Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

louis · 2020-05-13 07:53:39

Eventually Mars's population will reach a level where it needs a mass transportation system that can work over thousands of miles.

Rockets

Rocket hoppers or Starships might serve to begin with. But any rocket trip is very demanding on a person's body. Would frequent long distance travellers really want to go through that experience time and time again? I doubt it.

Starships would have the advantage on Mars that there were would be fewer concerns about noise and environmental pollution, compared with the situation on Earth.

Roads

The road system on Mars is unlikely to be much help. It is unlikely that the Mars settlement will spend trillions on developing a planetwide metalled road system, when road trails can be created with relative ease (clear any boulders and compress the regolith with road rollers. The weather on Mars (no rain or powerful storms) is generally so benign that it is difficult to see the cost of making metalled roads being justified. An important point is that metalled roads would be damaged quite easily by the one big weather issues on Mars - the huge temperature shifts.

So whereas with metalled roads, you might get a top speed of 100 MPH, with unmetalled road trails on Mars the top speed might be more like 50MPH. To cover 5000 miles would take 100 hours or just about 4 sols.

Road vehicles carrying passengers would need to have radiation protection.

However, for cargo - water ice, iron ore, silica, basalt and so on - the road system seems ideal. Robot vehciles can be used for shifting cargo. They can be solar powered, recharging batteries at wayside PV power stations along the way. If they are only travelling at 25MPH, it doesn't much matter, it will get there some time. Once you have your regular supply chain established, the vehicle speed is of little importance. Robot road trains will be the equivalent of our ocean going cargo ships.

Conventional Rail

There is no reason rail couldn't work. One could have solar powered electric trains (or even methox trains) operating on conventional rail. Perhaps they could run even faster on Mars in the lower gravity. However, I would be concerned about the temperature range efffects on the rail beds and the rails themselves.

The worst aspects would be the construction of the rail system - operating in an unpressurised environment, using robots mostly since EVA work would be very difficult. It wouldn't be easy.

As with road, rail cars carrying passengers would need to have radiation protection.

You might be able to have a rail system operating at around 250 MPH. The 5000 mile journey would take 20 hours.

Maglev Rail

This is a much better option from the point of view of speed, with speeds of 500 MPH likely to be possible. The 5000 mile trip becomes a manageable 10 hour journey.

But again, there is the issue of construction (even more complex than for conventional and how susceptible a maglev system would be to the huge temperature shifts) and radiation protection for passengers.

Hyperloop

Hyperloop is not so great as a mass transportation system because of carrying capacity being more limited than with conventional or maglev rail. But then again, Mars's inter-settlement transport needs are going to be relatively limited. The population is unlikely to be in the billions any time soon! So a lower passenger capacity is unlikely to present serious issues on Mars.

Furthermore hyperloop has some distinct advantages for Mars.

- It meets the speed requirement. A top speed of around 500 MPH seems quite possible.

- With the hyperloop system, the radiation protection can be provided over the hyperloop tunnel, so that the passenger cars don't require special protection. That means they are lighter and require less energy to move. The radiation protection can be as simple as shovelling large quantities of regolith over the tunnel.

- Instead of construction being a largely outdoors exercise as with conventional and maglev rail, the hyperloop tunnels can be constructed at a factory (in a pressurised environment) in one of the big settlements and then simply shipped out to be connected (bolted on) to the next tunnel along the line. So there would be minimal outdoor work.

- It would be relatively maintenance free as all the parts would be incorporated within the tunnels.

This polemic against hyperloop is an interesting watch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XFMIqiDWAc

Made some good points but of course the context on Earth is entirely different to the situation on Mars.

Last edited by louis (2020-05-13 09:07:37)

Void · 2020-05-13 08:56:15

I think you have done a fine job Louis, in your analysis.

Out of respect, I may expand on the Rockets thing later today, but over at Alternate BFR, that is unless you object to me doing that.

louis · 2020-05-13 09:06:35

Thanks. I meant to add something to the rocket entry, which I have now done. No objections as to where you deposit your thoughts.

Void wrote:

I think you have done a fine job Louis, in your analysis.
Out of respect, I may expand on the Rockets thing later today, but over at Alternate BFR, that is unless you object to me doing that.

Last edited by louis (2020-05-13 09:09:24)

tahanson43206 · 2020-05-13 09:25:16

Nice work, Louis! Best wishes for success with this new topic.

The various modes of transport would be funded, built, operated and maintained by companies resident on Mars.

The robot convoys seem (to me at least) like the most cost effective way to approach the challenge of building a viable business.

Locations of valuable resources will become known, and locations of clusters of people will become known, so the need will be to move resources between the locations. Precedent would suggest this will happen in the most efficient way possible.

Thus, I can follow your logic to imagine a robot train/convoy operation acquiring the capital sufficient to afford a more expensive but faster transport system.

(th)

Void · 2020-05-13 10:01:58

Louis,

Elon Musk at one time had things to say about Hyperloop on Mars. Just a track is needed, apparently not a tunnel.

https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-mu … ars-2016-2
Quote:

Elon Musk explains how a Hyperloop would work on Mars
Danielle Muoio, Tech Insider Feb 8, 2016, 8:40 AM
Reuters
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has been vocal about his desire to get humans to Mars.
He's previously said we should drop nuclear bombs on Mars to make it livable, and fears a third World War will break out before his dream of getting humans there materializes.
And for the first time, Musk talked about how transportation could work on Mars. Specifically, he discussed how a Hyperloop could run on the planet at the award ceremony for his Hyperloop design competition.
His thoughts? It really wouldn't be that hard to set up.
"On Mars you basically just need a track," he said at the ceremony. "You might be able to just have a road, honestly. [It would] go pretty fast."
This is because the air density isn't as high on Mars as it is on Earth. As Musk explained, the density of Mars' atmosphere is only 1% of Earth. That roughly translates to there being less air resistance to slow down a moving object.

Of course I don't know how good it can work if the average pressure becomes elevated to 11 mb, or 16.5 mb, which for the most part it would seem humans might like. But if needed, then vacuum tunnels are not ruled out.

Last edited by Void (2020-05-13 10:02:31)

louis · 2020-05-13 11:59:31

I guess he's talking about a maglev line then...But that does raise the issues I pointed to: radiation protection (on what would be pretty long journeys of several hours at least), construction (out in the open - a v slow and complex operation on Mars with something like maglev), durability (would maglev be OK with the huge temperature range) and maintenance (most maintenance would be taking place out in the open (not ideal on Mars for something as technically advanced as maglev, I would suggest).

Void wrote:

Louis,
Elon Musk at one time had things to say about Hyperloop on Mars. Just a track is needed, apparently not a tunnel.
https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-mu … ars-2016-2
Quote:
Elon Musk explains how a Hyperloop would work on Mars
Danielle Muoio, Tech Insider Feb 8, 2016, 8:40 AM
Reuters
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has been vocal about his desire to get humans to Mars.
He's previously said we should drop nuclear bombs on Mars to make it livable, and fears a third World War will break out before his dream of getting humans there materializes.
And for the first time, Musk talked about how transportation could work on Mars. Specifically, he discussed how a Hyperloop could run on the planet at the award ceremony for his Hyperloop design competition.
His thoughts? It really wouldn't be that hard to set up.
"On Mars you basically just need a track," he said at the ceremony. "You might be able to just have a road, honestly. [It would] go pretty fast."
This is because the air density isn't as high on Mars as it is on Earth. As Musk explained, the density of Mars' atmosphere is only 1% of Earth. That roughly translates to there being less air resistance to slow down a moving object.
Of course I don't know how good it can work if the average pressure becomes elevated to 11 mb, or 16.5 mb, which for the most part it would seem humans might like. But if needed, then vacuum tunnels are not ruled out.

SpaceNut · 2020-05-13 12:35:00

Rocket hoppers is the earth version of an airplane and would seem reasonable to cover greater distances in shorter periods of time.

The road system on Mars is one where its more like 4 wheeling over the terrain until paths are established and then later smoothened for other vehicle types.

The Conventional Rail or Maglev Rail is not fair off from rails and subways on earth as its just determining where its needed and other factors not just how to power it whether its hauling cargo or people.

Hyperloop is a question of underground tunnels as Elon musk or the above ground self propelled vehicle in a tube where you can see the surroundings as you go.

Time scale to build each is dependent on community size and settlements or to mining sites.

louis · 2020-05-13 14:21:44

I think rocket hoppers will be useful in the early stages for making trips between say a mining settlement located maybe 50-200 miles away from your main settlement which is maybe on the other side of a mountain range. But that's never going to be a high capacity system. For journeys more like 1000s of miles, the Starship could work but if you are a frequent traveller, would you really want to put your body through that sort of stress on a regular basis? Also Starships rely on propellant production, whereas hyperloop could work off direct PV power with batteries.

I agree about the 4 wheeler comment, but not sure whether it's worth creating an Earth like road network before terraformation - well certainly ordinary metal roads would surely crack up under those Mars temperature fluctuations. You'd probably have to lay concrete but even that might not work well. I suppose stone paving could be tried. Overall, I just don't see the benefit.

We have problems on rail networks now with very cold temperatures. So I don't think we can assume rail would work as well on Mars as on Earth. I think there would be numerous problems requiring lots of additional infrastructure and intense maintenance.

I may have written tunnel, but I meant tube for the hyperloop. How the tubes are best mounted, I don't know. Given they are going to be covered in regolith, it might be best to cut a semi-cylinder trench and put the tube in the trench, then cover with regolith. That would require less regolith to be moved. The advantage for construction is that the tubes can be manufactured elsewhere in pressurised conditions and then joined together in situ. A lot of maintenance work might just require replacement of a tube section - a relatively simple job - or work can be undertaken internally.

SpaceNut wrote:

Rocket hoppers is the earth version of an airplane and would seem reasonable to cover greater distances in shorter periods of time.
The road system on Mars is one where its more like 4 wheeling over the terrain until paths are established and then later smoothened for other vehicle types.
The Conventional Rail or Maglev Rail is not fair off from rails and subways on earth as its just determining where its needed and other factors not just how to power it whether its hauling cargo or people.
Hyperloop is a question of underground tunnels as Elon musk or the above ground self propelled vehicle in a tube where you can see the surroundings as you go.
Time scale to build each is dependent on community size and settlements or to mining sites.

Last edited by louis (2020-05-14 11:20:10)

louis · 2020-05-14 11:40:42

I think there would be a strong argument for a global maglev hyperloop transport system for the northern hemisphere settlements - probably something around 10-15,000 miles long (depending on the location of the settlements), circuiting the whole of the northern hemisphere, would make sense. If settlements were established in the southern hemisphere, branches off the main circuit line could be created.

The road trail system, useful particularly for cargo transport, using convoys of robot rovers, would cut across the great plains of the northern hemisphere and follow ridge lines to avoid major inclines and deep craters.

Last edited by louis (2020-05-14 11:42:12)

kbd512 · 2020-05-14 13:18:44

Louis,

We already have a solution for ground transport that requires very little development and therefore cost. The US M113 Armored Personnel Carrier is primarily made of 5083 Aluminum alloy armor (28mm to 44mm thick), which was originally developed as a material for the storage of cryogenic liquids, but was subsequently used by FMC for the US Army's M113 APC design because it provided equivalent protection to steel against small arms fire for less weight. The M113 is a perfectly viable transport vehicle for both personnel / ores / metals / liquid fuels, dependent upon configuration. Far fewer resources would be required to operate them in comparison to rocket hoppers and the likelihood of killing anyone in them is much lower than any rocket-propelled vehicle with similar useful load capacity. By the time Mars is ready for a global hyper loop, it will have long since had lots of off-road vehicles delivered there for construction and mining. Despite the fact that the M113 started life in the 1950's, it remains in production in other countries to this day. NASA still uses M113's to transport astronauts and fire / rescue crews to / from rockets in emergencies.

There's no reason a Mars variant with a LOX/LCH4 fuel cell couldn't be produced. The Earth-bound variant has a Detroit Diesel 275hp engine. A Mars-bound variant would only require a 105hp engine for equivalent performance. The empty weight would be around 10t and the loaded weight would be around 15t (actually weighs 5.7t on Mars). 1/3rd payload with a 300 mile (Earth-bound) driving range is a very healthy payload mass fraction. The Earth-bound M113's 6V53T diesel engine weighs 1,000kg all on its own and the Allison X-200 transmission adds another 229kg. A 105hp / 78kW fuel cell and pair of insulated stainless steel LOX/LCH4 tanks that would provide equivalent or better range wouldn't weigh as much as the engine alone. A 100kW fuel cell weighs about 35kg and would provide about double the fuel economy of a diesel engine. The M113 uses 95 gallons of diesel fuel to travel 300 miles / 480km. A 70% efficient fuel cell, using LNG at 12,100Wh/kg, would extract about 8,470Wh/kg of LCH4. Figure on a 50% load (50kW) on the electric motors for off-road operations (yes, we're souping up the power loading of the vehicle to provide better performance, even though it wouldn't be necessary to maintain 25km/h, but I'm operating off of worst-case rather than best-case terrain), so 5.9kg of LCH4 per hour of operation. Cross country speed is 25km/h, or 19.2 hours to cover 480km, or 113.28kg of LCH4. That's about 71.4 gallons of LNG. I can't remember off the top of my head how much O2 would be required. IIRC, the stoichiometric ratio is for complete LNG combustion is 17.2, which would be a hell of a lot of LOX (1,948.416kg), but I don't think that's the correct value to use for a fuel cell. In fact, I know that's not correct.

4F * quantity of O2
...
O2 = Pe / (4 * Vc * F) moles s^-1

I can't remember the rest. It's definitely not 1,948kg of O2, though; that's for complete combustion. I'm mixing my combustion and fuel cell equations. We're not going to need 113kg of LCH4, either. It's going to be significantly less for both reactants. I'll get back to you when I find the equations to figure out how big the reactant tanks need to be.

louis · 2020-05-14 14:30:37

Im sure that would be good for journeys up to maybe 500 miles - but what if you are travelling 5000 miles? Do you really want a 100 hour drive?

kbd512 wrote:

Louis,
We already have a solution for ground transport that requires very little development and therefore cost. The US M113 Armored Personnel Carrier is primarily made of 5083 Aluminum alloy armor (28mm to 44mm thick), which was originally developed as a material for the storage of cryogenic liquids, but was subsequently used by FMC for the US Army's M113 APC design because it provided equivalent protection to steel against small arms fire for less weight. The M113 is a perfectly viable transport vehicle for both personnel / ores / metals / liquid fuels, dependent upon configuration. Far fewer resources would be required to operate them in comparison to rocket hoppers and the likelihood of killing anyone in them is much lower than any rocket-propelled vehicle with similar useful load capacity. By the time Mars is ready for a global hyper loop, it will have long since had lots of off-road vehicles delivered there for construction and mining. Despite the fact that the M113 started life in the 1950's, it remains in production in other countries to this day. NASA still uses M113's to transport astronauts and fire / rescue crews to / from rockets in emergencies.
There's no reason a Mars variant with a LOX/LCH4 fuel cell couldn't be produced. The Earth-bound variant has a Detroit Diesel 275hp engine. A Mars-bound variant would only require a 105hp engine for equivalent performance. The empty weight would be around 10t and the loaded weight would be around 15t (actually weighs 5.7t on Mars). 1/3rd payload with a 300 mile (Earth-bound) driving range is a very healthy payload mass fraction. The Earth-bound M113's 6V53T diesel engine weighs 1,000kg all on its own and the Allison X-200 transmission adds another 229kg. A 105hp / 78kW fuel cell and pair of insulated stainless steel LOX/LCH4 tanks that would provide equivalent or better range wouldn't weigh as much as the engine alone. A 100kW fuel cell weighs about 35kg and would provide about double the fuel economy of a diesel engine. The M113 uses 95 gallons of diesel fuel to travel 300 miles / 480km. A 70% efficient fuel cell, using LNG at 12,100Wh/kg, would extract about 8,470Wh/kg of LCH4. Figure on a 50% load (50kW) on the electric motors for off-road operations (yes, we're souping up the power loading of the vehicle to provide better performance, even though it wouldn't be necessary to maintain 25km/h, but I'm operating off of worst-case rather than best-case terrain), so 5.9kg of LCH4 per hour of operation. Cross country speed is 25km/h, or 19.2 hours to cover 480km, or 113.28kg of LCH4. That's about 71.4 gallons of LNG. I can't remember off the top of my head how much O2 would be required. IIRC, the stoichiometric ratio is for complete LNG combustion is 17.2, which would be a hell of a lot of LOX (1,948.416kg), but I don't think that's the correct value to use for a fuel cell. In fact, I know that's not correct.
4F * quantity of O2
...
O2 = Pe / (4 * Vc * F) moles s^-1
I can't remember the rest. It's definitely not 1,948kg of O2, though; that's for complete combustion. I'm mixing my combustion and fuel cell equations. We're not going to need 113kg of LCH4, either. It's going to be significantly less for both reactants. I'll get back to you when I find the equations to figure out how big the reactant tanks need to be.

kbd512 · 2020-05-14 15:54:10

Louis,

If we need to drive 5,000 miles to a mine, then maybe we need to ask the question as to why we put the colony 5,000 miles away from the resource we need so badly that we can't run the colony without it. We don't use rockets to deliver iron ore here on Earth because the relative efficiency (energy cost) of doing that is so excessively poor. We have power to spare here on Earth, yet we don't do stuff like this. The only other practical form of faster transportation that I can think of would be a low altitude airship, but again, that's not likely to deliver metal ores from Point A to Point B. If it can, then it's going to be vastly larger than anything ever used on Earth, which also seems unlikely.

We can obviously use land vehicles, which are also used to transport ores here on Earth. A train would be highly desirable, but both the train and the tracks have to be built first. Delivering cargo trains and 5,000 miles of train track to Mars isn't likely to happen any time soon, if ever, which means you'd have to create both the trains and the tracks using ores mined on Mars. To do that, you'd first need vehicles capable of off-road operations and oodles of power.

louis · 2020-05-14 16:30:50

I think there's been a misunderstanding. I am suggesting that, within 50 years of our first arrival on Mars, there will be several urban centres. There is likely to be one main settlement city but others will be establishing themselves. I would expect that there will be tourism-based cities around Olympus Mons and the Valles Marieneris and maybe the Viking Lander sites. They might be quite small at this stage but people there will need to go into the main settlement for interplanetary travel, for medical treatment, for entertainment, to attend conferences and so on.

For mining operations, I really don't see a problem with robot rovers being used as the equivalent of ocean going cargo vessels on Earth.

As long as you have PV power way stations along the road trails where the robot rovers can recharge their batteries (automatically), the situation is much like that with ocean going vessels - they move very slowly but they get there eventually! Once your supply line is established, it really doesn't matter if a robot rover convoy takes maybe 15 sols to cover 5000 miles. The convoy system could work well. You'd have a specialist lead vehicle fitted with lots of communication and sensory devices e.g. radio, radar, laser etc to detect hazards and to follow road trail signs e.g. white marker stones or regularly placed transponders. Then any number of vehicles follow behind linking to the vehicle in front, using the same sort of technology that allows for automated parking of vehicles.

I think the problem with trains and rail tracks on Mars is that they are exposed to the full temperature range. Probably the main issue is with the tracks and rail beds.

My conception of "road trails" is that they are somewhere between metalled roads and off road conditions. Ice roads in North America are probably a good example of the sort of thing that can be achieved.

We see on Mars that, in many places, Rovers (even Curiosity at nearly one ton) can move with relative ease over main parts of the landscape. If you move rocks and boulders out of the way, and impact the surface regolith with heavy rollers, you can likely create a reasonable smooth surface over which robot rovers can travel. Then all you need to do is put down visual or radio markers for the trail, so robot vehicles can follow them.

kbd512 wrote:

Louis,
If we need to drive 5,000 miles to a mine, then maybe we need to ask the question as to why we put the colony 5,000 miles away from the resource we need so badly that we can't run the colony without it. We don't use rockets to deliver iron ore here on Earth because the relative efficiency (energy cost) of doing that is so excessively poor. We have power to spare here on Earth, yet we don't do stuff like this. The only other practical form of faster transportation that I can think of would be a low altitude airship, but again, that's not likely to deliver metal ores from Point A to Point B. If it can, then it's going to be vastly larger than anything ever used on Earth, which also seems unlikely.
We can obviously use land vehicles, which are also used to transport ores here on Earth. A train would be highly desirable, but both the train and the tracks have to be built first. Delivering cargo trains and 5,000 miles of train track to Mars isn't likely to happen any time soon, if ever, which means you'd have to create both the trains and the tracks using ores mined on Mars. To do that, you'd first need vehicles capable of off-road operations and oodles of power.

kbd512 · 2020-05-14 17:28:59

Louis,

The problem is that current batteries weigh 10 times as much as a given quantity of fuel. A 950kWh battery would weigh 3,800kg, or 50% of the useful load of the vehicle if the diesel engine and transmission were subtracted and batteries weight subtracted from the useful load to provide equivalent driving range. If the battery was equivalent in weight to the original diesel engine and transmission combination, then you have a 307kWh battery. That might provide a range of perhaps 100 miles, which means at least 50 recharging stops between Point A and Point B if they're separated by 5,000 miles. That also means vehicles spend 50 days recharging using nominally sized solar arrays, or solar arrays of substantial size (which somehow have to make their way to Mars and be deployed by someone or something there), or quick-swapping batteries that weigh as much as cars at the solar recharging stations. All of those potential "solutions" seem to be working overtime whilst trying to ignore what's so blatantly obvious.

Nobody is going to be routinely traveling between planets, now or even 50 years from now using chemical rockets, so at least you don't have to worry about that happening. I can see prompt medical treatment being an actual problem to solve, although we used to send the doctors to the patients. Entertainment? Isn't that what cell phones / tablets / television / radio are for? On that note, what conferences would they be attending at the main settlement? Would Skype software cease to work on Mars?

louis · 2020-05-14 18:01:01

Well there are a number of ways to crack this one...Here are my comments:

1. You can have much smaller battery packs on board the rovers but have numerous PV power way stations - maybe 1000 in a 5000 mile stretch - with sections of induction charging. Alternatively you use fast recharge technology.

2. You live with the battery weight - which will of course be much less on Mars.

3. Remember that if we had diesel on Mars - you'd have to constantly have vehicles moving the diesel. The PV power waystation supplies energy from the photons that arrive from the Sun - no delivery system required.

4. Setting up a PV way station is relatively simple and maintenance-free. Once established, they won't cost much in terms of maintenace, so even if you go with induction charging and 1000 stations per 5000 miles that's really not a problem.

5. Whilst it's true there isn't going to be a huge amount of interplanetary transportation going on in the early decades - nothing like Musk's "million migrants to Mars" plan - as there will be no (or only very, very few) permanent colonists, people will have to return to Earth, 2, 4 or 6 years after their arrival. So if you have 100,000 people on Mars after five decades, that might mean (a v rough calculation) an average 25,000 people going in and out on 250 Starships every (Earth) year.

6. I think a Mars colony will be able to make its own PV panels within 10 years of arrival ...yes it's an advanced technique, but it's one where you can set up a manufacturing plant simply by shipping in all the required machines. A team of 50 people could probably meet all the early colony's PV power needs. It's a largely automated process now. So I don't think providing the PV power for any transport system is a problem.

7. It's true that there is no absolute need (apart perhaps from medical treatment or getting to a Spaceport) for people to travel to the main settlement from outlying settlements but we are humans not robots. We see it all around Earth...people are persuaded to go and work in difficult environments such as deserts or North Sea oil fields on the understanding they get paid a lot and also get a generous leave allocation so they can get back to places that have a lot more to offer than where they are working. The main settlement - the one I call Sagan City - will be a centre of excellence in all areas. It will be the entertainment capital of the planet for sure, so people will won't to and see shows there...theatre, music, exhibitions etc.

kbd512 wrote:

Louis,
The problem is that current batteries weigh 10 times as much as a given quantity of fuel. A 950kWh battery would weigh 3,800kg, or 50% of the useful load of the vehicle if the diesel engine and transmission were subtracted and batteries weight subtracted from the useful load to provide equivalent driving range. If the battery was equivalent in weight to the original diesel engine and transmission combination, then you have a 307kWh battery. That might provide a range of perhaps 100 miles, which means at least 50 recharging stops between Point A and Point B if they're separated by 5,000 miles. That also means vehicles spend 50 days recharging using nominally sized solar arrays, or solar arrays of substantial size (which somehow have to make their way to Mars and be deployed by someone or something there), or quick-swapping batteries that weigh as much as cars at the solar recharging stations. All of those potential "solutions" seem to be working overtime whilst trying to ignore what's so blatantly obvious.
Nobody is going to be routinely traveling between planets, now or even 50 years from now using chemical rockets, so at least you don't have to worry about that happening. I can see prompt medical treatment being an actual problem to solve, although we used to send the doctors to the patients. Entertainment? Isn't that what cell phones / tablets / television / radio are for? On that note, what conferences would they be attending at the main settlement? Would Skype software cease to work on Mars?

Last edited by louis (2020-05-14 20:30:12)

Calliban · 2020-06-03 04:54:18

I would propose road trains, driving on gravel roads. Multiple cars coupled together each with independent steering, with power cars every few cars. The top of each car would be lined with solar panels, directly coupled to DC motors in the power cars. When the sun shines, the motors would drive the train forward. As solar output drops, so the speed of the vehicle will drop until friction reduces it to zero. The only stored energy needed would be for life support, which isn't needed at all for freight and for overcoming static friction, which is best achieved using hydraulic accumulators in the drive cars. Basically, this is a minimum infrastructure transportation system that can be built on Mars.

I agree with Louis that thermal expansion would be a problem for rail. To a limited extent, this could be overcome by dividing rails into shorter sections. That would make for a bumpy ride. Perhaps a bigger problem is that ordinary carbon steels become martensitic as temperatures beneath -20C. Adding manganese lowers the transition temperature somewhat, but it won't be enough for Martian night time temperatures of -100C. A broken rail could derail a train miles from anywhere.

Another option that might be useful for freight is underground hydraulic pipelines, containing floating capsules. Speed in this case would be limited to walking speed. Useful if you want to transport thousands of tonnes of ore from a mine to a distant processing site and don't care how long it takes so long as it gets there.

Compressed CO2 rocket vehicles might be an option. You use solar power to compress CO2 into a tank. Then generate thrust through simple adiabatic expansion through a nozzle. Suitable for short hops. Dangerous, I would have thought. Takeoff and landing in any rocket vehicle is always hazardous. But relatively simple. You land, roll out the flexible solar panel, run the compressor and charge up the tank, roll in the solar panel and then take off again. Repeat until you get where you are going.

The same compressed CO2 could be expanded in an engine and used to propel a ground vehicle. Put compressor stations every five miles. These would be little more than solar powered axial compressors with a storage tank. You drive between each station and refill. Tedious, but entirely workable, given that CO2 can be stored as a liquid at 5.1bars at -56C.

Mass drivers could be used to launch small ballistic vehicles on sub-orbital trajectories, which could decelerate by inflating a balloon after a set time, allowing a soft landing. The Martian atmosphere is too thin to allow anything heavier than 100kg to be transported in this way. But within that limitation it should work. I wonder if we could shoot a man to the other side of Mars in this way? The man could be equipped with a pressure suit and could walk to a settlement if his landing is within a few km of the intended target.

Last edited by Calliban (2020-06-03 05:21:56)

louis · 2020-06-03 14:39:27

Regarding road trains, I think that would be a slow road train, unless perhaps you had something like an ATK fan arrangement that spread out either side to generate more PV power.

Personally I favour solar power way stations where rovers can take on power either through hooking up to batteries or travelling slowing over induction rails. For human passenger rovers, the way stations could also offer water, emergency food and other items.

Would a road train be less prone to failure if each car was independently powered, and made contact with the car in front through laser or similar technology? Then all your main robotic navigational aids could be located in the front vehicle, a specialised version of a cargo car. This would make it easier as well I would have thought if you wanted to split or join road trains at various junctions.

Did you ever follow the Armadillo rocket?

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

I was rather taken with that. That's quite a lot how I would imagine Mars ISRU rocket technology. Not sure how well compressed CO2 would work in comparison to rocket fuel.

You would travel light - just humans and a bit of life support. Might be ideal for journeys up to say 50 miles - just my guess. Then, as you say, use solar power to concentrate CO2 again.

Calliban wrote:

I would propose road trains, driving on gravel roads. Multiple cars coupled together each with independent steering, with power cars every few cars. The top of each car would be lined with solar panels, directly coupled to DC motors in the power cars. When the sun shines, the motors would drive the train forward. As solar output drops, so the speed of the vehicle will drop until friction reduces it to zero. The only stored energy needed would be for life support, which isn't needed at all for freight and for overcoming static friction, which is best achieved using hydraulic accumulators in the drive cars. Basically, this is a minimum infrastructure transportation system that can be built on Mars.
I agree with Louis that thermal expansion would be a problem for rail. To a limited extent, this could be overcome by dividing rails into shorter sections. That would make for a bumpy ride. Perhaps a bigger problem is that ordinary carbon steels become martensitic as temperatures beneath -20C. Adding manganese lowers the transition temperature somewhat, but it won't be enough for Martian night time temperatures of -100C. A broken rail could derail a train miles from anywhere.
Another option that might be useful for freight is underground hydraulic pipelines, containing floating capsules. Speed in this case would be limited to walking speed. Useful if you want to transport thousands of tonnes of ore from a mine to a distant processing site and don't care how long it takes so long as it gets there.
Compressed CO2 rocket vehicles might be an option. You use solar power to compress CO2 into a tank. Then generate thrust through simple adiabatic expansion through a nozzle. Suitable for short hops. Dangerous, I would have thought. Takeoff and landing in any rocket vehicle is always hazardous. But relatively simple. You land, roll out the flexible solar panel, run the compressor and charge up the tank, roll in the solar panel and then take off again. Repeat until you get where you are going.
The same compressed CO2 could be expanded in an engine and used to propel a ground vehicle. Put compressor stations every five miles. These would be little more than solar powered axial compressors with a storage tank. You drive between each station and refill. Tedious, but entirely workable, given that CO2 can be stored as a liquid at 5.1bars at -56C.
Mass drivers could be used to launch small ballistic vehicles on sub-orbital trajectories, which could decelerate by inflating a balloon after a set time, allowing a soft landing. The Martian atmosphere is too thin to allow anything heavier than 100kg to be transported in this way. But within that limitation it should work. I wonder if we could shoot a man to the other side of Mars in this way? The man could be equipped with a pressure suit and could walk to a settlement if his landing is within a few km of the intended target.

SpaceNut · 2020-06-03 16:23:43

What are the mass limitation rest on payload capacity. The source material or equipment as well as energy to make it happen.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-10-02 05:36:12

On Earth

Indonesia to launch China-funded high-speed rail, first in Southeast Asia
https://www.thehindu.com/news/internati … 369531.ece

This might have been an original thread topic I was looking for, I searched for a similar topic over 1 month and some weeks ago and did not find it. So I posted a ' Circumnavigation' topic wondering how remote locations might connect.

However my thread seems to have almost gone off-topic with debate if a Balloon or Aircraft 'can' fly on Mars.

if not for transport of seeds and data and medical vials maybe as a HAPS or ULDB communication platform

Not all atmosphere on Mars is the same, Insight at Elysium Planitia is reading 730-720 Pa the Perseverance rover with MEDA in the Syrtis Major quadrangle is reading 629.3 - 632 Pa
At Hellas a huge crater Basin you find 1240 Pa or 0.0124 bar is still a large gap between these pressures of, it is as deep as Everest is high.
Hellas is a huge region with its own weather, it measures about 7,000 km (4,400 miles) across
Australia is 3700 kilometres or 2,299 miles from north to south, and 4000 kilometres from east to west, United States is about 2800 miles or 4,506 km from east to west

On Mars you can find a site perhaps the reading is 12.4 mbar

If you can fly a craft or Balloon in the Crater Basins like Hellas or Valles Marineris and move into a Lower Region in the Northern Mars Lowlands then you will have achieved Flight Transportation. Maybe cross a high plateau or mountain will be difficult, to go beyond the higher altitude regions perhaps the Aircraft or Balloon will be folded up and put on a train.

I will make a simple child like illustration

https://i.ibb.co/

https://pic8.co/sh/0Eaoq4.jpeg

On Earth, Helicopters can go above Mt Everest they can even go to 40,000 feet but risk burning out, Ingenuity is said to be 'special' flying equivalent to a helicopter flying at 34,000 m 112,000 ft altitude in the atmosphere of Earth but the Mig 25 or Lockheed NF-104 hit heights above 120,000 ft or 36,576 m Balloons are now going to much higher altitude records even thinner than Mars atmosphere, for example 176,000 ft by a JAXA Balloon is much higher
In regard to flying stuff claims of atmosphere too thin and if its possible, NASA JPL are now considering more Helicopters this time with Arms to retrieve samples for the Mars Sample Return mission, so clearly NASA thinks Helicopters are a method of transportation.
Balloons, Aircraft and Helicopters might be used as Scouts or as search drones perhaps some type of short takeoff and landing (STOL) aircraft will be developed.

It would seem also the ballute type system can work on Mars, a portmanteau of balloon and parachute is a parachute-like braking device optimized for use at high altitudes and supersonic velocities. There is also proposed the winged supersonic nuclear hopper but also so many problems in terms of flight weight, shielding, nuclear particles. For those who would keep quoting old disproven ideas that nothing would fly on Mars or keep keep writing they know the Math and Aerodynamics of Mars and that an Aircraft or Balloon can not fly on Mars

Maybe I will quote
John Vistica - Leviathan Explorations? Provided Nuclear Safety oversight, Submarine Officer, Chemical Engineer. Aerospace Consulting.

Planetary Balloon Missions Revisited or Mars Aero-Bot concepts
2016
https://www.slideshare.net/JohnVistica/ … ted-2016#1

the Balloon will float at 6.5 km and Traverse the Majority of Mars Landscapes

He says Mars elevation at Curiosity's Gale creater is - 4.4 km so elevation would be 10.9 km above Gale Crater

A unique design of the balloon it is divided by a bladder to allow segregated mixtures of Lighter gas like Helium and Martian air

To those will say nothing else will fly on Mars?
Maybe you want to write him an email and tell him he got the Math wrong?
and only a NASA JPL magic Helicopter will fly in the Syrtis Major quadrangle...no other aircraft will fly in any other region...or so some people will claim?
of course the most obvious way to fly from one region of Mars to another is the ballistic rocket hopper but I don't see why the Balloon or Aircraft or Airship is so easily dismissed when it is now proven that Mars Helicopters can fly.

Mars trains might offer a Roll-on/roll-off discharge facility for the landing Aircraft or lander Balloon and move it pas the more difficult region if this is done more of Mars opens up. Through the higher pass the Balloons or Aircraft or Helicopter might stop, a Train would come in and transport the Fleet of Balloons or Aircraft or Helicopters through the higher region and back down into to the North Low Lands. A roll on and roll off technology much like you can take a car or automobile and passenger ferry service in the U.S. state of Washington, or like you can drive from the South of England to the North of France or go back from North France to South England there are also service in Denmark, Malta, the Philippines, Japan, Alaska by shore-based ramps or ferry slips but this time you would land and fold up your Mars Balloon and roll your Balloon Airship or Helicopter onto the Mars Train.

Seasonal Cycles

https://pic8.co/sh/8hAlxC.png
,
https://i.ibb.co/pxt3J5x/planetary-ball … -2048.webp

To quote again
https://www.slideshare.net/JohnVistica/ … ted-2016#1

altitude limit of 4 km should allow access to at least 80% of the planet

Some kind of large Pipeline project would be used for Fluid Management far better than putting barrels of stuff into Martian Trucks. Plumbing or Tunnels and Pipe will come with their own challenges, dust everywhere and thermal issues and enviornmental extremes are going to be huge on Mars. There have been suggestions for Solar and Nuclear and Methalox rover on Mars, the Truck might be super long centipede like Road trains and Double Stacked Trucks.

questions on the interwebs
https://physics.stackexchange.com/quest … rk-on-mars

perhaps the answer wrote by Mark Adler an American software engineer known for his work in the field of data compression as the author of the Adler-32 checksum function, earned his Ph.D. in physics from the California Institute of Technology also the Spirit Cruise Mission Manager for the Mars Exploration Rover mission.

Yes, a helium balloon can certainly work on Mars. There have been many studies at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and NASA's Wallops Flight Facility that show feasible mission designs. Solar-heated Montgolfier balloons may provide more lift for the same total system mass, but have very large altitude variations, usually touching down at night. A super-pressure helium balloon provides much better stability for long-duration missions. Both such systems are discussed in this paper. (Side note: a system to keep Helium in the liquid state would very likely be more mass than just high-pressure tanks to hold the same amount of compressed Helium.)
Why would you want to recompress the Helium?
Using a balloon for terminal descent purely to avoid a parachute and rockets would be mass inefficient. You need a very large balloon for a small payload mass. However it has been proposed for very small payloads. (See above paper.)
A balloon on Mars is useful for payloads that want to be above the surface but not very far, and then want mobility across the surface. What is really needed is a mission that needs a balloon, not a balloon that needs a mission. One common example is a magnetometer mission to map magnetic fields. Since the magnetic fields drop as a high power of radius, the sensitivity is much greater at balloon altitudes than at orbital altitudes.

MARS BALLOON TRAJECTORY MODEL FOR MARS GEOSCIENCE AEROBOT DEVELOPMENT

https://web.archive.org/web/20061008180 … 7-0362.pdf

The Mars Geoscience Aerobot (MGA) is a proposed Mars aerobot (Aeronautical roBOT) mission featuring advanced capabilities for surface imaging and atmospheric science. The MGA consists
of a superpressure balloon that is reflective on top and white on the bottom to avoid condensation of C@ frost during the night. The MGA also features a “sman” gondola with autonomous navigation capabilities.
Development of the Mars Balloon Trajectory Mctdel (MEtTM) has been an essential element of the planning and design of the MGA mission. This paper presents the balloon design and resutts from the
M&TM, an integrated thermal, verticat, and trajectory model for balloon flight at Mars.
A promising design for the MGA involves a 27-m diameter, spherical, superpressure balloom and a
sophisticated science gondola weighing 15-30 kg. The batloon is designed to float more than 6.5 km above the planetary daw and the MBTM shows that long- duration, 90day missions are possible using advamxd
composite materiats for the balloon envelope.
Simulated trajectories show that several West-t@East transects are possible, covering hundreds of thousands of kilometers and more than 30 degrees latitude. Horizontal speeds range from a maximum of 80 m/s to a minimum of about 10 rrds with a nominal eastward
velocity of nearly 40 rnk.

The final design specifications of the MGA balloon that demonstrate technical feasibility are as follows:
Spherical Superpressure Balloon
Volume = 10,500 m 3
Diameter = 27.17 m
Balloon mass = 55 kg
Gas Mass= 12kg
Payload = 15-30 kg
Float altitude = 6.5-12 km
Daytime AP = 240 Pa
Nighttime AP = 20 Pa

The above results show that a Mars aerobt mission is feasible and provides signifkant opportunity for planetary science. An aerobot can be designed for worst-case atmospheric conditions, and CC% frost accumulation can h mitigated. Numerous planet-
encircling tmmects are possible over a 90day flight. High levels of uncertainty exist for the Mars
atmosphere and topography. The uncertainty in the Martian atmosphere leads to difficulties in balloon
design. A balloon designed for worst-case conditions (in terms of atmospheric temperature and pressure)
will fly unsuitably high when placed in an atmosphere with nominal pressure and temperahue characteristics.
For example, a balloon designed for the lowest expected surface pressure may fly 1-2 km higher at offdesign condhions (e g. another time of year with nominal conditions). Longduration aerobot flights
provide a technical challenge that may be solved by cm@g extra ballast which would be useful in a favorable atmosphere. Lf the aerobot encounters a nominal or Urtfavomble atmosphere, ballast could be dropped as described in the example mission presented above.

old fashioned Trucking?

Australia Road-Trains
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TksLDZ9IDbE

Trains seem to be the most efficient form of Transport but after a while a colony might have its own natural path and way for driving motorists, the roads in remote locations on Earth supporting mineral and energy exploration and miners, colonies on Mars might also make use of Mobile power stations. If you have some kind of Car or Truck it will also need to provide radiation shielding.

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2024-04-20 13:56:38)

Calliban · 2023-10-02 09:09:22

From discussions in the past, the atmosphere is too thin to provide enough lift until supersonic speeds are reached. Such a craft would need an excessively long runway and landing especially would be dangerous. So I think aeroplanes would be impractical on Mars.

For remote locations, the transportation system needs to avoid investment in infrastructure. That means no roads, railways or runways. The idea of a solar powered wagon train seems most practical, albeit slow. Whether or not it will be possible to engineer a tire that can withstand the ebrasion resulting from driving over thousands of km of unimproved regolith is an open question. The vehicle needs to be slow to avoid kicking up dust that then gets into wheel bearings and other moving parts.

A Mars base would benefit from some kind of expendible, sub-orbital rocket system that can deliver emergency supplies to anyone in trouble on the planet. By this I mean a temporary inflatable hab, with enough air, food and water to keep people alive until help can arrive.

Void · 2023-10-02 21:16:27

Calliban,

My own notion is robotic sub-orbital craft that would have CO and Oxygen as propellants. Then you would have landing pads all over the planet. These could transport things like Hydrogen or Water, or Plastics from landing pad to landing pad.

The ISS has shown that water can be tightly recycled. So, bringing small amounts of replacement water to "Dry Bases" could go a long way.

The more "Gas Stations" you have with landing pads the more places of refuge there would be for stranded persons. And the craft I am speaking of might deliver rescue resources to the needy and might even fly them back to a landing pad if necessary. Your "Covered Wagons" could fit into this as well.

A base/landing pad would likely have solar power resources + Chemical resources with fuel cells, plus a store of water, plus some food, and likely a basic emergency shelter that could be pressurized.

I like it this way because CO + Oxygen as propulsive method does not need water, so they can be almost anywhere.

And although most would be robot craft, you also could have hoppers that are made for humans to travel. They could refuel and emergency land at the base/landing pads if necessary, and to refill on propellants.

I believe that the wilderness of Alaska uses air travel quite a lot, so maybe it would be good for the wilderness of Mars.

Done

Last edited by Void (2023-10-02 21:18:39)

Calliban · 2023-10-12 17:51:35

Roman roads may provide inspiration for how we build roads on Mars.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_roads

Most images of the Martian surface reveal a field of rubble, with lots of fine dust seperating rocks of various shapes and sizes. Simply compressing the fines is capable of producing a hard ceramic, as dust is desicated clay. We can build roads on Mars by seperating the different sized rocks and using them for difference layers. At the bottom, a layer of compressed dust. Above that, a layer of hand sized rocks mixed with fine regolith and compressed together. Above that, a deeper layer of fine regolith, supporting large paving stones, which form a hard and abrasion resistant upper surface. The whole structure is compressed together.

Calliban · 2023-10-12 18:33:01

Cast basalt appears to be extremely tough, with a compressive strength of about 300MPa (3000kg/cm2), about 10x greater than concrete.
http://www.abrasionresistantpipe.com/wp … -tiles.pdf

Bending strength is only 1/10th as much, but is still 30MPa. If basalt can be cast into rectangular slabs, it would made an excellent paved road surface. The slabs would be settled on a layer of fine regolith, beneath which would be a layer of coarser stone.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-11-23 07:26:27

Back on Earth with this Balloon idea, the Japanese at NASA have flown balloons at altitudes comparable to conditions on Mars

131 °F to -67 °F

Rugged Antennas Play a Part in NASA’s Stratospheric Research Balloon Performance
Southwest Antennas supports NASA partner Louisiana State University’s High Altitude Student Platform, with rugged antennas designed to withstand the rigors of high altitudes, and temperatures ranging from -55 to +55 degrees Celsius

At the Columbia Scientific Balloon Facility in Palestine, Texas, NASA provides unmanned balloon services for universities and research organizations around the globe, helping them run experiments and managing launch, tracking and recovery. One of their partners is Louisiana State University, whose HASP (High Altitude Student Platform) venture carries multiple student-built payloads high into the stratosphere, at altitudes of up to 120,000 feet (36 kilometers).

https://www.unmannedsystemstechnology.c … rformance/

High Altitude Balloon Eclipse
https://aero.engin.umich.edu/2023/11/21 … n-eclipse/
Students travel to Texas to take part in the National Eclipse Ballooning Project

During their last successful flight, the balloon burst at an impressive 98,000 feet.

Legal troubles in Spain Europe

Spanish court indicts two high-altitude balloon companies for stealing from third
https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-b … rom-third/

In a legal battle between the three Spanish high-altitude balloon tourist companies (Zero-2, Halo, and Eos-X), a court in Spain has indicted the latter two for stealing trade secrets from the first.
The case stems from Zero 2 Infinity’s allegations that the people hired to raise money for its space tourism business established two competing firms based on Zero 2 Infinity’s intellectual property.
After asking for extensive documentation to share with potential investors, some of the individuals indicted “changed the logo in the presentations and managed to raise 1 million euros for a company that was just a website with some” computer generated imagery, Jose Mariano Lopez-Urdiales, Zero 2 Infinity founder and CEO, told SpaceNews. “They thought they could do that because Zero 2 Infinity was in financial distress, in part because we were expecting that 1 million euros to arrive.”
…The law in question carries potential penalties “of imprisonment from three to five years” if the secrets in question were “disseminated, revealed, or transferred to third parties” in addition to fines, Spanish attorney Leonardo López Marcos, co-founder of the International Legal Center for Space Sustainability, said by email.
One of the companies, Halo, apparently used the fund-raisers as a go-between so that it never had any direct links to the original company, Zero-2. Of the three companies, Halo has now done the most test flights. Whether this ruling will force it to shut down remains unclear

An article from last year on Japan and a Lunar Train system

Japan’s Bullet train to the moon and Mars: Researchers plan living facilities in space
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/j … 13084.html
The space train would travel between the Earth, the moon, and Mars.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-11-23 08:45:10

NASA Uses Two Worlds to Test Future Mars Helicopter Designs

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/nasa-uses … er-designs

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2020-05-13 07:53:39

Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#2 2020-05-13 08:56:15

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#3 2020-05-13 09:06:35

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#4 2020-05-13 09:25:16

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#5 2020-05-13 10:01:58

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#6 2020-05-13 11:59:31

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#7 2020-05-13 12:35:00

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#8 2020-05-13 14:21:44

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#9 2020-05-14 11:40:42

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#10 2020-05-14 13:18:44

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#11 2020-05-14 14:30:37

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#12 2020-05-14 15:54:10

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#13 2020-05-14 16:30:50

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#14 2020-05-14 17:28:59

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#15 2020-05-14 18:01:01

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#16 2020-06-03 04:54:18

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#17 2020-06-03 14:39:27

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#18 2020-06-03 16:23:43

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#19 2023-10-02 05:36:12

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#20 2023-10-02 09:09:22

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#21 2023-10-02 21:16:27

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#22 2023-10-12 17:51:35

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#23 2023-10-12 18:33:01

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#24 2023-11-23 07:26:27

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

#25 2023-11-23 08:45:10

Re: Inter-settlement transportation on Mars

Board footer