New Mars Forums

Bill White

Member

Registered: 2001-09-09

Posts: 2,114

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

The NSS http://www.nss.org/news/Aldridge_20040505.pdf]has called for permanent settlement as being the goal of the Bush Exploration plan.

If President Bush states clearly and forcely that permanent settlement, sooner rather than later, is the objective of his vision then I will give the Bush space vision a rousing two thumbs up.

GCNRevenger

Member

From: Earth

Registered: 2003-10-14

Posts: 6,056

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

A space colony? On $10Bn a year? (the cut of Nasa's budget it can spend on manned hardware)... maybe enough to keep a CEV crew alive indefinatly with Earthly supplies, but I don't think much else. Payloads are too hard to get into orbit and to get anywhere just yet. For a real space colony, then you need Shuttle-II and reuseable spaceships, which won't come cheap.

---

[i]"The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those that do not have it." - George Bernard Shaw[/i]

[i]The glass is at 50% of capacity[/i]

idiom

Member

From: New Zealand

Registered: 2004-04-21

Posts: 312

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

You just blow the whole lot on Deltas and Titans...

Eventually after a few years you will hve landed enough stuff on the same spot to get something interesting going.

Especially if you treat the astronauts as expendable. Not deliberatley killing them, but not shutting the program down for a wonky hatch etc.

---

Come on to the Future

GCNRevenger

Member

From: Earth

Registered: 2003-10-14

Posts: 6,056

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

There aren't any more Titans, and the Delta-IV HLV would only move ~100MT to orbit a year for a billion dollars.

---

[i]"The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those that do not have it." - George Bernard Shaw[/i]

[i]The glass is at 50% of capacity[/i]

Ian Flint

Banned

From: Colorado

Registered: 2003-09-24

Posts: 437

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

GCNRevenger,

Somehow I always know what you're going to say.  "You can't do (fill in the blank) until you develop faster/cheaper vehicles."

Do you work for NASA?  If not you should apply.  They seem to be your type.

I agree that colonization should be Bush's goal.  Here's how NASA should do it:

1.  Send a crew to Mars and return them a la Mars Direct (2 1/2 years).
2.  If they survive that mission, have the next crew stay for 4 years.  Don't forget to keep sending people every 2 years.
3.  Have the next crew stay for 6 years, etc., etc.

This type of step by step progression will satisfy the conservative people in congress (there will always be the option to bring people home).  Since the crews are staying longer and longer each time, it will also satisfy the progressives (since the tenth crew will stay for 20 years, they will probably just decide to settle there).

And to satisfy GCNRevenger, the presence of a permanent outpost/colony on Mars will create more of a demand for Gas Core Nuclear Reactors.

Bill White

Member

Registered: 2001-09-09

Posts: 2,114

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

Take this plan, tweak it a fair amount, and it might work.

Ian Flint

Banned

From: Colorado

Registered: 2003-09-24

Posts: 437

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

Ooo...Ooo!

Tweak it baby, tweak it!

Please explain how you would tweak it Bill.

GCNRevenger

Member

From: Earth

Registered: 2003-10-14

Posts: 6,056

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

Unfortunatly MarsDirect simply doesn't provide much actual payload mass. Keeping people in the little cramped tin cans forever doesn't seem to be that great of an idea, you will still need water since LSS isn't entirely closed, and nuclear reactors will wear out in half a decade or so... Ultimatly, there needs to be a better way to get more mass to the Martian surface easier than MD before you can really start thinking quasiperminant settlement. Even now, the MD mass estimates for the actual amount of material you can get down are probably pretty wishful, even the rover or drill rig would probably have to be dumped from the current arcitecture.

And, the actual vehicles would have to have very precise landing capability, which doesn't exsist either... MarsDirect right now is "few hundred km is good enough," which isn't for a colony. Not too happy with the long trip times and rare windows for MD too.

---

[i]"The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those that do not have it." - George Bernard Shaw[/i]

[i]The glass is at 50% of capacity[/i]

Ian Flint

Banned

From: Colorado

Registered: 2003-09-24

Posts: 437

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

See! I knew you would say something like that!

OK, page 99 of "Case for Mars" --

"We should remember that both Viking landers touched down within 30 kilometers of their targeted sites without active guidance, while the Apollo manned lunar landers were able to land within 200 meters of a target Surveyor spacecraft."

And these missions didn't have a landing beacon to follow like Mars Direct will have.

About the mass being a little skimpy -- Just do Mars Semi Direct or send another Hab full of supplies or build a slightly more powerful booster.

About the crews living in the Habs for their entire stay -- Only an idiot astronaut would do that.  They would start building underground shelters as soon as possible.  They would erect domes as soon as possible - at least for crops.

About water -- Mars has a lot of water.  The only launch costs associated with water would be sending the equipment to gather it.  And, one simple/light piece of equipment would be a transparent tent to heat the regolith and 'boil' the water out.  This would work fine for the first few crews.

Oh, just because you personally wouldn't prefer long trips and rare launch windows doesn't mean that it won't work to start the colony.  You gotta start somewhere.  Why not now with Mars Direct?  It is more expensive than the other technologies you promote (which are further from development than MD, I might add), but it is doable.

Bill White

Member

Registered: 2001-09-09

Posts: 2,114

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

Ultimately, there needs to be a better way to get more mass to the Martian surface easier than MD before you can really start thinking quasiperminant settlement.

Exactly!

Any quasi-permanent settlement may need one thing more than anything - -  MiracleGro plant food - - especially if Mars regolith is laced wih heavy metals that will be taken up by any plants grown in the stuff.

IF water is found, H, C and O is no problem. N can be processed from the atmosphere but freeze dried hydroponic solution (MiracleGro) would be very helpful.

As far as bulldozers and heavy rovers, additional uncrewed MarsDirect style shots might cost a billion or three each IMHO.

Once a non man-rated Ares class booster is deployed, buying one more is not really all that expensive relative to a plan that will cost upwards of $150 billion, or more.

If we cannot land bulldozers and rovers successfully then we are not landing the initial Cew Return Vehicle either and we can forget the whole show. Right?

= = =

But tons of plant food, kevlar mats, tofu paste, clean underwear, machine tools, drill pipe and stuff like that does need a cheaper delivery system.

Solar ion to L1, then fly-by Luna then Earth might be a  slow "Lo road" for logistics but we still need Earth to LEO.

= = =

Oh I forgot - - we need to find maybe $200 billion dollars, or maybe only $100 billion if we fly lots of Russian rockets.

= = =

More I forgot! Nukes. Lots of nukes. The biggest SAFE reactors David Poston can build and as many as we can fly there. Energy budgets will be critical even with nukes. Grow lights suck power like crazy.

SBird

Banned

Registered: 2004-03-10

Posts: 490

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

I'm too lazy to go back to our old LEO to Mars thread and look up my calculations but if one posits a dry spacecraft launch and LEO fuelling, even standard chamical engines can throw something like 60 MT to Mars without too much trouble with a 120 MT liftoff cargo mass. If you start playing with things like ion drives and low energy transfer orbits (for non-perishables) your Mars cargo load starts approaching your LEO capacity.

As for accurate landings, NASA has been consistently improving their landing accuracy, Spirit and Opportunity were both pretty accurate throws.  Also, the Mars 2008 orbiter (MRO) will have an optical camera/UHF transponder system that will greatly improve the ability of incoming spacecraft to figure out their location in space, further improving landing accuracy.  If there's a landing beacon and nothing catastrophic happens in the orbital insertion, I don't see why we can't drop a payload on Mars within a 1 km oval.

For an example, look at Gravity probe B.  It had a 1 second launch windown and ended up hacing a postitional accuracy 6 times what they were expecting.  We've got the technical capacity to make it happen and NASA is already obviously planning on using that capacity to the fullest.

GCNRevenger

Member

From: Earth

Registered: 2003-10-14

Posts: 6,056

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

For a space colony though, we're talking down to the meters with a far larger vehicle in a far stronger gravity well using a much less precise (aerobraking entry) means of entry through an atmosphere which varies daily. Its not as easy as a carefully controlled rocket decent over the airless Moon.

Build habitats underground? How? Bring along a Martian fuel-cell powerd bulldozer/end loader? That will be pretty heavy, which is already more than MD can do most likly. Even a machine big enough to simply pile regolith over a TransHab will be pretty beefy.

And i'm not too sure about growing crops on Mars right away either... Domes? Made of what? What about the weight of all the hydroponic racks and the energy cost of heating the greenhouse? Would require reactor modification probably...

Mars has quite a bit of water, but I don't think its that easy to get to. Cooking it out of the regolith is an unproven technique, just like aerobraking which makes MD possible, and I have doubts if it can be relied upon to provide the amounts needed.

---

[i]"The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those that do not have it." - George Bernard Shaw[/i]

[i]The glass is at 50% of capacity[/i]

Bill White

Member

Registered: 2001-09-09

Posts: 2,114

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

Underground habs?

I envision sending a ditchwitch type trenching tool via Energia (or equivalent) direct throw, unless a BIG solar ion tug has been deployed. Then spiral out to L1 for Luna/Earth fly-by or use solar ion to accomplish perigee kicks before firing the trans-Mars main engine.

RobS I forget, does your novel depict the burn as seen from Earth when the main engines fire while on the Terran gravitational fly-by?

Visualize a moonless clear night in the Aussie outback and the trans-Mars injection burn fires at few hundred km altitude as MarsOne swings by the Earth. A tongue of fast moving fire racing across the sky, no?

Anyway, Energia/Ares drops a big robot ditchwitch on Mars.

Trench out a nice big trench. if water ice laden regolith, first drill narrow tunnels and insert electric heating coils to melt the water and break up the cohesion. Power hungrey? Sure but we got lots of nukes.

Then unroll pre-formed aluminium tubes and line with TransHab fabric and aerogels. Backfill with a dozer-bot.

Easy as pie, once you deploy a few dozen billion dollars worth of equipment (based on transportation costs).

:;):

= = =

Crops? That is why we need MiracleGro.

Amateur soldiers study combat. Professionals study logistics.

The settlement of Mars will need a robust logistical pipeline to Earth combined with superb supply chain management and ample funding to pay for it all.

Show me enough money and the technology exists today.

GCNRevenger

Member

From: Earth

Registered: 2003-10-14

Posts: 6,056

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

No no, too much assembly... just make a shallow trench and pull a already-built TransHab into it on skis, inflate, and then pile regolith on top of it.

---

[i]"The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those that do not have it." - George Bernard Shaw[/i]

[i]The glass is at 50% of capacity[/i]

Bill White

Member

Registered: 2001-09-09

Posts: 2,114

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

No no, too much assembly... just make a shallow trench and pull a already-built TransHab into it on skis, inflate, and then pile regolith on top of it.

Cool. Thats even easier. Is there any reason a deflated TransHab cannot be made in various shapes and sizes?

clark

Member

Registered: 2001-09-20

Posts: 6,362

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

Like a giraffe?  :laugh:

Meh to digging. You have to store your water somewhere, right? Put it on top. bam! instant rad exsposure. Cover the remaining three sides of the hab in regolith (for rad protection). Leave one side open for egress.

If you're going to dig, find a suitable hill or cliff face, bring a demolition expert along, and TNT your way to habitat comfort. 

GCNRevenger

Member

From: Earth

Registered: 2003-10-14

Posts: 6,056

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

Blasting? Mars? Not sure if I like the sound of that... what if the cave/hole collapses? Debries from the explosion on Mars would also travel further with more force due to the low gravity and thinner air, presenting more of a safety hazard etc etc.

---

[i]"The power of accurate observation is often called cynicism by those that do not have it." - George Bernard Shaw[/i]

[i]The glass is at 50% of capacity[/i]

clark

Member

Registered: 2001-09-20

Posts: 6,362

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

What if the cave/hole collapses? Umm, well, ideally no one would be inside the hole until it is reinforced.

As for the blast itself and debri... let me hold your hand here GNC,      STAND ASIDE.  :laugh:

Low air pressure means the concussive force would be lessened too.

Ian Flint

Banned

From: Colorado

Registered: 2003-09-24

Posts: 437

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

I don't think GCNR wants to go to Mars. :laugh:

clark

Member

Registered: 2001-09-20

Posts: 6,362

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

Sure he does, and he is trying to help in his own way. Just because he points out obvious problems dosen't mean he dosen't want to go to Mars.

He is saying we should do this sensibly. It isn't so easy to do all the things we just imagine.

We have slide rules that say we can, and a spirit that can make it happen. But glossing over the details does no one any good. 

Bill White

Member

Registered: 2001-09-09

Posts: 2,114

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

Supply chain logistics:

Assume the existence of a solar ion tug able to get payloads from LEO to L1 and then return to LEO. The following rockets can throw decent payload to LEO at a low cost - - Zenit-2, Zenit 3SL and Proton.

The Zenit 3SL does not seem able to throw more to LEO than Zenit-2 and the SeaLaunch payload fairings and upper stage may well have reduced useable payload capability.

Anyway, Zenit-2 can loft 30,000 pounds (Futron says less than $1500 per pound) and Proton over 40,000 pounds (Futron says less than $2000 per pound).

Even if these boosters launch at 51 degrees, a solar ion tug can still push the payload out to L1, correct? IIRC (as a liberal arts guy) all inclinations are equal on a trip from LEO to L1. Correct me if I am wrong.

Once at L1, take the "Lo road" with a Luna and Earth fly-by then on to Mars.

Add a MER style airbag delivery system and it seems to me that bulk supplies can be delivered to a colony or the MarsDirect astronauts for less than $2500 per pound.

By adding $55-$65 million to a MarsDirect budget one Zenit 2 could send 25,000 pounds of bulk supplies to be waiting at the landing site for when MarsOne arrived.

= = =

A $500 per pound SpaceX Falcon makes this even easier.

nirgal2002

Banned

From: Eugene, OR

Registered: 2004-04-30

Posts: 8

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

This is actually pretty sound in the first part, but unfortunately you are not going to want to deliver all of your supplie via a landing bag system.  One key factor is that there are weight limits for the landing bag style landing.  Second, you may have supplies that could be damaged in the randomness of a landing bag style of landing.

Bill White

Member

Registered: 2001-09-09

Posts: 2,114

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

This is actually pretty sound in the first part, but unfortunately you are not going to want to deliver all of your supplie via a landing bag system.  One key factor is that there are weight limits for the landing bag style landing.  Second, you may have supplies that could be damaged in the randomness of a landing bag style of landing.

Agreed.

I was thinking airbags for tofu and MiracleGro. And Meals-Ready-to-Eat (MRE).

If the airbags fail to open? Spam Crater.

PLIND

Banned

From: Canada

Registered: 2004-04-13

Posts: 18

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

A thought on the airbags, habitats whatever...

Why don't you wrap (don't be too quick to discount) the airbags around the ship. Make them so that they can be 'unzipped' from around the craft. They can serve as extra protection on the trip and then used (again) as the habitats etc.

Don't laugh, it might work?

PLIND ???

Rxke

Member

From: Belgium

Registered: 2003-11-03

Posts: 3,669

Re: National Space Society - Calls for settlement as the goal

PLIND... not sure about that, the airbags are probably folded very precicely etc, also if they protect you ship and are in the open space all that time, probably being punctured or 'burned' by radiation etc, you might end up with pretty worthless airbags in the end...

But of course, they should and will be recycled, once down, even when completely torn, tough fabric has many uses.