Page 1 of 1

The RAPSODY Plan

Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 2:56 am
by John Hunt
The RAPSODy Plan stands for the Really Affordable Plan for Space Opening and Development. It is similar in some ways to the Spudis-Lavoie Plan but uses a Lunar COTS approach and emphasizes the early establishment of a minimally self-sufficient colony and an bootstrapping approach to limit costs.

The RAPSODy Plan would establish a lunar ice-based lunar and cis-lunar infrastructure which would get to the verge of:
- a self-sufficient manned colony with a back-up of Earth's biosphere,
- being able to supply LEO orbital fuel necessary for orbital servicing,
- a lunar infrastructure sufficient to support other permanent lunar operations and tourism,
- L1 and LEO depots which would allow the fuel and water shielding necessary for a manned mission to Deimos.

In a separate thread I will be discussing my costs estimates for the RAPSODy Plan. It comes to about $3 billion dollars which I know is crazy low but I will show what historic data I base that upon.

The RAPSODy Plan Slide Presentation

Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 8:30 am
by John Hunt
I have created a Power Point presentation which illustrates many of the components of the RAPSODy Plan.

http://www.slideshare.net/JohnHunt2001/the-rapsody-plan

Don't try to view it at slideshare.net. They won't be able to show you the animations. Rather, just download it and then play that Power Point file.

Enjoy,

beware, the penny pincher strikes again

Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 6:20 pm
by Engineer
[quote=""JohnHunt""]I have created a Power Point presentation which illustrates many of the components of the RAPSODy Plan.

http://www.slideshare.net/JohnHunt2001/the-rapsody-plan

Don't try to view it at slideshare.net. They won't be able to show you the animations. Rather, just download it and then play that Power Point file.

Enjoy,[/quote]

I need to disagree with the lander being as much as the launch. You're thinking research company committed to 1 thing when there's several thousand people willing to help design it just for extra college credit. not only that but having their names on the damn thing would be incentive enough. as for the construction, think advertising. Think what it would mean to a certain company that helped establish a lunar outpost. what I should say is what it would do for their business. Its all about the money and advertising. we don't actually *need* to pay for anything really. there are a lot of enthusiasts willing to chip in just to get their claim to fame in it. of course, it might not be efficient when you have multiple people that never communicated with each other before working together. differences in learning and all that. Thats my 2 cents. Other wise, I love the idea of putting the robies up there. perhaps we could modify their wrists to imput special tools instead of hands. save on weight of landing a socket wrench build for human hands. :D
:cool:

Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 11:06 pm
by John Hunt
[quote=""Engineer817""]I need to disagree with the lander being as much as the launch. You're thinking research company committed to 1 thing when there's several thousand people willing to help design it just for extra college credit. not only that but having their names on the damn thing would be incentive enough. as for the construction, think advertising. [/quote]

Please give an example of a large sized rocket, lander, or plane that was developed to regular use from volunteer or advertising money alone. My hope is that if we can make a good argument that the goals can be achieved less than $10 billion the we might be able to get Congress to fund it if the SLS stumbles.

Comparing the RAPSODy (TRP) vs the Spudis-Lavoie Plans (SLP)

Posted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:23 am
by John Hunt
SIMILARITIES
  • Moon-first approach
  • A number of small steps (early progress, harder to terminate)
  • Starts with prospecting missions
  • Targeting lunar polar areas with sunlight and ice
  • Early telerobotoic set-up
  • Lunar ice resource utilization
  • Use a bootstrapping approach
  • Results in a sustainable transportation infrastructure
DIFFERENCES
Goals
  • SLP & TRP - Learn to work & live off-Earth
  • SLP & TRP - Build a cis-lunar propellant infrastructure based upon lunar ice
  • SLP & TRP - Provide the propellant and infrastructure for the next step (LEO, Deimos, and/or Mars)
  • SLP & TRP - A manned lunar base
  • TRP - A self-sufficient colony for humans and the biosphere
Prospecting Mission
  • SLP - Part of the plan
  • TRP - Assumes this will be completed by others. Recommends NASA-funded prizes for specific results.
Number of Missions
  • SLP - Prospecting + 28
  • TRP - (Prospecting) + 15
Number of Landers
  • SLP - Prospecting + 4
  • TRP - (Prospecting) + 1
Launchers
  • SLP - Atlas 441, Atlas 551, and an unspecified HLV
  • TRP - Uses combinations of Falcon Heavies including two docked in LEO before Earth departure
Heavy Lifter
  • SLP - Unspecified HLV for manned missions
  • TRP - Uses two Falcon Heavies as its HLV
Length of Program
  • SLP - 16 yrs
  • TRP - 11 yrs
Commercial Approaches
  • SLP - Doesn't assume commercial prices or commercial approaches
  • TRP - Uses SpaceX prices and assumes the use a Lunar COTS and some prizes
Size of Steps
  • SLP - $700 million - $4 billion
  • TRP - $300 million - $700 million


Overall Price Tag
  • SLP - $87 billion (can't be done unless Congress reverses itself on the SLS)
  • TRP - $ 8 billion (could be a follow-on to COTS/CRS/CCDev)