Planetary and Space Science 56 (2008) 368–377 Lunar science with affordable small spacecraft technologies: MoonLITE and Moonraker Yang Gao a,Ã , Andy Phipps b , Mark Taylor b , Ian A. Crawford d , Andrew J. Ball e , Lionel Wilson f , Dave Parker c , Martin Sweeting a,b , Alex da Silva Curiel b , Phil Davies b , Adam Baker b , W.Thomas Pike g , Alan Smith h , Rob Gowen h a Surrey Space Centre, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK b Surrey Satellite Technology Limited, Surrey Space Centre, Guildford GU2 7YE, UK c British National Space Centre, London SW1W 9SS, UK d School of Earth Sciences, Birkbeck College, London WC1E 7HX, UK e Planetary and Space Sciences Research Institute, Centre for Earth, Planetary, Space and Astronomical Research, The Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes MK7 6AA, UK f Environmental Science Department, Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YQ, UK g Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK h Mullard Space Science Laboratory, University College London, Dorking RH5 6NT, UK Received 13 June 2007; received in revised form 6 November 2007; accepted 9 November 2007 Available online 22 November 2007 Abstract Returning to the Moon has been advocated by a large number of international planetary scientists in order to answer several key scientific questions. The UK also has an active lunar science community keen to support (robotic) lunar exploration missions. However, for several years these interests have been eclipsed by the drive to Mars. Recently there is a renewed global interest in the Moon demonstrated by the Vision for Space Exploration in the USA, the evolving Global Exploration Partnership, and new lunar missions from Europe, Japan, China, India and the USA. The ESA Aurora programme may also broaden its focus to embrace the Moon as well as Mars—realizing that the risks associated with many of the major technical challenges that are faced by Mars missions could be reduced by relatively inexpensive and timely lunar technology tests. Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd. (SSTL) and Surrey Space Centre (SSC) have been preparing a ‘smallsat’ approach [Sweeting, M.N., Underwood, C.I., 2003. Small-satellite engineering and applications. In: Fortescue, P., Stark, J., Swinerd, G., (Eds.), Spacecraft Systems Engineering, third edition. Wiley, New York, pp. 581–612] to achieving a low-cost lunar mission for more than a decade—including various activities, such as the earlier LunarSat study funded by ESA and a current hardware contribution to the Chandrayaan-1 mission. With the recent successes in GIOVE-A, TOPSAT and BEIJING-1, 1 alongside participation in Aurora and Chandrayaan-1, Surrey have developed capabilities for providing affordable engineering solutions to space exploration. Recently, SSTL/SSC was funded by the UK Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council (PPARC) (now subsumed into the UK Science and Technology Facilities Council) to undertake a study on low-cost lunar mission concepts that could address key scientific questions. This paper presents some major results from this study [Phipps and Gao, 2006. Lunar mission options study. UK Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council Report Reference No. 118537, pp. 1–104] and provides preliminary definitions of two mission proposals. r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: The moon; Mission definition; Lunar science; Spacecraft design 1. Introduction Since the last Apollo landing on the Moon in 1972, our knowledge of the Solar System has expanded immeasurably, ARTICLE IN PRESS www.elsevier.com/locate/pss 0032-0633/$ - see front matter r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.pss.2007.11.005 Ã Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 1483 683446. E-mail address: yang.gao@surrey.ac.uk (Y. Gao). 1 Recent Earth satellite missions built and launched by SSTL.