The American vs Chinese Moon Base Plans: Who Will Win?



πŸ”΄ YOU WANT TO SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL? πŸ”΄
😎 Join us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/techchasm

πŸ˜‰ Or become an official Maiorianus member on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUF-OfqZ3hFCxnnKJ-lG1yg/join

πŸ€— One-Time Donation?
– PayPal: https://paypal.me/JS2TheFuture
– Bitcoin: bc1qv4lsfsplvfecrrgvmfclhga28we7mvh9563xdj
πŸ”— Share the video with anyone who might be interested (it helps a ton!)

πŸ“¬ Contact us: [email protected]
#TechChasm

source

21 thoughts on “The American vs Chinese Moon Base Plans: Who Will Win?”

  1. I get the feeling that a horizontal starship base won't happen. NASA is as much a Congress jobs programme as a research and exploration agency and reusing starship only gives jobs to one company under one guy in at most a couple states. The key factor is that even if they start handing out overpriced contracts for lunar base modules around the country there's only so much one can inflate the price. Competition between companies for structural engineering is much easier than literal rocket science. I hope for many different smaller companies alongside the old boys to compete on cheap proposals for these tasks (and never again will NASA be strong armed into multi billion dollar single project deals πŸ™), in the meantime spacex mars program will have a regular cash flow to fund their endgame project of mars. But we will have to see

    Reply
  2. I think I have a better way to turn a Starship into a base. Don't turn it sideways, because then you'd have to spend a lot of effort ripping out the living space and rebuilding it. It's much better to keep it vertical, and put it into a hole in the ground. But maybe it should be upside down, because the hole wouldn't have to be so deep. In fact, you could still use the tanks for storing LOX and methane, and they would provide radiation shielding to the living space below.

    Reply
  3. Indeed, the hull of a lunar starship could be used as a building enclosure for a lunar habitat. But it needs an extra starship delivered to the moon beside the starship that brings the crew to the Moon and back from the moon.
    Why should it be cheaper to produce a complete starship , with all its engines and equipment needed to launch that spaceship from Earth to the Moon, than building modules that are optimised for a habitat and can be transported inside one starship? specially when inflatable modules are used, that are lightweight and can be packed into a very small volume and easily fit into the cargo compartment of starship

    Reply
  4. why would they use a starship as the base? the whole point of starship is to be a reusable rocket to make lunar trips more economically viable back and forth. Destroying starships to create a moon base sounds cool but economically unrealistic

    Reply
  5. Folks, no one sees this.
    China is making a simple and legal lunar land grab.
    You start with a bot base that needs repeaters for its little bots. No satellite repeaters.
    The repeaters designate the area of usage.
    Then bring in humans for maintenance to a huge area of usage already under Chinese control. That's a huge amount of square miles.
    Please share this.

    Reply
  6. Let's see a cargo starship transport a habitat that's 25ft W 25ft L and 50ft tall. That's a possibly a 4 story tall habitat. Two cargo starships bring two habits and another cargo ship bring the rest of the supplies. You save on life support by only having 8 people per habitat.

    Reply
  7. Who is doing it correctly? I'm sure you know I’ve commented to use robots to build the human habitats. The telecontrol humanoid robots dig to a giant lava tube that is half full of ice. The rovers are mining for useful rocks that we can use. After the ice and rocks are mined the floor of the tube is flattened, at least three football fields square, where the tracks for the first Hyper Gravity Habitat that runs in a 200 meter wide cercal.
    Interviews about Mars that I start at a MD who talks about the need for Gravity.
    https://youtu.be/jFBZtmlVpNw
    Before I start telling you about the bigger passenger cars running in a cercal to grant the Occupants hyper gravity of 1G. If NASA is set to putting humans on the Moon before they have a place under ground to survive the massive radiation exposure at the surface. I guess NASA’s true objective is to spend our money, oh and make jobs for US, so the money makes it back into the US citizens pocket, so we can use it to pay the Taxes…

    Reply

Leave a Comment