New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society and MarsNews.com

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: As a reader of NewMars forum, we have opportunities for you to assist with technical discussions in several initiatives underway. NewMars needs volunteers with appropriate education, skills, talent, motivation and generosity of spirit as a highly valued member. Write to newmarsmember * gmail.com to tell us about your ability's to help contribute to NewMars and become a registered member.

#1 2004-05-23 01:29:51

Enyo
Member
From: Pacific Northwest
Registered: 2003-10-21
Posts: 36

Re: Don Peterson Critque of Bush Plan

This is a small part of the whole article...

2.2.1 Is lunar testing the most efficient and effective way to test various Mars Program test objects (i.e., objects intended for use in the HMEP, such as: rovers, pressure suits, solar arrays, radiators, batteries, habitats, communications antennae, etc.)?

Clearly, there are some aspects of the Mars vehicles and systems, such as aerobraking and parachute descent, that cannot be tested on the moon. Tests of some other systems and components, (e.g., solar arrays, energy storage devices, thermal conditioning systems, etc.) could probably be done with greater validity (and at much lower cost) in environmental chambers where the solar constant, day/night cycle, atmosphere effects, and temperature could model Martian conditions quite accurately.

In fact, it seems that the only truly unique factor in lunar testing is the effect of 1/6 gravity, which is important for systems and components that involve mass dynamics (e.g., rover vehicles, fluid flow devices, etc.). Even in these cases it isn't obvious that testing devices designed for Mars gravity (about 2/5 earth) in lunar gravity (about 1/6 earth) will yield any more valid results than testing in earth gravity (again at much lower cost) using the same "reduced gravity emulators," (underwater neutral buoyancy, sling supports and slanted walls to reduce weight effects, Zero-G aircraft, air bearing floors, etc.) that apparently produced satisfactory results in the Apollo Program. It is also worth noting that the robotic vehicles now on Mars were all successfully designed and tested without benefit of a low gravity test environment.

In any event, the differences between the lunar environment and the Mars environment will impose significant differences between the design and operation of lunar test objects (rovers, solar arrays, energy storage devices, thermal conditioning systems, etc.) and the analogous Mars objects. This in turn will necessitate some rather complicated manipulation of "modeling factors" to make lunar test results applicable to Mars equipment, and the program will incur extra cost and complexity to field and operate and analyze two sets of substantially different equipment in two significantly different environments.

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=953]Don Peterson objections to Bush Jr SEI

Offline

#2 2004-05-23 07:43:57

Ian Flint
Banned
From: Colorado
Registered: 2003-09-24
Posts: 437

Re: Don Peterson Critque of Bush Plan

Exactly.

Offline

#3 2004-05-23 08:12:09

Rxke
Member
From: Belgium
Registered: 2003-11-03
Posts: 3,669

Re: Don Peterson Critque of Bush Plan

http://www.transterrestrial.com/archive … 03772]Rand Simberg does not agree...

(He never does...)

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB