Gateway to the Moon and Beyond by Blazon Publishing and Media Ltd

The contracts have been signed at the end of last year, for the two modules. The ESPRIT module can also do the refuelling and has a 360 degree viewing observatory for astronauts to see the moon and control dockings. That will be ready by 2026/2027 and iHAB will be ready by 2025/2026, for launch. Prototyping has started and cutting metal will begin at the end of the year.

Initial concept art for the space station. © ESA/NASA/ATG Medialab

Gateway to the Moon and Beyond ESA is working with NASA to put a space station in lunar orbit and astronauts back on the Moon. Richard Forsyth talks to Didier Schmitt, Strategy and Coordination Group Leader for Robotic and Human Exploration at European Space Agency, about breakthroughs in human space exploration we will witness in the coming years.

he last man to walk on the Moon was the late Gene Cernan, a US astronaut who flew the Apollo 17 mission back in 1972, nearly 50 years ago. Considering the scale of the achievement and the time that has since passed, it is understandable that there are some people today, who even question we went there at all. It is therefore gratifying for scientists to see that the appetite for human space exploration has returned. The time has finally arrived, where we are ready and preparing to go back to the Moon and this time, Europe will play a major part. Two endeavours are underway, Gateway and Artemis. ESA is working closely with NASA and several other space agencies and private companies to make the new goals for human exploration a reality. Gateway will be a manned outpost orbiting the Moon whilst the Artemis programme (twin sister to Apollo) will see a man and a woman step foot on the lunar surface, with a longer-term objective of establishing a sustainable presence. These ambitious lunar missions will also provide the equivalent of base camps, when the time comes to scale the Everest of space exploration, a human mission to Mars.

Same issues, new era Whilst a lot has changed since the 60s and 70s, the fundamentals of moon exploration, Schmitt emphasises, remain the same. “Obviously, the physics in the sixties compared to now has not changed. We still need the equivalent of Saturn V rocket, so rebuilding such a big beast is one of the big tasks – named the SLS Space Launch System – having the maiden flight at end of this year. What has changed though, with the Apollo missions there was roughly a fifty percent chance of not succeeding and they took immense risks. Nowadays, risk is massively reduced and that has a cost and time delay consequence. In the first race to the Moon, it peaked to four to five percent GDP in the sixties to do it and now at NASA there is a relatively flat budget of twenty three billion but only half of that budget is for human exploration. So that is the situation.” Budget has always been a hotly debated topic in the context of space exploration. Should it be spent elsewhere, is it enough, which projects should have the lion’s share and why? “To put it bluntly, our exploration programme is about 700 million

EU Research

euros a year, which is a little more than a euro per European citizen per year, which is half of a coffee cup in cost, approximately. It’s not a lot, and also, it’s not sufficient to be an equal partner. Landing on the Moon is not the same as flying to the ISS, frankly, going to the Moon is another ball game. It does cost more and going to Mars will cost even more still. We will have to increase the budget constantly for space exploration to keep up with the US and China, so let us face that very clearly. I can tell you though, that one euro a year, per citizen, to do what we do, that is not a lot of money and we are very efficient.” The technologies have come a long way since the 60’s, for instance, a basic smart phone today has 100,000 times more computational power in comparison to the Apollo missions’ technology. Innovation will make the new Moon missions much safer and technologically more advanced compared to the Apollo missions, meaning we will be able to stay longer and achieve much more per flight.

The making of a space station The Gateway is a space station designed to support robots and astronauts exploring the lunar surface, with a long elliptical orbit around the Moon allowing maximum direct visibility, thus communication with the Earth. NASA’s Orion spacecraft, which is integrated with ESA’s European Service Module will be able to dock with the space station. Gateway will be composed of interlocking modules, each with a critical role and ESA is accountable for many of the key components.

www.euresearcher.com

“The launch of the Power and Propulsion Element or PPE, which is the programme’s propulsion system on the NASA side and the Habitation and Logistics Outpost known as HALO, these elements are in construction and they could be launched as early as 2023. That is feasible. On our side we will provide the international habitat module or iHAB, and the ESPRIT module, which provides telecommunication, and we have some advanced telecommunication on the HALO also. The contracts have been signed at the end of last year, for the two modules. The ESPRIT module can also do the refuelling and has a 360 degree viewing observatory for astronauts to see the Moon and control dockings. That will be ready by 2026/7 and iHAB will be ready by 2025/6, for launch. Prototyping has started and cutting metal will begin at the end of the year.” The contract, worth 286.5 million euros, sits primarily with European company, Thales Alenia Space, who are currently responsible for over half of the volume of the ISS structure. They will be working on the ESPRIT module and iHAB module, and they also provide the pressurised structure of the NASA’s HALO. The ESPRIT module will handle voice, data and video and has a second role as a refuelling module for the Gateway, also able to support future reusable landers and deep space transport. The iHAB module provides an environment for sustaining human life during missions. There will be docking ports, resources for accommodating scientific experiments on the interior and exterior of the module, external attachment points for

Setting up a future lunar base could be made much simpler by using a 3D printer to build it from local materials. Industrial partners including renowned architects Foster+Partners joined ESA to test the feasibility of 3D printing using lunar soil.

“When our next astronauts fly, we are not procuring a flight from Space X, we make a deal with NASA and it’s NASA who pays SpaceX for the launch. So, from our side, it hasn’t changed from Soyuz launches to SpaceX launches because we still deal directly with NASA, which was the case for Soyuz as well, as NASA paid Roscosmos. However, there is one thing for NASA that has changed. They buy a seat for their astronauts and the arrangement is that SpaceX is free to sell additional seats, for additional flights if they have customers, so they can go to the ISS eventually, which is what they will be doing. They will also have these fully commercial flights for a few days, but without docking to ISS. But with these commercial flights, NASA is hardly involved, it is just the case that they allow the situation to happen because it was an incentive to convince the private initiatives to do the development, because they have seen that they could make money. So, NASA is an anchor customer, with the ISS crew, and beyond that the company can sell seats, which is complicated because of course if these people are going to the ISS and the ISS is not made for tourists, it’s made for science. Thus, there is an initiative to add special modules for the private flights.”

The base is first unfolded from a tubular module that can be easily transported by rocket. An inflatable dome then extends from one end of this cylinder to provide a support structure for construction. Layers of regolith are then built up over the dome by a robot-operated 3D printer (right) to create a protective shell. © ESA/Foster + Partners

Europeans on the Moon the Gateway robotic arm provided by Canada and internal points for Gateway internal robots, which can perform tasks when the module is not crewed. Life support systems will be provided by Japan. These modules are critical for the success of the future human lunar landings and as a learning curve for Mars missions preparation. In addition to constructing ESPRIT and iHAB, ESA is responsible for the European Service Module, or ESM. This will provide propulsion, electrical power, water and thermal control, and an oxygen and nitrogen atmosphere for the crew as part of the Orion spacecraft. “In the past years for the ISS, NASA could have done without us but we are now completely co-dependent. For the ESM Orion, it is clear that it is one spacecraft, where we built the propulsion system, the life support system and everything that has to do with power because we provide also the solar panels and so on. All this is moulded onto the Orion capsule which has the four crew members. Which means, for NASA, that for every flight to the Moon, around the Moon, to the Gateway and thus to reach the surface, Europe will have to deliver an ESM, a service module. There is no mission to the Moon without European involvement.”

Buying space Another important change in perception at least, in how we approach space exploration today is around the involvement of the private sector, with companies like SpaceX, Virgin Galactic, Boeing and Blue Origin, often heavy on the PR around pioneering space ready technology faster.

Didier sees the reliance on these bold new space companies currently more in the bracket of a different way of procurement by NASA than purely commercial from the onset, a subtle but important difference in definition. “Rather than doing an internal precisely defined NASA procurement where they rely on industry to execute, and are on top of it, they just say, ‘we will buy seats on a mission’, for example for the launchers and the Dragon crew. NASA states a light specification needed and it is up to industry to come up with a service. SpaceX and Boeing are doing this, it’s another way of procurement. For the Moon programme, for the PPE and the HALO modules it is NASA that gave precise specifications, and it is agreed they will be a Falcon Heavy launch. NASA will pay SpaceX to launch these two elements but I would not say it’s commercial, it’s a company that simply provides a flight, so, they are just paying a cheque to someone to do it, as it is not a NASA launcher like SLS. If ESA would launch its own modules, we would also purchase a launch, and we would not call it commercial. ‘Commercial’ in the US wording, means that there is a shared risk as NASA has largely financed the development of Dragon Crew and even Falcon 9.” However, it’s hard to deny that purely commercial space flight is coming soon. The reality is that the seeds are already sewn, and the nature of space exploration is going to face transformations. Space tourism, as one sector, is inevitable.

Despite ESA recruiting this year, for four to six new astronauts (with up to 20 reserve astronauts), the length of the selection and then training period for the recruits will mean their first flight should be around

This 1.5 tonne building block was produced as a demonstration of 3D printing techniques using lunar soil. The design is based on a hollow closed-cell structure – reminiscent of bird bones – to give a good combination of strength and weight. © ESA

2027. It is clear ESA would not send ‘rookies’ to the Gateway or any Moon mission on their first flight, which means that any Europeans in the running for the new Moon missions will be from the current seven active ESA astronauts: Alexander Gerst, Andreas Mogensen, Luca Parmitano, Timothy Peake, Thomas Pesquet, Matthias Maurer and

For NASA, that for every flight to the moon, around the moon, to the Gateway and thus to reach the surface, Europe will have to deliver an ESM, a service module. There is no mission to the moon without European involvement. European Service Module for Artemis. © ESA

Gateway with solar array glint © ESA

EU Research

www.euresearcher.com

Exploring is what we do

From ESA’s side we have one female in our seven astronauts, so there is a chance a European woman will walk on the moon. Installation of Orion adapter for first Artemis lunar flight. © NASA

Samantha Cristoforetti. However, NASA has selected six men and six women for the first flight, so it will be a 100% US Moon landing on the first return to the surface, which will involve a man and a woman. “NASA has decided that the first two next astronauts on the Moon will be one female and one male. That is agreed now. From ESA’s side Apollo photos © NASA

we have one female in our seven astronauts, so there is a chance a European woman will walk on the moon. The reason there is only one female ESA astronaut is very simple, in the 2008/09 selection process we had only fifteen percent of female candidates. The selection is not bias in favour or not in favour of women, which means that if we have for example, fifty percent female applicants this time, fifty percent of the selected crew will likely be female. Our position is that we are committed to do whatever it takes to have one European astronaut on the surface of the Moon, hopefully by the end of this decade, so we are asking our member states for the green light to negotiate this. We know we can provide interesting contributions to NASA in exchange like a European large lunar lander, to be launched on Ariane 6.” The dates and deadlines for putting astronauts back on the Moon are still in flux and being decided – at the time of writing. What is clear however, is that the date of the next Moon landings, set by the previous US administration, of 2024, is not feasible, nor therefore is Elon Musk’s date of 2024 for putting astronauts on Mars but all the stakeholders involved are clear on one thing, we are going back to the Moon and then we are going to Mars. The reasons we have taken so much time to come to this point are understandable, yet the complexities are seldom understood by many. “The ISS orbits around Earth at 400km, the Moon is at 400,000 km – so 1,000 times further, and when Mars is furthest away from the Earth, opposite the sun, it’s about 400 million km away so about 1,000 times further than the moon. Not only this, from the ISS you can come back in a few hours if there is an emergency. From the Moon it could take about three days to come back if there is a big problem, when you start out to Mars it could be up to three years because there is no U turn. To go to Mars and come back with a crew, it will take about six super-heavy launches (SLS type), and landing on Mars will take between nine and twelve such launches to assemble different convoys to go there. So that is the complexity of this undertaking… But it will happen. One of the reasons is because a new space race between China and the US has just started. There is now an agreement memorandum of understanding between Russia and China for a Moon base for example, and China are on a fast track, you just have to see what they have done by landing a rover on the far side of the Moon, and they have brought back samples. They also have the Tiawen-1 around Mars, with a rover to deploy, and will start assembling their own space station this year!”

EU Research

The reasons to go back to the Moon and to go further and put people on Mars, they depend on who you ask but there are several justifications. A politician will do it because it is a benchmark for humanity and for a nation’s standing, a scientist will do it because it will drive breakthroughs, industry may do it to create jobs and wealth, a person on the street may see it as inspiration and aspiration. “Of course, for Mars in particular, we should look at everything which can be beneficial to what we are doing, the benefits part is very interesting. Let’s put it like this, if you put four or five people in a box for three years it takes a lot of technology breakthroughs such as recycling, telepresence, and so on which has a lot of applications in daily life. Going three days to the Moon and coming back – that’s not a big issue for the sustainability but having a group of people live in a box for three years, that has massive returns, which means we will be working a lot with the non-space industries on recycling and tele-robotics and these kinds of things. We expect a lot of progress to be done between us and the non-space sector in these fields, including for health issues and greening”. “We are really intending to recycle everything, human waste for example, and asking, how do you preserve food for such a long time? How do you invent new foods, because you will not be raising chicken and cattle in space, so we are looking at solutions like unicellular algae, or new bioprinted foods to be better assimilated. We need a complete understanding of metabolism, to get to grips with a lot of things like this in the health sector concerning food. Also preserving and packaging, so there is a lot to be done. We will need to handle dust, as a lot of problems are linked to dust including health problems, which can impact us even in our cars and offices here on Earth, so we have to find solutions for that as well. Such examples are numerous and the innovation will have impact on our daily life before we even go there.” Having people on the Moon and Mars also allows for faster science. Rovers need to be designed and programmed for specific foreseen tasks and are slow, for example the Chinese lunar rover travels less than a

metre per day. Astronauts can react quickly in real-time to what the environment presents, conducting experiments and gathering insights and data at far greater speeds, a reason why there was a geologist on the last Apollo mission. Another key aspect of innovation to develop for the Moon and later, for Mars, is what is termed in-situ resource utilisation, technologies that will use lunar or Martian natural resources, so negating the need to carry them to the location. For instance, to extract water or oxygen that can produce fuel or provide sustenance. The renewed exploration of the Moon is quite different to fifty years ago. It is planned that we are going to the Moon to stay longer and that drives the choice of technologies there. The idea is that there is going to be a permanent presence on the Moon, and it is important to understand that the exploration of the Moon today is not an isolated target. It is viewed as key to the future exploration of Mars. The choice of technologies on the Moon are being designed with suitable technology for Mars in mind. Beyond all the technologies, the need for RoI, the benefits and practical reasons, it is undeniable that there is something more basic in the desire to achieve reaching these new horizons, to explore and see these locations beyond Earth with human eyes. As Didier puts it: “In 1962 when Kennedy did his inspirational speech ‘we choose to go to the Moon’, he didn’t talk about spin-off and return on investment, we are not doing this for return on investment.” The need to go further is what we are about. It is who we are. The Moon is next, then Mars and then we will go further still, it is what we are made to do. Special thanks to Didier Schmitt, Jose Martinez, Beatriz Arias and Tanja van der Putten at ESA for your support for this feature.

www.esa.int /gateway https://www.esa.int /esearch?q=Moon

From the moon it could take about three days to come back if there is a big problem, when you start out to Mars it could be up to three years because there is no U turn. To go to Mars and come back with a crew, it will take about six super-heavy launches (SLS type), and landing on Mars will take between nine and twelve such launches to assemble different convoys to go there. So that is the complexity of this undertaking… But it will happen. © ESA/Silicon Worlds/Daniele Gasparri