatiles out cheaply at high scale.There are definitely two tracks here: There’s the NASA version which is aimed at making sure that SLS isn’t instantly irrelevant but is modestly encouraging toward doing lots of small surface science missions. But then there’s this shadow effort revolving around something less insane like Moon Direct on either FH or New Glen with BFR lurking in the wings.NASA can’t acknowledge the shadow effort because the congresscritters holding its leash will tell it Bad dog!”” But I’m sure that they’re thinking real hard about it. Eventually”” the SLS fantasy will collapse. I’m just sad that we’re gonna have to waste another 3-4 years pretending that everything’s OK because that’s 3-4 years where SLS’s budget can’t go to making real large-scale spacecraft habs and ISRU equipment. Oh”” well.”””

  37. The problem with Bezos is he’s focused on reducing launch costs first, with the rationale that cheaper access to space will (eventually) enable a whole ecosystem of space startups by lowering the entry barrier. But he’s doing it so very slooooowwwwly. As much as he is a cislunar guy, I don’t see him getting around to actual Moon or infrastructure tech anytime soon, unfortunately.

  38. The problem with Bezos is he’s focused on reducing launch costs first with the rationale that cheaper access to space will (eventually) enable a whole ecosystem of space startups by lowering the entry barrier. But he’s doing it so very slooooowwwwly. As much as he is a cislunar guy I don’t see him getting around to actual Moon or infrastructure tech anytime soon unfortunately.

  39. Oh, I get it, eLon will be on that moon they have in that building in Hollywood . The biggest lie ever played on humanity

  40. Chemical propulsion can get through the Van Allen belts just fine, fast enough for the radiation to not be a big concern. That has been done before, unless you believe the conspiracy theories.

  41. Sintering requires very high temperatures, which would be difficult to achieve at a large scale with lenses. Directly sintering the lunar soil in-situ is also inconvenient, and you’ll have issues with heating depth, heat loss to surrounding soil, dust scattering the light beam, etc. A more practical approach would be to collect the regolith, filter it, maybe chemically or otherwise treat it in some way, then pour it into molds and place them in a closed sintering furnace. This lets you make slabs, bricks, etc, which you can then use as pavement or wall material. The furnace can be powered from solar or nuclear. With nuclear it may be possible to use the heat without extra conversions (more efficient). Otherwise, it would be an electric furnace. Another option is to convert the regolith to cement. Then that can be poured, cast, or fed to a 3D printer. See wikipedia /wiki/Lunarcrete . Most of the discussion there ignores the more recent Lunar water findings, but the principles are just as applicable. You have enthusiasm for the topic a creative mind, but it lacks guidance. I strongly encourage you to go study engineering. If not formally, then at least via the numerous online courses.

  42. I’d say that space *colonies* is literally the last thing we need to do. There’s a whole bunch infrastructure that needs to be developed and deployed first: servicing, mining, refueling, more mining, construction, etc, etc. All of that has actual economic value if done at the right scales and sequence, and will in turn make colonies much easier. Settlement will *follow* infrastructure, not lead it – unless it’s done from ideological motives, as Elon’s Mars settlement plans (which are still on, btw – the Moon base is a separate story, and probably won’t be done by SpaceX). That said, colonies and infrastructure aren’t mutually exclusive, so some small initial colonies could be done earlier. Along the colonies line of thinking, what would be more useful is a small rotating station to test long-term effects of various partial gravity levels. As for the Moon base, it doesn’t need to be manned at all. The Moon is close enough for teleoperation from Earth. Maintenance crews can be sent over when needed. Such a robotic mining/industrial base could be quite useful, producing methalox and other resources for cislunar use. If coupled to a refueling depot in EML2, it can be very useful for trips to Mars and beyond as well. P.S.: You probably meant LEO (low-Earth-orbit), not NEO (near-Earth-object).

  43. Oh I get it eLon will be on that moon they have in that building in Hollywood . The biggest lie ever played on humanity

  44. Chemical propulsion can get through the Van Allen belts just fine fast enough for the radiation to not be a big concern. That has been done before unless you believe the conspiracy theories.

  45. Sintering requires very high temperatures which would be difficult to achieve at a large scale with lenses. Directly sintering the lunar soil in-situ is also inconvenient and you’ll have issues with heating depth heat loss to surrounding soil dust scattering the light beam etc. A more practical approach would be to collect the regolith filter it maybe chemically or otherwise treat it in some way then pour it into molds and place them in a closed sintering furnace. This lets you make slabs bricks etc which you can then use as pavement or wall material.The furnace can be powered from solar or nuclear. With nuclear it may be possible to use the heat without extra conversions (more efficient). Otherwise it would be an electric furnace.Another option is to convert the regolith to cement. Then that can be poured cast or fed to a 3D printer. See wikipedia /wiki/Lunarcrete . Most of the discussion there ignores the more recent Lunar water findings but the principles are just as applicable.You have enthusiasm for the topic a creative mind but it lacks guidance. I strongly encourage you to go study engineering. If not formally then at least via the numerous online courses.

  46. I’d say that space *colonies* is literally the last thing we need to do. There’s a whole bunch infrastructure that needs to be developed and deployed first: servicing mining refueling more mining construction etc etc. All of that has actual economic value if done at the right scales and sequence and will in turn make colonies much easier. Settlement will *follow* infrastructure not lead it – unless it’s done from ideological motives as Elon’s Mars settlement plans (which are still on btw – the Moon base is a separate story and probably won’t be done by SpaceX). That said colonies and infrastructure aren’t mutually exclusive so some small initial colonies could be done earlier.Along the colonies line of thinking what would be more useful is a small rotating station to test long-term effects of various partial gravity levels. As for the Moon base it doesn’t need to be manned at all. The Moon is close enough for teleoperation from Earth. Maintenance crews can be sent over when needed. Such a robotic mining/industrial base could be quite useful producing methalox and other resources for cislunar use. If coupled to a refueling depot in EML2 it can be very useful for trips to Mars and beyond as well.P.S.: You probably meant LEO (low-Earth-orbit) not NEO (near-Earth-object).

  47. Exploring the giant lunar lava tubes should be a priority for Moon exploration. Inside could be large amounts of water ice. Any large scale lunar base would be best built inside a giant lunar lava tube. Marius Hills seems like the best place to check our first. Whoever discovers the ideal giant lava tube on the Moon, may well found the capital of the Moon.

  48. The slides are from a previous article of NASA and other groups’ work on Moon operations. NBF often aggregates and repeats related information from previous articles.

  49. Actually WW2 was influenced by a very significant effect by the various treaties that were in place during the 1920s and 30s.

    For example: The navies on both sides were heavily constrained by the naval treaties that prevented the construction of more than a few battleships, limited in size. And similar limitations on cruisers and other ships.

    Yes, once the peace broke down the nations all tried to build huge, unconstrained navies… but it takes time to build capital ships. It takes a LOT of time to build new types of capital ships (such a ones a lot bigger than the existing models). I don’t think any capital ship started during the war actually saw combat. So the actual battles were decided by the ships that were designed and largely built according to the treaties.

  50. So Elon replies 2025 to a text “when moonbase” and someone spins off a very questionable sets of slides like this is the idea. Although I like this nextbigfuture.com in general, this clickbait article looks more like nextbigfuture.con.

  51. Once again, SHOW ME.
    tell me how building 7 free fell (exactly like the other 2 buildings) with out a plane crashing into it or even coming near it . Otherwise, you are nothing more than a whiner, too……………………………………..

  52. One can only hope. But keep in mind that there’s a lot more to cislunar infrastructure than just a rocket and a lander. He is investing $1B/year in BO, so there is room there for other developments. But so far, it seems like another 4 years just to finish New Glenn (based on a recent NBF article). Then, if they keep the same pace, that’s another 10 years for New Armstrong, which they may well need to reach the moon. Hopefully New Armstrong will go faster, once they’re past New Glenn’s learning curve. In the mean time, who knows what else they are or aren’t working on…

  53. Just stay away from the peer-reviewed engineers that have already answered all your objections and more, and your anti-government fantasies will stay OK. Go have a nice warm glass of milk and a cookie, and I guarantee you’ll feel better.

  54. @Michael K
    Heard of the Blue Moon lunar lander? That’s being developed by Blue Origin for getting significant payloads to the lunar surface. So while development may look slow, they’ve got multiple things going on in parallel instead of sequentially. When they’re ready to go, things may fall into place more quickly than you think.

  55. Oh, I get it, eLon will be on that moon they have in that building in Hollywood . The biggest lie ever played on humanity

  56. Oh I get it eLon will be on that moon they have in that building in Hollywood . The biggest lie ever played on humanity

  57. Chemical propulsion can get through the Van Allen belts just fine, fast enough for the radiation to not be a big concern. That has been done before, unless you believe the conspiracy theories.

  58. Chemical propulsion can get through the Van Allen belts just fine fast enough for the radiation to not be a big concern. That has been done before unless you believe the conspiracy theories.

  59. Sintering requires very high temperatures, which would be difficult to achieve at a large scale with lenses. Directly sintering the lunar soil in-situ is also inconvenient, and you’ll have issues with heating depth, heat loss to surrounding soil, dust scattering the light beam, etc. A more practical approach would be to collect the regolith, filter it, maybe chemically or otherwise treat it in some way, then pour it into molds and place them in a closed sintering furnace. This lets you make slabs, bricks, etc, which you can then use as pavement or wall material. The furnace can be powered from solar or nuclear. With nuclear it may be possible to use the heat without extra conversions (more efficient). Otherwise, it would be an electric furnace. Another option is to convert the regolith to cement. Then that can be poured, cast, or fed to a 3D printer. See wikipedia /wiki/Lunarcrete . Most of the discussion there ignores the more recent Lunar water findings, but the principles are just as applicable. You have enthusiasm for the topic a creative mind, but it lacks guidance. I strongly encourage you to go study engineering. If not formally, then at least via the numerous online courses.

  60. Sintering requires very high temperatures which would be difficult to achieve at a large scale with lenses. Directly sintering the lunar soil in-situ is also inconvenient and you’ll have issues with heating depth heat loss to surrounding soil dust scattering the light beam etc. A more practical approach would be to collect the regolith filter it maybe chemically or otherwise treat it in some way then pour it into molds and place them in a closed sintering furnace. This lets you make slabs bricks etc which you can then use as pavement or wall material.The furnace can be powered from solar or nuclear. With nuclear it may be possible to use the heat without extra conversions (more efficient). Otherwise it would be an electric furnace.Another option is to convert the regolith to cement. Then that can be poured cast or fed to a 3D printer. See wikipedia /wiki/Lunarcrete . Most of the discussion there ignores the more recent Lunar water findings but the principles are just as applicable.You have enthusiasm for the topic a creative mind but it lacks guidance. I strongly encourage you to go study engineering. If not formally then at least via the numerous online courses.

  61. Once again, you refuse to prove me wrong, yet ya call me names. That’s what liberals do. Pull up your lil’ girl panties and tell me how building 7 free fell (exactly like the other 2 buildings) with out a plane crashing into it or even coming near it . Otherwise, you are nothing more than a whiner……………………………………..

  62. I’d say that space *colonies* is literally the last thing we need to do. There’s a whole bunch infrastructure that needs to be developed and deployed first: servicing, mining, refueling, more mining, construction, etc, etc. All of that has actual economic value if done at the right scales and sequence, and will in turn make colonies much easier. Settlement will *follow* infrastructure, not lead it – unless it’s done from ideological motives, as Elon’s Mars settlement plans (which are still on, btw – the Moon base is a separate story, and probably won’t be done by SpaceX). That said, colonies and infrastructure aren’t mutually exclusive, so some small initial colonies could be done earlier. Along the colonies line of thinking, what would be more useful is a small rotating station to test long-term effects of various partial gravity levels. As for the Moon base, it doesn’t need to be manned at all. The Moon is close enough for teleoperation from Earth. Maintenance crews can be sent over when needed. Such a robotic mining/industrial base could be quite useful, producing methalox and other resources for cislunar use. If coupled to a refueling depot in EML2, it can be very useful for trips to Mars and beyond as well. P.S.: You probably meant LEO (low-Earth-orbit), not NEO (near-Earth-object).

  63. I’d say that space *colonies* is literally the last thing we need to do. There’s a whole bunch infrastructure that needs to be developed and deployed first: servicing mining refueling more mining construction etc etc. All of that has actual economic value if done at the right scales and sequence and will in turn make colonies much easier. Settlement will *follow* infrastructure not lead it – unless it’s done from ideological motives as Elon’s Mars settlement plans (which are still on btw – the Moon base is a separate story and probably won’t be done by SpaceX). That said colonies and infrastructure aren’t mutually exclusive so some small initial colonies could be done earlier.Along the colonies line of thinking what would be more useful is a small rotating station to test long-term effects of various partial gravity levels. As for the Moon base it doesn’t need to be manned at all. The Moon is close enough for teleoperation from Earth. Maintenance crews can be sent over when needed. Such a robotic mining/industrial base could be quite useful producing methalox and other resources for cislunar use. If coupled to a refueling depot in EML2 it can be very useful for trips to Mars and beyond as well.P.S.: You probably meant LEO (low-Earth-orbit) not NEO (near-Earth-object).

  64. The problem with Bezos is he’s focused on reducing launch costs first, with the rationale that cheaper access to space will (eventually) enable a whole ecosystem of space startups by lowering the entry barrier. But he’s doing it so very slooooowwwwly. As much as he is a cislunar guy, I don’t see him getting around to actual Moon or infrastructure tech anytime soon, unfortunately.

  65. The problem with Bezos is he’s focused on reducing launch costs first with the rationale that cheaper access to space will (eventually) enable a whole ecosystem of space startups by lowering the entry barrier. But he’s doing it so very slooooowwwwly. As much as he is a cislunar guy I don’t see him getting around to actual Moon or infrastructure tech anytime soon unfortunately.

  66. Why ya call someone who believes the opposiute from you, yet has literally hundreds of engineers and sciencists backing the truth a nut? Most liberals. when confronted with facts that they can’t dispute, resort to name calling. Russ, I’d bet ya voted for Hillary and Obama didn’t ya?

  67. Moon landing, yep, on the set in Hollywood. Ain’t no human ever stepped foot on the moon. WAY too much evidence against it
    Flat-earther, haven’t studied it enough to know about it.
    911 truther, you got that right. 100% US goverment orchestrated , nano thermite, guaranteed. Building 7, that didn’t even get hit by a plane, just happens to collapse at free fall speed to the ground. What the video
    I can’t believe that people believe the gov/msm at ALL.
    Russ, lets hope you don’t still believe the gov/msm when they show up at your doorstep to take ya to the FEMA camps,

  68. Elon is a day dreamer. He needs to figure out how he plans to get thru the Van Allen radiation belts LONG before he thinks about actually getting to the moon with humans

  69. Elon is a day dreamer. He needs to figure out how he plans to get thru the Van Allen radiation belts LONG before he thinks about actually getting to the moon with humans

  70. That would be a terrible idea. The delay for coms from the moon is something like 4 seconds I think. Thats basically relegating you to state sized targeting. Throw in the fact everyone can see it, the gravity from the moon, the atmosphere of earth etc…. Not worth it.

  71. That would be a terrible idea. The delay for coms from the moon is something like 4 seconds I think. Thats basically relegating you to state sized targeting. Throw in the fact everyone can see it the gravity from the moon the atmosphere of earth etc….Not worth it.

  72. This preso is aimed more at doing serious selenology with the small-payload options that will be available in the current plan. But I’d love to see a dumber mission that simply tried to figure out how to get volatiles out cheaply, at high scale. There are definitely two tracks here: There’s the NASA version, which is aimed at making sure that SLS isn’t instantly irrelevant, but is modestly encouraging toward doing lots of small surface science missions. But then there’s this shadow effort, revolving around something less insane like Moon Direct on either FH or New Glen, with BFR lurking in the wings. NASA can’t acknowledge the shadow effort, because the congresscritters holding its leash will tell it, “Bad dog!” But I’m sure that they’re thinking real hard about it. Eventually, the SLS fantasy will collapse. I’m just sad that we’re gonna have to waste another 3-4 years pretending that everything’s OK, because that’s 3-4 years where SLS’s budget can’t go to making real large-scale spacecraft, habs, and ISRU equipment. Oh, well.

  73. This preso is aimed more at doing serious selenology with the small-payload options that will be available in the current plan. But I’d love to see a dumber mission that simply tried to figure out how to get volatiles out cheaply at high scale.There are definitely two tracks here: There’s the NASA version which is aimed at making sure that SLS isn’t instantly irrelevant but is modestly encouraging toward doing lots of small surface science missions. But then there’s this shadow effort revolving around something less insane like Moon Direct on either FH or New Glen with BFR lurking in the wings.NASA can’t acknowledge the shadow effort because the congresscritters holding its leash will tell it Bad dog!”” But I’m sure that they’re thinking real hard about it. Eventually”” the SLS fantasy will collapse. I’m just sad that we’re gonna have to waste another 3-4 years pretending that everything’s OK because that’s 3-4 years where SLS’s budget can’t go to making real large-scale spacecraft habs and ISRU equipment. Oh”” well.”””

  74. Chemical propulsion can get through the Van Allen belts just fine, fast enough for the radiation to not be a big concern. That has been done before, unless you believe the conspiracy theories.

  75. Sintering requires very high temperatures, which would be difficult to achieve at a large scale with lenses. Directly sintering the lunar soil in-situ is also inconvenient, and you’ll have issues with heating depth, heat loss to surrounding soil, dust scattering the light beam, etc. A more practical approach would be to collect the regolith, filter it, maybe chemically or otherwise treat it in some way, then pour it into molds and place them in a closed sintering furnace. This lets you make slabs, bricks, etc, which you can then use as pavement or wall material.

    The furnace can be powered from solar or nuclear. With nuclear it may be possible to use the heat without extra conversions (more efficient). Otherwise, it would be an electric furnace.

    Another option is to convert the regolith to cement. Then that can be poured, cast, or fed to a 3D printer. See wikipedia /wiki/Lunarcrete . Most of the discussion there ignores the more recent Lunar water findings, but the principles are just as applicable.

    You have enthusiasm for the topic a creative mind, but it lacks guidance. I strongly encourage you to go study engineering. If not formally, then at least via the numerous online courses.

  76. I’d say that space *colonies* is literally the last thing we need to do. There’s a whole bunch infrastructure that needs to be developed and deployed first: servicing, mining, refueling, more mining, construction, etc, etc. All of that has actual economic value if done at the right scales and sequence, and will in turn make colonies much easier. Settlement will *follow* infrastructure, not lead it – unless it’s done from ideological motives, as Elon’s Mars settlement plans (which are still on, btw – the Moon base is a separate story, and probably won’t be done by SpaceX). That said, colonies and infrastructure aren’t mutually exclusive, so some small initial colonies could be done earlier.

    Along the colonies line of thinking, what would be more useful is a small rotating station to test long-term effects of various partial gravity levels. As for the Moon base, it doesn’t need to be manned at all. The Moon is close enough for teleoperation from Earth. Maintenance crews can be sent over when needed. Such a robotic mining/industrial base could be quite useful, producing methalox and other resources for cislunar use. If coupled to a refueling depot in EML2, it can be very useful for trips to Mars and beyond as well.

    P.S.: You probably meant LEO (low-Earth-orbit), not NEO (near-Earth-object).

  77. The problem with Bezos is he’s focused on reducing launch costs first, with the rationale that cheaper access to space will (eventually) enable a whole ecosystem of space startups by lowering the entry barrier. But he’s doing it so very slooooowwwwly. As much as he is a cislunar guy, I don’t see him getting around to actual Moon or infrastructure tech anytime soon, unfortunately.

  78. Elon Musk has tweeted that a moonbase will be created in 2025.” He also tweeted that he had buyers to take Tesla private at $420/share and that turned out to to be total bullshyte.

  79. Elon Musk has tweeted that a moonbase will be created in 2025.””He also tweeted that he had buyers to take Tesla private at $420/share and that turned out to to be total bullshyte.”””

  80. No reason why you can’t do both. The necessary precursor to both is the development of a fully reusable super heavy lift rocket which is what he is doing.

  81. No reason why you can’t do both. The necessary precursor to both is the development of a fully reusable super heavy lift rocket which is what he is doing.

  82. The technology is there, but the economics aren’t, so it’s a matter of a billionaire wanting prestige or love of sci-fi to push it forward. Musk is rather busy with Tesla and SpaceX, neither of which is returning much money to him yet, so we need to find another billionaire.

  83. The technology is there but the economics aren’t so it’s a matter of a billionaire wanting prestige or love of sci-fi to push it forward. Musk is rather busy with Tesla and SpaceX neither of which is returning much money to him yet so we need to find another billionaire.

  84. Wasn’t he initially saying he would send people to Mars by that time? What happened to that idea? Reality? We need to focus on rotating space colonies in NEO, under the van Allen belts. Not as sexy, but a much more practical and important step in moving forward.

  85. Wasn’t he initially saying he would send people to Mars by that time? What happened to that idea? Reality?We need to focus on rotating space colonies in NEO under the van Allen belts. Not as sexy but a much more practical and important step in moving forward.

  86. And put a few Kilopower reactors at the base so it doesn’t have to be right at the pole to have continuous power.

  87. And put a few Kilopower reactors at the base so it doesn’t have to be right at the pole to have continuous power.

  88. That’s nice. How many treaties were broken during WW1 and WW2? A treaty is only good so long as neither side sees an advantage to not following it.

  89. That’s nice. How many treaties were broken during WW1 and WW2?A treaty is only good so long as neither side sees an advantage to not following it.

  90. Man ON the moon? Would not man IN the Moon be better for shielding and meteorite protection? Why not put the balloons in a lava tunnel and use more local materials? This helps with abrasive and pervasive dust. And why yellow color? Caterpillar company? Not John Deere green? 🙂 Better reflective white, no? But then I’m not Elon Musk. It is his money, right? Or our taxes money…?

  91. Man ON the moon? Would not man IN the Moon be better for shielding and meteorite protection? Why not put the balloons in a lava tunnel and use more local materials? This helps with abrasive and pervasive dust.And why yellow color? Caterpillar company? Not John Deere green? 🙂 Better reflective white no?But then I’m not Elon Musk. It is his money right? Or our taxes money…?

  92. I don’t think it’s that, it rather seems like nobody is seriously considering what we are going to do with the promised but believable options being currently developed (like BFR). I mean anyone seriously planning to build a lunar habitat module as of now.

  93. I don’t think it’s that it rather seems like nobody is seriously considering what we are going to do with the promised but believable options being currently developed (like BFR).I mean anyone seriously planning to build a lunar habitat module as of now.

  94. Did everybody decide that Zubrin’s scheme to seal a patch of ground in the dark part of a crater, beam microwaves at it from the crater rim, and hoover up the volatiles that boil off was silly/unfeasible? Seemed kinda clever to me.

  95. Did everybody decide that Zubrin’s scheme to seal a patch of ground in the dark part of a crater beam microwaves at it from the crater rim and hoover up the volatiles that boil off was silly/unfeasible? Seemed kinda clever to me.

  96. Hmmm…a base 240,000miles from Earth would mean a LONG time for weapons to travel to the Earth. While we don’t have space-base radar military sats looking outward right now, that doesn’t mean we couldn’t put a few up in short order and see everything the base is doing/sending. And by the same token, Earth could send enough high explosives to the Lunar base to deal with the issue. Any space-based installation would be much more “fragile” than a US base/bunker…I mean it’s hard to just run away from your comfy moon bunker and not die from lack of oxygen or food, or water; and then there’s the radiation and too much Sun for two weeks and not enough for another two weeks. No, I don’t see the Moon as a good military installation. Now, LEO, on the other hand, would offer multiple passes/day over Earthly targets with a much reduced travel time for weapons and all the benefits of gravity-assisted energy at the impact point. Geostationary, on the gripping hand, offers a 24hr look at your targets, but they can see you as well…

  97. Hmmm…a base 240000miles from Earth would mean a LONG time for weapons to travel to the Earth. While we don’t have space-base radar military sats looking outward right now that doesn’t mean we couldn’t put a few up in short order and see everything the base is doing/sending. And by the same token Earth could send enough high explosives to the Lunar base to deal with the issue. Any space-based installation would be much more fragile”” than a US base/bunker…I mean it’s hard to just run away from your comfy moon bunker and not die from lack of oxygen or food”” or water; and then there’s the radiation and too much Sun for two weeks and not enough for another two weeks. No I don’t see the Moon as a good military installation. Now LEO on the other hand would offer multiple passes/day over Earthly targets with a much reduced travel time for weapons and all the benefits of gravity-assisted energy at the impact point. Geostationary on the gripping hand offers a 24hr look at your targets”” but they can see you as well…”””

  98. Indeed. They do a lot already by providing a ride. Someone else also has to worry and work towards it too. My concern here is that given the fretful, very conservative attitude of possible financial backers for a lunar return and settlement (e.g. NASA), SpaceX may be landing and returning rockets to the Moon that have no other payload than themselves, a Tesla car, a dummy and a camera to proof the feat. And this way before anyone commits to send people, because the lunar base customers don’t want to impact other programs (namely SLS) or because they don’t trust the new platform to carry people. And given they are among the few that can actually pay it, nobody will go until they decide to do it. I really hope the trip of the Japanese billionaire to orbit the Moon goes really well, and servers to entice others besides NASA to do more things towards visiting the Moon again, before NASA finally decides it’s good time to do it.

  99. Indeed. They do a lot already by providing a ride.Someone else also has to worry and work towards it too.My concern here is that given the fretful very conservative attitude of possible financial backers for a lunar return and settlement (e.g. NASA) SpaceX may be landing and returning rockets to the Moon that have no other payload than themselves a Tesla car a dummy and a camera to proof the feat. And this way before anyone commits to send people because the lunar base customers don’t want to impact other programs (namely SLS) or because they don’t trust the new platform to carry people. And given they are among the few that can actually pay it nobody will go until they decide to do it.I really hope the trip of the Japanese billionaire to orbit the Moon goes really well and servers to entice others besides NASA to do more things towards visiting the Moon again before NASA finally decides it’s good time to do it.

  100. None of these predictions are made with any skin in the game. I would be willing to be Elon Musk any amount of money that nothing of the sort will happen by 2025.

  101. None of these predictions are made with any skin in the game. I would be willing to be Elon Musk any amount of money that nothing of the sort will happen by 2025.

  102. That would be a terrible idea. The delay for coms from the moon is something like 4 seconds I think. Thats basically relegating you to state sized targeting. Throw in the fact everyone can see it, the gravity from the moon, the atmosphere of earth etc….

    Not worth it.

  103. This preso is aimed more at doing serious selenology with the small-payload options that will be available in the current plan. But I’d love to see a dumber mission that simply tried to figure out how to get volatiles out cheaply, at high scale.

    There are definitely two tracks here: There’s the NASA version, which is aimed at making sure that SLS isn’t instantly irrelevant, but is modestly encouraging toward doing lots of small surface science missions. But then there’s this shadow effort, revolving around something less insane like Moon Direct on either FH or New Glen, with BFR lurking in the wings.

    NASA can’t acknowledge the shadow effort, because the congresscritters holding its leash will tell it, “Bad dog!” But I’m sure that they’re thinking real hard about it. Eventually, the SLS fantasy will collapse. I’m just sad that we’re gonna have to waste another 3-4 years pretending that everything’s OK, because that’s 3-4 years where SLS’s budget can’t go to making real large-scale spacecraft, habs, and ISRU equipment. Oh, well.

  104. I saw a tube recently that I tend to agree with that the moon could be the ultimate high ground military base. The arguments was that it is incredibly easy to defend with lasers and missiles, has spots for “24/7” solar plants for continuous power, and that the low gravity would allow an effectively unlimited supply of ‘rods from god’ soil projectiles to be launched at earth. If military strategist ever come to the same conclusion it may be the driving force for a US moon base even if Mars is obviously the better alternative for habitation.

  105. I saw a tube recently that I tend to agree with that the moon could be the ultimate high ground military base. The arguments was that it is incredibly easy to defend with lasers and missiles has spots for 24/7″” solar plants for continuous power”””” and that the low gravity would allow an effectively unlimited supply of ‘rods from god’ soil projectiles to be launched at earth. If military strategist ever come to the same conclusion it may be the driving force for a US moon base even if Mars is obviously the better alternative for habitation.”””

  106. “Elon Musk has tweeted that a moonbase will be created in 2025.”

    He also tweeted that he had buyers to take Tesla private at $420/share and that turned out to to be total bullshyte.

  107. Is there anyone out there with that level of commitment AND money? Not SpaceX – they appear too busy with BFR and launching to even put serious thought into the design of a Mars base, and that’d have to be higher priority. I suspect ‘2025’ wasn’t even a ‘Musk time estimate’ but more likely a Musk joke – else he’d have used more than 4 characters. Though sometimes when he makes these off-the-cuff/off-the-wall tweets, it seems to make him think about how to accomplish the thing.

  108. Is there anyone out there with that level of commitment AND money? Not SpaceX – they appear too busy with BFR and launching to even put serious thought into the design of a Mars base and that’d have to be higher priority.I suspect ‘2025’ wasn’t even a ‘Musk time estimate’ but more likely a Musk joke – else he’d have used more than 4 characters. Though sometimes when he makes these off-the-cuff/off-the-wall tweets it seems to make him think about how to accomplish the thing.

  109. The technology is there, but the economics aren’t, so it’s a matter of a billionaire wanting prestige or love of sci-fi to push it forward. Musk is rather busy with Tesla and SpaceX, neither of which is returning much money to him yet, so we need to find another billionaire.

  110. Wasn’t he initially saying he would send people to Mars by that time? What happened to that idea? Reality?

    We need to focus on rotating space colonies in NEO, under the van Allen belts. Not as sexy, but a much more practical and important step in moving forward.

  111. I want this to happen quite badly…but, the time prediction …I’m skeptical. I don’t want to he, though. Maybe it’s possible. The advance in technology within that time could turn out to be a huge advantage.

  112. I want this to happen quite badly…but the time prediction …I’m skeptical. I don’t want to he though. Maybe it’s possible. The advance in technology within that time could turn out to be a huge advantage.

  113. Man ON the moon? Would not man IN the Moon be better for shielding and meteorite protection? Why not put the balloons in a lava tunnel and use more local materials? This helps with abrasive and pervasive dust.
    And why yellow color? Caterpillar company? Not John Deere green? 🙂 Better reflective white, no?
    But then I’m not Elon Musk. It is his money, right? Or our taxes money…?

  114. I don’t think it’s that, it rather seems like nobody is seriously considering what we are going to do with the promised but believable options being currently developed (like BFR).

    I mean anyone seriously planning to build a lunar habitat module as of now.

  115. Did everybody decide that Zubrin’s scheme to seal a patch of ground in the dark part of a crater, beam microwaves at it from the crater rim, and hoover up the volatiles that boil off was silly/unfeasible? Seemed kinda clever to me.

  116. Hmmm…a base 240,000miles from Earth would mean a LONG time for weapons to travel to the Earth. While we don’t have space-base radar military sats looking outward right now, that doesn’t mean we couldn’t put a few up in short order and see everything the base is doing/sending. And by the same token, Earth could send enough high explosives to the Lunar base to deal with the issue. Any space-based installation would be much more “fragile” than a US base/bunker…I mean it’s hard to just run away from your comfy moon bunker and not die from lack of oxygen or food, or water; and then there’s the radiation and too much Sun for two weeks and not enough for another two weeks. No, I don’t see the Moon as a good military installation.

    Now, LEO, on the other hand, would offer multiple passes/day over Earthly targets with a much reduced travel time for weapons and all the benefits of gravity-assisted energy at the impact point. Geostationary, on the gripping hand, offers a 24hr look at your targets, but they can see you as well…

  117. Indeed. They do a lot already by providing a ride.

    Someone else also has to worry and work towards it too.

    My concern here is that given the fretful, very conservative attitude of possible financial backers for a lunar return and settlement (e.g. NASA), SpaceX may be landing and returning rockets to the Moon that have no other payload than themselves, a Tesla car, a dummy and a camera to proof the feat.

    And this way before anyone commits to send people, because the lunar base customers don’t want to impact other programs (namely SLS) or because they don’t trust the new platform to carry people. And given they are among the few that can actually pay it, nobody will go until they decide to do it.

    I really hope the trip of the Japanese billionaire to orbit the Moon goes really well, and servers to entice others besides NASA to do more things towards visiting the Moon again, before NASA finally decides it’s good time to do it.

  118. None of these predictions are made with any skin in the game. I would be willing to be Elon Musk any amount of money that nothing of the sort will happen by 2025.

  119. I saw a tube recently that I tend to agree with that the moon could be the ultimate high ground military base. The arguments was that it is incredibly easy to defend with lasers and missiles, has spots for “24/7” solar plants for continuous power, and that the low gravity would allow an effectively unlimited supply of ‘rods from god’ soil projectiles to be launched at earth. If military strategist ever come to the same conclusion it may be the driving force for a US moon base even if Mars is obviously the better alternative for habitation.

  120. Is there anyone out there with that level of commitment AND money? Not SpaceX – they appear too busy with BFR and launching to even put serious thought into the design of a Mars base, and that’d have to be higher priority.

    I suspect ‘2025’ wasn’t even a ‘Musk time estimate’ but more likely a Musk joke – else he’d have used more than 4 characters. Though sometimes when he makes these off-the-cuff/off-the-wall tweets, it seems to make him think about how to accomplish the thing.

  121. I want this to happen quite badly…but, the time prediction …I’m skeptical. I don’t want to he, though. Maybe it’s possible. The advance in technology within that time could turn out to be a huge advantage.

Comments are closed.