New Mars Forums

I want to work a bit more with the materials from this post: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 50#p231950  Quote:

Instead of bifacial solar panels we could build a building and use the East and West walls, as mounting for solar panels.

Here is something that may have application on both Earth and Mars:

On Earth the advantages can be protection from Hail.  Also the heated air will become accessible at the bottom of the Eaves of the House.  Obviously strong wind will interfere with that when it occurs.  If you wanted to put a glaze in front of your solar panels, that would correct that problem.

On Earth a problem with this system would be that you need heliostats for both the East and West side, and they would only be of service half of the day.  But if your Heliostats can be mobile, then they can move from East to West and then West to East.

I really have been thinking about this more for Mars.

I am really looking to shelter robots.  A room temperature of -10 Degrees Centigrade may be preferable.  In the thin air this may help with cooling of motors.  I suppose there could be a minimal pressurization of the buildings which could help with cooling.

The buildings could be very long north/south, or there may be multiple instances of the East and West of each other, with the Heliostats between them.

So, my intention in this is to harvest both the electric and the solar heat.  For Mars, I am hoping that warm Mars air can be sucked in and filtered of dust and then compressed to increase the heat.  In the manner of a heat pump.

And that the collected heat, could be stored into mass, solid or containers of water.

In the event of global dust storms or high latitude winters, the robots might hibernate in a huddle around a nuclear power source.

So, most work would be done off of solar energy, but nuclear would keep the work force alive.

A Norwegian heat pump can reach 180 degrees C, so that would be a hoped-for capability.

Here is a drilling method for heat pumps that might be useful in this scheme: https://cleantechnica.com/2025/01/21/bo … lications/
Quote:

This may actually be sufficient to keep robots safe during a global dust storm of high latitude winter.  But it would be nice to have some nuclear.

The exact nature of the buildings could be different than I have shown, but the method is illustrated.

The method may be able to harvest both heat and electricity from sunlight.  Also a vertical surface, is likely to be possible to keep clean in the Martian environment.  A vertical surface may shed more heat from convective heat flow than a more horizontal situation.

I would be happy to get comments on this.

In this other topic I have made my case that robotics that are emerging should be able to build quite a lot on Mars even before humans might arrive.  https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 41#p232041

Ending Pending

Request from the just previous post:

I say yes, and grant the requested permission.  I hope the person requesting will be OK.

I expect that I will never know what post or what it was about.

Ending Pending

Continuing, the Starships could have their cargo compartments cut off, and kept in a relatively low Earth orbit to construct things with. 

The "Locomotive" might travel to the Moon to be of service there.  If a Starship has a dry mass of 120 tons, perhaps the Locomotive might be 60 to 80 tons dry mass.

If Oxygen begins to be produced from the regolith of the Moon, then the Ships may in part be refilled on the surface of the Moon, to allow repeated excursions to orbit and to land.

Depots, sent from LEO to orbit the Moon could supply Methane.  The ships would lift things like extra Oxygen or regolith to orbit.  Regolith might in this case be treated and refined materials.  For instance Iron Oxide.

The Locomotives would run until failure at which point they would become scrap metal.

So a stream of Oxygen may travel from the Moon to LEO in the form of Oxygen or perhaps Iron Oxide, or Aluminum Oxide.  A Stream of Methane would travel from LEO to the orbits of the Moon.

The scrap in part can be converted to propellant for Magdrive or Neumann Drive.  This will be the means to transport cargos from Low Lunar Orbit to Low and Medium Earth Orbits.

Similarly some scrap from the cargo sections of the Starship will be converted into propellant for Magdrive or Neumann Drive, to facilitate the transport of bulk mass from Low and Medium Earth orbits.

So, we would not be burning liquid fuels, except to rise from a worlds surface to an orbit and back, and except for the case of moving humans swiftly between the Earth and Moon.

Should this system have enough excess Oxygen then it might help fill ships destined for Mars.

I think it could be good.

Ending Pending

OK, I now can find the video, that I did not get yesterday in the last post: https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r … &FORM=VIRE
Quote:

From post #86, just previous:

In post #85, I did some rough calculations about the value of a Starship sent to LEO and then moved to a rendering facility for reuse/repurpose/recycle: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 16#p232016

Quote:

If SpaceX were to build 1000 ships a year, and left 250 of those a year stranded in LEO, then that would be almost 21 ships per month.  Rather than to burn them in the atmosphere, lifting them higher slowly with an electric rocket tug could make sense.  So, then you would have an input of 30,000 tons of mostly metal, to such a rendering facility each year.

One thing you could do to start with is remove the cargo sections from the rest of the ship, and to repurpose each of them.  Cargo sections to be joined into space stations perhaps, or maybe large ships to travel to Mars.  The Propulsion sections could be converted to land on the Moon, and become a resource there, as it would be hard to make high quality Stainless Steel on the Moon, at least at first.

Some materials might be converted into propellant for Magdrive or Neumann Drive.  This might be used to move Stranded Starships, from LEO to a higher orbit where rendering facilities might be created. 

Also possible to look into might be power stations of some kind.

So, at some point you would need to do a calculation.  How much value does a Starship have returned to the Earth, against how much value it may provide, being rendered into beyond LEO uses.

You might choose to return a certain portion of the Starships, and leave the balance in orbit for conversion.  Obviously if they are to be used in a rendering facility to convert, you would not be likely to bother with a heat shield, or other landing parts such as Flaps and Motors.

Things like gyros, avionics, and engines might be returned to Earth in some cases.

Ending Pending

Here are some interesting claims: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcollPP … aceXReport
Quote:

The new Block 3 will be stretched and use Raptor 3 engines, and is said to be able to lift 200 tons to LEO, fully reusable.
That system is said to be able to lift 400 tons to LEO, if the whole rocket "Thrown away".
Block 3 will have 3 instead of 4 grid fins.

The old ships 10, 11, and 12 will be outdated so are either for scrap or for destructive testing.

Block 3 will not launch on pad "A", but will launch from pad "B".

I speculate that you could lift ~300 tons to orbit, reusing the Superheavy, but leaving the Starship in orbit.

If they do get to the rate of build of 1000 Starships a year, what if 250 of those were made to not return to Earth?
That would be 100 extra tons to LEO per each of the 250.  And the ships would still be in LEO or maybe boosted up a bit higher.  So, an extra 25,000 tons to LEO.  And if the ships are 120 tons dry mass then another 30,000 tons of metal.  The ships as well if refilled might be used for an additional service.

Additional service might be construction of Space Stations, as well, or the rendering of some of the metal to propellants for Magdrive or Neumann Drive.

If refilled some of these ships might be able to fly one way to land on the Moon, to become a resource for bases there.

They also might be refilled to send massive probes to other worlds.  In that case the second use of the Starship would be finished by abandoning it to a solar orbit or around another planet, I suppose.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Another interesting idea would be a "Shortie" Starship.  Where SpaceX very much is into stretching Starships, by shrinking the tanks, and the cargo compartment the dry mass might be reduced in these cases.

Where there is interest in moving from 6 engines to 9 on the stretched Starships, could a shortie get by with 2 Sea levels, and 2 Vacuums?  That would reduce dry mass a little and also reduce engine cost a bit.

This would not be a Mini-Starship that Dr. Zubrin wants, but it might give similar service.  So, you might partner a "Shortie-Starship with a Full-Starship for a flight to Mars.  As for the Moon, a "Shortie-Starship" might be a better fit.
It might be more suitable for bringing people back from Mars as to use less propellants that have to be manufactured on Mars.

Particularly if the Shortie-Starship could be refilled in several places.  Oxygen on the surface of the Moon, and from Depots placed in useful positions in orbits of the Moon and the Earth.  The Depots might be positioned there by electric-plasma propulsions.  A Shorty would be less inclined to tip over, and also might disturb regolith or landing pads less.

Ending Pending

Dr. Zubrin seems to think that a ship that can deliver 30 tons of payload to the Moon or Mars, might be quite useful.  Perhaps a "Shorty-Starship" could.  What if it's dry mass were 60 tons instead of 120 tons?  40 tons?

Ending Pending

Dr. Robert Zubrin, Starboat mentioned: https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r … 6e9484c505
Quote:

I agree with the bulk of his materials.  I do however think of a Mars mission(s) and Moon mission(s) as an objective in itself.  That is I see that perhaps the relationship between humans and robots as being similar to algae and fungi in a lichen.

So, then a "Lichen" civilization to develop as an objective, and the acquisition of Mars and the Moon and other worlds as  the natural result of the "Lichen" objective.

After that all we need is fusion, and we will be able to apply methods developed for Mars and the Moon, to set up expansions into all of the solar system.

Ending Pending

As it happens Asterofuturism just came out with a video on the subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p230vGS … ROFUTURISM Quote:

There is quite a bit of good information in this one.

Using Iron Pyrites apparently was a trick of the Inca's in their stone work.  But the article indicates that Sulfur will be in relatively short supply on the Moon.  (Not so for Mars).

I have thought that perhaps Iron wool could be used between cast blocks of Basalt.  I would expect that might be possible to melt the Iron wool using a coil to induce strong eddy currents in the Iron.  It is possible that this might help to bond the blocks.  Perhaps a surface preparation of the blocks to give a texture, could make that more effective.

Using Iron Pyrites apparently was a trick of the Inca's in their stone work.  But the article indicates that Sulfur will be in relatively short supply on the Moon.  (Not so for Mars).

I am also encouraged in the video of statements of desire to move Lunar Oxygen to LEO to support a space effort.

Ending Pending

This video annoys me for the sort of sing-song of the dialog.  I don't know how correct it is but it gives an opinion on the problems of #7, #8, #9 each individual.  For the #7-Harmonics, #8-hardware/engine failure, *9-Tank Leaks.  (Ship Problems).

For the Superheavy, they intentionally pushed it to failure.

https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r … &FORM=VIRE
Quote:

The Superheavy, if it could survive the test profile, could save propellants, it is said.  So, I guess if they can modify Superheavy to survive the new flight profile, it may be worth it in the long run.  I believe that Raptors #3 are going to be actively cooled, so maybe they will be more tolerant of the new method.

I have recently read that Starship now is intended to be able to lift 200 Tons to LEO, if fully reusable.  And if fully expendable, then 400 Tons to LEO.

I wonder if partially expendable, (Recover Superheavy, expend Starship) can do 300 or 350 Tons?  If a ship was to be expendable, then it would not have the heat shield, or flaps and motors.  A Starship shell in orbit "Expended" could still have value in orbits, I feel.  It could be refilled and used as a booster for another Starship to go to a very far destination.  Or it might be scrapped in orbit, to make things, or to provide propellants for Neuman Drive or Magdrive.

I am not sure I trust the predictions for #10, #11, and #12, but I suppose some parts might happen.

Ending Pending

As requested by (th)(https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 51#p231951) in "Void Postings": https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 50#p231950
Quote:

Ending Pending

This is a deviation from Humanoid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yA_tCoE … LACARWORLD
Quote:

A quadruped?

I see utility for it on the Moon and Mars, as for outdoor, in spaces not so much designed for humans.

But I am interested in a Centaur: https://civitai.com/models/138772/rpgcentaur
Image quote:

But this is Spot, partway there: https://robotsguide.com/robots/spot
Image Quote:

You would not want a full sized centaur, for inside your house, but maybe if they can miniaturize some kind of hand/grasper, they could make a Mini-Centaur.

I do understand that Tesla has its hands completely full with Cars, Optimus, and now a dog robot, but somewhere down the line.

I think that such a robot could be quite useful on the Moon or Mars.  It could have a toolbox on top of its saddle.  Plus it could have more battery than a humanoid.  The torso might be built so that it could turn almost 180 degrees at the waist, so that it could access its tool box.

If you had a nuclear reactor, and some kind of a protective tent, these things, might make it OK to get some work done on Mars.

For the Moon, I imagine adding an umbrella with solar cells, so that it could operate throughout most of the Lunar Day.

Ending Pending

I think that evaporative ice mining may be of significant value, compared to working with liquids and so much with solids.

This is intended to convey methods, it should not be considered proportional to actual relative sizes.  However the idea of evaporating a pit, and landing a ship into it, is demonstrated.

Of course the dome and the other items have to be moved out of the way for the landing, but might be brought back after that.

Keeping the ice stable after that may require reducing the amount of sunlight that can enter the dome.  As it happens Mars will try to do that with dust anyway.

It can be obvious that on average the base of the ship will have the most radiation protection from this, both GCR and Solar.  But of course their may be times of day where solar may be more a danger if for instance some kind of a solar eruption.  In that case you might seek a better shelter.

The ship will also be thermally buffered in a hole under a dome.

The nuclear itself might be put into an evaporation hole of its own, to protect the ship, and perhaps moved a bit elsewhere.

It is possible that a great deal of setup could be done prior to a ship landing.

While landing precisely in a hole from space, seems too demanding to me, I would suggest that if the ship could land, disgorge its equipment, and be partially refilled, then the site prep could be done and then the ship activated to do a hop.  Hops were done with early starship using raptor #1, so I do not think that is too demanding.

A big hope would be that this could be done by a collection of Optimus-Like and other types of robotic equipment.

I know it is not going to be popular, but I suggest again a side landing ship.  I am pushing my luck but I will suggest again that it not have movable flaps, but rather a "Flange" all around its long perimeter, to expand its air braking footprint.

This is the idea:

So, I don't think that flaps are going to be that effective for Mars anyway, and I suggest that perhaps thrusters on the leeward side could be able to maintain the angled-horizontal presentation of side #2's heat shield to the atmospheric burn.

By having a larger surface area than that of the ship itself only, I hope to get a better braking effect to slow to a lower terminal velocity prior to landing, thus hoping to reduce the amount of propellants needed for landing.

Of course, if the thrusters are to orient the craft during passage through the atmosphere to landing, then those will consume more of the propellants.

But, you would not have the weight of the flap motors, or the power system to run them.

I am not thinking of carrying cargo in a ship like this.  It is the cargo, so you could justify the weight of the flange and the legs by the idea that you skipped carrying 200 tons of Cargo.

After the aero burn the ship will have to rotate 180 degrees to present the thrusters and landing gear to the ground. and I don't know it could endure the forces imposed by doing that.

About terminal velocity.  (I am hoping to cut it in half with the flange):
Quote:

So, you would do the 180-degrees roll somewhat high in the atmosphere, so the air density would not be as much as on the ground.  On the ground saying the air density if 1% that of Earth is being generous.

So, I am hoping that the ship could survive the 180-degree roll because the air is so thin.

As for the flanged ship being pushed to LEO though Earths atmosphere, I am hoping that it could be streamlined enough that it could be done.  Landing gear and reinforcement structure could be added in LEO, I hope.

My notion is that this would only need a one-time heat shield as you would not be flying it again from Mars.

Here again you might do a crude landing and then be partly refilled and then hop into a evaporation pit, to be then in a buffered environment, where radiation and thermal issues are reduced.

Post landing you could have some choices:
1) Remove the flange for another material use.
2) Put water bags over the horizontal craft to freeze and be further radiation protection.

A horizontal landing then avoids the need to tip the ship over and put braces under it.

As for the thrusters, Rocket Lab and Relativity Space will have smaller engines that are Metha-Lox, that might work.
And SpaceX has notions for special engines to land on the Moon.

Ending Pending

This goes into a lot of detail about this topic and also some about synthetic labor: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTH7RRj … ithHerbert  Quote:

This gives me an opportunity to unload some stuff from the Attic of my mind.

Among this are stirring, heating, splitting, and collecting.

A scheme I have in mind that I do not have 100% certainty on is distillation of water on the floor of an ocean.

I read that Optimus might be able to work underwater to about 10 bar level.  (This is having a lot of uncertainty).  This then opens some continental shelf, and some lake bottoms.

If you have a tank of 10 bar atmosphere, with a pool of warm water in it, and in cold water deeper, and we circulate the 10 bar air, we may hope to condense, fresh water in the interior top of the tank.  We may want to have fans to circulate the "Air" rather vigorously.

Unlike vacuum distillation this is evaporation and condensation in a body of gases that might convey more moisture due to the thick nature of the air within.

In my dream world we could make these tanks out of Carbon.  If so, we will need to anticipate microbes that will evolve to eat it so we may want to perhaps cover the Carbon walls, to keep Oxygen away.  (Carbon eating microbes will perhaps not be too much of a problem for a while).

So, I feel that this process is capable of consuming lots of superpower, in various ways and we hope to provide strong economic value: https://superinnovators.com/2024/08/wor … s-99-tons/  Quote:

So, now we have a market for our Hydrocarbons.  If we pull the Hydrogen off, we might make Carbon objects we can submerge under water.

You may heat the water in the tank by several methods.  Electric Heat Pump?  Electric Heater, Pulling Tropical Surface Water pumped into the bottom of the submerged tank.

The cold of the water on the Continental Shelf, a certain distance down will serve to drive a condensation process that will dry the "Air" interior to the tank, and so then will promote evaporation from the surface of the warm water in the bottom of the tank.  I will make a diagram.

Pause..............

So, for the gasses in the tank, we might want to avoid explosions or burning, so to limit the Oxygen.  We might store Hydrogen or CO2 in them.

Of the choices, I suggest Hydrogen/Nitrogen, and to introduce some CO2, and maybe Air.
As the water is to be warm at least we might grow things in the water that consume the gasses.

In doing this we may be doing a bit of Stirring.  If we heat the water inside the pool inside the tank and water evaporates and the condenses on the cold tank wall, then the cold water is made more warm, and so then may rise, and may carry nutrients with it.  This may make the seas more fertile at those locations.

We might do this in lakes as well for instance Lake Erie,  it is rather shallow, but the water might not be that clean.

Dealing with interior salt lakes:  Great Salt Lake, Dead Sea, Aral Sea, Salton Sea, Caspian Sea.

As for the Great Salt Lake, heating may cause the lake itself to evaporate more.  But if you put solar panels over it, it may inhibit evaporation.  So, then you may be able to cause the lake to expand, if you reduce evaporation.

Salton Sea, same thing more or less, make it swell.  If California had any brains actually, they would route more water from the Colorado River into the Salton Sea.

Because if you did the Carbon Tank thing off the arid coastal areas of California, you might get quite a product of water and also produced biomass.  You might be able to shut off the Aqueducts, and reroute the water.

Thankfully there are other salt lakes on the planet so that our "Green Tards" will not be able to stop the research.

Sorry, but I group the liberals in to the royal thinkers.  Just look at Carbon Trading/ Carbon Taxes.  They are simply trying to elevate themselves to the elite and to reduce common people to peasants whose resources will "Wisely" be metered, until they will be happy to pay with their "Worthless" lives to kiss the heal that crushes their mouth.

The "Green Tards" are the ones who bite the hand that feeds them.

Ending Pending

Why am I so brutal?

Well these "Green Tards" want to ring the alarm bells to have their butts wiped for them but they will not fix anything.

Of course I am annoyed.

Ending Pending