New Mars Forums

The majority of the dome would be 20 or so miles above the average Martian surface but true, admittedly dust storms could reach above even that on occassion.

The dust sweeping would clean the glass, but also think of it as resource gathering.  A good portion of that same dust could be forged into the metals and glass needed for dome repair.

Um...  :?   can you point out a specific picture on that site and tell us what its supposed to be, or might be?  I see rocks and mineral grains.

I wouldn't put us in the nano age just yet.  They had the equations for the nuclear bomb back in the late 1890s and learned of radiation but it wasn't until the first nuclear bomb detonated that we were put in "The Atomic Age".

Personally I'd wait until the first working nanite is created before proclaiming "Nano Age".

Still I agree this is an advancement.  DNA isn't a bad choice since it is a self-replicating molecule.  If this self-replication can be harnessed we'll be making nanites more naturally than artificially.  A ways off from nanites but still...

That also brings up an interesting question...if a nanite made of DNA is created, reproduces, is self-aware...does it count as life?

I know its a legitamate propulsion concept, but tell me...how are you going to get people aboard saying "Oh we fly by detonating an H-bomb under your seat."

....thats where it goes from theory to common sense.  H-bombs were made as weapons.  The only way you could use them even remotely safely for an Orion spacecraft is from several miles away - possibly for space but not on a planet and certainly not a launchpad.

Now for more 'technical' suggestions...

It would definetely be wise to establish a rough outline of the ship.  Crew quarters, galley...of course if this is based off NASA as opposed to Star Trek there won't be such a thing as a 'science station' per say.

I assume you're going to have an orbiter/lander combo.  For such a situation I recommend having the 'orbiter' section being essentially a segment of the ISS truss (I say this in terms of apperance) with the Nuclear Electric Drive, main Nuclear Reactor, and long-range science instruments.  The 'lander' would house just about everything else, including most obviously the crew quarters.

In short, picture the Discovery from 2001 and 2010 - the long shaft would be the orbiter section and the round ball would be the lander section - the two decouple and reattach.  Just add deployable legs to the ball of the Discovery and you have a working lander.

I think 600 tons is a bit much.  I don't think even the ISS is half that in its yet-to-be-built full configuration.  I'd think maybe 100, 200 - something a little bigger than Robert Zubrin's configuration for Mars Direct but not outrageously big.  No way any space agency will build or assemble something 600 tons, not on a budget.

Now trajectory: unless you have a celestial mechanics program of some kind I don't know if there's way to work out the timing for a Mars Gravity Assist Fly-by, so it'll likely be direct.  Fortunately Jupiter aligns itself with Earth once a year - it doesn't move too much relative to Earth so its simple to get to assuming you have the fuel.  The Nuclear Electric Drive would be enough to put the craft on a two-year outward jaunt - possibly one year if in your story the reactor's large and electric propulsion is advanced enough.

Orbit insersion - again I assume the electric drive.  Aerobraking at Jupiter is too risky Leonov style - your arrival velocity is huge compared to Mars - Galileo's probe had enough trouble and working to make it bounce off the atmosphere just right on top of that is impossible.  As long as the craft stays beyond Ganymede no radiation worries.  The orbiter could be left at a LaGrange Point in Callisto's orbit - that would make it an effective communication satellite, so long as the crew land on the hemisphere facing the satellite (if they land away...well that could make an interesting twist ).

Once mission at Callisto is complete, lander melts some ice, electrolosis, refuel, and launched back to orbiter to recouple and cruise back to Earth.

The Crew Vehicle is only meant to deliver the crew, and the crew habitat.  Its NOT a cargo-loading shuttlecraft. 

Any heavy cargo can be launched by itself without the CEV involved at all.  Look into NASA's "Vision" - the CEV all-in-all is "optional."  All it does is play piggy-back to the Lunar Lander and EDS (Earth-Departure-Stage).  You don't even need minor tweaking to the HLV-half of the architecture to delive some BIG modules to the lunar surface like an oxygen refinery or the Hubble-equivelant of a Lunar Telescope.

Zubrin's plan favors simplicity, NASA's flexibility.  Either way works fine for crew delivery.  Personally my concern is just getting something useful on the ground: telescopes, construction materials, base materials...anything that works to establish a sustainable facility.

Red Jr. should be an extremely interesting Jovian phenomena to follow.  I heard theories before the trio of oval clouds merging that the original Great Red Spot formed in such a manner.

Perhaps as the Great Red Spot and most of Jupiter's weather fades Red Jr. will grow, even surpassing or merging with the remnants of its predicessor to become the New Great Red Spot!

This raises a faint possibility that the spot Galileo first spotted (no pun intended) might have been a different Red Spot.

Hopefully observing this immense cyclone will become at least a secondary objective to the New Horizon Fly-by and the upcoming Juno missions.  I suggest emailing to Alen Stern, project manager of New Horizons, to dedicate some time to observing Red Spot Jr.

Normally I'm something of a pessimest when it comes to the future but here I'll post some general thoughts and what might go right in the next 60 years...

Energy: In North America and Europe at least oil will slowly be turned away from as a major energy source; likely spearheaded by Americans finally fed-up when gas prices tips $10 a gallon.  China will likely replace America as the biggest oil consumer only because it lacks access to solar power that is gradually spreading from roof-top to roof-top.  Fusion power might move from theoretical to prototype as there's bound to be a breakthrough in lasers or magnetic-field containment, but open use will still be a few more decades off and fission will remain about as steadfast in use for perhaps a century more.

Politics: Terrorism will likely rise and fall in waves, but as OPEC loses power and the Middleeast moves away from the civilized world's eye it will be less of a concern that it was in the hyped-up 00s that began the 21st Century.  Lacking the oil funds of earlier years, Republicans will lose some power unless they finally move off their pro-oil seat - and in the power vaccum a new political party may form (but highly unlikely the Green Party    ).  China will finally become a world power slightly more stable than the Soviet Union, Russia will reestablish itself as a world power as well (albeit in 3rd place), and in Europe there may be talks to establish a nationalized European Union (save the UK and Ireland) that may become a 4th world power in future years.  Africa, long ignored, may be turned to as a continent waiting for development and a site of competition between world powers, corporations, and enviromentalists.

Space Exploration: The ISS will be long forgotten as a poorly managed fiasco - ESA and China will manage their own research stations for their budding orbital human programs although attempts to the Moon, including NASA's, will likely prove to be short-term poltical stumbles that result in maybe another dozen humans on Luna briefly - Mars too far to keep the attentions of politicans.  Commercial space flight, however, after an initial 20 years of maturing, will prove more successful and lunar tourism flights will be in the planning stage - a colony on Luna in its construction phase preparing for opening on the 75th anniversery of human spaceflight.