Thursday, August 11, 2022
Contact    |    RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon  
You are viewing: Home > News > Space & Astronomy > News story
Welcome Guest ( Login or Register )  

Did you know that you can now support us on Patreon ?

You can subscribe for less than the cost of a cup of coffee - and we'll even throw in a range of exclusive perks as a way to say thank you.
Space & Astronomy

Lockheed Martin reveals its new lunar lander

October 4, 2018 | Comment icon 17 comments



The new lander will be capable of carrying four astronauts. Image Credit: Lockheed Martin
The ambitious new vehicle will be twice the size of the lunar landers used during the Apollo missions.
The unveiling demonstrates the aerospace giant's commitment to fulfilling NASA's plan to land humans on the surface of the Moon as a stepping stone towards a future mission to Mars.

The space agency had asked its partners to present plans for both a lander vehicle and an orbiting 'Lunar Gateway' - a manned space station scheduled for completion by the year 2026.

Lockheed's new lander concept, which is designed to shuttle astronauts between the station and the Moon's surface, can carry four astronauts as well as enough fuel and supplies to last two weeks.
After each mission, the crew would return to the station to rest and resupply.

The reusable nature of the spacecraft will make it a far more cost-efficient solution to lunar exploration than the Apollo landers which had to endure launch and re-entry through the Earth's atmosphere.

"NASA asked industry for innovative and new approaches to advance America's goal of returning humans to the Moon, and establishing a sustainable, enduring presence there," said Lisa Callahan, vice president and general manager of Commercial Civil Space at Lockheed Martin Space.

"This is a concept that takes full advantage of both the Gateway and existing technologies to create a versatile, powerful lander that can be built quickly and affordably."



Source: Phys.org | Comments (17)


Recent comments on this story
Comment icon #8 Posted by pbarosso 4 years ago
i totally agree. we need to militarize space NOW, before the other countries do it and we need to have a war to get them out. military base on the moon with powerful moon tanks to stop any other nation from visiting it.  the moon is the united states' property, its ours. china and russia stay away. in fact we should bomb their islands they are building and contain them because they are an existential threat to every free man in the world.
Comment icon #9 Posted by pbarosso 4 years ago
the shuttle could have been used with a runway and more directional control jets. after it landed it could have used the runway, jets to push it down, and then after enough speed was built up jets under the front to push the nose up and then full throttle. they would have landed by standing it on its tail and then dropping the front slowly as it decended
Comment icon #10 Posted by toast 4 years ago
And where to put the needed 1350 tons of external tanks and propellants, where to put the landing gear, genius?
Comment icon #11 Posted by pbarosso 4 years ago
what do you need those for at 17%G? not to mention if there was a moon base they would build it where there was water so they could manufacture rocket fuel. you lack proper imagination.
Comment icon #12 Posted by toast 4 years ago
Sorry my bad, I`ve overseen that your "idea" was for a lunar module, but anyway, its nonsense because the shuttle wasnt designed&build (propellant capacity) to reach the second cosmic speed so it would never reach the Moon anyway.
Comment icon #13 Posted by pbarosso 4 years ago
i wonder if they built a fuel tank in the cargo bay would that be enough fuel to get it to leave earth orbit  
Comment icon #14 Posted by toast 4 years ago
Will not do the trick because the Shuttle had a limited payload of 24tons, to low orbit, only.
Comment icon #15 Posted by pbarosso 4 years ago
24 tons of extra fuel isnt enough?
Comment icon #16 Posted by toast 4 years ago
No. The 24tons would be eaten by the main engines within 16 seconds (or so) and that wouldnt be enough to reach the second cosmic speed.
Comment icon #17 Posted by pbarosso 4 years ago
wow. thats insane  


Please Login or Register to post a comment.


 Total Posts: 7,311,593    Topics: 300,823    Members: 197,978

 Not a member yet ? Click here to join - registration is free and only takes a moment!
Recent news and articles