[go: nahoru, domu]
Jump to content

Talk:Google Lunar X Prize

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

X PRIZE vs. XPRIZE - article rename

[edit]

2013-03-26 17:24:17's web archive of http://www.googlelunarxprize.org/prize-details has the wording 

The Google Lunar X PRIZE

while 2013-05-11 17:06:01's, as well as the live version, has 

The Google Lunar XPRIZE


I'm renaming the article to match.


The copyright notice at the bottom of the webpage continues to be in the name of "X PRIZE Foundation".


--Mathieu ottawa (talk) 15:47, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MOSTM supports the old title. Since your move was undiscussed I've reverted it, if you disagree please take it to WP:RM. --W. D. Graham 13:14, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Cool cool.--Mathieu ottawa (talk) 00:58, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The coalescing plans of a few teams to actually plan 2015 launches is undercovered at present

[edit]

There seem to have been several announcements recently with a few of the better-funded GXLP teams putting down real money for launch deposits with various launch service providers, but not much in the article to reflect the more substantive launch plans. Here are a couple:

  • GXLP Update: Team Phoenicia Inks Deal for Space Traffic Control Services, 9 Dec 2013. "Phoenicia-­1 Mission will be ground-­breaking. With Penn State’s Lunar Lion Google Lunar X-­‐PRIZE team and more"
  • Messier, Doug (2013-12-05). "Moon Express Unveils "MX-1" Commercial Lunar Lander". Parabolic Arc. Retrieved 2013-12-07.—Moon Express plans for a 2015 lunar "maiden technology demonstrator flight."

I've seen others. But with real launches being scheduled/deposits-paid, it seems it may be time to take the article out of the speculative unicorns phase and begin to do more encyclopedic coverage of the few teams that are actually making a run for the GXLP prize. N2e (talk) 17:25, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking about the same. I don't find the current state of the article very "unicorny". But there should be a new section with planned launches. And the milestones will hopefully also give a way to track the progress of the teams, or to separate those with an actual chance from those that are "just playing". Wild8oar (talk) 18:56, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Here is some article that gives an overview of which teams have announced launch plans: Google Lunar X Prize leader board. Wild8oar (talk) 06:17, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As of June 2015, it appears (per IEEE Spectrum) that none of the teams currently have a launch reservation, even though only 18 months remain until the prize expires. I have updated the history section and the article lede. N2e (talk) 12:59, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Exact deadline?

[edit]

When exactly is the current deadline? It must be the beginning of 2018-01-01, but is that UTC, GMT, or some arbitrary local time? The article should say, in a manner which allows for the possibility of a Leap Second in the case of UTC. 94.30.84.71 (talk) 16:31, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this has to be added to the article, and certainly not down to a second. I also think they would extend the deadline by one day if necessary. --mfb (talk) 11:48, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Launch contracts coming in: Part-time scientists

[edit]

I'll leave this here, and include it in the article in the next days until someone else is faster. --mfb (talk) 01:30, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Logo update

[edit]

The logo to Google and XPRIZE has changed, so the Google Lunar XPRIZE logo has, too.

I'm unable to find a vector for the logo, and on their site there is only white PNG on their site, and I don't know if that is Creative Commons.

Scarkrow03 • Talk 14:05, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Google Lunar X Prize. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:33, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

SpaceIL still in the contest?

[edit]

The third paragraph does not list SpaceIL as one of the four remaining competitors. Elsewhere in the article, it is listed as a still-viable contender. Please resolve this discrepancy. 199.46.249.149 (talk) 17:13, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Google Lunar X Prize. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:11, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hakuto is not privat anymore

[edit]

They get a lot of government money. This is not a fair competition anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:E3:93FB:3D42:E855:8308:89DB:D45C (talk) 02:57, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Luxembourg and ispace, a Tokyo-based lunar robotic exploration company, sign MoU to co-operate within the SpaceResources.lu initiative — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:E3:93FB:3D42:E855:8308:89DB:D45C (talk) 02:54, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Luxembourg and ispace, a Tokyo-Based Lunar Robotic Exploration Company, Sign MoU to Co-Operate within the Spaceresources.lu Initiative

Luxembourg and ispace, a Tokyo-based lunar robotic exploration company, sign MoU to co-operate within the SpaceResources.lu initiative

Japanisches Unternehmen Ispace macht bei SpaceResources.lu mit und plant für Dezember die erste Lunarmission. Dafür erhält Ispace von Luxemburg einen Forschungszuschuss von einer halben Million Euro, wie Wirtschaftsminister Schneider erklärte.

Das Großherzogtum will gemeinsam mit einem japanischen Unternehmen bis Ende 2017 einen kleinen Roboter zum Mond schicken. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:E3:93E9:2D29:1486:7225:C364:8F91 (talk) 23:53, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Google Lunar X Prize. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:06, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thanks User:InternetArchiveBot. N2e (talk) 02:17, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

X PRIZE foundation will let the prize expire, unclaimed

[edit]

The X PRIZE foundation will let the prize expire, unclaimed. That is all pretty well explicated in the article now, with sources. None of the five teams will make it by the deadline, as no launches are even scheduled before the deadline.

The teams are, a couple of days later, mostly saying they will continue some forward work, and sorta kinda might get to the moon with their landers later on. We'll see. N2e (talk) 01:41, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is a bummer for team Hakuto, as their rover is finished and was shipped to India for integration to the PSLV. (Team Indus' rover is 80% finished so they can't complain). BatteryIncluded (talk) 02:38, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cancelled ISRO

[edit]

This needs updating for the final status before the announcement by Google, when ISRO cancelled the launch contract, and all teams relying on ISRO exited the competition before it died. -- 70.52.11.217 (talk) 20:11, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What I read in the related news is that the TeamIndus asked to dissolve the contract as they could not get a launch soon enough. The cancelation was amicable and left the window open for a future contract. -BatteryIncluded (talk) 22:47, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In either case, they didn't have a launch contract, so fell out of competition before the end announced by Google. -- 70.52.11.217 (talk) 01:36, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

not sure about Astrobotic

[edit]

A couple of recent (2018) citations say that Astrobotic's lander is expected to carry rovers belonging to Teams Hakuto and AngelicVM, but Hakuto (ispace) has announced plans which don't include Astrobotic. I suspect the Astrobotic citations are both based on https://www.astrobotic.com/manifest which hasn't been updated since 2015, and Astrobotic may not be carrying the AngelicVM lander either. We'll see. Dan Bloch (talk) 00:40, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of teams is incorrect

[edit]

The list of teams shows entries that were not actually registered for the competition. The total should be less than 20. This article explains that "Shortly after the announcement of the complete roster of teams, an X Prize Foundation official noted that a total of thirty one teams entered a partial registration program by filing a "Letter of Intent" to compete; of these, twenty did indeed register or join other registered teams, while eleven ultimately did not register". The reference could be better than a blog, but it needs to be corrected. -Rowan Forest (talk) 21:32, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A good and useful updated source

[edit]

This article by space journalist Jeff Foust takes a good cross-team approach to provide a mid-2019 update on a number of the teams that had been part of the final group competing for the GXLP. Many changing plans: e.g., both SpaceIL and Team Indus, who had stated they would go to the Moon even without GXLP incentive have now announced they will not be doing that. Here is the link. N2e (talk) 11:05, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Scope of the prize included the rocket

[edit]

My edit, that "bringing a rover to the moon" was now reverted, saying that "the challenge did not include bringing the rover to the moon". Sorry, please have a look at the archives, like this LunarX website version from 2008:

On the top right, "About the price" it says:

  • "The Google Lunar X PRIZE is a $30 million competition for the first privately funded team to send a robot to the moon, travel 500 meters and transmit video, images and data back to the Earth."

The rocket developement was clearly part of the competition, and there was no "Taxi service" offered by Google-LunarX. A friend of mine was affiliated to one of the teams, and offered a workshop about rocket propulsion, including a hint on escape velocity. Some teams understood that rocket developement was the main challenge, and focused their efforts on it, like the netherland and danish teams, see this wired article:

If that aspect was just lost over time, or later downplayed by the foundation, because it was a little bit naive, is not ours to judge - but to document the original concept. --Edoe (talk) 10:29, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It was part of the competition to get the rover there (trivially: you can't drive on the Moon without getting there), but you don't need to develop the rocket(s). None of the teams developed an orbital rocket, they were all aiming at launches with rockets by independent companies. There are teams developing suborbital or orbital rockets, but these don't want to go to the Moon. -mfb (talk) 15:12, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There are three vehicles involved, a launch vehicle, a lander, and a rover. Launch technology is extremely difficult and expensive. As Mfb said, none of the teams were doing their own launches. To put this in perspective, the teams typically had a budget on the order of $100 million, more than half of which went directly to a rocket launch company to put them in Earth orbit. The nearly successful Israeli team used SpaceX. The Danish group in the Wired article above wasn't involved in the Lunar X Prize, they're just rocket enthusiasts. Also note, their best efforts only went up a few tens of kilometers, with no payload.
Next there's the lander, which does have rocket propulsion, but is much smaller since it doesn't have to escape Earth's gravity. It goes from Earth orbit to the moon. Finally there's the rover, which travels on wheels or treads. As I mentioned in my edit summary, not all the teams had their own lander--specifically, the Japanese team Hakuto was planning to send their rover on the Indian team TeamIndus's lander.
To avoid confusion about this, and because the current citation specifically says that the competition is "to land a privately funded rover on the moon, travel 500 meters, and transmit back high definition video and images", I think the current wording is better, but if you want to add your source and change the wording it's not a big deal. Dan Bloch (talk) 19:15, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"None of the teams developed an orbital rocket" - that's not right, at least the danish (Copenhagen Suborbitals) and netherland teams tried, built rocket engines, posted videos of the test runs, published about it. Over time more and more teams learned that rocket developement was too costly and/or not embraced by their governments, and left the competition.
"I think the current wording is better" - The current 'wording' represents the current attitude of Xprize how they would like to describe their canceled project. But at the time when the prize was actually offered, the 'wording' - actually condition - was send a robot to the moon. So, if WP reports about the prize it makes only sense to describe the conditions at the time when it was offered, not the PR talk that is used to overplay them later. --Edoe (talk) 00:29, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Again, the Danish and Dutch groups are rocket enthusiasts. There's no evidence that they ever had a connection with the Lunar X Prize competition.
The original announcement also said "land a privately funded robotic rover" Dan Bloch (talk) 02:10, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We can only guess why they changed the "original announcement" at the time when the teams actually signed (and paid a starting fee of 10,000 US$ each) to "send a robot to the Moon" - maybe SpaceX clarified that they would not sponsor the rocket?
More Sources:
1. Here is a report of the Lunar X Prize conditions and rules, with several positions clarifying that "launch" was part of the game (published 2008-06-02 accotrding to Meta-tag):
  • Each team must consult with the competition's administrators six months before attempting a launch.
  • Teams can launch their respective vehicles from any launch facility. ...
  • In order to win the full Lunar X Prize, a team must be the first to complete the following tasks: .. Launch a vehicle and make a soft landing on the surface of the moon.
2. And here is an article by The Verge from Dec 2015: "A second team in the Google Lunar X Prize competition has secured a rocket to take its lunar lander into space. Moon Express ... is now one of only two teams in the X Prize competition to have secured a ride into space for its lunar lander" - "The Google Lunar X Prize competition challenges private companies to build a spacecraft that can land on the Moon ... But just making the lander isn't enough; the companies need to find a rocket that will take their hardware to the lunar surface."
3. This satmagazine.com article from 2017 reports: "The NEPTUNE rocket test .. that will carry all payloads listed in this article is also being tested on this launch for use as the main structural and propulsion component for SYNERGY MOON’s LUNA Moon Rocket, which it will fly in its bid to win the Google Lunar X PRIZE."
--Edoe (talk) 14:25, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing that you've added changes my view that since none of the teams had the ability to launch their own rockets it makes more sense to focus on the landing. But as I said in my first reply, it's not a big deal. If you add a citation supporting "travel to the moon" wording, you can change the wording. Dan Bloch (talk) 18:08, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Right, the teams who actually understood the rules realized that the "launch" part of the deal was way off their abilities. But this article is about the prize, and thus should focus on its terms, not the later conclusions by the teams.
What I propose is adding a small chapter "Rules and Conditions", with citations from the howstuffworks.com article. --Edoe (talk) 18:24, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Google_Lunar_X_Prize&oldid=1216506444"