Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

tahanson43206 · 2021-04-26 11:30:00

This topic is offered for posts that related to the primary topic, but which might not be suitable for the topic itself.

Examples would be suggestions for corrections of facts in a post.

The author of the post in the primary topic is responsible for making the needed adjustments.

(th)

edit spacenut:
Internal wiki like development page topics and process.
Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members. is our first wiki page owner is Oldfart1939

Please remove posts from it to this topic area

oldfart1939 will evaluate our comments here on the topics adjustments that we would like to see if possible and or plausible in the wiki's creation page.

Edit tahanson43206 at 9:05 local time 2021/04/28

For SpaceNut: Thank you for your support of this venture! It is possible for a group of the current size (15 or so) to encourage Oldfart1939 as he progresses in development of an article suitable for publication.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2021-04-27 05:29:30

For Oldfart1939 and SpaceNut (in particular) and all are welcome to comment and contribute...

Overnight a concept of how Oldfart1939 might develop his topic gelled in my mind ...

I've had the honor of participating in editing of a published book on the History and Philosophy of Science. It is possible that the topic Oldfart1939 created can become a full fledged article in a print magazine such as Popular Mechanics. My personal preference for consideration is the Science Fact article in Analog Science Fact and Fiction. I've received encouragement from a member of the staff there to offer a science fact article for their consideration.

For Oldfart1939 .... if you are interested in this concept, we could (administrators, moderators and you) collaborate to build up your primary topic paragraph by paragraph until it is suitable to be submitted. In this scenario, if everyone agrees, you would have a "staff" of 15 highly interested and motivated folks from around the world to help you craft an article that would past muster with Trevor Quachri, Editor.

The tried and true mantra for writing/composing a speech is to "Tell 'em what your going to tell them" "Tell 'em" "Tell them what you told them"

It is certain that you have written academic papers in your career, so you know more about this than I do, but I am highly motivated to learn a bit more about the art than I do now (or maybe a lot more).

(th)

Oldfart1939 · 2021-04-27 09:47:42

Thomas-
You are indeed correct that I have published articles in peer-reviewed journals.
2 in J. Phys. Chem.
1 in Analytical Chemistry
1 in Biochemistry
1 in Experimental Eye Research
1in Vision Research

Those were all done early in my career; this would be a new experience, since I have not done anything in the area of Aerospace.

tahanson43206 · 2021-04-27 10:05:18

For Oldfart1939

Thanks for the (impressive to me) list of the articles you've submitted to peer-reviewed journals!

It is possible your initiative here may attract folks with experience and credentials who can help to fill in the myriad details that I feel sure are in need of attention.

The scope of the problem is suggested by this report of a recent interview with Elon Musk, about the Mars venture ...

https://people.com/human-interest/elon- … y-to-mars/

Musk is (apparently) still hoping to send an unmanned vehicle to Mars in 2024, and a crew as early as 2026 (maybe).

NASA meanwhile is holding to the 2030's as a possible target opportunity. Their current focus is (apparently) on proving the ability to land on the Moon and return safely.

However, those are only two of the many potential players in this game, and a well crafted article, delivered to the right market, might be able to help some teams to make progress more rapidly than they otherwise might.

As GW Johnson has pointed out recently, and probably many times before that, any planning at the detail level is going to be dependent upon data from Mars itself, so it is fortunate that several nations are now engaged in trying to reduce uncertainty.

***
Small bit of business .... do you endorse the concept of isolating the primary topic for building an article?

We will need the assistance of SpaceNut and kbd512 (Administrators) to move posts out of there and into Companion, if you like the idea and want to pursue it.

(th)

Oldfart1939 · 2021-04-27 10:44:54

Yes. I endorse that concept. Otherwise too many other sidebar comments cloud things. That's a general comment and not only for the topic at hand.

tahanson43206 · 2021-04-27 11:08:39

Thanks! I'll begin the request process over in Housekeeping. (th)

My concept is (assuming everyone approves) that the author (ie, Oldfart1939) should be the only person adding content to the primary topic.

As you are no doubt aware, posts can be edited as needed by the owner. In this case, if you structure your posts in a granular way, you can go back to the granules (whatever you decide on) by means of a quick lookup.

This is just an example, and you probably will come up with something that suits you better, but it might be something like:

SearchTerm:Granule01 (you would then search for Granule01 in topic human missions with Author Oldfart1939 and bingo! You'd have it.

I use that method every day when preparing the Today on Mars calendar update. The primary document is Post #82 of RobertDyck's Holiday's topic.

RobertDyck was kind enough to give the calendar project a running start, and then evicted it because it was not well suited for the Holidays theme.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2021-04-27 18:19:37

For SpaceNut ... Thank you for explaining the difficulty of "moving" posts from one topic to another

To start with, let's all use the companion topic, and let Oldfart1939 post in the Primary.

Each of us can help by copying our posts and pasting them into the Companion.

We can then delete them from the Primary.

the sooner we start this process the better, because the primary already has accumulated several posts.

I'll take care of my posts tomorrow.

I'm here now to run another test.

I found a couple more missing commands in the script, and found an incorrect variable name in the special function.

It turned out the special function had NOT worked, but I thought it had, because the Stop on Error feature was not enabled.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2021-04-27 18:30:13

Here is a copy of my post #2 from the primary topic:

tahanson43206 wrote:

For Oldfart1939 re new topic ...
Congratulations on this (to me energizing) new venture for the forum ...
For 20+ years the forum has been accumulating insight, knowledge, great numbers of links to knowledge or references that may contain knowledge, and with your initiative here, we (forum members now and future) have an opportunity to provide a detailed roadmap for the expedition members and their supporters.
A mission of this size will have ** lots ** of supporters. If the mission is sponsored by a Nation State (as seems (to me at least)) highly likely, then there will one or more government agencies dedicated to or at minimum supportive of the initiative.
While the three established space faring nations (those with experience with human space flight) are (no doubt) already planning expeditions, your initiative is available to second tier nations who are ** almost ** ready to venture into space themselves.
Accordingly, I invite all current (and future) forum members to treat this topic as though it were "for real" because there is an excellent chance it will be.
I'll create a companion topic for posts that anyone can make that relate to the topic, but (perhaps) are not suitable for the topic itself.
(th)

tahanson43206 · 2021-04-27 18:32:10

Here is a copy of my post #4

tahanson43206 wrote:

For Oldfart1939 and all members present and posting ....
This topic has the potential to be a model for a ** real ** expedition. The observation of Louis, about the relative emphasis of science vs construction must surely mirror actual discussion in space agencies around the world.
It seems to me (pending inevitable correction) that the folks who pay the bills are going to be calling the tune.
Oldfart1939 is the Expedition Planner who will be depending upon input from posting members to shape this topic into something salable.
Louis, since you have (kindly) volunteered to pitch in at the early stage of the topic, it would seem appropriate for you to explain to the funders why you think they should NOT invest in science. Who is your audience for your point of view?
There may well be one.
It would appear that the science funders are more abundant, but that could just be my perception.
(th)

tahanson43206 · 2021-04-27 18:34:22

Here is a copy of my post #7:

tahanson43206 wrote:

For Oldfart1939 re development of this topic
I have created a Companion topic to go with this one.
My hope is that posts that are in support of this topic, or which make comments upon this topic will be posted in the Companion.
For SpaceNut ... would you be willing to move posts from the primary to the Companion topic.
I'll go over to companion now to explain what I have in mind.
(th)

SpaceNut · 2021-04-27 19:23:03

Oldfart1939 wrote:

Thomas-
You are indeed correct that I have published articles in peer-reviewed journals.
2 in J. Phys. Chem.
1 in Analytical Chemistry
1 in Biochemistry
1 in Experimental Eye Research
1in Vision Research
Those were all done early in my career; this would be a new experience, since I have not done anything in the area of Aerospace.

Nice to add author bio content...

SpaceNut · 2021-04-27 19:24:39

The legs of the mission is where the doubling up of skills are required but in the same token you do not need an engine or science when you need a drilling or mining specialist when developing a sustainable water supply.

The first few missions are gaining the toe and foot hold required to keep us alive and building on the resource we achieve with each crew change out cycle.

As posted in starship Elon musk does not care if people die to obtain the goal of getting to mars to build a settlement...

see limitations in the forum bbc code fluxbb topic

other wise OldFart1939 needs to identify which posts needs to be removed to the other topic....

Do not forget we do have a mars calendar project on going to aid in the day to day planning and for seasonal changes.....

This applies here as well from the settlement topic...

The trouble with building and especially remotely from support trains is the issue of time, quantities of what types of payloads can be moved. It will always come back to the planned steps to achive the final goal and must start with the first step, to the next and so forth fully itemized as to what happens when.

louis wrote:

I agree. I think it makes sense for at least the first 4 Misssions to take your habs with you, ready made.
Then over the next few missions, you might start trials with ISRU construction. The most promising I have seen have been the robotic laying down of cement structures. Cut and cover using Mars brick might be used for artificially lit farm habs.
Air locks will be a crucial design element. It may be necessary to import those for a while longer until Mars has a well developed steel industry. On the other hand, we might be able to address that issue with industrial scale 3D printers.

Question for habitat for brought if a cygnus or inflatables for mass consideration style do have limitations and even the same holds true for a cargo ship thats converted for mars inhabitances since we will be leaving it behind on mission 1 through 4.

So lets plan on the same size for each of the foot hold missions with increasing build for each after most of the initial site science has been met....

tahanson43206 · 2021-04-27 20:37:43

Louis, do you need some help moving your posts from the primary Expedition topic to the Companion.

SpaceNut and I have completed our transfers. Your's are the only posts left to be moved.

For SpaceNut .... It appears a Moderator can move (copy and paste, then delete) the posts that Oldfart1939 wants removed.

Do you want Oldfart1939 to specify the posts to be moved to Companion by Post # or by Author?

For Oldfart1939 ... SpaceNut has requested that you specify the posts to be moved. Since Louis is the only author still present in the primary topic, you can just specify the author's name.

For Louis, you can copy, paste and delete your own posts into Companion. Your input to the project is important and needed.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2021-04-28 09:27:40

For Oldfart1939 ...

While we wait for Louis to move his posts, we can start (well, ** I ** can start) thinking about how to help you in this (to me energizing) project.

Analog is a reasonable vehicle for publication of a Fact Article along the lines of your topic. You will (undoubtedly) accumulate far more material than can be accepted in a typical article that Analog will publish, so ** that ** can either go into a proposal for a Nation State, or another format publication.

Something I've been keeping firmly in mind is that this **is** going to be a Mars Society project, and it will reflect favorably upon Dr. Zubrin, under your leadership. And ** that ** MIGHT lead to his approval of a better data storage system for the NewMars forum than we have now.

***
Looking ahead, you'll be building up a list of references and quite possibly, both an index and a table of contents.

I'd like to invite you to set up separate posts for those elements at your convenience.

You can also create posts for the paragraphs you expect to need, and you can add more later.

The entire structure for the project can be created ahead of time, and then filled in as needed without creating new posts each day.

***
As I am imagining how this will go, the Administrators and Moderators can assist if you want to delegate responsibility for updates in your topic.

However, I expect that for the most part, everyone wanting to assist will be able to do so here in the Companion.

***
I'm planning to review my collection of Analog to see if I can find examples of fact articles that might approximate what (I think) you will be doing.

If I can find examples, then I can report back to you on word count, references, images, etc.

***
There is an author's guide at analogsf.com, but (at this point) I don't know if it covers fact articles.

Best wishes to you for the energy and inspiration you need to pull this off! I am confident numerous members of the forum will be delighted to assist as opportunity arises.

I am thinking of GW Johnson for navigation planning, and of RobertDyck to adapt his Large Ship vision for this undertaking.

There is NO reason the Large Ship has to carry 1000 people on its maiden voyage.

17 people sounds just about right to me << grin >>

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2021-04-28 10:05:45

For Oldfart1939 ...

Your conversation with Louis would seem a better fit for the Companion.

My interpretation of the comments from SpaceNut is he looks for you to explicitly request that the posts by Louis be moved to Companion.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2021-04-28 11:09:18

For Oldfart1939 ...

https://scar.org/research-features/iodp-expedition-379/

To learn more about the expedition visit iodp.tamu.edu/scienceops/expeditions/amundsen_sea_ice_sheet_history.html

Expedition planning
How do you prepare for an expedition? For Karsten the process has been nine years in the making, starting with the first expedition proposal in 2010. The proposal process involved determining drill sites, demonstrating feasibility, and preparing site survey data to set the foundation for the project. Once the proposal was approved and an expedition scheduled, logistics, operational planning and staffing had to be planned in conjunction with the IODP Science Operator. The expedition was an international one; the nature of IODP means that all their expeditions have international science teams on board.
The expedition took place onboard the JOIDES Resolution in the January – March 2019 field season, the first time the whole team came together. It involved a huge infrastructure with ninety technical and drilling staff alongside the thirty scientists.

This expedition included 120 people onboard the vessel.

If we consider the proposal of Oldfart1939 for ground crew as 17, then the number of 120 in all would fit comfortably in RobertDyck's Large Ship, and the non-ground crew would be available to assist from orbit using teleoperation, as well as providing support services via communication and landing of additional supplies if necessary.

Please note the 10 year stretch from proposal to weigh anchor.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2021-04-28 11:12:42

For Oldfart1939 ...

I have assembled random copies of Analog from years 2013-2021. I'm planning to report on science fact articles I find, and if they are available online, I'll report that as well.

Most of Dr. Cramer's Alternate Views are available online. They are written in a way that is accessible to the educated public, while (apparently) able to withstand scrutiny by his peers. Dr. Cramer is also the author of several books.

(th)

Oldfart1939 · 2021-04-28 16:27:06

Thomas--
This comment needs to be here as it's a statement of mission composition and purpose:

This mission is NOT going to be an Experiment in Social Engineering, and there will be NO RACIAL QUOTAS or gratuitous inclusion of currently fad groups, i.e. LGBTQ individuals because that's their only qualification. I'm striving for an effective and harmonious group who can function well as a team--not as a bunch of "token" individuals. I am planning for success at establishing a viable foothold on the Red Planet, and not meeting someone's idea of Social Justice. There is enough opportunity for that here on Earth, and we don't need people on the expedition getting into a huff because they are "offended."

I plan to work on job descriptions and secondary roles, and cross training requirements.

Building a Mars Pioneer Outpost #1 is a major undertaking.

Before anyone jumps on my for lacking sensitivity: no one will be excluded because of their sexual orientation race, or gender. If they meet the qualifications for the job and pass the necessary psychological testing, anyone can be included.

Here's a quote from another thread written by kbd512 that I am happy to include here, re: diversity:

As far as diversity is concerned, it's not a de-facto strength or weakness, despite all claims to the contrary. The diversity either adds something tangible to the mission goals or it doesn't. Diversity adds something to the US military because no matter where we go in the world, we have someone who looks like the people who live there and can speak their language. The same applies to having women in the military. If you care at all about keeping your people alive, that's important.

That said, putting anyone in a position who is not qualified and capable of performing their job, that your training program can reasonably produce, is a disaster waiting to happen.

Last edited by Oldfart1939 (2021-04-28 22:25:49)

SpaceNut · 2021-04-28 17:43:33

reposting

louis wrote:

There's nothing very wrong with your set up. Seems more or less the right focus for Mission One though I would query whether we would really be giving the search for life a high priority on Mission One and the need for construction work would be minimal if we used inflatable habs.
But given the size of the crew, I guess the first question I would have is, are you taking enough supplies - in particular food - to ensure the crew can survive for four years on Mars in the event that a Starship cannot be launched to return to Earth, so that the crew can be rescued by Mission 2? If so, what tonnage allowance are you giving to ensure their survival. If not, do you recognise that this could be an unmitigated disaster - with 17 crew dying of starvation?
Oldfart1939 wrote:
Thomas, here it is!
I am suggesting as a first Starship Mission to the Red Planet Mars and having a crew composition of 17 astronauts
This is based on the "Triad concept," and a somewhat military style organization. There will be a relatively loose hierarchical structure, but there needs to be a leadership pyramid established before anyone sets foot inside a Starship.
Triads: Three astronauts with a particular set of skills assigned to complete a certain set of tasks; particularly important for working outside in the hazardous desert-like environment. It's not possible to find a single individual who has all the necessary skills that will be utilized when the skill set required is enormous. There also needs to be inspection of work done by at least a second individual when so much is "on the line." Medical skills are also sometimes requiring a second or third set of skilled hands.
What have I planned as the necessary sets of skills"
Leadership: A group commander and an assistant commander; both with great communications skills and abilities to do lots of data management. They will be tasked with work assignments and difference resolution. There needs to be a final authority when differences of opinion arise between crew members.
Geologist triad: They will be tasked with collection of samples and determination of WHERE to put the permanent habitation modules. Do studies of weight bearing capabilities of potential landing sites and layout of the landing complex. Search for water.
Construction and maintenance triads; there will be 2 of these because they will be the most important set of tasks needed to keep everyone else alive. Maintain the rovers, Set up a solar farm or a nuclear reactor system.
Scientist triad: a good biologist and microscropist to examine samples looking for signs of life, past and present; a chemist with skills in elemental analysis to determine the contents of various samples returned by the geologist triad. A molecular biologist with instrumentation skills (polarimetry, gas chromatography, HPLC, and other skills needed to analyze samples for signs of life).
Medical triad: One Surgeon, one GP, cross trained as a dentist, and one nurse with Nurse Practitioner certification.

OK, this is my baseline for a crewed mission.

SpaceNut · 2021-04-28 17:44:25

repost

louis wrote:

At the moment the only game in town is Musk and Space X. All Musk's statements are very goal orientated and the goal is establishing human civilisation on Mars.
So that's the way I would look at this sort of proposal - how would it fit in with Space X's priorities.
I've nothing against pursuing science on Mars but it's not the top priority for Mission One.
I would accept that one of the first jobs to be undertaken will actually be to search for life forms in the base area and at the water ice mine. That's a matter of establshing what environment the pioneers will be living in and whether there is any potential threat from Mars pathogens. But I wouldn't expect Mission One to "go looking" for life.
OF's proposal specifically relates to Mission One.
I think from Mission 2 onwards, Space X would be looking to undertake numerous science projects and probably within 10 years to begin taking science teams based in Universities or space agencies who would pay handsomely for the privilege. I think Space Agencies from countries like Brazil, Argentina, Nigeria, South Africa, Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Japan and India could all be very willing to pay 10s of millions of dollars to send their people to Mars, wearing their insignia and making a statement for their country.
So yes, I am v pro science and developing the science potential of Mars because - using the Musk perspective - that will be the quickest way to develop the settlement on Mars and generate revenue.

tahanson43206 wrote:
For Oldfart1939 and all members present and posting ....
This topic has the potential to be a model for a ** real ** expedition. The observation of Louis, about the relative emphasis of science vs construction must surely mirror actual discussion in space agencies around the world.
It seems to me (pending inevitable correction) that the folks who pay the bills are going to be calling the tune.
Oldfart1939 is the Expedition Planner who will be depending upon input from posting members to shape this topic into something salable.
Louis, since you have (kindly) volunteered to pitch in at the early stage of the topic, it would seem appropriate for you to explain to the funders why you think they should NOT invest in science. Who is your audience for your point of view?
There may well be one.
It would appear that the science funders are more abundant, but that could just be my perception.
(th)

SpaceNut · 2021-04-28 17:45:49

repost

louis wrote:

I agree it is a perfect symbiosis - just doesn't apply to Mission One which will be unique in a number of ways.
But generally, yes, if NASA turns itself into a pure science, coms and LSS technology operation and forgets about rockets, exploration and settlement then a Space X/NASA combo could work really well. All the science lovers in NASA would find they suddenly had a few extra billion to spend every year. But you are up against US governance and pork barrel politics.
Oldfart1939 wrote:
In order to have NASA as a partner on Mission 1, Science has to have a very high priority. SpaceX hasn't really worked that much on habitat design or long term life support systems, whereas NASA has been in the business with ISS for 20+ years. It's a perfect symbiosis: NASA needs SpaceX and SpaceX needs NASA. No science = no NASA participation.

SpaceNut · 2021-04-28 17:46:41

redirect repost

Oldfart1939 wrote:

Louis-
I am a career professional scientist, and I consider finding out as much as we can on a first mission in case there are problems and NO immediate second mission. For me--finding evidence of life, past or present, is my overriding interest in "going there." I find the concept of colonization very appealing, but that's going to take a lot more time and financial input than even Musk has available. There is very little supporting infrastructure to support a colonization effort now, and that needs to be developed first.
In a follow-up post to this, I will outline why a laboratory needs to be brought along, what instrumentation will be needed, and why. This will become part of the proposal of Mission 1.

tahanson43206 · 2021-04-28 17:55:05

For SpaceNut re reposts above ...

Thank you for helping with the moves! The primary is ready for Oldfart1939 to build up as he sees fit!

We (members) can all assist in various ways.

This is a ** first ** for the forum, so I hope it is a success!

(th)

SpaceNut · 2021-04-28 17:56:19

I agree that we will need a chemists lab but we will also need more in those initial years and mission cycles to aid in detection of ore, water and other science interests that make it worthwhile to go to stay.

The way I see it we are going to make use of a long work day but the time each individual will use as there primary reason of science or engineering for being part of the team (6 hours) with the day mixed around 2 breaks, breakfast, lunch (2 hours) before switching hats for you secondary function (3 hours) and being part of the crews that aid to help in getting each other fed for the final days meal with exercise program to finish out the day with health checks (not to be more than 3 hours).

That makes for a total day planning of 14 hours before some free time and sleep.

tahanson43206 · 2021-04-29 10:00:34

It is going to take concentration on everyone's part to help Oldfart1939 in this first-of-a-kind initiative in the NewMars forum.

Louis, I can sympathize with how hard it is to resist the temptation to jump into Oldfart1939's primary topic with both feet.

This Companion is here just for you (and everyone else) to make comments, offer encouragement, and to offer suggestions.

Oldfart1939 wrote:

Composition of the science triad:
(1) Chemist. The principal investigator will be doing sample analysis of many things: soil (regolith) samples from the surface and from excavated samples. Mineral specimens collected by the geologist/exploration triad will also be subjected to analysis. Water testing when found; is it potable (drinkable); what needs to be done to make it suitable for human consumption and bathing. Be in charge of starting an electrolysis system for production of Hydrogen and Oxygen. Monitor performance of this system.
(2) Microscopist and biochemist. Examine samples for evidence of past bacterial and monocellular life forms. Do testing of samples for organic molecules that are related to life (as we know it) forms. Look for amino acids and other stable molecules of biological origin.
(3) Chemical technician. Will keep instrumentation working and do sample preparation. Keep working area clean from sample cross-contamination. Will do cataloguing of samples and results.

In this opening post, we can get a glimpse of what we might hope to see in the weeks ahead. This is a marathon and not a sprint.

In the Analog topic, I am planning a series of reviews of Science Fact articles. I am hoping to find patterns that successful authors there have employed.

(th)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2021-04-26 11:30:00

Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#2 2021-04-27 05:29:30

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#3 2021-04-27 09:47:42

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#4 2021-04-27 10:05:18

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#5 2021-04-27 10:44:54

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#6 2021-04-27 11:08:39

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#7 2021-04-27 18:19:37

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#8 2021-04-27 18:30:13

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#9 2021-04-27 18:32:10

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#10 2021-04-27 18:34:22

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#11 2021-04-27 19:23:03

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#12 2021-04-27 19:24:39

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#13 2021-04-27 20:37:43

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#14 2021-04-28 09:27:40

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#15 2021-04-28 10:05:45

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#16 2021-04-28 11:09:18

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#17 2021-04-28 11:12:42

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#18 2021-04-28 16:27:06

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#19 2021-04-28 17:43:33

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#20 2021-04-28 17:44:25

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#21 2021-04-28 17:45:49

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#22 2021-04-28 17:46:41

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#23 2021-04-28 17:55:05

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#24 2021-04-28 17:56:19

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

#25 2021-04-29 10:00:34

Re: Companion fo Mars Expedition Number One; 17 crew members

Board footer