Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

Void · 2022-02-19 20:42:56

From post #47, a review of the possible use of airtight (Fairly airtight) seals used.

This is just me goofing around with an idea for a spin gravity habitat:

Or you could use a sort of airlock that can spin, to match a spinning habitat drum, and then to match the adjacent one. Here again good seals wanted. But not quite as dangerous as in the case where you are docking a spacecraft to a space station. Leakage would only go into the VOID space between the Stator and Rotor drums and may not be lethal to the people in the spin lock or in the spinning drum, so long as the VOID space does not draw the habitat air pressure down so far that people might get the bends or explosive decompression problems.

So, emergency methods available to deal with a leaking airlock seal.

Here is an underwhelming illustration:

What could also be of interest would be that there could be passageways built into the outer shell, that perhaps something like a spin lock would also be able to give access to even if synthetic gravity machines are spinning.

Then to be able to bypass a malfunctioning "Cell".

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-02-19 20:53:07)

Void · 2022-02-20 09:36:39

I just got done with one of Isaac Arthur's videos on O'Neil Cylinders.
Here is a query you may use to fetch some: "Isaac Arthur, O'Neil Cylinders".

He mentions LED's instead of sunlight in that one. He also mentions radiator fins to cool the structures. In reality I do not expect that excessive LED deployment would be done. The 1 g habitats if you needed them would just be city like with parks, I think, and humans could have an eternal night outside, with streetlights, and arenas and parks with much more intense lighting. I won't obsess about cooling, as there will be solutions, and that would interfere with what else I want to suggest.

I have already mentioned zero g agriculture. Problems with that are cleaning up vomit and other floating unclean situations. But I guess some sort of robot could do it.

I more like something resembling a round washing machine, to provide a gravity of perhaps that of Ceres. Or more likely a gravity simulation that provides the sense of up and down, and where waste and garbage will sink to the "Ground". Such as this could also double as a sort of agriculture zones.

I recall that Dr. Zubrin is not so comfy about these things, but my case here would be to support orbital terraform assets, and as a plan (B)esos, if it proves unwise to keep people, particularly children on the surface of Mars too much. If reality requires it.

However, I do support that the first habitation of Mars will be done "Mars Direct" more or less, and that at least a base and a beefed-up base will be on the surface of Mars.

And I also anticipate that hard assets would be manufactured on the Moon of Earth, and slow shipped to the orbits of Mars to help in this.

-------
Solar Wind Propulsion, and Photon propulsion could be considered.

Photon propulsion could also include Laser assists.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-02-24 13:28:28)

Void · 2022-02-21 11:12:43

In the previous post I mention water involved with shielding windows. Perhaps rather, oil, or maybe Ammonia might be considered. Water, of course expands when freezing. That might not be so good inside windows. But you could have water bags on the inside of the windows, as a secondary transparency behind the windows. But in the diagram, I gave, the window faces the outer solar system, so most radiation would be GCR, and that from only one direction, if the non-window walls would be well protected from radiation.

You might have noticed that most of my diagrams are more block and schematic than Engineering. That is by intention as I don't want to devote too much energy to communication, rather I want to invest energy in things to communicate.

Our culture(s) have become less innovative for honoring Orthodox Structures, rather than creative emergences.

It is a great talent to master the playing of an instrument, so that is very important, but not at the expense of prohibiting the creation of new music.

The misuse of language skills coupled with stone age violence is an improper grooming of society. Some of this along with true intellectuals is fostered in both Universities, and slums. This is how a society can die genetically, as very verbal low skilled humans can feed on those who churn butter.

Elon Musk and others "Churn the Butter". Others say "Oh, you have butter, I want it".

Guns and Butter. Well banning guns will not matter much. If they need to the degenerate verbal people will resort to sticks and stones, and they do. Just look the world over. Those who churn butter also have need of protections, from the verbal and violent.

Churning Butter is the case of innovations. Violence is the taking of the butter, the churn, and eventually the ones who churn butter.

Societies that allow the verbal and violent to breed in excess, flirt with the extinction of their abilities to innovate. So, then no Butter at all.

So, my hope is to stimulate the churning of butter. To over define something is to risk that other eyes and ears can do with seeds given.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-02-21 11:21:25)

Void · 2022-02-21 18:46:46

I have two things just now. I am thinking about how to work with Venus, and also the Earth. Two very different technologies though. I guess I want to deal with Venus first. Then another post perhaps.

I have taken this from post #428 from the topic Terraforming/Venus:
Quote:

A gift from Anton Petrov:
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Un … M%3DHDRSC3

I draw materials from the Finns as well for their megasatellite for Ceres.

If the thinking about Venus having a mantle twice as hot as that of Earth at the beginning is true, I think it reduces the probability for life in the atmosphere of Venus. I think it reduces the chances that substantial standing water existed on Venus for time enough for water life to take hold. But our probes will soon give some evidence of truth for life, I hope.

Frankly I have never figured out why our science community is so completely absorbed in trying to find other life in our solar system. Yes, I am curious, and we do have a responsibility to take a look and have concern, but my thing is about building the human race and encouraging it to become better. I would be really annoyed if the whole purpose of finding life was to justify atheism, so that the powerful can appoint themselves to Godhood, and be under no obligation to be moral to those who they don't value. Granted, I also feel that those who stand in the way of human improvements should not be coddled, but if they don't actually commit a crime of interference, then I would be inclined to withhold judgment and leave them alone.

But that is a social matter more than a terraform matter.

If there is no life on Venus or it's atmosphere, then I guess we can claim it by the rules of salvage, sort of. At least that is my notion. So, then it requires a means to achieve something. That something has to be defined. I guess to make if more useful to humans and their machines might serve as a guide.

I have been talking about large collections of space habitats largely connected into a unitary framework(s). I had thought that we could shade Venus, with such orbiting the planet. But it might e more effective to simply have one in the "L1" location, and why not look at a magnetic field as well.

Lagrange Point information:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a … emispheres.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange_point
Picture Quote: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange_ … oints2.svg

To keep an immense structure of habitats in the L1 for Venus would be very hard, and possibly getting it to stay together would be a challenge as well. But two forms of propulsion 1) Photon Inertia 2) Solar Wind exist.
A complex magnetic field for this shading device would possibly help station keeping and to deflect the solar wind for Venus.

I think that a lot of the raw materials for this would need to come from Mercury, as it is upwind to the flow of Photons and Solar wind. Perhaps some materials from the atmosphere of Venus would also be harvested into it. Nitrogen, Carbon, Sulfur, Oxygen, Argon? And it may not be impossible to mine the surface of Venus, so, maybe a bit of that.

So, I guess the idea is to cool the planet, but I also feel that a magnetic field would retain the Oxygen which is now being forced off the planet by static electricity. The hope is that it would form an Ozone layer. That then would reduce the creation of Sulfuric Acid, and perhaps allow the Sulfuric Acid to decompose into H20 and Sulfur Oxides at the base of the clouds, that occurring because of the heat.

If that were achieved, then it would be much easier to have floating citie(s) in the atmosphere.

And then it might very well be that Venus would sell atmosphere to other worlds. I have previously suggested canisters manufactured on Mercury, that could be filled with Clathrates of the Venus atmosphere.

I guess that is good enough. Don't forget that there would be an enormous amount of habitat in the Venus L1 location.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-02-21 19:18:01)

Void · 2022-02-21 19:19:24

Now, I will jump to Earth.

In post #60, I discussed this: (Solar Wind and Wave. Can this ocean hybrid platform nail all three?)
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=So … M%3DHDRSC3

I suggested that they could add solar thermal power and OTEC technologies.
I still think so, and I think that a form of "Ocean Battery" may fit in as well.

I feel that the phrase "Ocean Battery" has considerable powers to annoy. But it is likely important.
I will make a "Raw" query":
I guess this time it is not so stupid. It does not talk about dumping batteries into the Ocean.
Here is this article which I did not fully understand from its video: https://newatlas.com/energy/ocean-batte … y-storage/
OK, this diagram now makes me sort of understand: https://assets.newatlas.com/dims4/defau … tery-2.png
You may want to find it in the article, explanation is below the picture.
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyieOHAdU4I
I
But others have a different one. I am annoyed with the internet again. The other method is to have a giant "Bobber" that can move up and down in an Ocean Water Column. It is quite interesting as well, but my query will bring it up again, just the one I have materials posted here. I think they use sealed pipes of PVC, maybe with air in them as a bobber, and so it is the inverse of hanging a weight in air to store energy.

However, in both cases, you might be able to store heated fresh water in them, so then where fresh water is lighter than sea water, heated fresh water will float even better. But the idea is then to store hot water, for the OTEC process.
Of course, there might be considerable thermal losses, so it would have its limits if this could not be controlled. A large freshwater tank could have an air layer on its top as a partial solution. Hot water will float inside the tank above a layer or colder water and would not have convection. So, then the sides would need insulation. Something like whale blubber?

The Ocean Floor version would need other solutions.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-02-21 19:53:19)

Void · 2022-02-24 13:29:17

I would like to work a little more with this:
Quote:

I more like something resembling a round washing machine, to provide a gravity of perhaps that of Ceres. Or more likely a gravity simulation that provides the sense of up and down, and where waste and garbage will sink to the "Ground". Such as this could also double as a sort of agriculture zones.

Void · 2022-02-24 13:31:09

I would like to work a little more with this:
Quote: (From post #77)

I more like something resembling a round washing machine, to provide a gravity of perhaps that of Ceres. Or more likely a gravity simulation that provides the sense of up and down, and where waste and garbage will sink to the "Ground". Such as this could also double as a sort of agriculture zones.

I guess I will mention a possible moisture cycle, coupled with a thermal and power cycle.

In general, it should be possible to circulate warm moist air to the "VOID" between the rotor and stator. And so, the Stator will not only hold air pressure and protect from ration to a large degree but will also serve as a condenser and radiator. The outside might also include Anti-Solar cells, but in orbital space I am not sure if this is worth it. You might just have normal solar panels outside this structure. Or if you want to be very serious about making the structure a power generator, you might have a heat engine involved, to cool the stator, and generate electricity with a turbine, and a fluid such as Ammonia.

In this device it could be considered that circulating air and phase change Vapor>Liquid water, will transfer heat out to the Stator shell.
And inside the rotor, plants will serve as the Evaporators, almost boilers in their function.

The buildup of a film of moisture on the inside of the Stator will need managing. We would not want to cultivate dangerous biology in it such as can happen in air conditioners. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legionnaires%27_disease

One possible treatment would be to have holes in the Rotor where sunlight can pass to the inside of the Stator. Maybe Chlorine at a proper dose?

I suppose a name for this device could be a "Light Cup". It might be possible to have the lighting levels strong enough that sufficient light gets through the holes in the stator to not favor fungi or other pest critters.

The water condensed would need removal. Wicks and Wipers come to mind. Also, it is likely that the air in the "VOID" will have motion and so can blow the film of water to an "Accumulator" of some kind and so it could be pumped to the inside of the Rotor.

Probably the bulk of agriculture in the Rotor would be without soil, to keep the Rotors weight down.

Another issue is people and synthetic gravity.

This has been done on Earth to simulate long term microgravity: (Tedious, I am sure)
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26893033/

So, I am thinking of a different simulation. If people are going to live in a collection of synthetic gravity worlds as I have described, they will have available 1 g if needed, and also much lower g situation, on a daily basis. We apparently have a similar situation already on Earth.

While we walk, stand, and run, in 1 g, part of the day we sit, and approximately 1/3rd of the day we lay down, more or less.

So, maybe a simulation of what I am talking about would be a 12/12 cycle where 12 hours you are in 1 g, just doing normal awake stuff, possibly including the gym. And the other 12 hours you are simulating low gravity and also bedrest.

So, this would be less tedious than a multi-month study where the subject had to remain in bed. Rather, for ~8 hours they could sleep, and for about 4 hours, they would be allowed low level physical activities, such as get up for a drink of water or the nature calls, and I guess some other things, that would challenge the body about like if you were ~in the Gravity of Ceres???

So, we might get estimates of how much challenge the body requires in a 24-hour period, and so have a heads up on what to try to do in the future per gravity simulation devices which are also food, water, and energy devices. In other words, as you don't have to run 24-hours a day to stay healthy, or stand 24 hours a day, or walk 24 hours a day, it may well be that greater permissions for gravity simulation can be defined within some sort of a +/- estimation.

Done.

I pretty much try not to interfere with other people's creations. However, it has occurred to me that the health study for synthetic gravity might have value for how "Large Ships" for interplanetary travel might be constructed. It may be that if the permissions that still allow sufficient health were defined, then the mass of the ship, and very likely the structure might be altered. Of course, the desire would be to reduce the mass of the ship, which then would likely drive structure changes.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-02-25 12:07:53)

Void · 2022-02-25 12:01:49

I think that for various reasons it would be good if we could build habitats out of liquid water and ice. Of course, that is not going to work.
But those can be considered as bulk items it might be preferred to use. They would need protective shells/containers to be used.

For many places, in the inner solar system, inner than Mars, this might be prohibited by the alternate values for water, which is hard to come by in the space environment. But Mars has plenty, and even the moons may have some stores of Hydrogen gas, ice, hydrocarbons, adsorbed Hydrogen.

So, it is my opinion that beginning with Mars/Phobos/Deimos, construction methods can be modified to more greatly use water/ice.

Isaac Arthur has a recent video about water in space habitats: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Is … M%3DHDRSC3
Quote:

Oceans in Space: Marine Space Habitats & Preserves

Here and there, my ideas somewhat converge with his. Of course, I am thinking small habitat scale at this time.

This again:

I have already mentioned water bags inside of the window(s), to be radiation protection. Curiously I have just read that water bags will be in use for the radiation storm shelter for Starship.

But what about the Stator? Well, you could do that, and there could be advantages. If the walls of the stator developed a crack, then it is possible that a water bag with sufficient structure and able to have sufficient movement, might plug that crack to some extent. But it might also be in the way of fixing the crack. Further, if pressed against the stator inner wall, it might also moderate the thermal cycling of the stator metal? walls. Thus, reducing the production of stress cracks. If you wanted to still use the Stator as a radiator, then you could put channels in it like a rocket engine. I nominate Ammonia as the fluid, but perhaps something else will do better.

With 3D printing and Vacuum Deposition, this may not be that hard to supposed to be a thing that could be done.

This also might moderate the production of thermal induced fatigue of the Stator. In this case it is likely that the ice blocks in plastic bags, may press directly against the inside of the Stator, maybe be glued to it with a tar like substance.

Putting ice blocks on the outside walls, may interfere with the Stator being a radiator. But you might space them and stager them so that that problem can be reduced, while providing radiation protection. Of course, if the "Sun Cup" should tilt, and put the ice blocks into direct sunlight, that could be a problem. So, maintaining orientation is important.

To try to deal with micrometeorites, a coating that protects the bags is needed on the surfaces where such impactors may impact.

But for bigger impactors, the hope would be that the protective materials would fragment, but mostly remain attached, if possible. As for the ice, in a large impact event, if it spews out, it will soon evaporate.

This then would be hoped to produce a reduction of the possibility of the Kessler Syndrome.

I have not really produced what I think are the final notions on this. I am just setting up some frames of it to consider over time, and perhaps be able to improve one.

Keep in mind that even if the moons of Mars do not have Hydrogen of any kind attached to anything, A Starship tanker should be able to bring Hydrogen up to the moon, where water could be produced with it.

The asteroid belt is expected to often have objects with some kind of Hydrogen available.

So, the consideration of water and ice as a major construction component from Mars out, seems reasonable to me.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-02-25 12:24:51)

Void · 2022-02-25 13:58:57

This is about Superheavy, but without those dreams of access to other worlds are not very real.

It has seemed to me that to send the Superheavy prograde with a Starship on top of it and then bring it directly back retrograde to the launch site, might not be the only way to do things.

I think......~~~??? that if you could land the superheavy on another site, and then refill it, put a fairing on top of it, and then fly it back to the original launch site. Of course, in that case periodically propellants and fairings would be brought back to the prograde landing site.

While this would add some additional encumbrances, it would allow more payload to orbit on the original launch, I think, as you would not need as many propellants to get the thing down to a refilling site.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-02-25 14:04:17)

Void · 2022-02-27 10:48:04

I have three things on my mind today.
1) Solar Wind propulsion.
2) Underwater thermal storage.
3) My obligation to (th). (Regrets, will try to get it done).

It is perhaps best if I run parallel to conversations in other topics, so that I do not disrupt those other conversations, but perhaps we can suggest ideas to each other in this manner, with minimal disruption. I appreciate that Calliban has helped to correct some of my thinking from time to time.

1) Solar Wind propulsion. (I will try to mostly keep to the materials of a more professional class of thinking, but then later with a note, indicate some speculations from me, to think to seek do even more).
Reference: https://thedebrief.org/this-new-deep-sp … olar-wind/
Quote(s):

THIS NEW DEEP SPACE PROPULSION SYSTEM RIDES LIKE A LEAF ON THE SOLAR WIND
Plasma Magnet Propulsion can revolutionize interplanetary travel, we just need to ride the wind.

WIND RIDER IS DIFFERENT
“The Plasma Magnet is a wind drag device invented almost twenty years ago by Dr. John Slough from the University of Washington,” said Dr. Brent Freeze, a Cornell-educated mechanical engineer and one of the two scientists championing Wind Rider in an interview with The Debrief. “Wind Rider is our updated version.”
In fact, he said, his team has calculated an entire array of potential targets within the solar system and has found that pretty much each of them is reachable in a year or less.
Want to go to Jupiter? Wind Rider can have you racing by the gas giant within a paltry three or four weeks. Fancy a trip to Neptune, the planet farthest from the Sun (sorry Pluto)? Wind Rider can do it in about 18 weeks.
“It is possible to reach nearly all destinations within the solar system in a year,” Freeze said, “with at least one launch window opening per year for each of them.”
In that same interview, Freeze explained the basics of the Wind Rider design and the basic science behind this revolutionary propulsion method.
“By definition, it is a drag device, meaning it’s not a rocket function,” said Freeze. This, he explained, means that, unlike a rocket that uses a propellant to create momentum, a plasma magnet like his Wind Rider uses the pressure of the solar wind to gather momentum.

I advise reading the entire article. Sadly, they did not mention a trip to Mars.

More: https://www.centauri-dreams.org/2021/11 … e-magsail/

More: https://spacesettlementprogress.com/win … ar-system/

More: https://www.realclearscience.com/2021/1 … 9899.html#

Protection from some radiation: https://physicsworld.com/a/magnetic-shi … pacecraft/

----------
So, now my suggestions for Mars access that they are not at all responsible for: (Coffee now)

I am going to list a whole bunch of things, a combination of them may be proven valid in the future, so, if one is wrong or judged not useful, keep consideration that I am putting out mental "Fertilizer" here, or so I hope.

If you may think that I don't like the "Starship", by SpaceX, you would be wrong.

It appears the Wind Rider, is only for going out from the sun. I visualize a version of Starship, that has the Alligator Fairings, and is relatively universal for many things.

Well, I am not so sure how much I trust this article, but it is interesting. It would indicate that SpaceX has a loophole in case the creepy crawlies, can keep holding Starship back. https://apogeereport.com/spacex-replace … con-heavy/

It seems like a smart move to me, as it then reduces the incentive for "Old Space" and their cronies trying to bankrupt Starlink/SpaceX.

I think I will read it a for a bit, more coffee.

Anyway, I think it has to almost be guaranteed that they need something that can carry cargo to the Moon and Mars. Type of fairing, who cares? Just as long as it does the job.

I expect that indeed the initial crews to go to Mars will use the Hohmann Transfer, and a pseudo–Mars Direct method. For this they may have to endure some undesired radiation damage, and considerations may be needed to keep them functionally strong on arrival.

This will not be so true for later arrivals, who can be given therapy in accordance with needs, on arrival to either the Mars surface of it's orbits. So, in general, I would seek to understand what could be accomplished with a less amount of artificial gravity method(s). Generally, we should prefer a sense of up and down for them, and a sanitary assistive level of synthetic gravity.

So, a "Wind Rider" Raft, might include Starship(s), and "Wind Rider" Components, which could include energy sources, useful upon arrival to inhabitants on the surface of Mars, or also in orbit of Mars.

The "Raft" would not do a Hohmann transfer to Mars. It instead may use a combination of methods, to insert into Martian orbit(s).
-"Wind Rider", "Raptor", and perhaps "Ballistic Capture" methods???

So, this version of Starship would not require a heatshield, but may have one as needed, to go to Mars.

This "Raft" could include all sorts of things that would not be stored in the cargo hold of the Starship(s).

Items that come to mind might be: "Wind Rider" propulsion system, including energy producing methods. Lightweight solar "Sunshields", that might make it more practical to use the main tanks as reservoirs for propellants on the trip to Mars.

Additional Propellant tanks which would include Sunshields as well. Cargo "Drums".

While SpaceX seems to plan to use bags of water for solar flares, it seems that this cargo might be arranged to be assistive as well, and particularly a tank of Methane may help. There is lots of room for swapping notions around here. Maybe you keep the Oxygen tank external, and keep the Starship Methane tank filled as a radiation shield??? I would favor this as the Oxygen could become pressurized space in orbit or even on the surface, and I don't like the idea of long-term storage of Methane and Oxygen in adjacent tanks, for fear of catastrophic explosions.

So, likely some of this stuff goes to the surface ultimately, and some to the moons of Mars, or at least one of them. Little would be wasted, I hope.

So, for the return trip, perhaps 3 out of 100 people would be on board??? Very little of the cargo would come with back to Earth.

A Hohmann transfer seems like the probable method, but I do have some very speculative notions about modifying that.

We are of the opinion that "Wind Rider" is only for trips out. But can it be used for navigation on the way back?
And can it impact the Earth's magnetosphere, to modify its speed and path? Really, I don't know.

That is interesting a sort of Magneto-Burn into the Earth's magnetic field. Possible, useful??? I know that one method to slow down in interstellar travel is to use a magnetic field to push against the solar wind of the star that they are arriving at.

As I have speculated that only 3 of 100 people would travel back, I suggest consideration of capsules as arrival methods for the 3, with parachutes perhaps. Then the Starship might use Magnetic Breaking and Aero-Burn to either land or be captured to orbit. In the case of captured to orbit, it might use several passes, possibly both magnetic and Aero-Burn methods. Maybe a full heat shield in all cases, maybe not so much.

That's plenty.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-02-27 16:48:34)

Void · 2022-02-27 12:31:12

Under Water thermal tanks. Likely for Earth, maybe in other places, for storage of intermittent energy.

Lets start with 2 existing items, one natural and one created.

-Dry Valley lakes, sometimes, have warm bottoms, even room temperature. Sort of solar driven, although ~2 weeks of melt water each summer also contribute heat to the upper layers.

-Solar Ponds: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_pon … th%20depth.
Quote:

A solar pond is a pool of saltwater which collects and stores solar thermal energy. The saltwater naturally forms a vertical salinity gradient also known as a "halocline", in which low-salinity water floats on top of high-salinity water. The layers of salt solutions increase in concentration (and therefore density) with depth. Below a certain depth, the solution has a uniformly high salt concentration.

So, I am thinking of a created "Dome" to hold such bodies of water, hold them on the bottom of bodies of water.

Most sea shore locations have access to cold water, not too far off. But if you had a hot water reservoir, you could run OTEC technology off of that.

A "halocline" could be used inside of the dome, and the actual bottom of the sea or like would also serve to store thermal energy. This might also be done inland for significant sized lakes. Many locations have fairly tolerable levels of solar intermittency. And for most of Europe, wind is also a method of intermittent energy. Much of the wind power is often near seashores as well.

I will admit that corrosion of the dome will be a problem to address.

I am thinking of additional insulation for the domes, at least on the outside. I am thinking of buoyant rocks. Actually, something that will resist corrosion for a long time that will have air bubbles in it and will not get waterlogged.

It is possible that a layer of it could be put over the dome, and "Gland Water" may be pumped into the gap between it and the dome, to slow down corrosions, presuming that the dome was of a material that might corrode.

I see the buoyant rock as possibly being 3D printed, or by melting the materials and injecting a expanding fluid, a "Sponge Rock" could be created. Perhaps also using vacuum at some point. Perhaps in a rotating kiln, that does not create significant synthetic gravity, but confused the up and down for gas bubbles in the matrix of it.

So, I think the underwater domes might be great in many places.

It must be understood that there may be many enemies of technological solutions to supply energy in a manner more compatible with environmental concerns. Unfortunately, those can be internal and external forces. Some would like our kinds to de-industrialize, so that we can more easily be enslaved.

Some are of the hive mind and very verbal and have not yet "WOKE" to the fact that what was OK for the survival of what we call advanced societies, is not always for all time the way to do it. It is a great pity when people who have been given another chance, then seek to take slaves. And I am talking about a variety of peoples, the one you may be thinking of is not really more guilty of this than many others.

And no, I am not with the so called "WOKE"s. Not at all. I just hate slavers and attempts to make a comfy chair for a class of entitled, royalty. And I am not speaking of kings and queens. They carry a burden and are useful. I am speaking of the self-entitled, who indeed more of words than solutions. In fact, I believe that many of them do not like solutions, other than by reducing the technology peoples to poverty, as they see them as rivals for power.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-02-27 16:49:25)

Void · 2022-02-27 16:51:19

Bold print for corrections:
Corrected post #85 "Raptor" changed to "Starship"
Corrected post #86, "Want" changed to "Water".
Done.

Void · 2022-02-27 20:13:02

Working on the materials of post #85, I am interested in the possibility of potential for travel to and from the Moon.

Earth's magnetic field: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_magnetic_field

Earth's magnetic tail: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com … %2040%20Re.

https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/s … st25jan_1/

Images: https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=ea … RE&first=1

Earth's magnetic tail and the Moon: https://www.nasa.gov/topics/moonmars/fe … tic%20tail.
Quote:

Disclaimer: This material is being kept online for historical purposes. Though accurate at the time of publication, it is no longer being updated. The page may contain broken links or outdated information, and parts may not function in current web browsers. Visit NASA.gov for current information
The Moon and the Magnetotail04.16.08
The moonThe moon. Credit: NASABehold the full moon. Ancient craters and frozen lava seas lie motionless under an airless sky of profound quiet. It’s a serene, slow-motion world where even a human footprint may last millions of years. Nothing ever seems to happen there, right?
Wrong.
NASA-supported scientists have realized that something happens every month when the moon gets a lashing from Earth’s magnetic tail.
“Earth’s magnetotail extends well beyond the orbit of the moon and, once a month, the moon orbits through it,” says Tim Stubbs, a University of Maryland scientist working at the Goddard Space Flight Center. “This can have consequences ranging from lunar ‘dust storms’ to electrostatic discharges.”
Yes, Earth does have a magnetic tail. It is an extension of the same familiar magnetic field we experience when using a Boy Scout compass to find our way around Earth’s surface. Our entire planet is enveloped in a bubble of magnetism, which springs from a molten dynamo in Earth’s core. Out in space, the solar wind presses against this bubble and stretches it, creating a long “magnetotail” in the downwind direction.
Anyone can tell when the moon is inside the magnetotail. Just look: “If the moon is full, it is inside the magnetotail,” says Stubbs. “The moon enters the magnetotail three days before it is full and takes about six days to cross and exit on the other side.”
It is during those six days that strange things can happen.
Diagram of Earth's magnetotailFine particles of dust on the moon's surface can actually float off the ground when they become charged by electrons in Earth's magnetotail. Credit: NASA
> Larger imageDuring the crossing, the moon comes in contact with a gigantic “plasma sheet” of hot charged particles trapped in the tail. The lightest and most mobile of these particles, electrons, pepper the moon’s surface and give the moon a negative charge.
On the moon’s dayside this effect is counteracted to a degree by sunlight: UV photons knock electrons back off the surface, keeping the build-up of charge at relatively low levels. But on the nightside, in the cold lunar dark, electrons accumulate and surface voltages can climb to hundreds or thousands of volts.
Imagine what it feels like to be a sock pulled crackling from a dryer. Astronauts on the moon during a magnetotail crossing might be able to tell you. Walking across the dusty charged-up lunar terrain, the astronauts themselves would gather a load of excess charge. Touching another astronaut, a doorknob, a piece of sensitive electronics -- any of these simple actions could produce an unwelcome discharge. “Proper grounding is strongly recommended,” says Stubbs.
Screen shot of an animation showing Earth's magnetotailEarth's magnetic field responds to the solar wind much like an airport wind sock: It stretches out with its tail pointing downwind. Credit: NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center- Conceptual Image Lab
> Magnetospheric substorm animationThe ground, meanwhile, might leap into the sky. There’s growing evidence that fine particles of moondust might actually float, ejected from the lunar surface by electrostatic repulsion. This could create a temporary nighttime atmosphere of dust ready to blacken spacesuits, clog machinery, scratch faceplates (moondust is very abrasive) and generally make life difficult for astronauts.
Stranger still, moondust might gather itself into a sort of diaphanous wind. Drawn by differences in global charge accumulation, floating dust would naturally fly from the strongly-negative nightside to the weakly-negative dayside. This “dust storm” effect would be strongest at the moon’s terminator, the dividing line between day and night.
Much of this is pure speculation, Stubbs cautions. No one can say for sure what happens on the moon when the magnetotail hits, because no one has been there at the crucial time. “Apollo astronauts never landed on a full moon and they never experienced the magnetotail.”
The best direct evidence comes from NASA’s Lunar Prospector spacecraft, which orbited the moon in 1998-99 and monitored many magnetotail crossings. During some crossings, the spacecraft sensed big changes in the lunar nightside voltage, jumping “typically from -200 V to -1000 V,” says Jasper Halekas of UC Berkeley who has been studying the decade-old data.
Diagram of Earth's magnetotailThe moon spends about six days each month inside Earth's magnetic tail, or "magnetotail." Credit: Tim Stubbs/University of Maryland/GSFC
> Larger image“It is important to note,” says Halekas, “that the plasma sheet (where all the electrons come from) is a very dynamic structure. The plasma sheet is in a constant state of motion, flapping up and down all the time. So as the moon orbits through the magnetotail, the plasma sheet can sweep across it many times. Depending on how dynamic things are, we can encounter the plasma sheet many times during a single pass through the magnetotail with encounters lasting anywhere from minutes to hours or even days.”
“As a result, you can imagine how dynamic the charging environment on the moon is. The moon can be just sitting there in a quiet region of the magnetotail and then suddenly all this hot plasma goes sweeping by causing the nightside potential to spike to a kilovolt. Then it drops back again just as quickly.”
The roller coaster of charge would be at its most dizzying during solar and geomagnetic storms. “That is a very dynamic time for the plasma sheet and we need to study what happens then,” he says.
What happens then? Next-generation astronauts are going to find out. NASA is returning to the moon in the decades ahead and plans to establish an outpost for long-term lunar exploration. It turns out they’ll be exploring the magnetotail, too.
More Information:
Earth’s magnetotail isn’t the only source of plasma to charge the moon. Solar wind can provide charged particles, too; indeed, most of the time, the solar wind is the primary source. But when the moon enters the magnetotail, the solar wind is pushed back and the plasma sheet takes over. The plasma sheet is about 10 times hotter than the solar wind and that gives it more "punch" when it comes to altering the charge balance of the moon's surface. Two million degree electrons in the plasma sheet race around like crazy and many of them hit the moon's surface. Solar wind electrons are relatively cool at only 140 thousand degrees, and fewer of them zip all the way down to the shadowed surface of the moon's nightside.

Tony Phillips
NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center

So, the "Wind Rider" from post #85. can it do anything special with the Magne tail? I don't know. However, I am wondering. Are there useful solar wind concentrations on the edge of the tail, or somewhere else? So, could "Wind Rider" help to move a payload to the Moon, maybe even better if the tail contains such a feature?

Less likely to be useful, but still worth looking into, if you come from the Moon towards Earth, is there any advantage, to using the "Wind Rider" as a brake either in the Solar wind, or the Earth's magnetic field/or Magne tail?

Just some stuff to wonder about.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-02-27 20:30:17)

Void · 2022-02-28 19:08:33

This material from post #85 has me thinking today:

Well, I am not so sure how much I trust this article, but it is interesting. It would indicate that SpaceX has a loophole in case the creepy crawlies, can keep holding Starship back. https://apogeereport.com/spacex-replace … con-heavy/
It seems like a smart move to me, as it then reduces the incentive for "Old Space" and their cronies trying to bankrupt Starlink/SpaceX.

I am having trouble believing the article in its entirety. I have to suppose that SpaceX intends to have a Cargo version of Starship, but perhaps without the wide door.

In any case, I already see an incompatibility with what I want to suggest, but I am going to go ahead anyway.

This has more to do with needs and wishes. It does not hurt to say what you think could be a good option. It does not require that then that option is pursued, but perhaps someone who has greater skills than me can at least run it though their mind.

For what I am thinking of, I recommend that someday SpaceX or some other rocket company reconsider the large bay door option, down the road.

As an example, let's suppose a process that is reverse staging. We already know that Rocket Lab is declared to build the Neutron 2 stage rocket. It has a fair amount of its own clever features. But the 2nd stage is expendable as far as I can tell. But a Starship could bring it down, in some cases. My impression is that Starship would bring a lot of payloads up to orbits but not so much down.

So, why would SpaceX facilitate that? Well, if both companies obtained a financial advantage, then they might. Neutron and Starship will likely offer a different set of services that may not always be in direct competition with each other. I don't know what the legal rules per monopoly might be for such a thing, but I could anticipate that SpaceX might actually invest in Rocket Lab, or maybe Elon Musk himself would.

But if I were to believe the article that is in the quote, Falcon Heavy will have a Fairing that will be based on the Starship's Fairing.
This may not be easily re-usable or perhaps not re-usable at all.

But could it be possible to make it just a little smaller, and have an alligator jaw Starship to bring it and the 2nd Stage rocket back down to the ground?

So, now the Fairings for the Falcon Heavy can be dumbed down, no heat shield, no parachute, no thrusters.
And the 2nd Stage rocket as well would need no heat shield.
And the whole assembly would then not need the motors and flaps that Starship needs.

And in my mind, this would lead to a possible multi-branching possible evolution of new space systems useful for the Moon, Mars, and Earth orbits. Starting with the existing propulsion system of the Falcon 9/Heavy family but eventually going over to Metha lox perhaps.

Just possibly getting smaller engines, maybe even from Rocket Lab. Again, if both entities make money, and do glory, why not?

A pause for rest.........

So, the package, then might also lead to a Mini-Starship of sorts. In many cases, the Lunar or Deep Space Starship is overkill for the Moon, but it will be good to have. But if you want to jump about on the Moon, Starship may not be the only thing desired.

Starship, refilling its own Mini, or even a version of the Neutron 2nd stage, might do some interesting things. Clearly then not requiring as much filling to do those things. Granted if you want a bunch of hardware and a Starship to convert to a part(s) of a Moon Base, then Starship itself is a very good option. But if you want to change out crew, or bring a few replacement parts, then a Mini might have its values. And if you wanted to send out a robotic mission to collect some samples and make some measurements, then a Mini may have its values also.

As for Mars, it may be that it is desired to have a Mini there. Such may not be orbital, but just to move place to place. Maybe in the rift valley and above it? But maybe also a version that could do orbital.

Anyway, if a lot of Starships are going to go up, maybe in some cases they could bring such things down from time to time.

Something to think about. I don't have a notion of how to use a propellant starship for that, but who knows??? Probably not so.

Done

Last edited by Void (2022-02-28 20:12:37)

Void · 2022-02-28 20:19:20

This is new from "The Angry Astronaut".

I post it here but have to say I will attempt to adapt the presented materials to my notions. (Of course, )
Quote: "NEW!! Photon Thermal Drive!! Mars in 45 days! Jupiter in one year!".
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Th … &FORM=VIRE

Of the presented materials, I support the boost for already in space devices. I imagine that in a century, lifting off from the surface with it might be developed. As for dealing with space Junk, I think that really justifies the work that would be needed to develop the system.

I am not in love with a fast trip and a very fast Aerocapture. But would modify it to be slower and to include more radiation shielding and synthetic gravity.

I am tempted to think that the laser system could be like a 1st stage boost, and in my case I would further go with solar wind propulsion such as "Wind Rider" for a supplemental propulsion.

Of course, the supplemental propulsion could be nuclear.

------

I am in terraforming, and I suppose there is a question of being on topic. But my argument is that you will not terraform Mars without a good system to get people and stuff in the Mars area.

I would of course per this post prefer slower speed, greater mass, and so greater safety, and health options, and probably to use a Ballistic Capture, as then you dispose of the Aero burn concern, until you are ready to bring the people and things down. But this will not be for the first arrivals. It will not be likely to exist at that time. In that era, where a base is established, it may be quite silly to come in from interplanetary space and directly land. Threre should be local Starship service by then.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-02-28 20:27:10)

Void · 2022-03-01 11:56:54

A quote from post #89:

Something to think about. I don't have a notion of how to use a propellant starship for that, but who knows??? Probably not so.

Thinking about it, it would not be current SpaceX policy of method of art, but you could perhaps lift canisters of fuel and Oxygen to orbit and fix them into a raft of materials of the sort I have suggested, to go to Mars. Then those canisters can be converted to infrastructure, at least at the orbits and Martian moons.

Also, such tanks could be dropped to the Moon. Let's say you have some type of ship without landing gear that could drop them down to the surface, like a "Sky crane". Of course, then you would want the ships to have enough propellant to get back to a useful orbit.

An interesting alternative would be that such a ship could drop down and hook such a tank filled with propellants manufactured on the Moon, at least perhaps in the case of Oxygen. No landing gear needed, but of course hooking gear mass will be an issue.

Anyway, dropping such tanks to the Moon's surface, presuming that they are Stainless Steel, they can then be incorporated into a base as infrastructure and of course covered with regolith.

So, then while it will cost to have a "Can within a Can" method of delivering propellants to orbit, you do get a Stainless-Steel canister to place in various locations.

And in that kind of a ship, maybe a "Starship", you may bring 2nd stages down in the method I have suggested, provide they might fit into the cargo bay of the Starship.

So, then there would be a way, it is not sure though if it is worthwhile. But I don't like throwing ideas out. You just put them on a shelf somewhere and remember them for the future, if circumstances render them worthwhile later.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-03-01 11:59:56)

Void · 2022-03-02 11:37:00

I am actually going to continue with some of the types of materials I have been posting about, but I feel it may be that this next posted information may upgrade the value of the Moon. I think the Moon is under rated. Of course, this site was specifically biased for Mars.

Comets and the Moon:
https://www.jhuapl.edu/NewsStory/220208 … OSS-impact
Quote:

New Analysis Points to Comets as Source of Near-Surface Ices at the Moon’s South Pole

https://www.universetoday.com/154544/on … et-impact/
Quote:

One Crater on the Moon is Filled with Ice and Gas that Came from a Comet Impact

https://hub.jhu.edu/2022/02/11/comets-s … e-on-moon/
Quote:

New analysis points to comets as source of near-surface ice at the moon's south pole
An analysis of debris blasted away from the moon's surface in 2009 uncovers layers of lunar—and Earth—history

Should someone wish to search more the query for the above was "Comet deposited ice on the Moon 1 billion years ago".

The above does not eliminate the possibility of other sources, but the Comet source is very interesting. A large object in my opinion might produce a temporary atmosphere on the Moon, and the poles being so cold, they would likely suck much of the atmospheric materials into condensation as ice, before it all got blown away by the solar wind. We may also have the possibility that over long periods of time dust ejecta may have covered some deposits more deeply. We seem to have a distribution of chemicals needed, such as Carbon and Nitrogen. Possibly there will be comet dust which could include desired metals. Don't know so much about that. Temporary winds, in a temporary atmosphere, would it vacuum the comet dust to the poles?

I do believe that the solar wind does make water along with small impactors. Some small impactors may bring Carbon and even Nitrogen.

So, we might want to consider that the Moon is much more useful than what was supposed. I have always had a suspicion of the "Mars Roach Motel Possibility", anyway.

The "Mars Roach Motel Possibility" is a somewhat paranoid is essentially the notion that by diverting the space program to Mars, an ultimate failure could more likely be promoted, at least a failure to settle Mars, and in skipping the Moon, we would also have failed to establish anything there.

A space program can be crafted such that it takes fedral tax dollars and funnels it to entities that are about establishing Hierarchy over a collection of servants. Quite a lot of politicians in certain locations, and quite a lot of the science community would prefer this, as what may be important to them is to rule, and to be given recognition, in the case of the science community. It is very quiet not at all like the American or Canadian Pioneer spirits.

But while they did take captive slaves by these methods for about 50 years, liberation is slowly coming, and must come, as the servant culture in this country is circular, and self-consuming in the end. To keep our republic strong, these powers must be taken away from those who misuse the energy of the population, for very useless unproductive activities.

--------

But what about the Orion? Taxpayers paid for it. Can it be appropriated to a use still?

I kind of feel that as I am retired, and fortunately don't particularly crave recognition, I can do the stupid and reckless things as per suggestion. I know what I will get, and don't so much care anyway.

For the same reason that the "Roach Motel" ploy is becoming Moot, access to both the Moon and Mars, and other objects seem to be coming into reach. The old architecture is still in existence, and I do not propose the advocate to intentionally destroy it.

We seem to have the present blend of NASA Heritage and SpaceX, and perhaps some others.

But that is confusing to a degree. SpaceX stuff has been given some expansion in the vision of NASA and other government entities.

As far as I can see, for the Moon:
-You can do a one way landing of Starship, (Presuming its full development), and land a massive amount of cargo to the Moons surface. You then can use that Starship to repurpose on the surface of the Moon.
-You can use the "Lunar Starship" as a lander also which would include people. This will be helpful in getting Starship down that path.

However, I wish to ask further about the " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matryoshka_doll " Starship notions.

Get over the "Russian" issue. Both Russian and the Ukraine were founded by the "Russ". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rus%27_people

So, having something to do with old Sweden, and there-abouts. As it happens, I am part Swedish, so I don't much like irrational notions about "Who we is, and who we isses not be". I am also from the first British settlers, and also of those who went west. I think I will consider myself and I think I will consider myself American both by old blood and new blood.

So, yes if I see value in a "Russ" concept, I will investigate and possibly embrace it.

Some of this material(s) I have sort of kind of embraced already, but still each review can show different views.

For LEO, it might be true, that some future product from SpaceX with a 2nd stage device capable of re-entry and landing, could Matryoshka
a 2nd-stage of a smaller size without re-entry and landing capabilities to a landing as landing cargo. I have suggested this possibly for the 2nd-Stage for the Neutron rocket propose to build by Rocket Lab.

I have suggested the SpaceX itself might want to investigate, carrying its own 2nd-stage products by Matryoshka to the ground. Possibly a dumbed down type of Fairings for Falcon 9 or Falcon Heavy. Possibly a 2nd-stage propulsion system of Falcon 9.

A problem may be that orbits will not match. Well, it is possible that some kind of Ion tug could get them matched up. I don't know the economics. Maybe sometimes you could Matryoshka, sometimes no. It is beginning to jell in my head, that it may be that there will be a LEO launch platform, that cargo devices will launch from, and that then most upward bound 2nd-stage travelers will go there. Then from that orbital base perhaps transported to a path to location needed for purpose. In some cases, using a tug, some tugs perhaps being ion drive. In other cases, if it is to go "Way out there", it will not contribute much to space junk, to abandon a onetime tug in a very high orbit, or a sun orbit.

SpaceX is a template at this time upon which I might lay some of my notions. SpaceX is not indispensable, but it seems like the only real player at this time. So, perhaps to consider a two-layer Matryoshka rocket system.

The notion is to have a less well-equipped device be delivered to the ground, intact and retrievable with the assistance of an outer nest device that will have all the bells and whistles needed to survive the path from orbit to ground. Worth the trouble? Well, I don't know. I am just suggesting the possibility to investigate.

This is not so much a new invention. Rember the LEM of Apollo, but it was not returned, actually quite the opposite of what I am thinking.

Mini-Starship has been proposed to be brought up by regular Starship and brought down by regular Starship. I think that at least two people have discussed it, so getting close.

Maxi-Matryoshka would be different and may have a few problems. A big enough hatch in the Cargo Bay of the Starship? The heat shield may be in conflict and unloading once the Starship is on its stage '0' catch tower.

Also, length of the inner ship will be a problem. I think the ship should be in at least 2 parts. The thrust section, and the Fairings section.
So, it would take at least 2 Full Starships to bring it down.

But the advantages might be that you could leave the Fairings section in orbit if that is useful, and I anticipate that you could use the Superheavy with some smaller modifications to loft the re-assembled inner Matryoshka.

So, I guess then you have to figure out if the advantages justify the trouble. This is just talk. Just maybe someone else will alter it to something else that is useful. But remember that for the inner 2 or more part, a great deal of simplification allowed, which means less dry mass to orbit, which means more cargo for less propellant. For some cases that could mean $$$. Profit from underpants?

It is to be remembered that in this system both the inner and outer Matryoshka, 2nd-stages would be free to lift cargo to orbit. The inner one being smaller, perhaps it could carry payloads requiring less volume, and the outer one to take the payloads with more volume needed.

------

I have in mind a special Moon rocket system based on all of this.

First of all, it might be of such a size that it could be carried down from orbit as the inner Matryoshka. So, it could be brought down if desired in one piece if it is not too big, or in two or more pieces.

I would prefer that it have a reduced heat shield capability. In fact, I would prefer that the base heat shield be Stainless Steel. Then if forced to you would have to add more complicated additional heat shielding. I do not seek a re-entry to landing, rather a capture to orbit from the Moon. This might involve several passes. I don't know if it would require flaps or just use thrusters to navigate the upper atmosphere. Flaps would then complicate brining it down to the surface from an Aerocapture.

The multiple pass capture thing would be a problem for passengers, so I suggest a capsule to return personal to the Earth's surface, per such with likely parachute and perhaps splashdown, certainly a robust heat shield. The NASA SLS capsule seems like a notion to consider.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_(spacecraft)

In this case the Moon ship, (Inner Matryoshka) would be the service Module for it. Just the ability to get through the atmosphere to the surface alive is desired. Taxpayers paid for it. It is heavy, but also might have what it takes.

I am presuming that since the topic is the Moon for now, this thing either unhooks from the Moon or slingshots around the Moon to deliver the capsule to re-entry, and the Moonship to multi-pass aerobraking to orbit.

What goes on with the Moon, would be many possible options. But in this situation, it is possible. that you can size the Moon ship to desires, and can have some aerobraking abilities to save propellants, and yet not have to bring the full-blown heat shield with you to the Moon.

And I am overdue for something else, so bye for now.

More of my output later perhaps.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-03-02 13:13:33)

Void · 2022-03-02 19:15:28

I have been considering the various ways to Mars. We know of the Hohmann transfer championed on this site.
We also have a sort of a "Red Headed Child", method of the Ballistic Capture.
We also have spiral methods such as Ion Drives, and also possibly Solar Sails, and magnetic sails.

Another is the Venus path. I have been thinking of that in combination with other things.
The Venus method would use a gravity assist I believe.
The proposed idea is: https://www.space.com/mars-astronauts-v … -idea.html
Quote:

Astronauts bound for Mars should swing by Venus first, scientists say
By Rahul Rao published July 07, 2020
It could be cheaper, faster and two planets for the cost of one.

OK what has me thinking, is could you use "Wind Rider" with the Venus path, to open up a wider band of timing for the trips? You see, in passing Venus, you end up "Up Wind", to both Earth and Mars.

"Wind Rider", only goes downwind, but if you set it up this way, then "Wind Rider" can give additional propulsion to both Earth or Mars. So, it may be possible to modify the arrival timing to a planet to a larger window of options?

Also, in each case, it may be possible to use a "Ballistic Capture" method, if that can be of assistance.
Ballistic Capture may also open the window, as I have so far understood.
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio … %20between....
Quote:

Abstract
We construct a new type of transfer from the Earth to Mars, which ends in ballistic capture. This results in a substantial savings in capture $\Delta v$ from that of a classical Hohmann transfer under certain conditions. This is accomplished by first becoming captured at Mars, very distant from the planet, and then from there, following a ballistic capture transfer to a desired altitude within a ballistic capture set. This is achieved by manipulating the stable sets, or sets of initial conditions whose orbits satisfy a simple definition of stability. This transfer type may be of interest for Mars missions because of lower capture $\Delta v$, moderate flight time, and flexibility of launch period from the Earth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_capture
Quote:

Ballistic capture
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Ballistic capture is a low energy method for a spacecraft to achieve an orbit around a distant planet or moon. Prior to ballistic capture, spacecraft would use a method called Hohmann transfer orbit, this requires the spacecraft to burn fuel in order to slow down at the distant planet. The requirement to carry fuel across space adds to the cost and complexity of the craft.
To achieve ballistic capture the spacecraft is placed on a flight path ahead of the target's orbital path. The spacecraft is then captured by the target planet's gravity allowing low power ion thrusters to complete the orbit. Ballistic capture was first used by the Japanese spacecraft Hiten in 1991 as a method to get to the Moon.[1]
Advantages
It is predicted to be:
safer, as there is no time critical orbit insertion burn,
launchable at almost any time, rather than having to wait for a narrow window of opportunity,
more fuel efficient for some missions.
A spacecraft moving at a lower orbital velocity than the target celestial body is inserted into an orbit similar to that of a planet or moon, allowing it to move toward it and gravitationally snag it into orbit with no need for an insertion burn.[1][2][3]

Spacenut, once pointed out that it may be that propellant savings, may require ion drive. However, I think that "Wind Rider" would serve as well.

For Ballistic Capture, you can in some cases go to orbit without an Aero burn. But the craft will eventually exit Mars, unless you modify it's path. But with "Wind Rider" and Raptors, you could fill that need.

For arrival back to Earth, I am interested in finding out if "Wind Rider", can butt into the Earth's magnetic field to slow down for orbital capture. Don't know.

I am also interested in "Wind Rider", and the Oberth Effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oberth_effect
Quote:

Oberth effect
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Not to be confused with Gravity assist.
Part of a series on
Astrodynamics
Angular parameters of an elliptical orbit
Orbital mechanics
Orbital elements
Types of two-body orbits by
eccentricity
Equations
Celestial mechanics
Gravitational influences
N-body orbits
Engineering and efficiency
Preflight engineering
Efficiency measures
vte
In astronautics, a powered flyby, or Oberth maneuver, is a maneuver in which a spacecraft falls into a gravitational well and then uses its engines to further accelerate as it is falling, thereby achieving additional speed.[1] The resulting maneuver is a more efficient way to gain kinetic energy than applying the same impulse outside of a gravitational well. The gain in efficiency is explained by the Oberth effect, wherein the use of a reaction engine at higher speeds generates a greater change in mechanical energy than its use at lower speeds. In practical terms, this means that the most energy-efficient method for a spacecraft to burn its fuel is at the lowest possible orbital periapsis, when its orbital velocity (and so, its kinetic energy) is greatest.[1] In some cases, it is even worth spending fuel on slowing the spacecraft into a gravity well to take advantage of the efficiencies of the Oberth effect.[1] The maneuver and effect are named after the person who first described them in 1927, Hermann Oberth, an Austro-Hungarian-born German physicist and a founder of modern rocketry.[2]
The Oberth effect is strongest at a point in orbit known as the periapsis, where the gravitational potential is lowest, and the speed is highest. This is because a given firing of a rocket engine at high speed causes a greater change in kinetic energy than when fired otherwise similarly at lower speed.
Because the vehicle remains near periapsis only for a short time, for the Oberth maneuver to be most effective the vehicle must be able to generate as much impulse as possible in the shortest possible time. As a result the Oberth maneuver is much more useful for high-thrust rocket engines like liquid-propellant rockets, and less useful for low-thrust reaction engines such as ion drives, which take a long time to gain speed. The Oberth effect also can be used to understand the behavior of multi-stage rockets: the upper stage can generate much more usable kinetic energy than the total chemical energy of the propellants it carries.[2]
In terms of the energies involved, the Oberth effect is more effective at higher speeds because at high speed the propellant has significant kinetic energy in addition to its chemical potential energy.[2]: 204 At higher speed the vehicle is able to employ the greater change (reduction) in kinetic energy of the propellant (as it is exhausted backward and hence at reduced speed and hence reduced kinetic energy) to generate a greater increase in kinetic energy of the vehicle.[2]: 204

I don't think that a gravity assist from the Moon can be added to this, but maybe I am wrong.

The point it that if you could get a ship swinging around the Earth in a Elliptical orbit, and then burn at "at the lowest possible orbital periapsis", then you might get a nice send off to Venus or Mars. But you would have to keep your propellants from boiling off during the wind up with "Wind Rider".

I also have a notion of a two stage path to Venus>Mars. I am thinking that the propulsion stage that did the Oberth Burn in low Earth Orbit, could head back to Earth while the part to go to Mars takes it's own path. Then you don't have to propel the Oberth thruster back to Earth from Mars, and it arrives back to Earth sooner, I would hope. Both stages might have their own "Wind Riders".

------

I want to make sure that the Members understand that I am not trying to replace the pseudo Mars Direct method which seems to be the one that SpaceX will use for the first flights. Rather I am trying to discover efficiencies, to bring a large amount of freight to the Orbits of Mars and the Surface of Mars also. These may include professional crews, but I am not sure that passengers would take these pathways. Not unless long term health concerns were addressed, radiation, zero g. Passengers might happen but they would likely have more flight time to pass to get to Mars.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-03-02 19:50:38)

Void · 2022-03-04 16:45:07

Sort of jumping back towards post #92.....

Just saw another video from "The Angry Astronaut", that had an item of particular interest. It was about thermal laser propulsion to Mars, but the item of most interest was that they intend to explore very high-speed entry to the upper Martian atmosphere, and to get away with it by not going too deep, but also clinging to the atmosphere with downward lift force, to allow the entry to not get too hot. So, this entry would curve around the planet. I am not equipped to say if such an entry at very high speed can be made to work. However, I am interested in it for a Moon ship to enter the Earth's atmosphere, at not such a high speed?

I believe that Starship will have a bit of lift at hypersonic speeds, so that it can dwell in the upper atmosphere longer, to shed speed before going lower. This would need to be a craft that can resist being bounced out of the Earth's atmosphere by actually using a sort of upside-down wing thing, I guess, or rather holding an altitude to shed off speed, while not exceeding heat shield tolerances.

My dream of course is a Moon ship that would have only Stainless Steel for the heat shield. However, in the likely event that that is not enough, then I guess you add more heat shield methods as required but prefer to keep it to a minimum.

It would not land, unless it were taken down by a protective normal Starship.

It might normally go to a refilling station with some maintenance possible.

If it could slow down in one or two passes, then perhaps humans would be able to ride it back to LEO. If not, then humans would likely need to go to the Earth's surface with a capsule system. I have mentioned this before.

Options for the Moon itself might be several. It might land. It might have a special smaller lander, specifically for the Moon landing. It might just pass by, behind the Moon, and drop a lander and pick one up without stopping. However, that last one would be rather dangerous for crew. It would have to work very reliably. But it might be good for parts and stuff like that.

The last thing I read is a suggestion of hundreds or thousands of people on the Moon. I guess as time would go by local production, (In situ) would pick up and the need for bulk transfers would diminish.

Some of this is "Too early to tell".

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-03-04 17:01:57)

Void · 2022-03-04 17:16:10

I am looking at this as well today:

And that might go along with this video, which has been seen before: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Ju … M%3DHDRSC3
Quote:

Solar Wind and Wave. Can this ocean hybrid platform nail all three?
YouTube · 96,000+ views · 2/13/2022 · by Just Have a Think

However, I add other energy methods as well. Land energy....Well if you have conductors to bring sea energy to land, at certain times you might do the reverse, provided you had a useful load. A sea tank holding hot water would possibly be one.

And with the cold of the sea and also hot water, then you may consider OTEC technology, which also can generate fresh water.

The Pyramid is also an anchor point for surface or near surface devices.

I have shown soil from the sea bottom put on top of the cone walls, both as thermal insulation, and to counteract the buoyancy of the heated and/or fresh water within.

More likely it could be a brine and so to avoid convection then to use a salt layers method.

I will give the conversions later. For Super Critical water, you need??? water on top of this. (Of course I am being a bit insane).

Quote:

Understanding Supercritical Water
Water – that is not liquid, gas, or solid – is the power behind Plantrose.

https://renmatix.com/understanding-supe … he%20stove.
Quote:

At 373°C and 220 bars, normal water becomes supercritical water. "Supercritical" can be thought of as the "fourth state" of a material. It is not a solid, a liquid or a gas -- and appears as something like a vapor. So, to picture supercritical water, think about a familiar example: boiling water on the stove.
Understanding Supercritical Water - Renmatix
renmatix.com/understanding-supercritical-water/

About 32 feet of water for each bar pressure, or (9.7536 Meters you Metrics!)

So, the base of the cone would need to be at least 7,040 feet down in fresh water. Salt water/brine would be somewhat different). Meters=(2145.792)

However, I am thinking you might not want to be that silly. Lower temperatures, and shorter cones should do a lot of good without the need for highly corrosive Super Critical brine.

Supposing the cone were made of Stainless Steel, (The popular metal now), I guess it would be a lot of it. But SpaceX is doing some stuff with it for Starship which might translate to something like this.

One more item. If you use bottom water for cooling an OTEC process, then that water warmed would rise, and having nutrients in it would cause a bloom of life, quite possibly. This then to make food and to sequester Carbon to a degree.

I think variations of this could be translated to some icy worlds such as Mars.

Done.

Strangely you have not used up sea bottom but have created more of it.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-03-04 17:37:00)

Void · 2022-03-05 11:44:32

Leep-Frogging back to the materials of post #94, I finally obtained the video that "The Angry Astronaut" recently posted, about a Laser propulsion method.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyRJnQuFISY

It has helped me to realize that if you can associate energy concentrations with matter, in space, then you might better get work/activities done.

This helps to turn some thinking on its head. First of all, it has become apparent that for the Moon and other orbits of Earth/Moon, we can have reasonable abilities to have large amounts of virtual labor where humans and computers can assist mass and energy manipulation devices, effectively if the time latency is not too large.

In a similar fashion, I believe that the notion that humans will project crafted mass into space orbits and/or the Moon, and then beam back energy to Earth, is not the sensible thing, at least not yet.

In dealing with machines that can manipulate mass and energy, it is much easier to maintain, control, and create such machines on the surface of Earth and to leave them on Earth.

I seem to recall that Elon Musk asserted that there is enough alternative energy on Earth. He does not seem to be enthusiastic towards bulk generation of energy off of Earth to project to Earth. I am moving in that direction at this time. You can see that if the materials of post #95, were actually useful to store a collection of energy inputs, for energy to be drawn off on demand, then surface energy, so called "Green Energy" may be more possible. I don't like the phrase "Green Energy". To me this associates to a sort of a neo-pagan "Goddess Mother Earth", notion of what is required, to solve problems existing in reality. Such a tilt is sort of not rational, in general, and it makes good political football materials. We don't need to work towards a political "Disney Land", to allow WOKE political harassment of a productive society.

The video has very interesting and advanced notions, which indicates it likely has 50 years of development ahead of it. Maybe not, as similar notions were considered when I was still young. Not the Mars aerobrake method though, but aerobrake seems to have some history of course.

I am happy to see the materials of the video but will deviate towards other manifestations of what you might do with strong laser projection from Earth to space matter, crafted matter.

We have the history of Laser output bounced off of mirrors on the Moon. I am sure it is not an easy thing to do.

Where in the Video, they want to expel hot Hydrogen, I am more interested in expelling gasses sourced from the Earth's atmosphere, the Moon, and maybe NEO objects. I am not against Hydrogen, it is just hard to come by in quantity in Earth's orbits.

Three forms of matter more plausibly expelled from a orbital propulsion device might be Plasma, Gas, Solid.
Liquid in the case of Oxygen might be desirable as it is magnetic, but on exposure to Vacuum, it will flash to Gas, and Solid, and I think managing that without fouling up the machine will be very tricky, if it can be done at all.

I suppose I might suppose that the Europeans have created a candidate propulsion device that it is said will be able to go to very low orbits, by sucking in tenuous atmosphere, and expelling it to gain orbital energy. So, that is more real than any ice cube ejector I may think of. We can try to work with that and hope to improve it will laser power from the surface of Earth. What I am thinking about will have to have good precision and minimized drag. Possibly not possible?
Certainly not possible if not investigated/tried. Obviously, I want to shoot lasers at high temperature solar panels, in orbit, to power the European propulsion device. The more mirror you need though, the more drag. So, if possible it would be good to design a low drag concentrating mirror. "Air" behaves strangely though when it is not in Viscous flow. I am not sure how drag works at those locations of the atmosphere. The molecules are perhaps following a ballistic trajectory if they hit, they may stick for a while, or may bounce off in some cases. It would be interesting if on a "Nano-Scale", it would be possible that the laser power could make them bounce off in a retrograde direction to a degree, relative to the device going in a prograde direction. Otherwise, then the game would be to reduce drag.

We have all likely seen those little things in a glass bottle that spin in a "Atmosphere" that is very thin, as the dark side makes the molecules bounce off at a higher speed. At least that is my understanding of what may be happening.

Last edited by Void (2022-03-05 12:26:16)

tahanson43206 · 2022-03-05 12:23:50

For Void ... this post is just to thank you for providing a break from the dismal news that is prevalent these days! (th)

Void · 2022-03-05 12:31:41

Welcome. I am sorry about what is going on, but in my opinion, it has deep roots, I believe that at it's bottom, the worst part of humans is Whoring and Murder. Some entities who were given a Royal Flush a while back decided to descend into excessive Whoring. Not naming names. But the result is to enable a Murder Cycle. Don't get me wrong. I actually think that certain forms of "Puritanism", are actually partners with "Whoring", the problem comes from trying to exploit the sexuality of our peoples for money. Money is not bad either, it beats being poor. But I think we need to get more back to productive sources of money. Not "Whoring" money.

I will resume for the previous post.

Done.

Void · 2022-03-05 12:38:36

OK, you need to scroll down on this page, after you get done with ET.
https://alien-ufo-sightings.com/2018/11 … 20on%20air.
This in itself seems interesting, but would be much better, if you could give it concentrated energy, and yet avoid excessive atmospheric drag. Some solar cells can be very high temperature. 600 C? or maybe more. So then less mass and less drag for the panels of the craft.
This one: https://phys.org/news/2016-08-high-temp … solar.html

Then though if you need a mirror, you will want to minimize drag and also even hope to create a sort of assistive molecular thrust. I don't know how assistive it can be. Perhaps it only can reduce net drag.

I will try a picture next. A little pause......

Please keep in mind that this is an attempt, not that I am satisfied.

The black surface of the mirror might eject molecules impinging on it at a faster speed than the reflective sections.
Grey represents reflective. I am sort of thinking of a concave pointing down, linear mirror in this case, not a circular mirror. Don't know.

I have been pondering stuff like this for a long time. Might not be there yet. I am presuming that the top side of the mirrors black sections will not be left black. It was just a quick diagram.

Of course, if your source of gas is outside the atmosphere, and you do not have significant drag, you don't need this. Maybe Oxygen from the Moon, or gasses from NEO"s? Of course, they would be for the ion engine. In such a case as that drag is not very important, unless you do aerobraking with a mirror, but mass/vs energy matters.

Gotta go.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-03-05 13:00:59)

Void · 2022-03-06 10:34:01

I am still interested in the previous post. I think it might be interesting to see if somehow the mirror and solar panels could become a sort of scoop for the icon thrust system. That then might help to deal with the mirror drag potentials.

------

But this morning, I sort of drifted into something else, so I guess I will get it out of my bucket head.

It would be a terraform item. It would be an attempt to "Sail" chunks of the atmosphere of Venus to other worlds, I guess, Mars and maybe the Moon.

In general, I visualize moving mass from the inner solar system to further out, so it would fit in with that. So, like a river, the bulk of mass goes downstream, but not all. It is possible to move some upstream.

But for a terraform of Venus, I have already asserted that a planetary magnetic field might be a very useful tool. I have thought it might block the exit of Oxygen and perhaps to some degree even some Hydrogen. The Oxygen is the more important item though, I feel. If I understand correctly, Venus has a very large electric field that levitates Oxygen out of the atmosphere of Venus. The solar wind and I suppose the photons also cause the Oxygen to depart in a tail.

https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1994G … ication%3A

https://www.mpg.de/6885096/venus-tail

https://www.nanowerk.com/news2/space/newsid=28719.php

So, anyway, I think that by two processes at least it might be possible to cause an Oxygen atmosphere to float on top of the regular Venus atmosphere. If that can be made to occur, then it might be possible that a significant Ozone layer might be possible in that high layer.

The two methods I can think of to accomplish this would be 1) Global Magnetic Field, 2) Removal of Carbon and/or Sulfur from the atmosphere.

It might be possible to bring Carbon and Sulfur to orbit by some method, perhaps a skyhook, or some other near-by type of method. These can both be construction materials in orbit. Other materials would also be desired in the orbits of Venus, to come from Mercury, Luna, asteroids, or maybe Venus itself.

Could a magnetic plasma bubble be constructed in orbit, and sailed from Venus to Mars. I anticipate that Mars would have a magnetic field to suck it in upon contact.

It might be possible to shut down the field of Venus to do the release, and to ramp up the Mars field to do the capture.

Of course it would have to be timed.

And I guess if you get good at that you might consider the Moon.

As for Ceres, I wonder can you envelop it in a giant plasma bubble and maintain that and what value might that have?

Plasma Bubble Stuff: Query: (Plasm bubble propulsion)
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20030067378
https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/s … st04oct_1/

Query: (Plasm bubble propulsion gas injection)
Well, Oxygen is not a neutral gas, so, it needs some further hopes, and work. Don't know.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a … 2605001239
https://www.colorado.edu/faculty/kantha … _paper.pdf

I'm not so equipped to take this any further, at least not at this time.

However, I would make note that the Extraction of Oxygen and other materials from the atmosphere, of Venus could provide propulsion mass for various uses.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2022-03-06 11:09:23)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#76 2022-02-19 20:42:56

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#77 2022-02-20 09:36:39

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#78 2022-02-21 11:12:43

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#79 2022-02-21 18:46:46

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#80 2022-02-21 19:19:24

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#81 2022-02-24 13:29:17

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#82 2022-02-24 13:31:09

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#83 2022-02-25 12:01:49

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#84 2022-02-25 13:58:57

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#85 2022-02-27 10:48:04

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#86 2022-02-27 12:31:12

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#87 2022-02-27 16:51:19

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#88 2022-02-27 20:13:02

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#89 2022-02-28 19:08:33

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#90 2022-02-28 20:19:20

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#91 2022-03-01 11:56:54

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#92 2022-03-02 11:37:00

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#93 2022-03-02 19:15:28

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#94 2022-03-04 16:45:07

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#95 2022-03-04 17:16:10

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#96 2022-03-05 11:44:32

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#97 2022-03-05 12:23:50

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#98 2022-03-05 12:31:41

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#99 2022-03-05 12:38:36

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#100 2022-03-06 10:34:01

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

Board footer