Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

Void · 2025-04-26 10:15:02

I took a look at data centers in space and on the Moon. I did not have an original idea, at all, of course.
https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/n … a-centers/
Quote:

Stealthy startup Lonestar plans Moon-based data centers
For off-world disaster recovery

So, some support for the idea indicates that I was not totally stupid to think about it. Thats good!

It may seem to some that I am advocating away from SpaceX's Stainless Steel Starship. Not at all. I do think however that Carbon structure could be very good for SSTO or 2nd Stages that go to orbit and never try to land again. (SSTO may be possible).

A think I do not like to see overused is binary thinking. Similar to sports games, tribalism, as a method to evaluate merit.

I give myself credit to have been interested in the numbers 3, and 6. Tesla was interested in 3, 6, and 9.

But of course the reason is I have electrical training and "Delta" and "Y" are both 3 pointed geometries, so I probably absorbed the concepts from the genius of the inventors of electric thinking.

But yes, still, I avoid binary thinking and prefer "Delta" and "Y" thinking.

For instance the concepts of 1) Colonizing existing worlds, and 2) Building artificial worlds, could be a binary process. Breed the human to have a war about it to settle the matter and try to breed the male population into Homo Erectus again. Throw in some Hypergamous cheer leaders to breed excessively with the winner.

That's an interesting slogan "Make Humans Homo Erectus Again!" MHHEA

The point being trying to breed the human race back to Dominant Man Homo Erectus sheds talents. This superman is a stupid concept.

So, from my point of view two parties encouraged to war with each other, ignores the 3rd party, which is outside.

For instance, for the space program, it became a meal ticket to make a siphon(s), to direct money as socialism to the anointed. Part of making this work is to keep two parties fighting with each other intensely so that the 3rd party will not be noticed picking money out of the facilities for common good.

But sometimes the 3rd Party could be like parents, to cause two parties to work together for a whole group gain.

So, I do not have a super contest between Stainless Steel, or Carbon. I would despise that.

It does seem that Stainless Steel may be better for a reusable 2nd Stage for Earth. Not necessarily so for the Moon.

As I see it if you had lots of Carbon, Nitrogen, and Hydrogen on the Moon, the Moon would be much more valuable.

Well it is not like that but adding even a little more of any of those will upgrade the value of the Moon.

Even a crashed Carbon ship might have quite a lot of value on the Moon.

It would be similar for any "Stony World".

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2025-04-26 10:45:44)

Void · 2025-04-26 16:26:21

I think it can be true that it might be correct to respond with the question "What is the cost of sending Carbon to the Moon?" with the question "What is the worth of Carbon on the Moon?".

Carbon on the Moon would open many doors. As always Carbon seems to be a magic substance, doing so many things at times.

It is not so much a question of how the Moon lacks things, as how many things can be opened up if you import Carbon to the Moon.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2025-04-26 16:27:18)

Void · 2025-04-26 17:07:19

This seems very good: https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r … ORM=WRVORC
Quote:

Solar Furnace
YouTube
AnthroFuturism
192 views

I am largely in agreement with the contents, and of course much of it is better than mine.

Since for his reasons, the equator of the Moon is favored, and I tend to agree, then I am even more sure that I would like to have a way to import substances such as Carbon, Hydrogen, and Nitrogen.

First of all I think that a major activity would be to lift water and Carbon to LEO. Then if you had a space factory in orbit, you could make Methane and Oxygen. Those are compatible with Starship and perhaps 2nd Stage Neutron.

But if plastics could be manufactured, then you could make garbage bags and packing peanuts.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/114440275410?v … cbfdad7f3b
A product that can be purchased, apparently:

We might want to put those inside of some kind of Carbon or other fiber sack. It is hoped that the bags if they do not rupture will inhibit outgassing from the packing peanuts.

So, then this is another case where I hope these can be ejected from a landing ship, at a rather low altitude over the Moon. Probably just prior to the ships "Thump-Down".

A certain temperature of the Moon might be more ideal than others. For instance when the environment is somewhat near room temperature. This will happen twice in an equatorial Lunar Day.

Obviously, we prefer the bags to not rupture on impact, but even if they did, if you collected the materials, the loss might not be that much.

While I would hope to get Carbon from crashed ships, or worn-out ships, this would be a way to do it as well, and the plastic of the "Packing Peanuts" would hold some Hydrogen, and maybe a little Nitrogen.

So, as before the reply question to "What is the cost to import this stuff? then "What is the worth of having it there?".

Ending Pending

Packing Peanuts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foam_peanut
Polystyrene is mentioned, but this other option is very interesting:

Starch-based
Packaging peanuts made from bioplastics (thermoplastic starch)
In the early 1990s, starch-based packing peanuts were developed as a more environment-friendly alternative. The starch in the peanuts comes from crop-based sources rather than petroleum-based polystyrene, and is non-toxic. One of the first brands of biodegradable peanuts, Biofoam, is made from the grain sorghum;[5] other brands are made from corn starch.[6] Biodegradable foam peanuts have no electrostatic charge, another benefit over polystyrene. Being biodegradable and nontoxic, they are also safe for humans and pets if ingested accidentally.[7] However, they are not produced in food-safe conditions, and are not recommended for eating. Also, during the manufacturing process, the nutritional value is removed from starch-based packing peanuts. This removes edible components, such as sugars, that would otherwise attract rodents and bugs.[8] Their main drawbacks compared with polystyrene are lower resilience, higher weight (6.5 to 13 g per litre/0.4 to 0.8 lb per cubic foot), dust creation, potential attraction of rodents, and higher price. While polystyrene peanuts are soluble in acetone, starch-based peanuts are soluble in water, so starch based products can be disposed with down the sink, dissolving on contact with water.[9]

So, can they be made for astronauts to consume, and then of course the result of that would then be as valuable as gold on the Moon, I think.

Ending Pending

Starch: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starch

Well it has Carbon, Hydrogen, and Oxygen. So, the Oxygen is a burden, but maybe it is worth it.

Ending Pending

The bags though will be of plastic, I expect.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2025-04-26 17:30:06)

Void · 2025-04-29 09:05:07

I would never say that I am no longer interested in Starship. I do want to see it do it's LEO achievements at the very least. And I think that they did well to go to stainless steel.

But I am extremely interested in what offshoots could come from Neutron, with its dominantly Carbon makeup.

Again, I think the logic of Starship has merit, and that bigger will likely be better, but it is going to be a big risk to develop but even so have very big rewards.

The Neutron, at its size, will offer many relaxations on launch sites, I expect. And I do think that it could have 1st Stage flyback retrograde, after refilling from a at sea landing platform. Not needing huge launch towers on a barge maybe a big win at that size. My impression is that that is the case with Neutron.

While I understand that at first the goal will be to make money by launching hardware to orbit.

But I have some further speculation of perhaps a no-payload launch scheme(s).

Pause.....Coffee.....

Two possible schemes:
1) Carbon/Argon.
2) Carbon/Carbon.

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

Neutron is a partially reusable medium-lift two-stage launch vehicle under development by Rocket Lab. Announced on 1 March 2021, the vehicle is designed to be capable of delivering a payload of 13,000 kg (28,700 lb) to low Earth orbit in a partially reusable configuration,[3] and will focus on the growing megaconstellation satellite delivery market.[4] The vehicle is expected to be operational sometime in 2025.[3][5] It uses LOX and liquid methane propellant on both stages of the vehicle.[4]

So, 13 tons payload to LEO, but also the 2nd stage's mass as well, if you repurpose it.

So, with #1 (Carbon/Argon), you could extend the 2nd stage, to include a 3rd propellant tank for Argon.
With Starship, you could refill, the three tanks, or maybe just the Argon tank. (Options).

If you have electric rocket propulsion methods in orbit, then you can exercise those options.

I have already mentioned how I think that Carbon could have great value on the Moon, at the very least.

If you have a collection of modified Neutron 2nd stages, which have brought Argon up to LEO, or if Starship brings the three propellants to LEO, Methane, Oxygen, Argon, then you can assemble a "Barge" of materials. You would have the electric propulsion device, solar or nuclear, a collection of modified Neutron upper stages, and you could then include a depot or two, which being highly protective in nature can contain Methane, Oxygen, and Argon.

Then this whole thing can ascend to higher orbits for whatever purposes are desired. Probably without human crew, so the Van Allen Belts would not be so much trouble.

If....The Neumann Drive can be upsized, then you could do the 2) Carbon/Carbon version of this.

Let's suppose that instead of Argon for propellant Carbon is the electric rocket propellant. It might need humanoid robots to feed the pieces of Carbon into the drive.

Anyway then the Barge can go to the Moon orbits.

For both cases #1, or #2, suppose that Starship could lift multiple landing leg assemblies for used Neutron 2nd Stage devices, so that they could land on the Moon.

For each landing of a Neutron 2nd stage, the legs and any cargo would be left behind on the Moon as a Carbon rich asset. Such landing leg assemblies might also include plastic components containing Hydrogen and Carbon, and even perhaps "Edible Structures" which with preparation could easily be made into food. NASA has studied "Edible Structure" in the past.

Edible structure would likely include Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen, and maybe a bit of Nitrogen.

There are desert animals that do not have to drink water. They just make water or extract water from their food.

So, if you balance things out, a human(s) can eat food, and oxidize it, and some of the Hydrogen will be incorporated into water formation, and some of the Carbon will be oxidized into CO2 formation. The somewhat disgusting process would be to recycle the urine and humidity from perspiration from humans to make fresh water. Then to make a soup from that water and dissolved "Edible Structure". (Sort of a Pee Soup).

Well, they do pretty much that on the ISS now. So, you don't have to bring tanks of water to the Moon, just edible structure landing legs for "Pee-Soup".

But I am not wild about huge amounts of humans on the Moon, only useful humans, and lots of robots.
So, Carbon Parts, Plastic Parts, and "Edible Structure Parts". As landing legs for the Neutron 2nd stage devices.

The Neutron 2nd Stages would be used until they became inoperable, and then if possible, the Carbon in them and any Hydrogen in them would be recaptured for repurpose.

The Depot in orbit would fill the 2nd stages with Oxygen and Methane for a landing. They would overfill the Methane, so that the ship could go back to orbit again. Ideally Oxygen from the Moons raw materials would be available to refill the Oxygen to the 2nd stages. Ideally the Oxygen might be overfilled, so that the 2nd stages reaching a low lunar orbit could use the excess Oxygen to land again.

Maybe the 2nd stages would be good for 10 trips, so that would be 10 sets of "Edible Structure" landing legs, plus any payload the ships would bring down to the Moons surface.

So, this would most likely be a good way to build bases on the Moon where no local water is available. Perhaps the Equator, as the Equator is easier to access as per amount of propellants needed.

Perhaps eventually their could even be a Carbon Starship 2nd stage, so very sized up.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2025-04-29 09:55:46)

Void · 2025-05-01 20:10:55

So, an energy storage device may be useful on worlds that are terrestrial, and perhaps those that resemble terrestrial, such as the Earth's Moon.
From: "Index» Science, Technology, and Astronomy» Geothermal and Geothermal Battery (Changed Title 12/21/23)"
https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 02#p231402
https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 05#p231405

Mostly an energy storage device but with a small potential for geothermal energy.

Of the Terrestrials, we have;
-Mercury (Has lots of Carbon)
-Venus (Has lots of Carbon)
-Earth (Has lots of Carbon)
-Moon (Has limited/unknown Carbon)
-Mars (Has lots of Carbon)
-Vesta (Has lots of Carbon)

So, if you can develop a geothermal device, which uses Carbon it may have broad utility.

A question exists for the Earth's Moon. Carbon is supposed to be limited in quantity, but recent measurements offer a puzzle. Also, it could be that some of the coldest spots in the shadowed craters of the Moon, may contain Carbon bearing compounds. And I have to wonder if the "Fire-Fountains" may still have Carbon in their frozen cores.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/22 … as-formed/ Quote:

Space
The moon is emitting carbon, raising questions about how it was formed
By Donna Lu
6 May 2020

Quote:

Carbon on the moon has been a subject of research, revealing several key findings:
The moon emits carbon ions across almost its entire surface, indicating the presence of carbon.
1
There is a significant amount of ancient carbon beneath the moon's surface, which has likely been there since its formation, raising questions about its origin.
1
Additionally, carbon-bearing ices have been found at the lunar poles, with concentrations reaching up to 20% by weight.
1
These findings contribute to our understanding of the moon's composition and its geological history.

I think that there are conditions and methods to import Carbon from any of the terrestrials including Earth. But of course access to local Carbon would be a desire as well.

I think that for the Equator of the Moon if you could store heat in the crust at say 1000 degrees C, that would be real energy to use in the nighttime. Radiators to capture and store cold could also be used.

And as I understand it, supercritical CO2 is a good way to tap into energy with a turbine.

Ending Pending

I think I want to try to explain how geothermal might work for Venus. It is probably beyond our abilities at this time, but suppose you could drill geothermal on Venus, with robotic systems. It appears that there is volcanism in many places.

Now suppose you could condense the Sulfuric Acid from the clouds of Venus into a liquid, and then with some sort of aircraft bring it down for evaporative cooling.

So, on Venus you would be dealing with hot supercritical CO2, and Sulfuric Acid. But say you had a Glider/Blimp, that could drop down to the surface with Sulfuric Acid as a ballast, and that it simply dumped the liquid into a vat on the surface of Venus. If the Sulfuric Acid is heated, it will decompose into Sulfur Oxides which could be vented, and then water, which could be used to evaporatively cool a geothermal process.

I will grant that this is quite a bit out there, and it will be some time and research before these capabilities might be mastered. But, I think that the energy levels would be fantastic, "I think".

If this process were dominant enough then the Sulfuric Acid in the clouds might be reduced, and the water vapor increased.

So, that could be quite an energy asset for a solar civilization. But it is quite a reach.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2025-05-01 20:49:35)

Void · 2025-05-03 09:55:45

I want to make a very rough effort to try to blend the materials of this topic with some concept of a cycling or semi-cycling spaceship, and then even the NOVA concept of Stoke Space.

Here is a refresher from Marcus House about cyclers: https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/r … &FORM=VIRE Quote:

Unleashing the Power of the Mars Cycler: SpaceX Starship to play a huge part?
YouTube
Marcus House
23K views

Returning to this from post #5:

OK, this may contain some practicality issues:

(Disregard the word "Lander")

What I have in mind is that both ships be brought to LEO, and then otherwise boosted by some other means if desired to a higher orbit.

One Ships tanks would be filled with Argon and water instead of Oxygen and Methane, and the other loaded with Oxygen and Methane. The assembly would include a power supply and some means of Argon Electric propulsion.

After this assembly were lifted to a higher orbit by a most convenient means of some kind, the Starship with the Methane and Oxygen would burn most or all of its Methane and Oxygen to head out into deep space, hopefully towards an intended intercept of Mars.

As I have explained in previous posts, the Methane and Oxygen tanks would be purged, and then converted to habitation using resources perhaps stored temporarily outside of the ships.

Then this assembly would be capable of generating artificial gravity by inducing a spin to the stack.

This then may allow for a ballistic capture to orbits of Mars eventually. The artificial gravity may promote health during the passage, but radiation is a big concern unless addressed by some additional means.

I propose that the additional means would be a "Semi-Cycler" which the assembly would rendezvous with in deep space. Before you go crazy (th), let me define a "Semi-Cycler".

Coffee..............

Semi-Cycler:
-This could be a device placed into a cycling orbit by primarily by Electric-Argon propulsion.
-It would include water tanks with water, and a power supply of some kind nuclear or electric.
-Since it will have water, for emergencies it may be possible to use thermal thruster methods for propulsion such as
explored by Calliban here: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 67#p231367
-Another thrust method could be "Just-In-Time" Hydo Lox, where water could be split and sent directly to a small thruster in the event of a need.
-The "Semi-Cycler" would also include the means to do precision fermentation to produce food, using Oxygen and Hydrogen and needed nutrients. Such "Food" could also be a means of radiation protection and emergency food as well.

In order to achieve its cycle needed, to be available to assist a crewed mission, the "Semi-Cycler", could use Argon-Electric drive and also perhaps gravity assists from planets such as Earth and Mars, maybe Venus.

-I would suggest adding a NOVA 2nd Stage from Stoke Space to the assembly as well, as the "Semi-Cycler" could generate propellants for it. https://www.stokespace.com/nova/ The NOVA would likely be useful for landing on Mars and returning to orbit. It would not airbrake from interplanetary space, but would be carried along on a "Ballistic Capture" method.

Here is Ballistic Capture: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_capture

As I understand it your ship gets to the leading edge of the hill sphere of Mars, and then falls downhill into an orbit of Mars, as Mars moves toward the craft. This process requires only minor thrusting with ion engines, and will not require air braking to get into orbit. However the orbit is unstable and the craft would eventually leave the Mars Hill sphere unless additional thrusting is done.

Now you have arrived and are in orbit of Mars, with synthetic gravity and also sufficient radiation shielding.

(An alternative would be to separate the "Semi-Cycler" prior to the encounter of the Mars Hill Sphere, and then the ships alone would proceed to a Ballistic Capture. This would then provide an increased radiation danger though).

If the Semi-Cycler did include itself in the "Ballistic Capture" then it might be primed with fresh Argon and water from Mars, and might then proceed to prime itself to be of assistance to another multi-ship expedition to Mars.

What has to be kept in mind, however, is that "Semi-Cyclers will have a service life, where power plants, and engines will deteriorate over time.

So, it might be good to use them in Mars orbit.

The NOVA type 2nd stage could then be used for transit from the surface of Mars to orbits of Mars.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2025-05-03 10:57:09)

Void · 2025-05-03 11:20:50

I would further like to make the point that you could have two major types of Starships going to Mars.
1) Ballistic Capture as described in the prior post.
2) One way Air Brake capture.

#1: Has been described in the just prior post, and could be the primary carrier of humans to Mars.
#2: Is a ship with no intention of relaunch, while it may carry cargo to the surface of Mars, it will after be converted to other needs such as habitation on the surface of Mars.

#1: Remaining in orbit and with synthetic gravity means and radiation shielding means with tanks of water, will remain in orbit and be incorporated into orbital activities, perhaps dealing with Phobos and Deimos.

A "Starboat" is desired, to link the two communities, and I suggest a updated version of NOVA 2nd Stage by Stoke Space. Since it will be a practice to keep radiation shields of water in orbit, and ice is available on or near the surface of Mars, Hydro Lox might not be such a bad plan for a Starboat.

Later on, the Starboats could carry Methane to orbit and the Carbon and Hydrogen be separated, to make water and Carbon structures in orbit. The water could be made 11% from Hydrogen in the Methane, and 79% from Oxygen from the two moons, Phobos and Deimos.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2025-05-03 11:24:30)

Void · 2025-05-03 12:04:34

Regarding the two prior posts, it has occurred to me that a one-time Starship would not need a reusable heat shield so just the under shield might do, without the tiles, and then perhaps a bit more ablative materials for the hot spots.

Then we can hope that the motors and flaps mechanisms may have some other further use on Mars.

As for the Engines for a One-Time ship, perhaps they could be at their "End of Life" service.

So, then you would not use tile type heat shields for either the One-Time Landers, or the Semi-Cycler type Starships.

Ending Pending

Void · Yesterday 08:54:45

So, the idea of a "Semi-Cycler", can be of different kinds.

Ignoring artificial gravity, you could have one primarily for radiation protection and emergency propulsion.

In this case I am going to imagine a Starship with a full heat shield of the nature that SpaceX, has indicated will be its form to go to Mars. It would use air braking and propulsive landing and may not have excellent radiation protection or backup propulsion.

To be efficient, the "Semi-Cycler" would use electric propulsion, and gravity assists but even could possibly have the ability to use some chemical burns of some kind, when doing a gravity assist.

The "Semi-Cycler could also have the nature of a "Kit". For instance, if the "Semi-Cycler had water tanks, they could be positioned around locations of the Starship to increase, radiation protection. But even more if the "Kit" had inflatable "Water Balloons", then water from the Semi-Cycler could be imported to the interior of the Starship, if you took care not to allow a rupture to damage things like electronics.

So, you could have "Water Bags", to give additional radiation protection, internal to the ship.

But prior to the Mars encounter all of the water bags could be emptied back into the tanks of the "Semi-Cycler" and the water bags returned to the "Semi-Cycler". So, these bags might be used repeatedly, until they wear out.

The Starship would separate from the "Semi-Cycler", and do the expected airbrake and propulsive landing on Mars. The "Semi-Cycler" might do a gravity boost off of Mars and go on it's separate path.

The "Semi-Cycler" could have extra solar panels on in it's structure. At times the energy would be used for propulsive needs, and at times it might do precision fermentation. So, it could provide the travelers some of their food needs along the way. Since to preform precision fermentation, it must split water, to produce Hydrogen, Methane, or Acetate, Oxygen would be a byproduct.

Our expectations at this time are that a Starship should provide full life support, to maintain sufficient health. However, it may not have a level of radiation protection that may be desired.

It a Starship were to become reliant on "Semi-Cyclers", then there is a danger if it launches and cannot attain docking with such a "Semi-Cycler", then they would risk long term problems from radiation exposure, and perhaps a level of starvation not quite fatal. They would have to crowd into solar shelters during solar radiation storms, which could be very unpleasant. But with the "Semi-Cycler", they would have a better travel experience.

So, dependency on a "Semi-Cycler", should be partial only. Ideally the Semi-Cycler would be attainable.
It might be that groups of "Semi-Cyclers" would tend to travel together. And Starships might also travel in groups.

It might be that some Starships would be rigged together for spin gravity, and people might be rotated between non spin gravity ships and the spin gravity ships along the way to Mars.

At times a "Semi-Cycler" might be serviced by robot ships, to give new resources to the "Semi-Cyclers".
Power supplies, Argon propellants, water, etc.

But a "Semi-Cycler" might stop off at a planet, or other world, to have greater servicing than that.

As for doing Ballistic Capture, choosing time of departure would allow you to bend the rules about the nature of the orbit it would then take. At Mars, it may have loaded up on Argon, water, and other materials.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (Yesterday 09:19:21)

Void · Yesterday 10:01:50

So, I prefer the Ballistic Capture method and here is a block diagram that could somewhat illustrate, the use of paired Starships and a "Semi-Cycler":

A successful mission would give "Premium" transit circumstances. A failure to bond with a "Semi-Cycler" might allow the completion of the mission but with rather miserable and "Lean" experiences.

If Ballistic Capture is used, then you have very strong radiation protection and synthetic gravity, included upon connecting to the "Semi-Cycler" and expansion of habitation into the propellant tanks of one of the two ships.

A "Semi-Cycler" could include water in tanks, water bags, maybe Paraffin, for radiation shielding. This could make the propellant tanks more habitable. Also, it could include furnishings.

It would give some additional redundancy to life support and propulsion.

With Ballistic Capture, the heat shields and flaps assembly would not be required to acquire orbit of Mars.

Two options exist during Ballistic Capture. 1) Just the two ships do the Ballistic Capture or 2) The "Semi-Cycler" also comes with the two ships.

In option #1, then upon acquiring Mars orbit, the water bags and furnishings in the propellant tanks have to be resupplied from the Mars community, supposing that the ones from the "Semi-Cycler" were returned to the "Semi-Cycler". or 2) The water bags and furnishings are left in the propellant tanks, and the "Semi-Cycler" which did the Ballistic Capture, is supplied with new resources to replace what was taken by the ships.

It might be that the 2nd ship might then also have it's propellant tanks altered for human habitations.

So, in this case humans might be able to live for long periods of time in orbit of Mars.

I am, of course in favor of settlements on the surface of Mars, and in the orbits of Mars, so this suits me.

The "Semi-Cycler" then being resupplied and maintained, might then depart Mars and use electric propulsions, and gravity boosts from planets to acquire a suitable orbit to be used again.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (Yesterday 10:14:58)

Void · Yesterday 19:43:11

A "Semi-Cycler" might start as a version of Starship converted to use an electrical power supply, and some electric rocket propellants of some kind.

One possible way to load it with water would be to bring Hydrogen up from a planet and then bond it to Oxygen from a moon.

Both Earth and Mars can supply Argon as propellants.

But Magdrive can use Iron, Aluminum, and Copper. (I don't know if this can be sized up).

But Neumann Drive can use most elements in the periodic table. (I don't know if this can be sized up).

So, really a assistive robot which can make journeys between worlds safer and more pleasant.

Ending Pending

Void · Today 09:07:15

I had a look at this material yesterday in another topic: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 51#p231451 Post #30.

Tony Seba, has notions about the future of technology for Earth. He is not so interested in space, but I am.

I feel that space needs updating. We seem to be locked into notions from the last Century. I was there, so I understand that to be true. Ideas like Mass Drivers for the Moon, and getting water from the Lunar poles to support Apollo type mission architectures.

The factors mentioned by Tony Seba, might be applied to some extent to the Moon.

Mass Drivers presumes a 60's and 70's type of thinking. No such thing as a humanoid robot, so labor on the surface of the Moon to be extremely expensive, being humans encumbered in space suits.

But I am now thinking of large sections of spaceships, being constructed on the surface of the Moon and then to be lifted to orbit by some means. That would most likely involve chemical rockets to get to a very low orbit and then perhaps electric rockets to get the orbits up higher. Some sort of tether method might also be involved to pluck a device from a very low Lunar orbit, maybe even from a sub-orbital path. The tether would offer momentum exchange between mass of the tether and an electric rocket system, and the payload launched into a very wobbly orbit. Such a tether might not have to be extremely long.

The Moon having lots of mass could be manipulated to offer necessary life support to robots of various kinds. Even telepresence from the Earth, or from humans on the Moon might work rather well to assist the manipulation of robots on the Moon.

So the steps might be:
1) Construct a ship section.
2) Lift the ship section to a very low orbit.
3) Snatch that section to a higher orbit.
4) Assemble sections into a "Semi-Cycler".

There are some idea around about using Lunar materials to make propellants for chemical rockets to lift the ship sections to a low orbit.

These sections now only have "Dry Mass". When assembled they might go to a location where they could take on "Wet Mass". The means of propulsion might be Magdrive or Neumann Drive.

I suppose the Moons polar areas might provide water and CO2, which could be an option. But these "Dry Ships" would be occupied by robots, not humans. If they by some means could travel to LEO, or to Mars, then they might have means to collect "Wet Mass".

So, from my point of view, this might be a better path than trying to use a mass driver to push loads of Lunar materials into an orbit like L5, and then trying to process the materials in microgravity. In both cases, you have to manipulate materials, and collect and use energy.

If we could learn how to construct and loft "Dry Ships" from the Moon, and they then were occupied by robots, these ships could go to various locations to get "Wet Mass". In the case of LEO and Mars they could also take on Argon for electric propulsion.

Probably this could start by building them out of modified Starships from Earth itself and then collecting the "Wet Mass" from Earth.

But next I would like to consider "Dry Mass" construction on the near side of the Moon near the equator. Then to travel to LEO for "Wet Mass", and alternately getting "Wet Mass" from the Moons poles.

Later it may be possible that "Semi-Cyclers" could travel to Mars, to collect "Wet Mass".

And even later perhaps out to the outer Asteroid Belt for the "Wet Mass".

Various electric propulsion systems can use various substances for the means of travel. Also I think that these devices could use gravitational boosts to get where they could collect "Wet Mass".

My definition of "Wet Mass" includes, Water, Methane, Paraffin Wax, and Argon at least.

I like Paraffin Wax a lot as I feel that a "Semi-Cycler could loan them to a Starship in transit, as radiation protection. But Paraffin Wax could also be used as a fuel, during an Oberth boost in passage around a planet for a gravitational boost. Here is an example: https://www.nasa.gov/news-release/paraf … or-tested/
Quote:

3 min read
PARAFFIN-FUEL ROCKET MOTOR TESTED

A "Semi-Cycler" could have Paraffin Wax objects, and bags or tanks of water. Along with some other chemicals such as Carbon and a bit of Nitrogen and nutrients for microbes.

For an Oberth burn, water might be spilt into Hydrogen and Oxygen. The Hydrogen could be fed to microbes along with Carbon and other nutrients, to make food. The Oxygen would be stored in a tank for the Oberth burn.

The ship having the ability to split water could also have a just in time method of thrust, where the Hydrogen and Oxygen were burned as soon as created.

So, rather flexible, but I would also want some form of electric propulsion as well.

Once these "Semi-Cyclers" were fully built with "Dry Mass" and "Wet Mass", they could go into service to assist Starships transiting to and maybe from Mars.

(Eventually other worlds).

A "Semi-Cycler" being properly positioned into a useful orbit could be overtaken by a "Starship(s)". Then resources such as Paraffin Wax objects and bags of water could be moved from the "Semi-Cycler" into the Starship as radiation protection for the transit to Mars.

A "Semi-Cycler" might also be able to feed the Starship(s) with food, and might offer redundancy in life support. If the Starships propulsion or life support failed, then the "Semi-Cycler" might offer, methods of survival and recovery.

Otherwise with a successful transit, the Paraffin, and water bags could be returned for reuse into the Semi-Cycler.
The Semi-Cycler may take a different path than the ship after that or might follow along to the same destination, such as a Mars orbit for resupply.

So, I do not hate Mass Drivers, but I would like to investigate this alternate path.

Ending Pending

Electric propulsions may be too slow to accelerate and decelerate for direct use with humans, but the supporting role of a Semi-Cycler might use it very well.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (Today 09:48:34)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2025-04-26 10:15:02

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

#27 2025-04-26 16:26:21

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

#28 2025-04-26 17:07:19

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

#29 2025-04-29 09:05:07

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

#30 2025-05-01 20:10:55

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

#31 2025-05-03 09:55:45

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

#32 2025-05-03 11:20:50

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

#33 2025-05-03 12:04:34

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

#34 Yesterday 08:54:45

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

#35 Yesterday 10:01:50

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

#36 Yesterday 19:43:11

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

#37 Today 09:07:15

Re: Multi-Ship Expeditions, Starboat & Starship, Other.

Board footer