Question Lunar VORs

[paddy2]

Following the opening of more and more Bases on the lunar surface a need for a formal system of navigation and safety aids is becoming more urgent. It is proposed that a framework for lunar based Navigational Aid transmitters (NavAids) be ratified to pre-empt the formation of an ad hoc system.

To this end Lunar Landscapes, operators of the Luna One Lunar Two and Lunar Three bases, put forward the following solution. While the need for the implementation of this plan in 100% of its entirety in unlikely it is offered in an attempt to prevent the growth of disparate system which is evident in terrestrial environments.

To this end the plan proposes the site of 144 NavAids and Frequency allocations well in advance of their need. Enough flexibility is built into the plan to allow the re-sighting of individual NavAids dependant on the actual deployment of future lunar bases.

With present Technology NavAids have a range of 250km. It is proposed that NavAids are laid out on a 12 by 12 grid with approx 150km spacing in Latitude and Longitude. This means that at any given spot within the grid a craft will be able to make use of a minimum of 2 long range beacons typical use would show 4 or more. The frequencies allocated would not pre-empt the sighting of additional navigation aids closer to any given base or impact on landing aids on individual “Landing Pads” or runways.

To conserve power the NavAids could stay on standby until they detect a crafts XPDR frequency when they then power up and / or be remotely powered up in advance of a known flight plan. (The advent of any remotely like general aviation as known on earth is not considered indeed it is actively discounted.)

Even if only 10% of the planned sites go active the plan will still have served its purpose.

The plan as proposed in centered on the Base known as “Brighton Beach” and uses 144 sites with 20 Frequencies allocated. No one site will interfere with and other site and the whole grid can be extrapolated over the entire lunar surface if so required. The first layout covers some 1800 by 1800 km. With the given spacing a craft can still choose to make a direct flight to a distant navaid to conserve fuel.

The full plan is laid out in the attached document. All interested parties are invited to comment

 

[N_Molson]

:hmm:

 

[paddy2]

Least someones thinking about it

 

[N_Molson]

That's the problem, I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean a sort of "grid" with VOR beacons ?

 

[paddy2]

That is exactly how it works out. By all means 20 different folk can modify their own Moon.cfg and have 20 different layouts. ( Nothing or no one can stop that) My idea is that some how we come up with a more standard layout. Just as one kind soul took it on himself the remodel the standard bases which ship with orbiter. I have just thrown out an idea for people to have a think about, standard locations which standard naming and freqs. If you like it and / or have some to add grand, if not then Thats your choice and your files.

Just I have found sometimes its better to put a almost fully formed idea out and kick it around rather then a blank piece of paper.

 

[paddy2]

So this is a non starter then?

I which case I am off to make a number of bases with just a landing pad a Small mesh tower for the VOR. They will appear in each scenerio by default.

 

[insanity]

I guess I don't quite get the need for it as I never fly from one lunar base to another, but it's an interesting proposition and may be a good idea for others.

 

[Hielor]

Given the lack of atmosphere, there's no real reason to "fly" from one point to another on the moon--a sub-orbital trajectory will be more efficient and faster for pretty much any possible destination from any origin. In that case, a VOR network is fairly useless, since your route will be fairly well planned beforehand, and a VOR network isn't the sort of thing you'd want to try to plot sub-orbital trajectories with.

 

[Cras]

Considering the ground based nav aid network on Earth is gonna be phased out, makes little sense to then put one on the Moon.

 

[N_Molson]

Given the lack of atmosphere, there's no real reason to "fly" from one point to another on the moon--a sub-orbital trajectory will be more efficient and faster for pretty much any possible destination from any origin. In that case, a VOR network is fairly useless, since your route will be fairly well planned beforehand, and a VOR network isn't the sort of thing you'd want to try to plot sub-orbital trajectories with.

Exactly what I was thinking. A trip between two points of the Moon's surface is a rather simple problem of ballistics, that any decent flight computer should be able to plot and even execute. To maximize efficiency, the burns have to be as short as possible, so the plot would be : an impulsion for takeoff, and another for landing (here an advanced radar altimeter should do the trick to get the perfect timing). Hovering is a waste of fuel. Armstrong had to do this on Apollo 11 because the planned terrain wasn't suitable for landing, and it almost costed the mission because of the tight fuel budget.

 

[statickid]

Hovering is good for manual a manual landing on a pad, as executed by the inefficient human pilot

What about using the VORs as an LPS, or Lunar Positioning System?

Which brings to mind... would it be possible to install a constellation of positioning satellites around the moon? They would be closer for sure.

 

[Hielor]

Hovering is good for manual a manual landing on a pad, as executed by the inefficient human pilot

But that's just the landing portion, not a transit between two baces...

 

[Izack]

I think an orbital lunar-GPS system would be most effective for lunar positioning/navigation. Regularly-placed transmitters would be questionably useful as a secondary navigational aid (If GPS becomes useless mid-flight, it should be no huge problem as you are already just following your planned trajectory. Corrections can be made when LOS is established with the destination.)

 

[paddy2]

Ok its a non runner then, but at least it's been chewed over


...right whose taking up the "GPS" challenge ???

 

[Izack]

MapMFD does lat/lon to two decimal places, and SurfaceMFD does them to three. Nothing really needs doing, unless you want a scenario with such satellites actually present.

 

[paddy2]

As with all things Orbiter, everything can be present and nothing is. It is with regret I have to say that in truth I do not think there will ever be multiple bases on the moon that would require VOR GPS or anything like it. So yes it's just for the heck of it.