Inflatable Moonbase
Published on Feb 26, 2007 at 4:41 pm.
1 Comment.
Filed under NASA, moon, space exploration.
NASA is testing an inflatable ground station for consideration of future lunar and planetary missions. The structure, called the “Planetary Surface Habitat and Airlock Unit” is supposed to be a simple structure,easy to set up, and (relatively) roomy inside. The idea is that carrying metallic structures to the Moon or Mars is difficult, and the pieces are heavy and bulky. Heavy, and to a lesser degree bulky, means spending a lot more money. Furthermore, assembly is a major task while wearing a bulky spacesuit, not to mention hazardous. If you cut yourself building something on Earth, you put a bandage on the injury. If you cut your spacesuit in space, you die. But, an inflatable structure would be lightweight and very compact. That would make it less expensive to transport. And, being inflatable, there is minimal assembly. ILC Dover has build and delivered to NASA’s Langley Research Center a prototype of such a structure, as seen in the photo above.
The idea of inflatable structures is not unique to NASA. The idea has been around for a while. In fact, the Soviet Union flew an inflatable airlock aboard Voskhold 2 in 1965 in order to perform the first every spacewalk. Bigelow Aerospace last year put an inflatable spacecraft into orbit as a test of a soon to be launched much larger inflatable module. You might think that something inflatable won’t be very strong, but that isn’t so. There is a lot of air pressure pushing outward against the vacuum of space, and this makes the inflatable craft rather rigid. Modern synthetic materials are also very strong and sturdy. Some are even more puncture resistant that the very thin layers of metal used in the Apollo lunar landing craft. When I first heard of inflatable spacecraft, my immediate reaction was to think of balloons and how easy they are to pop. Well, that is nothing at all like these craft. They are tough.
But, do we want to use inflatable bases? That’s a good question, and that is why NASA wants a prototype to study. Will an inflatable be better than a metallic base? How do the two compare in terms of durability, dust contamination, etc. How easy is it to put instrumentation into an inflatable? Can they be made radiation hardened? On the lunar surface, astronauts are exposed to cosmic rays and to radiation storms from the Sun. A severe storm can produce a radiation exposure that might by extremely hazardous, or even fatal, to astronauts. One suggestion for shielding is to bury the module in lunar regolith (the lunar soil). But, would an inflatable hold up under the weight of all that lunar material on top of it? No one knows. Now NASA has a test module. It will be transported to the Antarctic for further testing. The extreme conditions in Antarctica often require similar strategies as those that would need to be employed on other worlds — with the notable exception that the wind in Antarctica has no counterpart on the Moon or even Mars. (Mars has wind, for sure, but it is nowhere near as strong as the wind storms in Antarctica.)
Even for short stays of a few days or a week or two, such a base would be far better than the extremely cramped quarters of a landing craft. Especially for such short stays, it is not very cost effective to carry a heavy and bulky habitat module. Inflatables would be far easier. For a permanent base, inflatable tunnels can be used as connectors between permanent metal and concrete structures.
However, I’ll admit that years ago, when I thought of a Moonbase, the last thing that I’d think of was an inflatable one!
-Astroprof
Robert H. Redwine on November 15, 2007 at 7:43 pm: 1
Once again NASA is thinking too small.
Remember the original size for the
Space Shuttle was too small for
hauling ISS & military components
and the Miltary had to insist
NASA supersize it.
Without that change the ISS would
not have been possible.
Do you think NASA remembers that
little screw-up.