New Mars Forums

For Mars, engineers are designing smaller, electric, autonomous mining vehicles like NASA's IPEx (bulldozer/dump truck) for lunar use, adaptable for Mars's low gravity, focusing on In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) to build habitats from regolith (Martian soil). Concepts envision hybrid systems using small, nimble rovers with blades/buckets, powered by nuclear or solar energy, potentially building on Earth-based designs like modified excavators or even (conceptually) pressurized Cybertrucks, prioritizing efficiency and scalability over large, heavy Earth machinery.

Key Design Considerations for Mars Hauling:
Power: Diesel is out; electric motors powered by solar arrays or nuclear sources are essential.
Autonomy/Teleoperation: Vehicles will likely be self-driving or remotely operated to reduce risk to astronauts.
Size & Scale: Smaller, lighter, modular machines (like 1-5 ton excavators/dumpers) are favored for easier transport and maneuverability in low gravity, with redundancy built-in.
Functionality: Combine functions: a rover with a blade (grader/dozer) and a hopper (dump truck) for moving regolith to build roads or create radiation shielding.
Resource Utilization (ISRU): Moving regolith is key for creating "marscrete" and shielding habitats.

Examples & Concepts:
NASA's IPEx: A robotic system for lunar soil mining, combining bulldozer and dump truck functions, a blueprint for Mars.
Airbus's "Interplanetary Dump Truck": A concept for bringing Mars rocks back to Earth, focusing on sample return.
Reddit/SpaceX Concepts: Discussions suggest small, electric, autonomous rovers with excavator/loader attachments, potentially leveraging mature Earth tech like small excavators or even modified Cybertrucks for pressurized transport.
In essence, think less "big rig" and more "fleet of smart, electric robotic work vehicles" suited for low gravity and self-sufficiency

An "earth dump or hauling truck" refers to dump trucks, versatile vehicles that move loose materials like dirt, gravel, sand, and demolition waste for construction, site prep, and road building, with specific types like articulated dump trucks (ADTs) handling rough terrain and off-highway haul trucks moving massive loads in mines, all designed to efficiently transport and unload bulk materials.
Key Types & Functions

Standard Dump Trucks: Common on roads, transporting typical construction aggregates and debris over short to medium distances.
Articulated Dump Trucks (ADTs): Feature a pivot point (articulation) between the tractor and the dump body, offering excellent maneuverability and off-road capability for rugged sites.
Off-Highway/Haul Trucks: Massive, heavy-duty vehicles used in mining and large construction projects for extremely long hauls and huge payloads, often exceeding standard road limits.
Side Dumps & Transfer Dumps: Specialized designs for faster unloading or handling specific materials like asphalt.
What They Haul
Dirt, sand, gravel, crushed stone
Asphalt, concrete
Demolition debris, construction waste
Sod, brush
Where They're Used
Construction site preparation and excavation
Road building and maintenance
Mining operations (haul trucks)
Landscaping and site grading
In essence, any truck moving earth, sand, gravel, or similar bulk materials on or off-site for construction or demolition falls under the category of an earth dump or hauling truck, with the specific type chosen for the job's terrain and load size

While conventional, Earth-based excavators are not suitable for use on Mars due to gravity and atmosphere differences, NASA is developing specialized robotic excavators for future use on extraterrestrial surfaces like the Moon and Mars. These robots are designed to extract local resources for use in space exploration and colonization.
Challenges of Excavating on Mars
Standard terrestrial excavators rely on their significant weight (mass) to provide the necessary downward force (traction) to dig into the ground. This method is ineffective in the low-gravity environment of Mars (which has only about one-third of Earth's gravity). Additionally, the thin Martian atmosphere makes traditional cooling systems inefficient, and the high bulk density of the deep regolith (soil) presents further difficulty.
Specialized Robotic Solutions
To overcome these challenges, engineers at NASA's Kennedy Space Center are developing innovative, lightweight robotic systems as part of their In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) program.
RASSOR (Regolith Advanced Surface Systems Operations Robot): This precursor robot uses a system of counter-rotating bucket drums on opposing arms to provide a near-zero net reaction force during excavation. This design means the robot's digging capability is not reliant on its own weight or traction, making it effective in low-gravity environments. Its symmetrical design also allows it to continue operating even if it tips over.
IPEx (ISRU Pilot Excavator): This is the next-generation version of RASSOR. It is designed to be highly productive, capable of excavating up to 10,000 kg of lunar regolith in a single lunar day during testing. IPEx aims to bridge the gap between prospecting and full-scale resource extraction operations.
The Use of Martian Excavators
The primary use for these future excavators on Mars and the Moon is In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU). By using local materials, future missions can become more sustainable and self-sufficient.
Key uses include:
Extracting water ice: Robotic excavators would mine for buried ice deposits, which can then be processed into drinking water, oxygen for life support, and propellant (rocket fuel) for spacecraft.
Construction: Regolith can be used as a building material for habitats and landing pads, reducing the need to transport materials from Earth.
Mining minerals: The extraction of other valuable minerals is a long-term goal for potential commercial ventures and colonization.
Currently, while conceptual illustrations exist, there are no physical excavators operating on the surface of Mars; existing missions rely on smaller rovers like Spirit, Opportunity, Curiosity, and Perseverance which primarily perform geological analysis

Mars excavators are designed to be compact and lightweight for transport, with prototypes like RASSOR 2.0 weighing around 66 kg (145 lbs) and sized to fit within mission constraints, while larger concepts for future bases might be 1-2 tons, using mechanisms like counter-rotating bucket drums to handle low Martian gravity and excavate significant amounts of regolith (soil) for building materials or water extraction. They use efficient designs, like counteracting digging forces, to operate effectively in Mars' reduced gravity, differing greatly from massive Earth machines like Bagger 293.
Examples of Mars Excavator Concepts & Prototypes:
RASSOR (Regolith Advanced Surface Systems Operations Robot):
Mass: 66 kg (approx. 145 lbs).
Key Feature: Uses counteracting bucket drums to create net-zero horizontal reaction forces, making it stable in low gravity.
Capability: Can excavate several metric tons of soil daily.
Deep Space Excavator (RASC-AL Prototype):
Dimensions: 1m x 1m x 1.5m tall.
Mass: 49 kg (approx. 108 lbs).
Design: Uses lightweight aluminum framing for modularity.
Conceptual "Mini-Excavators":
Mass: Estimated 1-2 tons for larger base construction, emphasizing the trade-off between size and launch difficulty.
Function: Could be used for surface preparation, towing, or attaching tools like blowers.
Design Considerations for Mars:
Mass & Size: Must be small and light enough to launch to Mars (e.g., fitting within rovers like Curiosity/Perseverance, ~1 ton) but capable of significant work.
Low Gravity: Designs often use opposing forces (like RASSOR's drums) to maintain stability and prevent flipping over.
Power: Efficient power usage is critical; excavators might use <200W for modest excavation rates.
Autonomous Operation: Autonomous systems are key for efficiency, as direct remote control is limited by communication delays

Earth excavator sizes and masses vary dramatically, from small mini excavators weighing under a ton (around 2,000 lbs) for tight spaces, to standard models from 10-45 tons, up to massive mining excavators exceeding 100 tons (like 200+ ton models or giants like the Bagger 293 at 14,200 tons), with common standard excavators often in the 19-24 ton range, showcasing a huge spectrum of capabilities for everything from landscaping to large-scale mining.

Common Excavator Sizes & Weights
Mini/Micro Excavators:
Weight: ~1,500 lbs to 10,000 lbs (under 1 ton to 5 tons).
Use: Tight spaces, landscaping, small utility work.
Small/Compact Excavators:
Weight: 10,000 lbs to 25,000 lbs (5 to 12.5 tons).
Use: Versatile for general construction, better reach than minis.
Standard/Mid-Size Excavators:
Weight: 10 tons to 45 tons (with typical models around 19-24 tons).
Use: Most common, strong power for varied construction tasks, often tracked for rough terrain.
Large/Heavy Excavators:
Weight: 45 tons and up, some over 100 tons (e.g., Cat 207,300 lb model).
Use: Deep digging, large-scale earthmoving, demolition, mining.
Massive Mining Excavators (e.g., Bagger 293):
Weight: Thousands of tons (Bagger 293 is ~14,200 tons).
Use: Extreme-scale surface mining operations

Key Factors Influencing Size
Job Site: Tight urban sites need mini excavators; large open mines need massive ones.
Dig Depth/Reach: Larger machines offer significantly deeper digging and greater reach.
Power: Measured in horsepower, it dictates lifting and digging force, increasing with size.
Transport: Smaller models can be towed, while larger ones require specialized transport.

Mars has craters filled with water ice, most famously the Korolev Crater, located near the north pole, which holds a massive, year-round deposit of ice due to a "cold trap" effect where cold air settles and prevents melting, creating a beautiful, pristine, snow-like landscape. This 82-kilometer-wide crater features a central mound of ice up to 1.8 kilometers thick, a feature highlighted by the European Space Agency's Mars Express spacecraft.

Key Features of Korolev Crater:
Location: Near the north pole (Mare Boreum quadrangle).
Size: About 81.4 kilometers (50.6 miles) wide.
Ice Volume: Contains approximately 2,200 cubic kilometers of water ice.
Cold Trap: Its deep floor (2 km below the rim) cools the air, creating a stable, icy layer that stays frozen year-round, even in summer.
Other Ice-Filled Craters:
Other craters, particularly in the northern lowlands, also contain significant water ice deposits, sometimes visible as bright patches.
Significance:
These icy craters are crucial for understanding Mars' climate history and potential for past or present life, serving as valuable targets for future exploration

Back here on Earth, in admittedly less extreme temperatures, for Canadian mining and rock crushing equipment operating in -30C temperatures, they're using a combination of high-Manganese steel, high-Chromium "white" Iron, and Austenitic Ductile Iron.  Mangalloy is the traditional cold weather steel that becomes work hardened with use, but has already been replaced with Ductile Iron in many applications for cost and wear benefits.  White Iron is used in applications where abrasion / cutting from rock is the most important factor, such as razor sharp little shards of crushed rock being pulverized into a powder.  The first couple of stages of rock crushers will be Ductile Iron, with the final one to two stages being White Iron because softer metals will get abraded too quickly.  Chromium makes White Iron very hard.

Nearly every component in a heavy duty diesel engine can be and in fact are made from ADI, with only the connecting rods, pistons, piston pins, fasteners, and other small parts being steel vs Ductile Iron.  Forged 4340 steel is still the best general purpose material for crankshafts and connecting rods subjected to severe stresses, but even high performance engines like Chrysler's Gen III Hemi are now using ADI camshafts as OEM equipment, and some engines use ADI crankshafts as well.  Ford put ADI on the map during the 1980s when they put ADI crankshafts in some of their high-output engines, so one could say ADI is a 1980s and beyond material.  TVR, a British company known for their extreme performance road-legal race cars, was also well known for using ADI instead of forged steel in their high-output V8 and I6 engines.  If ADI lacked performance relative to 4340, then TVR would've discovered this during testing.  OEMs like Caterpillar don't try to "hot rod" their engines though, so ADI crankshafts work for them in their largest mining truck and marine engines, saving piles of cash over modestly stronger forgings.

If you do everything absolutely correctly with a 4340 forging, then you get about 20% more "power holding" capability and fatigue life over ADI, at extreme cost.  Modern "wonder materials" like 300M or Titanium also come with use case limitations, like "don't ever scratch the surface or drop the part on something hard".  You should not expect the average mechanic to abide by those limitations.  You see 300M and Titanium used in race engine connecting rods or aircraft landing gear / wing spars / engine mounts only.  Nobody uses Titanium in crankshafts, which should tell you something.  You would never design a factory diesel engine to use Titanium parts, for example.  You also "give up" toughness at low temperatures and chemical exposure resistance, hence why you don't see Titanium or super alloys used in ship hulls or propellers.  The Soviets used Titanium successfully in a literal handful of submarines, but not without a lot more hull maintenance, and every class of attack sub designed thereafter switched back to steel.  Titanium exhaust manifolds are notorious for cracking.  Everyone with a lick of sense uses stainless, an Inconel super alloy to reduce weight and achieve high temperature resistance, or plain old cast ductile Iron if cost matters at all.  Titanium is pretty and produces unique "engine noises", but engineers with design latitude will generally opt for any other material.

Why ADI for heavy duty earth moving equipment?

ADI is 50% less energy-intensive to make than cast steel and 80% less energy-intensive than forged steel because there are fewer processing steps involving extreme heating.  ADI will give you 80% of the performance of a 4340 forging in a practical application, like a crankshaft.  Nobody makes a crane boom out of 4340 forgings, though.  They all use mild steel or boiler plate steel.  ADI in automotive use is a 120ksi YS material, tempered 4340 can go up to 200ksi if you don't care about toughness, but 125ksi YS is typical of normalized 4340.  Fatigue resistance is better with 4340 forgings only if you spare no expense in production.  Any lesser forged steel is probably not as good as ADI, such as the micro-alloyed low-alloy content forgings that come out of the major automotive OEMs, particularly for crankshafts / camshafts / connecting rods.  They use forging of cheaper steels for part-to-part consistency, not absolute strength and fatigue life.  As heat treatment process control improved dramatically with computerized ovens, appropriately tempered Iron castings largely replaced forgings.

ADI can technically be welded, but isn't worth the expense.  If you want to economically weld parts together, then you really need to use mild steel or boiler plate steels.  The only kinds of cryogenic capable steel we have for heavy earth moving equipment are either 300 series stainless steels, which are no stronger than mild Carbon steels and often modestly weaker, or stronger high-Manganese steels more akin to HY80 equivalents used in ship building.

Caterpillar really likes to use ADI for cast components used to reduce component count and assembly time, or mild steel requiring no special weld prep, so that if someone welds on their equipment or bends a frame rail back into place, the structural integrity of the equipment hasn't been compromised.  Mild steel cannot remain ductile due to the cold temperatures on Mars, which leaves stainless, which is also safe to weld without concern over strength loss.

That complex part on the back of their haul trucks where the wheels / final drive / frame rails attach is a very large single piece ADI casting.  The bucket, cab, and forward chassis components are welded mild steel.  On Mars that would be welded stainless steel.

So, I have a proposal:
Let's "get real" about something fundamental to "civilization building":
Modern human society is built on water processing ability, industrialized farming, thermal energy, steel, and concrete.  All other "nice to have" materials and other technological advancements have come from that foundation.

Every Starship that lands eventually becomes part of the chassis or crane boom or other large components for these mining vehicles that we need to mine enough metal ore to create pressurized habitation to actually live on Mars permanently.  The first order of business is to be able to produce pure Iron using electrolytic reduction techniques.  This requires a lot of electricity, but the temperatures are very modest.  Pure Iron plus small quantities of alloying metals and Carbon unlocks ADI.  Most structural parts can be built using this material, because ADI has few problems with mildly cryogenic temperatures.  As we make more equipment from scratch using mined metals, we'll want to add a steel mill and forging tools so small parts that really need to be forged steel can also be locally sourced.  The only kinds of steels we can expect to survive the Martian nights are ADI, stainless, and high-Manganese alloys.  Every bit of metals-based infrastructure needs to "natively" survive being cold-soaked, meaning the intrinsic material properties are suitable for use in a mildly cryogenic environment.

Most Iron-based alloys used on Earth are intended for construction, with equipment of any kind being a distant secondary consumer of metals.  The majority of Iron production must be directed at pressurized habitation construction, not equipment or vehicles.  Iron wiring is not lightweight compared to Copper or Aluminum, but most of it won't go anywhere after installation, won't corrode, and won't be transported very far, either.  If a length of Copper conductor wire weighed 1lb, then its equivalent Iron wire only weighs 5lbs on Earth, but only 1.9lbs on Mars.  This is obviously not ideal, but eliminates the immediate need for a Copper or Aluminum mining and refining industry.  We can live with that result, though, even if Copper and Aluminum mining takes several additional decades of settlement development before it can be pursued.

After we have re-mastered Iron and steel suitable for production and use in the new context of the Martian surface environment, Aluminum, Silicon, Copper, and Uranium are our next priorities.  Unfortunately, all of these technology metals are also very energy-intensive, which is why they're secondary priorities.

Everything else is an artifact of mass production of those metals.  Iron is the key metal, as it always has been.  When you have Iron, you can make most of the the structures and machines humans need to survive on Mars.  The stainless steel is already being imported from Earth in the form of vehicles suitable for making the trip from Earth to Mars.  If SpaceX follows their plan to deliver 1,000 Starships per launch opportunity, then that's about 100,000t of steel to work with.  Mining haul trucks like the Caterpillar 797 weigh about 215t, so a decently-sized mining operation may have 10,000t of equipment, leaving the other 90,000t available for initial pressurized habitation construction.

We need tracked all-terrain earth movers powered by SCO2 gas turbine engines and electric motors to eliminate gear boxes, drive shafts, and as much of the working fluids as is practical.  The fuel will be a finely powdered Carbon fluidized with CO2 for pumping, compressed O2 or LOX for oxidizer.  The electric motors will save wear and tear on the brakes by mostly not requiring them.  A super capacitor bank will provide the jolt of energy to overcome initial rolling resistance to get the vehicle moving, and then be recharged by the traction motors during braking.  This is essentially an advanced turbine-electric locomotive power train.  Daily maintenance tasks will include fuel replenishment, checking hydraulic fluid levels, track tension adjustment, determining if someone accidentally bent one of the soft stainless steel structural members holding the vehicle together.  When turbine power is not being demanded to propel the vehicle, an electric pump will siphon CO2 from the atmosphere.  At the end of each shift, the LCO2 tanks will be emptied back at the shop where it will be used to supply CO2 for shop air tools and making fresh batches of powdered Carbon fuel and O2 oxidizer using Gallium-Indium-Copper liquid metal.  If we happen to discover a natural gas well nearby, then we might consider using Methane instead of synthetic coal, provided that the rockets don't consume all of the Methane.  Regardless, the Martian atmosphere is the fuel / oxidizer and working fluid of choice.

Since we cannot readily use gigantic rubber tires in a cryogenic environment, we'll use steel track links instead.  The dramatic reduction in relative vehicle gross weight means we need less power, even with tracks vs tires.  The Cat 797F haul truck's gross weight with 400t max payload is 623.7t on Earth, but only 237t on Mars.  Top speed is officially 65kmh when fully loaded, though I would surmise speed depends greatly upon local terrain and room to maneuver.  Instead of 4,000hp, we can manage with less than that, say 1,520hp.  1,500hp corresponds with the output of the M1 Abrams AGT-1500 conventional gas turbine.  Fuel consumption over an 18 hour shift is about 75gph.

US EIA rates diesel fuel at 138,500btu/gallon, so 75 gallons is 10,387,500BTU.

Net electrical output vs fuel burn for the big Cat C175-20 diesel engine which powers the 797F are as follows:
Max rated electrical output is 3.2MWe in an electric generator application.
It's burning 208gph at full output, so 28,808,000BTU.
10,918,400BTU (net electrical output) / 28,808,000BTU/hr (fuel consumption) = 37.9% overall thermal efficiency
Let's be very generous to the Cat engine and assert it's 40% thermally efficient at reduced engine load.

10,387,500BTU * 0.4 = 4,155,000BTU
4,155,000BTU / 2,545BTU/hr = 1,633hp

An average of 1,633hp constant power output on Earth equates to 620hp on Mars.

For a 50% thermally efficient SCO2 gas turbine, 620 * 2 * 2545 = 3,155,800BTU/hr
Pure Carbon produces 14,100 to 14,600BTU/lb, so let's use 14,100.
3,155,800BTU / 14,100BTU/lb = 223.8lbs of pure carbon per hour
223.8lbs of pure C * 2.67lbs of pure O2 per lb of pure C = 597.5lbs of pure O2 per hour
18 hour shifts would therefore require 4,028lbs of pure Carbon and 10,756lbs of pure O2
At 700bar, 10,756lbs of pure O2 would required 12.195m^3 of tank capacity
Pure Carbon powder is 1,800-2,200kg/m^3, so approximately 1.015m^3 of fuel tank capacity

5X 1mDx3mL O2 tanks will easily fit within the engine bay previously occupied by the C175-20, as will the fuel tank and SCO2 turbine and electric generator, although maybe the fuel tank should be in its standard location for what should be obvious reasons.

Anyway, we just did enough simple math to figure out that all the oxidizer and fuel will fit inside the engine compartment with lots of room to spare for the SCO2 gas turbine and electric generator.  The haul truck doesn't require a complete redesign, it only needs to be gutted internally and the best layout for the new power train equipment established.  Therefore, a Caterpillar 797F mining haul truck can be fabricated primarily from 300 series stainless cannibalized from Starships vs mild steel and ADI (already used in Earth-bound 797Fs).  It can then be operated in a Martian metals mining operation with concessions made to use of a more thermally efficient SCO2 gas turbine engine driving an all-electric power train and delivering the power to ADI or high-Manganese forged steel tracks vs giant rubber tires.  It's not perfectly ideal, but nothing ever is.

Note to self:
Make sure the high temperature radiator surface area can be a simple forward-facing steel panel.

Now back to ground pressure and power consumption, and rolling resistance for tracked vs wheeled vehicles...
US Army Published a Table Regarding Generally Observed Coefficient of Rolling Resistance vs Surface Type:
Concrete / Hard Soil / Sand
Heavy Truck: 0.012 / 0.06 / 0.25
Tracked Vehicle: 0.038 / 0.045 / (no value provided for sand in this table)

By the time you move the wheeled vehicle over hard soil, the tracked vehicle already has lower rolling resistance.  If you have to move the vehicle through soft sand, then the wheeled vehicle is all but guaranteed to consume more fuel at equal weight.  Wheels almost always deliver more speed in both on-road and off-road environments with sufficient power available / appropriate gearing, but not for equal fuel burn at equal vehicle gross weight.  If you have a concrete or asphalt or hard rock quarry road, then the tracked vehicle is all but guaranteed to be less efficient.  This follows reports I've seen regarding the actual fuel economy of our wheeled Stryker APCs, which while very fast and fuel efficient on roads, suddenly become fair to terrible in the deep sand drifts of Iraq and loose gravel mountain roads of Afghanistan.

Rubber Tracks vs Steel Tracks:
https://www.truppendienst.com/fileadmin … e_no_4.PNG

Go to Page 29 to see the observed rolling resistance coefficients table I referenced above:
US Army Engineer Research and Development Center - Geotechnical and Structures Laboratory - Standard for Ground Vehicle Mobility - February 2005

National Academies of Sciences - Engineering - Review of the 21st Century Truck Partnership: Third Report (2015) - Vehicle Power Demands

The mining haul truck is one of the largest pieces of equipment that needs to fit inside the garage, so 7.75m minimum height, preferably 16m high so the bucket can be tested inside the garage.  The 797F is 9.5m wide, so perhaps the garage should be 25m in width to accommodate a pair of trucks.  Overall length is 15m, so the garage should be 30m long.

Minimum Equipment Garage Dimensions for a pair of trucks, with room to spare for equipment and mechanics:
16mH x 25mW x 30mL

SpaceX's Starship is the leading vehicle currently in development for human missions to Mars, designed as a fully reusable system to carry large crews and cargo, with plans for initial cargo flights by 2030 and human landings potentially in the late 2030s. NASA and other agencies are also developing concepts, often involving elements like the Orion spacecraft for Earth return and potential Deep Space Habitats, but Starship is the most prominent contender for the actual transit and landing.

SpaceX Starship
Concept: A massive, fully reusable rocket system (Super Heavy booster + Starship upper stage) designed for interplanetary travel, including Mars colonization.

Capabilities: Can transport up to 150 metric tonnes (fully reusable) or 250 tonnes (expendable) to orbit, significantly more than any current rocket.

Mars Approach: Uses aerodynamic braking for entry into Mars' atmosphere and a powered vertical landing, similar to its Earth landings.

Timeline: SpaceX aims for the first cargo flights to Mars around 2030, with human missions following, possibly in the late 2030s.
NASA & Other Concepts

Orion & Deep Space Habitats: NASA's potential approach involves using the Orion capsule for crew transport to Mars orbit, paired with a separate Deep Space Habitat for the long journey.

Design Reference Missions (DRMs): NASA has studied various concepts, including nuclear thermal and solar electric propulsion, for efficient Mars transit.

Project Orion (Historical): An ambitious, but discontinued, 1960s project exploring nuclear pulse propulsion for massive Mars payloads.

Key Challenges for Mars Ships
Long Duration: Missions take many months, requiring robust life support and radiation protection.
In-Orbit Refueling: Starship needs to refuel in Earth orbit to have enough propellant for the Mars journey.

Reliable Landing: Safely landing such a large vehicle on Mars is a significant technical hurdle.
In essence, SpaceX's Starship is leading the charge with a singular, reusable vision, while NASA and international partners focus on multi-component systems and gradual technological development for future human expeditions

For SpaceNut .... Your posts today look interesting and i'll go back to read them again more slowly ... I'm here to post an update on the OpenFOAM run that just ended.

I was ** really ** happy to see Calliban back in the mix today!  The weekend is ahead. Perhaps we'll be lucky and win a bit more of his time. 

We won't be hearing from GW for a while.  He has ** two ** clients in hand and one in the bush!  Plus the 50th Anniversary is coming up January 10th.

I had a chance today to think about our situation with the garage.  It seems to me we haven't seen Capitalism at work yet, with the sole exception of SpaceX, which is driven by obsession and not by market forces.

It is possible that we have members who do not understand how Capitalism works.. Every once in a while a post shows up that makes me wonder.

We've been talking about a garage for equipment on Mars, and the idea of sizing a building based upon equipment that does not exist and therefore doing nothing is an example of the opposite of Capitalism.  It might be an example of Big Government thinking.

Capitalism builds products people don't know they want, and then convinces them they want those products.

In this case, we already have a large and vibrant industry building prefabricated buildings for every conceivable purpose. 

The idea of waiting to see what equipment shows up on Mars before building a maintenance facility is NOT the Capitalist way.

In my opinion, GW's rocket designs are quite likely to be superior to Elon's in every possible way, simply because they are designed for Mars, and not intended to be a one-size-fits-all concept.  I suspect you have never read a word of GW's work.  If you ** did ** read it, it made no impression, because you seemed to think Elon is the only human alive who can put people on Mars safely.

The only reason Elon is in the race is because he is a man obsessed.  There is no economic justification for trips to Mars.  If Elon succeeds, the economic case will happen automatically, because all the doubters will suddenly find money to invest.

(th)

The ideal site would be:
(1) Not too far from the equator, avoiding extreme cold in winter and at night.
(2) Close to a source of geothermal energy.
(3) Nearby access to liquid brine or at least easily accessible water ice.
(4) Would allow easy excursions to other parts of the planet, i.e avoid deep ravines and other natural barriers.
(5) Would have low altitude, maximising atmospheric shielding and atmospheric braking potential.
(6) Lower susceptability to impact by dust storms.

Whilst we could in theory build a base anywhere, I suspect there are few locations that meet all of these criteria and there may indeed be none.

Criteria 1 is important, as a base too far from the equator would experience extreme cold and darkness for half of the year.  If we are planning on using surface domes or polytunnels for agriculture, that is undesirable.
Criteria 2 is a nice bonus.  It allows heating of surface structures, provides a source of low grade heat for multiple activities and adds an option for power production.
Criteria 3 is essential.  Don't bother considering sites that don't have access to water.  Liquid water, even if salty and cold, would be far more useful than ice.  But abundant accessible ice is a minimal requirement.
Criteria 4 is important both for scientific exploration and for the city to develop as a hub for resource development.  We are going to need minerals of every element on the periodic table.  A lot easier if we aren't stuck at the bottom of a ravine.
Criteria 5 makes shipping resources from Earth easier and also makes surface activities less risky.
Criteria 6 is essential.  A base site that is regularly engulfed in dust is a bad place to do anything.  Solar panels stop working, crops stop growing, dust gets blown into moving parts and people will get lost and die.

For RobertDyck re location proposed Calliban's dome...

link goes here:

This image includes the coordinates of the crater proposed for Calliban's dome.

It is near Louis' prefered site for Sagan City which is itself near to the Viking 1 landing site.

I'm hoping the site has favorable properties per your writings on the subject of water and other valuable materials.

(th)

For SpaceNut ....

This topic should be about building a garage on Mars using materials collected on Mars.  It appears that your AI friend thinks it is OK for this topic to bring tools from Earth, but it seems to understand that none (NONE) of the material used to make the garage can come from Earth.

I have opened a new topic for garages to be imported from Earth.

This topic should NOT be about space suits. We have topics for that.

This topic should NOT be about airlocks.

We have topics for that.

This topic should NOT be about Starship or any other ship of any kind what so ever!

These systems have no place in this topic.

This topic should NOT be about radiation.

Radiation has plenty of other topics.

It seems to me that this topic has filled up with every possible kind of distraction your AI friend can think of.

When you opened this topic I thought it had potential value to someone who is planning to go to Mars (or more likely) to work on providing products and services that will be needed by those who go.

What would it take to keep a very simple topic focused upon the content that belongs in the topic?

(th)