What Are The Best Settlement Sites on Mars?

louis · 2017-04-15 17:42:34

With the Chryse Planitia you're within striking distance. You're away from good iron ore, water and PV territory if you head for VM first off.

I'd like to clear a "road" south from Chryse towards VM.

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

How about sending some bouncers to the Marineris Valles? If they survive, they can survey the landing terrain and guide in further landers to a pin point precision landing. Now need for boring flat landscapes! The most interesting thing on Mars is the Marineris Valles, so lets go there!

Dook · 2017-04-15 18:07:14

louis wrote:

The Viking Lander site is fine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking_1
Those rocks don't look too big. Better that then something that looks smooth but turns out to be less than solid.
As the MIT Paper specifies, 10,000 sq metres of ultra light PV panelling is not ridiculous. It's 100 metres by 100 metres and can be laid down in 17 hours.

Dook wrote:
louis wrote:
Dook -
From the MIT Team's evaluation of the best latitude for PV systems:
"The results show that there is an optimum location for solar architectures around 30 degrees north latitude. The results also show that northern latitudes are always better then their southern counterparts."
http://systemarchitect.mit.edu/docs/cooper10.pdf
So for me, favouring PV, that would push it a little further north of the Viking 1/Pathfinder landing sites.

31 degrees north of the equator is the best spot for solar panels on Mars? Okay, fine, sounds like that's where the settlement needs to be then for solar panel power making and for heating.
This study suggests a 100 kw solar panel farm, that's tens of thousands of panels. That's absolutely ridiculous.
Can't land anywhere close to where Viking 1 is. Have you seen the pictures? You can't land in a rock field.

What size do these rolls of thin PV roll up into?

I looked at Viking 2 pictures. The Viking 1 landing site is probably okay.

louis · 2017-04-16 03:10:42

The ultra-light arrays have efficiencies of 15% and a mass/area of 0.063kg/m2! So for 10,000 sq. metres that's 630kg. I am guessing you can probably fit that into a couple of cubic metres, but with protection and roll out mechanism...perhaps they are talking about three cubic metres?

Dook wrote:

louis wrote:
The Viking Lander site is fine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking_1
Those rocks don't look too big. Better that then something that looks smooth but turns out to be less than solid.
As the MIT Paper specifies, 10,000 sq metres of ultra light PV panelling is not ridiculous. It's 100 metres by 100 metres and can be laid down in 17 hours.

Dook wrote:

31 degrees north of the equator is the best spot for solar panels on Mars? Okay, fine, sounds like that's where the settlement needs to be then for solar panel power making and for heating.
This study suggests a 100 kw solar panel farm, that's tens of thousands of panels. That's absolutely ridiculous.
Can't land anywhere close to where Viking 1 is. Have you seen the pictures? You can't land in a rock field.
What size do these rolls of thin PV roll up into?
I looked at Viking 2 pictures. The Viking 1 landing site is probably okay.

3015 · 2017-04-16 17:35:27

Louis, the panels described in the paper are very light but they don't pack densely. The paper cited in the one you linked (with the 0.063 kg/m^2 panels) lists a volume of 0.055 m^3 per 35.3 m^2 of panel area. So for 10,000 m^2 of panels the volume would be 15.6 m^3.

Last edited by 3015 (2017-04-16 17:37:37)

Mars_B4_Moon · 2024-05-16 13:40:35

Mars Loaded With Mineral Closely Associated With Life, NASA Rover Finds
https://www.yahoo.com/news/mars-loaded- … 59322.html

'Settlement' might require reasonable weather temperature for Biosphere farming, access to sub surface waters, some lower altitude or atmosphere for flight or caves to protect from solar storms, near by minerals and Nuclear material for example 'Thorium'?

The spectrometer map from NASA's orbiter shows Thorium in northern Acidalia Planitia, other satellites and other groups, nations have detected other minerals and potential resources on Mars. NASA is looking at Nuclear Power in Space and the Chinese are also expanding Nuclear power in space.

There is also a philosophy of transporting a reactor from Earth to Mars, rather than trying to have a local Mars manufacturing economy.

Kilopower an experimental U.S. project to make new nuclear reactors led by NASA and the DoE’s National Nuclear Security Administration
https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/stmd/ … wer-hmqzw/

SAFE were NASA's small experimental nuclear fission reactors for electricity production in space.
https://web.archive.org/web/20231117053 … 049426.pdf

'Low-cost nuclear reactors'
http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=9197

of course there might be political and scientific reasons, people from the astro-biology community who want a Private Sector mission or NASA astronauts to go to where there may be a possibility of 'life' and push a mission to the most interesting site from a biological perspective.

tahanson43206 · 2025-12-11 10:10:56

This is an interesting topic that started in 2017... The participants included Louis, RobertDyck, SpaceNut and someone who went by "Dook".

Looking at that series from 2017, I find it interesting that Louis seems t have prevailed in the discussion, with a crater identified for Calliban's dome.

The Viking 1 site is nearby but not ** too ** close.

To see the site, members and readers can call up the Viking 1 Hirise images on trek.nasa.gov/mars

file.php?id=71

The down arrow points to "Calliban's" crater, and the right arrow points toward the Viking 1 landing site.

(th)

Last edited by tahanson43206 (2025-12-11 10:23:02)

SpaceNut · 2026-01-03 15:17:03

Calliban wrote:

The ideal site would be:
(1) Not too far from the equator, avoiding extreme cold in winter and at night.
(2) Close to a source of geothermal energy.
(3) Nearby access to liquid brine or at least easily accessible water ice.
(4) Would allow easy excursions to other parts of the planet, i.e avoid deep ravines and other natural barriers.
(5) Would have low altitude, maximising atmospheric shielding and atmospheric braking potential.
(6) Lower susceptability to impact by dust storms.
Whilst we could in theory build a base anywhere, I suspect there are few locations that meet all of these criteria and there may indeed be none.
Criteria 1 is important, as a base too far from the equator would experience extreme cold and darkness for half of the year. If we are planning on using surface domes or polytunnels for agriculture, that is undesirable.
Criteria 2 is a nice bonus. It allows heating of surface structures, provides a source of low grade heat for multiple activities and adds an option for power production.
Criteria 3 is essential. Don't bother considering sites that don't have access to water. Liquid water, even if salty and cold, would be far more useful than ice. But abundant accessible ice is a minimal requirement.
Criteria 4 is important both for scientific exploration and for the city to develop as a hub for resource development. We are going to need minerals of every element on the periodic table. A lot easier if we aren't stuck at the bottom of a ravine.
Criteria 5 makes shipping resources from Earth easier and also makes surface activities less risky.
Criteria 6 is essential. A base site that is regularly engulfed in dust is a bad place to do anything. Solar panels stop working, crops stop growing, dust gets blown into moving parts and people will get lost and die.

Bring site selection back into view.

tahanson43206 wrote:

For RobertDyck re location proposed Calliban's dome...
link goes here:
This image includes the coordinates of the crater proposed for Calliban's dome.
It is near Louis' prefered site for Sagan City which is itself near to the Viking 1 landing site.
I'm hoping the site has favorable properties per your writings on the subject of water and other valuable materials.
(th)

SpaceNut · 2026-01-03 15:19:03

Input for site selection in the insitu garage topic

KBD512 wrote:

We could use these "ice caves" on Mars for our earth moving equipment, as a water source, and for the radiation protection provided:
THE HEBRUS VALLES EXPLORATION ZONE: ACCESS TO THE MARTIAN SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE
Resource potential and planning for exploration of the Hebrus Valles, Mars
We have water, some of it potentially liquid, carbonates, sulfates, basalts, and other useful materials. If we find a good source of Iron-Manganese ore there, then I'd say we have a candidate for exploration at the very least, and likely a decent place to put a base since we're going to need enormous quantities of water for a decently-sized city.

SpaceNut · Yesterday 11:01:31

Here is another that has been indicated

Mars has craters filled with water ice, most famously the Korolev Crater, located near the north pole, which holds a massive, year-round deposit of ice due to a "cold trap" effect where cold air settles and prevents melting, creating a beautiful, pristine, snow-like landscape. This 82-kilometer-wide crater features a central mound of ice up to 1.8 kilometers thick, a feature highlighted by the European Space Agency's Mars Express spacecraft.
Key Features of Korolev Crater:
Location: Near the north pole (Mare Boreum quadrangle).
Size: About 81.4 kilometers (50.6 miles) wide.
Ice Volume: Contains approximately 2,200 cubic kilometers of water ice.
Cold Trap: Its deep floor (2 km below the rim) cools the air, creating a stable, icy layer that stays frozen year-round, even in summer.
Other Ice-Filled Craters:
Other craters, particularly in the northern lowlands, also contain significant water ice deposits, sometimes visible as bright patches.
Significance:
These icy craters are crucial for understanding Mars' climate history and potential for past or present life, serving as valuable targets for future exploration

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korolev_(Martian_crater)

5266_18_Mars_Crater_Ice-full2.jpg?w=1857&h=1433&fit=clip&crop=faces%2Cfocalpoint

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2017-04-15 17:42:34

Re: What Are The Best Settlement Sites on Mars?

#27 2017-04-15 18:07:14

Re: What Are The Best Settlement Sites on Mars?

#28 2017-04-16 03:10:42

Re: What Are The Best Settlement Sites on Mars?

#29 2017-04-16 17:35:27

Re: What Are The Best Settlement Sites on Mars?

#30 2024-05-16 13:40:35

Re: What Are The Best Settlement Sites on Mars?

#31 2025-12-11 10:10:56

Re: What Are The Best Settlement Sites on Mars?

#32 2026-01-03 15:17:03

Re: What Are The Best Settlement Sites on Mars?

#33 2026-01-03 15:19:03

Re: What Are The Best Settlement Sites on Mars?

#34 Yesterday 11:01:31

Re: What Are The Best Settlement Sites on Mars?

Board footer