You are not logged in.
I sounds like Nasa is dusting off the old viking engines for the next generation lander for 2009.
Aerojet Tests Engine Design For New Mars Rover
Aerojet is building three new 700 pound thrust monopropellant rocket engine assemblies to further evaluate design changes made to increase mission flexibility and life capability. Testing is planned to continue through 2005 to support technology development for JPL.
The most significant feature of the monopropellant engine is its ability to throttle from 15-100 percent thrust with a fixed propellant inlet pressure.
Would a monopropellant be in the cards for the manned lander in the future?
Aerojet Tests Engine Design For New Mars Rover
Talk about your rockets from the past.
Aerojet recently test-fired a Viking flight spare rocket engine assembly in order to help design a new engine which will deliver the next rover to the surface of Mars in 2009.
The rocket engine used in the test was originally built, tested and delivered in 1973 for the Viking program. The engine was put into storage after the successful landing of the Viking 1 and Viking 2 spacecraft on Mars in 1976.Aerojet is building three new 700 pound thrust monopropellant rocket engine assemblies to further evaluate design changes made to increase mission flexibility and life capability. Testing is planned to continue through 2005 to support technology development for JPL.
The most significant feature of the monopropellant engine is its ability to throttle from 15-100 percent thrust with a fixed propellant inlet pressure.
Thanks RobertDyck, for sending the ideas Nasa's way. The help was illustrated as always being there if they would only ask was just one of the themes that ran throughout the commissions hearings.
As for the Zvezda, was that not the module that was made by us but not flown since the Russians came though with theirs. Even if not completed it would be a good starting point to making what is needed.
Some of the many projects that have been cancelled seem to be making there way back into reality as being necessary to carrying out the Space explorations goals.
I do not think the question means to gubber an unknown probe design together but to build an existing one that works. ie cassini or the Mars probes I think is what was the thought, but then again maybe i'm all wet.
As gross as this may sound you have 6 plus months of human waste that can be used to fertilize the first fields that are planted and even if this crop is not eaten. The crop can become the compost for the next one that others will find more palatable since it will be grown more naturally(non human fertilizer).
Use automated planting and crop harvesters to retrieve the food where ever it can be grown.
Now the green house structure and how it will be erected now that's a different set of problems.
My comment of how to make things grow will be in the other thread.
We now have a couple of thread talking about basically Fear in one form or another. Coming, going and even of staying. This weeks sunday parade news paper ran an article Lets stop Scaring ourselves and I quite Agree that it is very easy to blow things out of proportion and that it is almost sometimes the excuse to not go and try to achieve our goals.
We have all seen the histerier that was whipped up over Y2K and now there seems to be alot of the same going around for the future of manned space travel and that needs to end if we are ever going to leave this rock.
Sounds to me that the biological clocks have been set to fattening up for hibernation.
Select first generation of each race or national that would want representation on such a mission from American citizens and be done with the whole question of international support.
Then again maybe an intended one is nature its self in how it will change how things get processed or obsorbed.
Researcher Finds Missing Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
A Northeastern University researcher Thursday announced that he has found that the soil below oak trees exposed to elevated levels of carbon dioxide had significantly higher carbon levels than those exposed to ambient carbon levels.
While this could be used to help create an atmosphere under a dome.
But how we make things less expensively is also the issue.
example of a Student Satellite Almost Ready For Space
Building a satellite takes years and costs millions. Well, not always. Nearly one hundred students from all over Europe have been working hard on SSETI Express. From the drawing board to launch in less than one year, all the while keeping costs to a minimum.
Well really a little off the subject but I think we can do better than the current cost development system. Volunteers are cheap and so are the unemployed.
Then we always end up talking about robotics, villages of them, tele robotics and mining or setting up the easy access approach to when man should go.
Build Your Own Borg: Sort of article gives the impression that people do not under stand space.
Most observers of the Mars missions think the rovers are driven, like a car, but in fact they are commanded.
A lot of stuff in the article though for the future possibilities if we only open our minds and dream.
"Saganaut" is, well, essentially useless. Some pictures and data that really help no one.
Well actually there is a use for them, put them on sale and enjoy the extra cash flow as a side benefit.
Now just think how much more these sculptors would sell for if they were authentic lunar or mars materials...
I would say that we have an even bigger problem with the cost for if we are unwilling to pay 1Billion per shuttle flight then how can we expect people to not balk at the cost being that and more for a single manned mission to mars or to the moon for that fact regardless to how many ships this will actually equate to.
Lets not forget the investment of the design dollars which will be more than 20 billion before we even get one ship off the ground no matter who's plan is used.
Here is some more on what started this thread.
A kilometre-high solar tower, to be built in the Australian outback by EnviroMission Ltd, will become the world's tallest structure when completed in 2006. Designed by Jorg Schlaich of Schlaich Bergermann und Partner, the solar tower (or solar chimney) operates like a hydroelectric power plant, but uses hot air instead of water, and it could provide enough electricity for 200,000 homes. Time calls it one of the best inventions of 2002, and I think it's one of the most ingenious ideas I've ever heard. Another solar chimney project was planned in Rajasthan, India, but I haven't found any information on its current status.
I guess the difference with the moon fear was of the unknown as to whether or not bacterial life was present. We did not know as much about how life was started back them. Lack of an atmosphere should have been enough to put out any though of such a fear. But Mars is a different set of variables for if life could have developed and is very possible to contain such.
But long before man will go we should be able to answer that question. Either with advanced probes sent to the surface with the ability to detect even the smallest of microbes. Or though the sample return in a contamination sealed container to a lab that can deal with the possibility. Whether that lab is in orbit with the ISS or near it or part of some other way station or on the ground it does not matter where the work gets done to analyze the sample so long as it is done.
Packing so much stuff into any vehicle will make it tough for us to go so any weigh reduction can help. That include solar cells as well.
Solar cell doubles as battery
The researchers' photocapacitor is also efficient at capturing energy from weak light sources like sunlight on cloudy or rainy days and indoor lighting.
Solar energy system usually includes solar cells that convert light to electricity and batteries that store the energy for later use.
We succeeded in incorporating both photovoltaic and storage functions in a single cell with a thin, sandwich-type structure.
The researchers are working on boosting the cell's capacity and making a flexible, lightweight plastic version of the device.
Thanks for the links, our particular requirement is weight restrictive, hence the performance times. I have found 2 other companies that will deal with the low volume or proto style quantities.
EaglePicher
MicroSun Technologies
Whether we can or can land accurately may be a for gone problem with rising fear of possible bacterial contamination.
Not only of crew but also with respect to a sample return.
Will astronauts return from Mars?
With new evidence that bacteria could live on Mars, a leading scientist is calling on NASA to improve procedures to prevent astronauts from bringing contamination back to Earth. If necessary, that could mean the astronauts would have to spend the rest of their lives on Mars
Thanks for going, Not all of us here blogging on this site have that ability, let alone the time available nor the financial capacity.
Thanks again, and tell us more....
I know that where I am working, we are designing a cooling suit that is using Lithium Ion rechargeables. The pack though only lasts a little over an hour due to high load currents. The recharge takes roughly 6 hrs on them. Also the pack at the end of run time is at 60 C. The suit is designed for desert use.
I think that they will be hopefully looking at a heating suit in the future.
But enough about work, now back to space talk...
Rant or not thank you,
I try to put forth the best that a common man can give in all these discussions, many of which are well over my head. I feel that the best option for lowering costs is to design one ship template to have all needs fall under for the Mars destination.
Lets look at the lander:
What is the max down mass needed to land with the end result is to aim for accuracy. I realize that the crew size, consumables will determine some of this mass and the remainder would be the fuel to land.
Now all unmanned landers must be capable but have there components turned off that would be used for a manned presence or at worst have them removed for increased down mass for the heavy cargo needs all in the same ship shell size.
This allows for lower construction costs and a ready available spare parts inventory.
Is there a need to leave anything in mars orbit like what was done for the lunar apollo missions. IMO I would say no unless the plan is to join them together to create a small orbiting work station or a resupply depo for the return home.
Another thought is since the lander must also be the launcher back to orbit using methane I think it would also be prudent to design the engines from the start to use that fuel source from earth and for its eventual landing on the martian surface.
Brazilians find dinosaur linked to Europe Fossil comes from the age of Earth's super-continent
Brazil - Scientists have found well-preserved fossils of a new dinosaur species that lived 225 million years ago in southern Brazil but had its closest relatives in what is now Europe suggesting life was able to cross the once vast super-continent here, on migration of dinosaurs across that continent.
Scientists reconstruct ancestral genetic code Computer analysis blends paleontology and genomics in search for mammalian ancestor.
Researchers have reconstructed a long string of genetic code for what they believe is the common ancestor of placental mammals — a shrewlike creature that lived in Asia more than 75 million years ago.

Now with all the possible genetic material that may have arrived for Mars meteorites. I think that we may see just that in the sequening that is shown. Now hire iron content woud possibly change the genetic code pttern or at least for a few spiecies.
As such as it is very expensive to go mars it would like wise be just as expensive to return.
NASA, Russians forging a deal for rides Crew-hours would be swapped for seats on Soyuz
NASA officials have confirmed Russian reports about an “outer-space swap” worth an estimated $60 million or more. If approved by the U.S. government, the deal could put off a looming crisis over access to the international space station.
RIA Novosti political commentator Andrei Kislyakov wrote about the deal on Wednesday. “Russia incurred a $60 million debt to the United States for help launching the Russian segment of the station into orbit,” he explained. “The debt was to be repaid in man-hours of working time in orbit.”Crew-hours serve as the currency for research time aboard the space station. Partners in the 16-nation effort "spend" those hours on the projects they want to pursue. Thanks to those NASA contributions in the early stages of the space station program, the Americans currently have a positive balance of about 3,000 crew-hours — a valuable resource.
One crew-hour on the station is equivalent to about $20,000 in commercial terms. This equivalence was discussed last May when the Russians sought a 500-hour credit for allowing use of their spacesuits. Although NASA refuses to place any dollar value on crew-hours, its current balance of about 3,000 hours is unofficially valued at about $60 million.
That is a very interesting site MarsDog, could spend hours explore all those neat concepts. Magnetic motors or perceptual motion machines...
http://www.rexresearch.com