New Mars Forums

http://www1.jsc.nasa.gov/jscfeatures/ar … 00446.html has more pics

Ok,
Not sure if it has been talked about in threads..did a quick scan but it seems to deserve a thread of its own...
Now that we know how we are getting to the moon, what payload is available?  One article I read, from space.com said that similar to newtons 3rd law

so I'm not going to discuss why its right or wrong, good or bad but what now to do with it.

The plan doesn't seem to have the permanent base on the moon built into the scheme, which probably is a good thing since it will just raise the cost that may scare the politicians (and general public) from supporting it as too expensive.  Some articles seem to hint that $100 billion is too high just for the "bare bones" approach.  But the possibilty doesn't discount if someone decides to foot the bill for making the habitat/factory. i.e A "Bigelow type" project or politicians decide to say hey.. it seems to be accepted by the general public so lets pay the design and building of an outpost.

So not having found the stats on the payloads for the Lunar lander, anyone know what it can carry to the moon suface?  Be nice to see a scenario like the ability of two landers going to the moon at the same time..one carrying a rover, the other a bigelow type inflatible stucture..so when they land close to another the rover can drag the stucture out of the other lander, have it inflated and then have the rover help cover the habitat with regolith so it is an instant outpost.

I myself think its a good start to the moon.  Love to see them throw more money at it but I don't think that will be politically acceptable... so lets do what we can with what we got.

Any comments?

I'm curious on how bumpy a ride "The stick" will be.  Be interesting how this will play out in the political arena

One of the reasons I ask what to bring is for discussion in my classroom.  I do a few days talking about the physics of how to get to Mars in my senior high school class (the delta v's I get are close to the "accepted" values so the kids are surprised physics makes some sense at times lol) and I figure I may add a small off shoot of what to bring..since its so expensive to ship it from earth.

You can never have enough power so the more power the better.. (hope they have the forethought to start designing that now).. never thought of a lathe myself (dam good idea)..I'm thinking half decent sized smelter.. a "high tech" blacksmith shop .. (I think a by-product of some of the chemical processes that can easily be done on mars can be used to make plastics... so maybe a "plastic" shop)  I guess it boils down to what you need to bring to make the making/repairing of structures/machinery easier.

case in point..to move "mars dirt" (or the "useless" stuff left over from your strip mine in your backyard...) you'll need a conveyor belt to cover the buildings you make from the metal from your smelter..so you make the coveyor belt from what you make from smelter and the "plastic shop".. with this bigger building you can make a bigger conveyor belt for quicker mining which gets you more raw materials for your "smith" shops...be an interesting "map" of what you should make first that will eventually make something else which can make something else and so on and so on...

any other "must haves"?

ok,
I'm not 100% sure of this has been covered...
Lets just say that by chance a huge "iron" deposit or some other useful ore for construction/fabricating was found right beside a huge ice deposit near the surface..
What do we take to mars to use it properly?
If my history is correct when North america was first being colonized they still needed many raw materials from Europe to make all the things needed.  It wasn't for a while before the true use of the resources here was used.  This was true even when you had a few hundred people and no worries of space suits for your mining...

with a crew of lets say six..what is needed to get self sufficiency going ASAP?  How do you get at the ice wthout it sublimating off uncontrolably?  A bulldozer of sorts, processor of sorts, etc..The thought of strip mining is kind of depressing but hey gotta do what ya gotta do     etc

Jabe

Zubrins [http://www.eppc.org/conferences/pubID.2 … script.asp]Transcripts of his debate last thursday are up..
just going to read it now.. 

Zubrin is having a [http://www.eppc.org/conferences/eventID … detail.asp]debate on thursday..  Should be a good one..  too bad it doesn't seem to be televised.. 

[=http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0401/14whitehouse/]Bush Speech summary seems to show money coming from moving $11 billion from with in NASA.  Should be interesting politics.....

out of curiousity...Any official response from Zubrin since this announcement?

gees..
gotta hate CNN some times.. 
CNN article has a quote ..

lets just through numbers in the air why don't you....arrggghhh

I think its seems to be a good way to develop the proper technology for it.  Lets hope that following Presidents don't cancel the thing and the International community will help out to some degree...

Thanks guys,
Appreciate the input.  Looks like the numbers are a "work in progress" so there are no hard and fast values.  Using a thermocoupler  with the reactor for energy transfer does seem the simplest solution..no moving parts so no maintenance (makes up for the relatively low conversion process).  The excess heat could probably could be used as "heat pump" as well if push comes to shove.

Regarding

So the 100 kW is the electrical output energy of the reactor after the conversion?  Makes a big difference if they improve the efficiency of the conversion process they use.  A small improvement in the energy conversion can makes a huge difference in the amount of energy output.  Almost free energy if they have a fixed reactor design and then start trying different methods of conversion.
Is there a schematic somewhere of the type of reactor that they will use?  which leads to the question...  For the 3.5 t , 2,000 kW thermal reactor, how much urnanium/plutonium is that and what is its useful life span?  Then the big question...  How can it be safely brought into orbit to satisfy the nuclearphobic?  i.e. send reactor up with out the fuel..and then carry the fuel up in small amounts on various flights in a "sealed" container so if rocket does blow up nothing is released into the Earths atmosphere.
thanks again ..
John