A reliability-aware framework for campaign-scale lunar construction logistics with space-elevator transshipment

Large-scale lunar construction requires campaign-level logistics models that distinguish route capacity, reliability, infrastructure commissioning, and transshipment constraints. We develop a reliability-aware three-node Earth–Apex–Moon framework comparing direct Earth–Moon transport, space-elevator (SE) transshipment, and hybrid operation. Analytical capacity bounds and nondimensional coordinates separate structural infeasibility from numerical non-acceptance and characterize architecture-regime transition regions. For a 10⁸\,t stress-test target, the reference direct and transshipment-only construction times are $$8.01$$ and $$235.91$$ years, respectively. Of $$294$$ structured cases, $$223$$ are analytically feasible and $$197$$ satisfy the numerical acceptance criteria, yielding an $$88.3%$$ conditional acceptance rate. All $$48$$ transition cases retain their regime classifications under refined temporal discretization. Among $$500$$ accepted Latin-hypercube campaigns, the conditional design frequencies are $$10.8%$$ rocket-dominant, $$42.6%$$ mixed, and $$46.6%$$ SE-transshipment-dominant; reclassification under alternative thresholds preserves the coexistence of all three regimes. A $$36$$ -case onward-transport analysis further yields approximately 2.00× 10³ – 7.79× 10³ scheduled Apex–Moon operation-equivalents per year. These results show that transshipment dominance depends jointly on capacity, schedule, and reliability conditions rather than following intrinsically from the introduction of a space elevator.