1 of 45

ARTEMIS BASE CAMP CANDIDATE SITES:

CONSTRAINTS, LAYOUTS, & ROADTRIPS

Pascal Lee1,2,3

Sophia English1,4, Cody Johnson1,5

Erin Pimentel1,6, Charles Willard1,7

John W. Schutt2

1SETI Institute, 2Mars Institute,

3NASA Ames Research Center,

4Texas A&M, 5Western Nevada College

6Hamilton College, 7University of Chicago

6th Annual MVA Workshop & Symposium

LAX Sheraton Gateway, Los Angeles, CA

9 Nov 2022

2 of 45

1

​

WHY BUILD A BASE & WHERE:

LESSONS FROM EARTH

3 of 45

PATRIOT HILLS (Chile + ANI)

McMURDO

(USA)

DUMONT

D’URVILLE

(France)

ANTARCTICA

Permanent Bases

Temporary Outposts

Pascal’s Field Trips

​

​

​

ANSMET

4 of 45

DUMONT D’URVILLE

5 of 45

DUMONT D’URVILLE MOBILITY SYSTEM

6 of 45

McMURDO

​

7 of 45

McMURDO MOBILITY SYSTEM

​

8 of 45

REMOTE OUTPOST AT ROI (Region Of Interest)

​

9 of 45

9

N U N A V U T

Grise Fiord

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Devon Island is the largest

uninhabited island on Earth.

DEVON ISLAND

10 of 45

10

© Pascal Lee 2010

HAUGHTON-MARS PROJECT BASE

11 of 45

11

12 of 45

Tycho

HAUGHTON-MARS PROJECT MOBILITY SYSTEM

13 of 45

2

​

ARETMIS BASE CAMP:

SOUTH POLAR OPTIONS

14 of 45

ARTEMIS

15 of 45

LUNAR POLAR WATER

16 of 45

SHACKLETON CRATER

Cold, Dark, Hostile, Environment w/ Resources, But Requires Power to Operate In.

17 of 45

Type

Criterion

Basis

Logistics

1) Solar Illumination

Maximize Solar Energy Generation

2) Direct-to-Earth (DTE) Visibility

Minimize Reliance on Orbital Relay Assets

3) Habitat Area

Analog Bases (Antarctica, HMP in Arctic, ISS)

4) Landing/Launch Pad Area

Minimize Rocket Exhaust Ejecta on Habitat Area

Science

5) Proximity to H2O-Ice bearing PSRs

LEAG: Water History on Moon + ISRU

6) Proximity to SPA Basin

LEAG: Lunar Bombardment History +

Evolution of Lunar Mantle & Crust

ARTEMIS BASE CAMP SITE SELECTION CRITERIA

18 of 45

  • Require solar Illumination > 65% of the time

​

  • High illumination zones grouped into 2.5 km radius ‘Sites’

Initial Map of Candidate Sites

deGerlache Crater Rim

2.5 km Radius Sites

Background: 120m resolution solar illumination map (Mazarico et al. 2011)

1. SOLAR ILLUMINATION

19 of 45

Initial Map of Candidate Sites

  • Within each site, identify Maximum DTE Visibility value

​

  • Eliminate sites with DTE Visibility

< 50% of the time

Nobile Rim

2.5km Radius Sites

Background: 120m Resolution Solar Illumination Map (Mazarico et al. 2011)

Background: 120m Resolution Earth Visibility Map

(Mazarico et al. 2011)

2. DTE VISIBILITY

20 of 45

Candidate Sites:

DTE Visibility vs. Solar Illumination

DTE Visibility (% of time)

Solar Illumination (% of time)

CRITERIA 1 & 2 COMBINED

21 of 45

West Malapert

~1.3 km2

Nobile - α

~1.5 km2

Shackleton Rim

< 0.4 km2

Slopes:

Sub-Criteria

< 5° Slopes (+ limited <10°)

≥ 1km2 Area

Includes Point of Maximum Illumination for Solar Array

Methods

1) Simple Python Area Integration

2) Manual Refinement using Search (Lunar Quickmap)

Slope maps from NASA LRO LOLA Elevation Data

3. HAB AREA

22 of 45

4. PAD AREA

Hab Area

Pad Area

Topographic

Barrier

23 of 45

Exhaustive Python

Algorithm

Sub-Criteria

Basis

Method

< 5° Slopes

NASA Human Landing System Requirements Document

(HLS-R-0071 & HLS-R-0021)

Exhaustive Python

Algorithm

​

≥ 100m Radius Area

1-3 km away from Point of Maximum Illumination

Minimize Rocket Exhaust Ejecta onto Hab Area [1][2]

Topographic Barrier or Elevation Difference of

≥ 100m.

Manual Confirmation in ArcGIS

Path to Habitat Area

Trafficability

[1] Watkins et al. 2021 [White paper + Refs therein]

[2] Metzger P. 2020, LPI Lunar Dust Workshop

Pink = Potential Pad Area

RGB Paths = Topographic Profiles

Nobile - α

4. PAD AREA

24 of 45

  • Green = Acceptable Topographic Barrier Between Solar Array & Pad Area

Pink = Potential Pad Area

RGB Paths = Topographic Profiles

4. PAD AREA

Nobile - α

25 of 45

Candidate Sites

Green: >75% Solar Illumination

Yellow: 65%-75% Solar Illumination

Logistics Criteria 1 – 4 Met

​

25 Candidate Sites

      • 26 - 1 Artifact
      • Only 24 Shown Here
      • Green: >75% Solar Illum.
      • Orange: 65-75% Solar Illum.

​

​

Shackleton-Slater

LOGISTICALLY

VIABLE CANDIDATE

SITES

26 of 45

NASA ARTEMIS III CANDIDATE LANDING REGIONS

Released 19 Aug 2022

27 of 45

ARTEMIS BASE CAMPS

(This Study)

vs

NASA ARTEMIS III CLRs

28 of 45

  • H2O-Ice Bearing PSRs or “H2O-PSRs” were identified by Lemelin et al. 2021

All Potential Sites

169 H2O-Ice Bearing PSRs

<10°

<15°

<20°

​

  • 120m Resolution Slope Map

​

  • Three slope thresholds: 10°, 15°, 20° (Apollo LRV Max = 17°)

Example Least-Cost-Path Analysis: < 15° Slopes

5. ACCESS TO H2O-ICE BEARING PSRs (Permanently Shadowed Regions)

29 of 45

SPAB

6. ACCESS TO SOUTH POLE-AITKEN BASIN (SPAB)

Left: Clementine Data

Right: Pieters et al.

30 of 45

Candidate Artemis Base Camp Site REGIONS

Proximity (km)

Minimal Average Distance to

1 H2O-PSR

Plurality (km)

Minimal Average Average Distance to

5 H2O-PSRs

Comments

Slope < 20°

Slope < 10°

Slope < 20°

Slope < 10°

Shackleton-Slater

4.8

6.7

17.4

39.2

Best Overall H2O-PSR Access

Shackleton-deGerlache Ridge

6.3

9.1

22.6

51.6

Nearest South Pole (~16km)

Mt. Kocher

7.3

8.4

21.4

N/A

Access to SPA-Basin [1]

West-deGerlache

10.0

17.9

32.4

44.1

​

Cabeus-Haworth

14.5

19.7 + N/A

21.9

N/A

Closest to Cabeus:

Proven Volatiles [2] +

Lunar Paleopole [3]

Faustini

17.0*

23.6

32.1

57.8

*Faustini-β: ~9.1 km access to 150ppm of Hydrogen PSR

Malapert

13.9

N/A

37.6

N/A

Poor PSR Access

Nobile

26.9

35.6

38.7

N/A

[1] Pimentel E. et al. 2021, LSSW XII [2] Colaprete A. et al. 2010, Science [3] Siegler M. et al. 2016, Nature

BEST SCIENCE ACCESS: H2O-ICE PSRs + SPA BASIN + OTHER

Note: Still need to consider illumination timing along all access paths.

31 of 45

Shackleton-Slater-α

78% Solar Illumination

60% DTE Visibility

Hab Area >1.2 km2

2 Compliant Pad Area Options

(only one shown)

Best Overall H2O-PSR Access

​

Traverse to Nearby H2O-PSR

~12km @ < 10° Slope (Shown)

~6km @ < 15° Slope

Slope Legend

Slope Map + NAC Images

SHACKLETON-SLATER-α

AKA SVERDRUP-SLATER-α

32 of 45

Slope Map + NAC Images

[1] Moriarty D. P. , III & Pieters C. M. 2018, JGR [2] Pimentel E. et al. 2021, LSSW XII

Additional Major Science Target: SPA Basin

Mt. Kocher is on boundary between Heterogeneous Annulus and Mg-rich Pyroxene-Bearing Annulus [1]

​

Possible Traverses deeper into SPA

Mt. Kocher-β

77% Solar Illumination

60% DTE Visibility

Hab Area >2.4 km2

> 2 Compliant Pad Areas

Average PSR Access, but

Access to SPAB as well!

Traverse to Nearby H2O-PSR

~8km @ < 10° Slope (Shown)

Figure Credit: [2]

MT KOCHER-β

33 of 45

TOP 3 BEST CANDIDATE ARTEMIS BASE CAMP SITES (THIS STUDY)

Shackleton-Slater

34 of 45

3

​

ARETMIS BASE CAMP:

NON-POLAR OPTIONS

35 of 45

Clavius

CLAVIUS

36 of 45

2001: CLAVIUS BASE

​

37 of 45

2001: MOON BUS

​

38 of 45

2001: ROI

​

39 of 45

MOON: COPERNICAN AGE CRATERS

40 of 45

MOON: LARGE COPERNICAN AGE CRATERS

41 of 45

MOON: NON-POLAR CANDIDATE BASE SITES

Philolaus

Clavius

ACK

Pascal Lee 2022

42 of 45

Tycho

Copernicus

TRANQUILITATIS

Philolaus

ACK

Clavius

43 of 45

Tycho

Copernicus

Aristarchus

ACK

Philolaus

Clavius

Kepler

44 of 45

Tycho

PHILOLAUS

45 of 45

Tycho

EARTH FROM PHILOLAUS