Landmark Decision Clears Way For First Commercial Lunar Flight

spacedaily.com ^ | 3 SEP 02 | staff

[RightWhale]

Landmark Decision Clears Way For First Commercial Lunar Flight

San Diego - Sept 2, 2002

TransOrbital, Inc. has become the first private company in the history of space flight to win approval from the U.S. government to explore, photograph, and land on the moon. The company expects to launch its Trailblazer Mission from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan within the next 9-12 months.

The approvals and licensing by U.S. State Department and The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) position TransOrbital as only company presently authorized by the U.S. Government to return to the moon.

Once launched, the Trailblazer will provide stunning, high-definition (HDTV) video and maps of the lunar surface (at 1 meter resolution), as well as new images of earth-rises over lunar craters.

The mission will culminate with the delivery of a time capsule containing personal cargo from Earth (such as messages and photographs), and a final "barnstorming" video as the probe impacts the lunar service. Additionally, the Trailblazer mission should provide the opportunity to view the equipment left behind from past Apollo and Russian landings.

The media collected during the mission will provide TransOrbital with an array of content vital to future scientific and exploratory endeavors, as well as educational and entertainment uses.

"We're not returning to the moon simply to explore ... we're returning because there are true opportunities there -- true revenue streams," said Dennis Laurie, TransOrbital CEO.

The regulatory approval is a significant hurdle for commercial space enterprises, as they must satisfy a number of design requirements and directives. For TransOrbital, the process took two years to complete.

"TransOrbital has the technology, the desire -- and now we have the licensing," said Laurie. "It's a significant moment for our company, and a significant development for all of aerospace.

People soon get to experience the moon in ways they never imagined."

[Frank_Discussion]

A growth industry for the moon is tourism. Lots of folks want to see the sterile rocks, and relish the trip to get to see them.

(Oh, and the rocks aren't sterile - they are resource rich. Oxygen alone is bound chemically all over the place, and we have a good idea where the water we need resides. When development starts, it won't be all that difficult.)

[Frank_Discussion]

I double-checked you, and I stand corrected, RightWhale.

However, as I said, settlement and use may change the landscape. As with the Missle Defense treaty, the US may unsign the Outer Space Treaty, if needed. And I would contend it will be needed.

[RightWhale]

the US may unsign the Outer Space Treaty

As is commonly done with treaties, there is a withdrawal clause contained within the body of the treaty. America should give its one-year notice of intent and pull out.

At the same time, America should establish an Office of Celestial Resource Licensing.

---

During his campaign for President, Bush's campaign staff said that the administration would look into the matter of property rights in outer space. That was a campaign promise and it should be done.

[Frank_Discussion]

Aye!

[Brett66]

Good for them, this should make such approvals easier to obtain in the future. Cutting through the red tape is a significant achievment.

[RightWhale]

That's true. Some kind of threshold has been passed.

[Brett66]

I always thought that Lunar resource claims might mirror sattelite claims. The companies will claim rights to their sattelites and no one has really challenged it. BTW, if someone set up a lunar hotel built with processed lunar soil and claimed it as their property, who would challenge them on it? I would assume if the proper authorizations are obtained, not much different from what Trans Orbital obtained, then it would be considered their property.

[Freedom4US]

Personally, I think the US should have claimed it as we were there "fustest with the mostest" as it were. It ain't a russkie or UN flag up there, after all.

Apparently, the US is content to fight all our battles, real and technological, with one or both hands tied behind our backs. Oh Well.

[Frank_Discussion]

I don't think the treaty says we can't refine the materials there for use, and it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to say that such lunar-derived products are no longer intrinsically "lunar". So, if you make a hotel out of lunar rock and soil, from which you derived building materials and fuel, then it's yours. Your work, your benefit.

Then again, even if the legal papers mandate the foolish route, purely from the view of reality who will stop the developers?

[Frank_Discussion]

"Personally, I think the US should have claimed it as we were there "fustest with the mostest" as it were. It ain't a russkie or UN flag up there, after all."

And at the time we landed, the Moon Treaty didn't even exist. PC is older than we think, eh?

[vollmond]

This is cool. With the technology that exists today, we can fake a much better moon landing.

[Frank_Discussion]

Ooooh... You SO funny...

[GnL]

That was my question when I read this article as well. I was going to go have a p!ss after I wrote this, but now I'm not sure whether I need permission from my U.S. government.