Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T03:40:21.789Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rationale and concept for a lunar pit reconnaissance probe

Part of: APISAT 2015

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 January 2018

G. E. Dorrington
G. E. Dorrington*
Affiliation:
School of Engineering, RMIT University, Bundoora, Australia
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Speculation on near-term scientific reasons for the exploration of lunar pits is offered alongside comments on possible longer-term human exploitation. It is proposed that in order to determine whether or not one or more of the pits offer access the large subsurface voids e.g. a non-collapsed lava tube, a preliminary reconnaissance mission solely focused on obtaining lateral images (and/or LiDAR maps) is needed. Possible concept options for such a preliminary reconnaissance mission are discussed. It is suggested that one of the best possible strategies is to employ a micro-sized probe (~0.3 m) that would hop from a nearby main landing spacecraft to the selected pit. After the surface position of the main lander is determined accurately, the probe would perform a ballistic hop, or hover-traverse, a distance of ~3 km over the lunar surface using existing propulsive and guidance technology capability. Once hovering above the pit, the probe or a separate tethered imaging unit would then be lowered into the pit to acquire the necessary subsurface void topology data. This data would then be transmitted back to Earth, directly, via the lander, or via a store-and-forward orbiting relay. Preliminary estimates indicate that a probe of ~14 kg (dry mass) is viable using a conventional hydrazine monopropellant system with a propellant mass fraction of less than ~0.2 (20%) including margins, suggesting a piggyback architecture would be feasible.

Keywords

MoonMarius Hillslunar baseskylightsinkholelava tubesublunareansubseleneanspeleology
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 122 , Issue 1250 , April 2018 , pp. 666 - 691
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This is an adaptation of a paper first presented at the 2015 Asia-Pacific International Symposium on Aerospace Technology in Cairns, Australia.

References

REFERENCES

1. Wells, H.G. The First Men in the Moon, 1901, Penguin, London, UK.Google Scholar
2. Haruyama, J. et al. Possible lunar lava tube skylight observed by selene cameras, Geophysical Research Letters, 2009, 36, L21206, doi:10.1029/2009GL040625.Google Scholar
3. Ashley, J.W. et al. Lunar pits: Sublunarean voids and the nature of mare emplacement, Paper 2771, 42nd Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, 7–11 March 2011, The Woodlands, Texas, US.Google Scholar
4. Robinson, M.S. et al. Confirmation of sublunarean voids and thin layering in Mare deposits, Planetary and Space Science, 2012, 69, pp 18–27.Google Scholar
5. Wagner, R.V. and Robinson, M.S. Distribution, formation mechanisms, and significance of lunar pits, Icarus, 2014, 237, pp 52–60.Google Scholar
6. Hong, I.-S., Yi, Y. and Kim, E. Lunar pit craters presumed to be the entrances of lava caves by analogy to the Earth lava tube pits, J Astronomy and Space Science, 2014, 31, (2), pp 131–140.Google Scholar
7. Head, J.W. Lunar volcanism in space and time, Reviews of Geophysics, 1976, 14 (2), pp 265–300.Google Scholar
8. Okuto, C.H. and Martel, S.J. Pit crater formation on Kilauea volcano, Hawaii, J Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 1998, 86, pp 1–18.Google Scholar
9. Hulme, G. A review of lava flow processes related to the formation of sinuous rilles, Geophysical Surveys, 1982, 5, pp 245–279.Google Scholar
10. Murase, T. and McBirney, A.R. Viscosity of lunar lavas, Science, 1970, 167, pp 1491–1493.Google Scholar
11. Hurwitz, D.M., Head, J.W. and Hiesinger, H. Lunar sinuous rilles: Distribution, characteristics, and implications, Planetary and Space Science, 2013, 79–80, pp 1–38.Google Scholar
12. Greeley, R. Lava tubes and channels in the lunar Marius Hills, The Moon, 1971, 3, pp 289–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Coombs, C.R. and Hawke, B.R. A search for intact lava tubes on the moon: Possible lunar base habitats, 2nd Conference on Lunar Bases and Space Activities of the 21st Century, Houston, Texas, US, NASA CP-3166, vol. 1, 1992, pp 219–229.Google Scholar
14. Martellato, E., Foing, B. H. and Benkoff, J. Numerical modelling of impact crater formation associated with isolated lunar skylight candidates on lava tubes, Planetary and Space Science, 2013, 86, pp 33–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Garry, W.B., Bleacher, J.E. and Warner, N.A. Emplacement scenarios for Vallis Schröteri, Aristarchus Plateau the moon, 39th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, Paper 2261, 10–14 March, 2008, League City, Texas, US.Google Scholar
16. Atkinson, A. and Atkinson, V. Undara Volcano and its Lava Tubes, published by the authors, Brisbane, ISBN 0957 8828 07, 1995. See also: ATKINSON, A. The Undara lava tube system, North Queensland, Australia: updated data and notes on modes of formation and possible lunar analogue, Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Vulcano-Speleology, Rea, G. T. ed., 5–9 August 1991, Hawaii, US, pp 95–119.Google Scholar
17. Stephenson, J. Emplacement and tube development in the long tube-fed lavas in N. Queensland, Australia, 9th International Symposium on Vulcanospeleology, 11–19 September 1999, Catania, Italy.Google Scholar
18. Blair, D.M. et al. The structural stability of lunar lava tubes, Icarus, 2017, 282, pp 47–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. Favre, G. Some observations of Hawaiian pit craters and relations with lava tubes, Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Vulcanospeleology, 30 July–1 August 1982, International Speleological Foundation, Seattle, Washington, US, pp 37–41.Google Scholar
20. Crawford, I.A. and Joy, K.H. Lunar exploration: Opening a window into the history and evolution of the inner solar system, Phil. Trans Royal Society, 2014, A372, 20130315, doi: 10.1098/rsta.2013.0315.Google Scholar
21. Crawford, I.A. Lunar resources: A review, Progress in Physical Geography, 2015, 39, (2), pp 137–167.Google Scholar
22. Ong, L., Asphaug, E., Korycansk, D. and Coker, R.F. Volatile retention from cometary impacts on the moon, Icarus, 2010, 207, pp 578–589.Google Scholar
23. Watson, K., Murray, B.C. and Brown, H. The behavior of volatiles on the lunar surface, J Geophysical Research, 1961, 66, (9), pp 3033–3045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24. Andreas, E.L. New estimates for the sublimation rate for ice on the moon, Icarus, 2007, 186, pp 24–30.Google Scholar
25. Cooper, B.L. Sources of subsurface reservoirs of lunar volatiles, Proceedings of the 20th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, 13–17 March 2009, Houston, Texas, US, pp 259–269.Google Scholar
26. Schultz, P.H., Staid, M.I. and Pieters, C.M. Lunar activity from recent gas release, Nature, 2006, 444, pp 184–186.Google Scholar
27. Radbruch-Hall, D.H. The roles of engineering-geology factors in the early settlement and expansion of the conterminous United States, Bulletin of the Int Association of Engineering Geology, 1987, 35, pp 9–30.Google Scholar
28. Duke, M.B., Mendell, W.W. and Roberts, B.B. Strategies for a permanent lunar base, in Mendell, W.W. (Ed), Lunar Bases and Space Activities of the 21st Century, 1985, Lunar and Planetary Institute, Houston, Texas, US, pp 57–68.Google Scholar
29. Schrunk, D., Sharp, B., Bonnie, L., Cooper, B.L. and Thangavelu, M. The Moon: Resources, Future Development and Settlement, 2008, Springer-Praxis, Chichester, UK.Google Scholar
30. Burke, J. Architecture for impact protection of a Moon Village, 68th International Astronautical Congress, IAC-17.E5.1, 25–29 September 2017, Adelaide, Australia.Google Scholar
31. De Angelis, G. et al. Lunar lava tube radiation safety analysis, J Radiation Research, 2002, 43, pp S41–S45.Google Scholar
32. Horz, F. Lava tubes: Potential shelters for habitats, in Mendell, W.W. (Ed), Lunar Bases and Space Activities of the 21st Century, 1985, Lunar and Planetary Institute, Houston, Texas, US, pp 405–412.Google Scholar
33. Daga, A.W., Daga, M.A. and Wendel, W.R. Evolving concepts of lunar architecture: The potential of subselene development, 2nd Conference on Lunar Bases and Space Activities of the 21st Century, 5–7 April 1988, Houston Texas, US, published in: Mendell, W.W. (Ed), NASA Conference Publication 3166, 1992, pp 281–291.Google Scholar
34. Blamont, J. A roadmap to cave dwelling on the Moon and Mars, Advances in Space Research, 2014, 54, (10), pp 2140–2149.Google Scholar
35. Spudis, P.D. and Lavoie, A.R. Using the resources of the moon to create a permanent cislunar space faring system, AIAA Space 2011 Conference and Exposition, 27–29 September 2011, Long Beach, California, US.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36. Ximenes, S.W., Elliot, J.O. and Bannova, O. Defining a mission architecture and technologies for lunar lava tube reconnaissance, ASCE Earth and Space 2012 Conference, 15–18 April 2012, Pasadena, California, US.Google Scholar
37. Ximenes, S.W. et al. LEAP2: Development of a lunar ecosystem and architectural prototype at the Marius Hills skylight, Workshop on Golden Spike Human Lunar Expeditions, Paper 6022, 3–4 October 2013, Houston, Texas, US.Google Scholar
38. Whittaker, W. Technologies enabling exploration of skylights, lava tubes and caves, NASA Innovative Advanced Concepts (NIAC) Phase 1 Final Report, Grant No. NNX11AR42G, September 14, 2012.Google Scholar
39. Yoshida, K. Low-cost rovers for exploration of lunar lava tubes, 11th International Academy of Astronautics (IAA) Low-Cost Planetary Missions Conference, 9–11 June 2015, Berlin, Germany.Google Scholar
40. Sauro, F., Bessone, L., Parmitano, L. and Carnelli, I. Lunatube: A new mission design for lava tube exploration on the moon, European Lunar Symposium, 2–3 May 2017, Münster, Germany.Google Scholar
41. Dorrington, G.E. Micro-probe for exploration of potential lava tube, 11th International Academy of Astronautics (IAA) Low-Cost Planetary Missions Conference, 9–11 June 2015, Berlin, Germany.Google Scholar
42. Dorrington, G.E. Rationale and conceptual design of a micro-spacecraft for lunar pit reconnaissance, 7th Asia-Pacific International Symposium on Aerospace Technology (APISAT 2015), 25–27 November 2015, Cairns, Australia.Google Scholar
43. Robinson, M.S., Thanga, J., Wagner, R.V. and Hernandez, H.A. ARNE – sublunarean explorer, Paper 3025, Annual Meeting of the Lunar Exploration Analysis Group, 22–24 October 2014, Laurel, Maryland, US.Google Scholar
44. Brown, C. Detection and characterization of lava tubes using surface gravity measurements in support of future lunar and martian missions, 68th International Astronautical Congress, IAC-17 A5.1.9, 25–29 September 2017, Adelaide, Australia.Google Scholar
45. Chappaz, L., Sood, R., Melosh, H. and Howell, K. Buried empty lava tube detection with GRAIL data, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, 4–7 August 2014, San Diego, California, US.Google Scholar
46. Sood, R. et al. Detection of buried empty lunar lava tubes using GRAIL gravity data, 2nd International Planetary Caves Conference, Paper 9016, 20–23 October 2015, Flagstaff, Arizona, US.Google Scholar
47. Carroll, K.A. et al. Exploring subsurface lunar voids using gravimetry, 46th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, Paper 1351, 16–20 March 2015, The Woodlands, Texas, US.Google Scholar
48. Rowell, C.R., Pidlisecky, A., Irving, J.D. and Ferguson, R.J. Characterization of lava tubes using ground penetrating radar of the Moon National Monument, USA, CREWES Research Report, 2010, 22, pp 1–14.Google Scholar
49. Zhao, J.N. et al. Geologic characteristics of the Chang'E-3 exploration region, Science China Physics Mechanics and Astronomy, 2014, 57, pp 569–576.Google Scholar
50. Haruyama, J. et al. Detection of lunar lava tubes by lunar radar sounder onboard SELENE, 48th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, 20–28 March 2017, The Woodlands, Texas, US.Google Scholar
51. Cushing, G.E. and Titus, T.N. Kilauea pit craters as Mars analogs: A new direction for cave-detection techniques, 40th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, 23–27 March 2009, The Woodlands, Texas, US.Google Scholar
52. Jung, J., Seon, I.-K., Cho, E. and Yi, Y. Method for identifying lava tubes among pit crater using brightness profile across pits on the Moon and Mars, J Astronomy, Space Science, 2016, 33, (1), pp 21–28.Google Scholar
53. Hay, A., Brown, C., Samson, C. and Ellery, A. Micro-rover magnetic exploration of extra-terrestrial lava tubes for astrobiological Potential, 7th Canadian Space Exploration Workshop, 24–26 November 2016, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
54. Nosanov, J. PERISCOPE: PERIapsis Subsurface Cave OPtical Explorer, Available at: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/periscope-periapsis-subsurface-cave-optical-explorer, last updated, Hall, L. (Ed), July 15, 2015.Google Scholar
55. Nosanov, J., Velten, A., Mitchell, K. and arora, N. PERISCOPE: PERIapis subsurface cave optical explorer, NASA Innovative Advanced Concept (NIAC) Phase 1 Final Report, 2015.Google Scholar
56. Huber, S.A. et al. Astrobotic technology: Planetary pits and caves for science and exploration, Annual Meeting of the Lunar Exploration Analysis Group, Paper 3065, 22–24 October 2014, Laurel, Maryland, US.Google Scholar
57. Kesner, S.B. et al. Mobility and power feasibility of a microbot team system for extraterrestrial cave exploration, IEEE International Conference, 10–14 April 2007, Rome, Italy, pp 4893–4898. doi: 10.1109/Robot.2007.364233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
58. Confente, M., Cosma, C., Fiorin, P. and Burdick, J. Planetary exploration using hopping robots, 7th ESA Workshop on Advanced Space Technologies for Robotics and Automation (ASTRA), 2002, ESA/ESTEC, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
59. Leitner, J. et al. LunaRoo: A proposal for the Google Lunar X Prize payload opportunity with the Part Time Scientists team, QUT University, Brisbane, Australia, Available at: http://eprints.qut.edu.au/84405/ accessed 2015.Google Scholar
60. Alibay, F. A new form of planetary surface mobility: Hoppers, Microrover Space Horizons Workshop, 16 February 2012, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, US.Google Scholar
61. Middleton, A. Paschall, S. II, and Cohanim, B. Small lunar lander/hopper performance analysis, IEEE Aerospace Conference, IEEEAC paper 1160, 7–14 March 2009, Big Sky, Utah, US.Google Scholar
62. Blewett, D.T. et al. Lunar swirls: Examining crustal magnetic anomalies and space weathering trends, J Geophysical Research, 2011, 116, E02002, doi:10.1029/2010JE003656.Google Scholar
63. Farquhar, R.W. The utilization of halo orbits in advanced lunar operations, NASA TN D-6365, 1 July 1971.Google Scholar
64. Wagner, R.V., Robinson, M.S. and Ashley, J.W. Small-scale pits in impact melts, 43rd Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, Paper 2266, 19–23 March 2012, The Woodlands, Texas, US.Google Scholar
65. Ashley, J.W., Robinson, M.S., Wagner, R.V. and Hawke, B.R. Voids in lunar mare and impact melt deposits – a common-sense expedient to the expansion of humans in space, Annual Meeting of the Lunar Exploration Analysis Group, Paper 7040, 14–16 October 2013, Laurel, Maryland, US.Google Scholar
66. Wagner, S.A. The Apollo experience lessons learned for constellation lunar dust management, NASA/TP-2006-213726, September 2006.Google Scholar
67. Metzger, P.T., Li, X., Immer, C.D. and Lane, J.E. ISRU implications for lunar and martian plume effects, AIAA 2009-1204, 47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, AIAA 2009-1204, 5–8 January 2011, Orlando, Florida, US.Google Scholar
68. Steltzner, A.D. et al. Mars science laboratory entry, descent and landing system overview, IEEE Aerospace Conference, Paper 1467, 4–11 March 2006, Big Sky, Utah, US.Google Scholar
69. Hasan, D. et al. The PEPT-230 micro-satellite propellant tank development, Spacecraft Propulsion, 3rd International Conference, 10–13 October 2000, Cannes, France, R.A. Harris (Ed), ESA SP-465, 2001, pp 535–541.Google Scholar
70. Neptec Technologies (Ottawa h/q) website. Available at: http://www.neptectechnologies.com/products/opal/, accessed 30 August 2017.Google Scholar
71. Velodyne (San Jose, CA) product website. Available at: http://velodynelidar.com/hdl-64e.html, accessed 30 August 2017.Google Scholar
72. Carpenter, J.D., Fisackerle, R., De Rosa, D. and Houdou, B. Scientific preparations for lunar exploration with the European lunar lander, Planetary and Space Science, 2012, 74, pp 208–223.Google Scholar
73. Sakai, S. et al. Small lunar-lander “SLIM” for the pinpoint landing technology demonstration, 11th International Academy of Astronautics (IAA) Low-Cost Planetary Missions Conference, 9–11 June 2015, Berlin, Germany.Google Scholar
74. Wieczorek, M. et al. Farside, a proposal in response to the call for a medium-sized mission opportunity in ESA's science programme for a launch in 2025 (M4), 2015, Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, Available at: http://www.ipgp.fr/~wieczor/MyPapers/Farside-M4-FINAL.pdf.Google Scholar
75. Mimoun, D. et al. Farside explorer: Unique science from a mission to the farside of the moon, Experimental Astronomy, 2012, 33, (2–3), pp 529–585.Google Scholar
76. Moon, Y. et al. Conceptual design of a lunar landing mission using Korea Space Launch Vehicle 2, 49th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, AIAA 2011–332, 4–7 January 2011, Orlando, Florida, US.Google Scholar
77. Joy, K.H. Lunar mission one: The first crowdfunded mission to the moon presenting new opportunities for lunar science, 46th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, Paper 2611, 16–20 March 2015, The Woodlands, Texas, US.Google Scholar
78. Robinson, M. How discoveries from the lunar reconnaissance orbiter mission feed rationale to return to the moon, NASA Community Workshop on the Global Exploration Roadmap, organized by the International Space Exploration Coordination Group, 9–11 April 2014, John Hopkins Applied Physics Lab, Laurel, Maryland, US, Available at: https://www.nasa.gov/exploration/about/isecg/ger-workshop accessed August 31 2017.Google Scholar
79. Anon. Vision and Voyages for Planetary Sciences in the Decade 2013–2022, Committee of the Planetary Sciences Decadal Survey, 2011, National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, US.Google Scholar
80. Cushing, G.E. Candidate cave entrances on Mars, J Cave and Karst Studies, 2012, 74, (1), pp 33–47. doi: 10.4311/ 2010EX0167R.Google Scholar
81. Dorrington, G.E. Rationale and strategies for lunar and martian pit crater reconnaissance, 16th Australian Space Research Conference, 26–28 September 2016, Melbourne, Australia.Google Scholar
82. Woerner, J. and Foing, B. The “Moon Village” concept, Annual Meeting of the Lunar Exploration Analysis Group (LEAG), 1–3 November 2016, Columbia, Maryland, US.Google Scholar
83. Carpenter, J. Fisackerly, R. and Espinasse, S., Lunar exploration objectives and requirements definition, European Space Agency, LL-ESA-ORD-413 Issue 1, February 2010, Available at: https://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/strategies/LunarLander_LERD_CDI_230512.pdf, accessed 1 August 2017.Google Scholar
84. Staehle, R.L., Burke, J.D., Dowling, R. and Spudes, P.D. Lunar base siting, in Resources of Near-Earth Space, Lewis, J.S., Matthews, M.S. and Guerrieri, M. (Eds), 1993, University of Arizona Press, Tuscon, Arizona, US, pp 427–446.Google Scholar
85. Bennett, F.V. Apollo experience report – mission planning for lunar module descent and ascent, NASA TN D-6846, 1 June 1972.Google Scholar
86. Paschall, S.C. et al. A self-contained method for safe & precise lunar landing, IEEE Aerospace Conference, IEEEAC paper 1643, 1–8 March 2008, Big Sky, Utah, US.Google Scholar
87. Johnston, A.E. and Ivanov, T.I. Analysis and testing of a LIDAR-based approach to terrain relative navigation for precise lunar landing, AIAA Guidance Navigation and Control Conference, Paper 2011–6578, 8–11 August 2011, Portland, Oregon, US.Google Scholar
88. Cheng, R.K. and Conrad, D.E. Optimum translation and the brachistochrone, AIAA J, 1963, 1, (12), pp 2845–2847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
89. Mueller, J. Thruster options for microspacecraft: A review and evaluation of existing hardware and emerging technologies, 33rd Joint Propulsion Conference, AIAA 97–3058, 6–9 July 1997, Seattle, Washington, US.Google Scholar
90. Scharfe, D.B. and Ketsdever, A.D. A review of high thrust, high delta-V options for microsatellite missions, 45th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit, AIAA 2009-4824, 2–5 August 2009, Denver, Colorado, US.Google Scholar
91. Carpenter, C.B. et al. CubeSat modular propulsion systems product line development status and mission applications, 49th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit, AIAA 2013–3760, 14–17 July 2013, San Jose, California, US.Google Scholar
92. Sackheim, R.L. and Masse, R.K. Green propulsion advancement: Challenging the maturity of monopropellant hydrazine, J Propulsion and Power, 2014, 30, (2), pp 265–276.Google Scholar
93. Spores, R.A., Masse, R. and Kimbrel, S. GPIM-AF M315 E propulsion system, 50th Joint Propulsion Conference, 28–30 July 2014, Cleveland, Ohio, US.Google Scholar
94. Cohen, B.A., Chavers, D.G. and Ballard, B.W. NASA's robotic lunar lander development project, Acta Astronautica, 2012, 79, pp 221–240.Google Scholar