New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society plus Red Planet Bound [BLOG] With Newmars lifeBoat a communications backup plus New Mars Image Server

You are not logged in.

Topics: Active | Unanswered

Announcement

Announcement: This forum is accepting new registrations via email. Please see Recruiting Topic for additional information. Write newmarsmember[at_symbol]gmail.com.

Pages: Previous 1 … 9 10 11 12 Next

#251 2026-01-31 10:54:16

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

I have experimented with the idea of a "Semi-Cycler" before. Got a lot of flak for it. So, I will rename it a "Planet Pass Spaceship".

It seems that focus in space will involve:
1) Earth/Moon
2) Deimos/Phobos/Mars

The difference between #1 and #2 is #1 will have the best space infrastructure early on, and #2 will have the bast access to raw materials.

It is easier to lift materials from Mars itself than from Earth, if you had equivalent infrastructure. Also, it is easier to extract materials from Deimos and Phobos than to extract materials from the Earth's Moon.

So, if you would have a "Large Spaceship" my feeling is that you can have a ship that stope in Mars orbits and launches from it. And when it would launch, it might do a fast pass of Earth obtaining gravity power from the encounter then go back to Mars. The reason I think that passing Earth makes sense is that since the Earth/Moon will have the better infrastructure, they could maintain, better fast shuttle services that could bring people back and fourth from the Earth/Moon<>"Panet Pass Spaceship". So, half of this is like a Cycling Spaceship at (Earth/Moon) and half like a normal spaceship (At Deimos/Phobos/Mars).

This device could do another gravity trick at Mars which is a Ballistic Capture. In order for people to be protected from space hazards, a "Panet Pass Spaceship" will be heavy with life support extravagance.

Quote:

How It Works
Trajectory Design: The spacecraft is launched on a trajectory that intersects the orbital path of the target body. As it approaches, the spacecraft's velocity is carefully managed so that it can be captured by the target's gravity.
Gravitational Forces: Once the spacecraft reaches the vicinity of the target, it relies on the natural gravitational forces of the planet or moon to slow down and enter orbit. This process often requires only minor adjustments using low-power thrusters for fine-tuning the orbit.
2

2 Sources
Advantages of Ballistic Capture
Fuel Efficiency: Unlike traditional methods, such as Hohmann transfers, which require significant fuel burns to slow down and enter orbit, ballistic capture can achieve similar results with minimal fuel usage.
2
Cost-Effectiveness: By reducing the amount of fuel needed, missions utilizing ballistic capture can lower overall costs and complexity, making it an attractive option for space agencies.
2

3 Sources
Historical Context and Applications
First Use: The first successful application of ballistic capture was by the Japanese spacecraft Hiten in 1991, which used this method to reach the Moon.
2
Subsequent Missions: NASA's GRAIL mission in 2011 and ESA's SMART-1 mission in 2004 also employed ballistic capture techniques, demonstrating its effectiveness for lunar missions.
2

2 Sources
Conclusion
Ballistic capture represents a significant advancement in spacecraft trajectory design, allowing for efficient and cost-effective missions to various celestial bodies. Its reliance on gravitational forces rather than fuel makes it a compelling choice for future space exploration endeavors.
Wikipedia
Ballistic capture - Wikipedia
Ballistic capture is a low energy method for a spacecraft to achieve an orbit around a distant planet or moon with

So, this ship is launched from a Mars orbit after being resupplied and refurbished in Mars orbit, using materials from the 3 worlds, Deimos/Phobos/Mars.

Launching methods could be various. Raptors-Metha Lox, Nuclear-Hydrogen, Other. Probably as a booster system that does not leave Mars orbit.

On board could be various types of propulsions. Perhaps Nuclear-Electric, or chemical or maybe Oxygen Mass Driver.

Two gravity maneuvers could be used. The Earth-Pass could modify the orbit to return to Mars.

And at Mars you would use Ballistic Capture to return into Mars orbit. To do that you also have to at least have some electric thrust to stay in orbit of Mars.

Mars could supply water or Hydrogen for Nuclear thermal propulsions. Deimos and Phobos can supply stony materials which contain solid substances and Oxygen. The two moons may supply Carbon. If not then that can be gotten from Mars itself.

There may be water ice in one or both of the two moons. There is massive amounts of water ice on Mars Itself.

This large-scale spaceship will not need a heat shield method to go into Mars orbit and will be able to reuse some of the original energy of launch from Mars orbit to swing past the Earth/Moon and return to Mras orbit. Also, can harvest gravity at both major planets.

Also the swing past Earth/Moon could use an Oberth Maneuver is desired: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oberth_effect

The Earth/Moon system may have good infrastructure to provide rescue for fast shuttles that do not make it properly to the "Panet Pass Spaceship".

It might be possible that a Venus or Mercury pass could be used instead of or in conjunction with an Earth/Moon pass.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-02-01 16:03:01)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#252 2026-01-31 12:08:30

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

Continuing with the "Panet Pass Spaceship" from the last post:

The concept of a Nuclear Thermal Booster to boost the "Planet Pass Spaceship" to pass by Earth.

Hydrogen Propellant is the best, but hard to source and hard to store. Water as a propellant with Nuclear is said to be about as good as combustion rockets.

So for Mars lifting water to Orbit from Mars might work well for the Nuclear Thermal Booster method.

Now want if we could do both?

What if you had a small tank of Liquid Hydrogen and a large tank of Water? You could feed the Hydrogen into the water as a gas, perhaps dissolved into high pressure water, and possibly as Aerated bubbles.

A Booster could be tanks up with large amounts of water when in orbit of Mars. Then a last load could be a small tank of Liquid Hydrogen.

"Hydrated Water" as in input to Nuclear Thermal propulsion might be rather better than just water. The Hydrogen would push the expansion very nicely, but the water has much more mass than Hydrogen does.

Such Nuclear Boosters could be pushed to Mars from Earth/Moon, just one time loaded with water and Hydrogen, perhaps from Earth.

Ending Pending

My view is that the Nuclear Thermal Booster will remain in orbit of Mars after boosting the "Panet Pass Spaceship" on its pass by Earth. Then to be reused. There could be many "Planet Pass Spaceship".

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-02-01 16:05:03)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#253 2026-01-31 15:27:07

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

In posts #251 and #252 "Planet Pass Spaceship" is suggested where it might be boosted out of Mars orbit using a Nuclear Thermal Booster which I hope could use Hydrated Water as a propellant. That is water that has Hydrogen dissolved into it or small Hydrogen bubbles put into it to form a temporary slurry of water with Hydrogen bubbles.

I think that might work.

While there is hope that Deimos or Phobos may have water ice in them many people do not think it does. Even if it does that might be hard to access.

I suggested that water could be brought up from Mars. But in reality, you could bring Hydrogen up and combine it quickly with Oxygen from Oxides in the regolith of Deimos and Phobos.

So, actually not only is the problem of brining water up from Mars easier by math than to bring it up from Earth, but for Deimos/Phobos/Mars, the bulk of mass for water is already in orbit of Mars in Deimos and Phobos.

Using water in a Nuclear Thermal Booster, is convenience as it can be stored in depots with little danger of boil-off. A Nuclear Thermal Booster then filled with water then just bring a small tank of Hydrogen up from Mars and load that on and the Nuclear Thermal Booster would be primed.

I expect that the Nuclear Thermal Booster pushing the "Planet Pass Spaceship" to an escape speed to depart Mars orbit would disconnect and then thrust to be retained in Mars orbit.

Then it might be brought back to a refilling orbit by some means, most practical, and rinse and repeat.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-02-01 16:06:23)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#254 2026-01-31 21:54:05

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

I have posted #251, #252, #253 today. Now in this post I return to somethings I have worked on before.

Mars orbits should have many propulsive methods available.

Alice for instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALICE_%28propellant%29
You could probably get Oxygen from Deimos and Phobos, Hydrogen from Mars and Aluminum again from Deimos and Phobos.

CO/O2 rocket engines are a possibility, Carbon and Oxygen may be available from Deimos and Phobos and is available from Mars.

Mass Drivers that shoot out Ice/Iron Bullets might be a way. Water Ice or Dry ice. Iron would be fine dust. Everything for this could come from Deimos and Phobos, and maybe Hydrogen, but Hydrogen could come from Mars.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-01-31 21:58:54)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#255 2026-02-01 10:19:35

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

So, if a "Planet Pass Spaceship" were used, it would probably have synthetic gravity available in some of it's parts. And means to produce food, air, and to recycle water. The device might be in parts that are not connected to each other during most of the flight. Perhaps connected when departing Mars orbit and when doing a pass of the Earth.

I think that if the parts could not be manufactured in the Deimos/Phobos/Mars system, then they could be created in the Earth/Moon system and filled with water. Then a Nuclear Fission Tug with a relatively small tank of Hydrogen could consume the water in the containers in order to push the devices to a Ballistic Capture into the Mars orbits. The Nuclear Fission Tug could then bring the assembly down in orbit to be at a orbit that suits setting the parts up as a "Panet Pass Spaceship" Resources from Deimos/Phobos/Mars might be used as well.

A "Panet Pass Spaceship" could be temporarily used as a Cycling Spaceship if desired, but of course then restocking it with resources becomes much more difficult.

IF a "Planet Pass Spaceship" could be refitted at Mars, it might do a swing-by of Earth and then (I hope), be able to do a Ballistic Capture to Ceres or even Jupiter.

It would be easier to set Ceres up as a refitting location as its raw materials are plentiful and the gravity low, in some ways easier than Deimos/Phobos/Mars.

But Deimos/Phobos/Mars almost certainly will come first.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Energy and water joined with machinery is the path to wealth in the case of Deimos/Phobos/Mars.

There are a lot of wild cards in the area of Energy for Mars, but for Water I think we understand where the major deposits are.
-Fusion is possible for Mars but is not yet a real thing for needed energy. Even so it might be that Fusion in microgravity may work better than on the surface of Mars.
-Nuclear Fission is possible, but for a time the fuels likely have to come from Earth.

-Solar, more in the orbits of Deimos and less elsewhere, seems like a good path as well.

Power in those orbits could be beamed down to locations of important ice masses.

Machines would then use the water and power to produce wealth for the locals, I presume.

This is likely compatible with the technologies that seem to be proposed for the Earth/Moon in the coming times, it looks like.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-02-01 16:08:08)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#256 2026-02-01 15:59:56

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

I have opened a new topic: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 80#p237780
"Index» Life support systems» Carbon is the New Metal"

OK, so I wonder if we could "Daisy-Chain" "Planet Pass Spaceship".

The feed points for one where it launches from being in Mars orbit and then passing Earth to return to Mars Orbit. (Using Ballistic Capture).

The feed points for another one where it launches from being in Ceres orbit and then passing Mars to return to Ceres Orbit. (Using Ballistic Capture).

Each ship as it passed its pass-by planet could release materials to be aero-braked to that world or it's orbits.

Mars/Phobos/Deimos has more Carbon nearer to microgravity than does Earth/Moon.

Ceres/Asteroid Belt has access to more Carbon than Mars/Phobos/Demos.

If you could achieve a Ballistic Capture to Ceres then you have a good position to access much of the Asteroid Belt which will have a lot of Carbon in it.

Of course, Carbon Transport might be done by different means such as Electric Rocket, or maybe a thin film of Carbon could sail around the solar system on Photons.

So then perhaps the value of everything might end up valued against Carbon, if it is to be as useful as it appears it might become.

Ending Pending

Oh Dear! How will we keep the Earth from freezing up if everyone takes Carbon out of the Air? With a Helium/Munchkin voice: "Help me, Help me Gretta!".

How Dare Me!

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-02-01 16:25:58)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#257 2026-02-01 18:14:41

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

I was surprised to find that someone has made an ion thruster that uses water for propellant mass, (It seems).

https://pale-blue.co.jp/news/946/
Quote:

Pale Blue confirmed the world’s first successful in-orbit operation of PBI, a water ion thruster optimized for small satellites. This marks the world’s first operation in space of an ion engine using water as the propellant. With a mass production system already in place, our proprietary PBI is now being delivered to partners worldwide.

【Key Features of PBI】
Superior Performance and Versatile Mission Capabilities:
Despite its compact, palm-sized 1U+ (approximately 10 cm cube) form factor, the thruster delivers a high total impulse*, contributing to various missions including orbit maintenance. The thruster can also be clusterized, enabling multiple units to work together to accommodate a wider range of spacecraft sizes and diverse mission requirements

I don't know if it can be sized up or what its power consumption is, but it is a good start that it works, it seems.

What I see for this an Deimos/Phobos/Mars, is that if you could get water from someplace in these three worlds of course that would be big.
But if not then you might get Hydrogen from Mars and then combine it with excess Oxgyen from Deimos or Phobos and have a propellant mass.

It would in effect shoot Oxygen along with some Hydrogen out as propellant mass.

It has a long way to go though, to be a major player.

Maybe it will get there.

https://pale-blue.co.jp/

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-02-01 18:22:11)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#258 2026-02-02 11:33:36

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

So, I am actually on shaky ground as concerns my assumptions "Planet Pass Spaceship". The idea as I see it is to launch from a "Host" world with easily obtained orbital resources and then pass a world which is located inner relative to the sun to the orbit of the "Host" world. Then it has to travel outward to intercept the "Host" world at a speed where it can be Ballistically Captured to the gravitational pocket of the "Host" world.

So in this a Spacecraft would have a "Host" world and a "Pass" world. Typically, mass would be accumulated to the Spaceship at the host world mostly. At the Pass world mass could be distributed as cargo to be captured to the "Pass" world or thrust exhaust. Much of the mass that might be accumulated from a "Pass" world would be humans. However, it might be possible for there to be mass transfers in flight where robotic ion propulsion devices may intercept the orbital path of the Spaceship.

When passing by the "Pass" world, gravitational alteration of orbit can be done and also possibly a Oberth Maneuver. In flight various methods could be used to modify orbit.

Many propulsion methods are available but those based on water are of significant interest. At Deimos/Phobos/Mars or Ceres, lots of water could be taken on board, if you had the tanks for it. It seems that it can be used in Ion propulsion, or you can split it and do immediate burns of Hydrogen and Oxygen, or stored burns of it. In flight the water is radiation protective and agricultural capable. And also, a potential source of Oxygen if you need to do that. Additional propulsion methods are steam and mass driver ejection methods.

For Deimos/Phobos/Mars, it is hopeful that propellant ships could lift Liquid Hydrogen from Mars and have that quickly bonded to Oxygen from Deimos and Phobos, to create water.

For Ceres, the gravity well is very shallow, and the amount of water is thought to be very large.

Calliban at some point, as I recall, was good enough to evaluate the question of if a Ballistic Capture could be done at Ceres. He indicated that he thought that it could be done. I expect that as for Mars you have to be traveling slow enough to be pulled into it's gravitational pocket. Its pocket is smaller relative to Mars I expect but I recall that it is large relative to the size of Ceres.

If Ceres might work, I wonder if other major asteroids might work? If so, then several bases in the asteroid belt might serve as "Host" worlds. That may facilitate the distribution of mineral extraction actions in the asteroid belt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_e … _asteroids
Image Quote:

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-02-02 11:56:54)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#259 2026-02-03 15:04:38

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

At this time I am considering that the cone is the transition between the cylinder and the disk(Torus). Between the two major types of in space habitats.

I hope that it is more like a disk than a cylinder. So, I hope to escape gyroscopic flip flops.

The structure may provide some cooled surfaces for AI, and of course intercepts the sunlight.

Unlike a Stanford Torus, this might not have pressurized spokes. But a ship could land inside of it, and using safe methods the inner surface of the cone could be walked on. Stairs, safety harnesses?

So, I am thinking of a structure like this for part of a "Planet Pass Spaceship".

Although space stations and other structure might be built like this.

Ending Pending

The "Torus" might be replaced with two or more spherical habitats as an option.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-02-03 15:24:09)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#260 2026-02-10 12:10:59

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

This is something that I have pondered for some time:

Can you land a cylinder like a Starship?

So, you might have to use some active cooling for this but I would like to see a version where the "Locomotive" only lands back on Earth.

That would be the propulsion systems including the propellant tanks and engines.

The "3rd" stage could also be equipped to land on Earth or Mars but more likely would not be.

So, this version would not be expected to land any cargo on Earth or Mars, using the "Locomotive".

An enlarged version of the Stoke Space 2nd stage might be hosted though.

Or you could make a Stainless-Steel Moon ship with it's own engines.

Or you could make something out of Carbon for the "3rd" stage, perhaps getting assistance from Rocket Lab Neutron Rocket build methods.

I see it as being a plus as you need to retain less propellants to land, and the tower does not need to catch as much mass. Or if you land on a barge at sea the "Stack" is not as tall or heavy.

But can you enter the atmosphere with a Cylinder shape?

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-02-10 12:19:29)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#261 2026-02-11 18:21:31

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

I have been focusing on the new SpaceX direction to the Moon first and as its own purpose as well.

Elon Musk seems to be of the opinion that the Moon will be found to have sufficient Hydrogen and Carbon for a civilization.
I think it is more likely than not.

But I have also been thinking about photon sailing. I wondered if it would be possible to make a fabric out of Carbon that could sail on the suns photons. It probably is possible, but I don't know about performance. Things already contemplated might be a better option.

It turns out that out Moon and many of the inner asteroids may lack some of the materials needed to create solar sails, but every other world in reach seems to have them.

Mercury, Venus, Deimos/Phobos/Mars, and about 40% of the inner asteroid belt objects may have what is needed.

The point is if solar sails sail in order to bring their substances to be used in the Earth/Moon, orbits, and on the Moon, they may compliment what can be found on the Moon.

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

Mylar or polyimide
Solar photon sails are typically made of lightweight materials such as Mylar or polyimide, which are highly reflective and designed to maximize reflectivity while minimizing weight and maintaining structural integrity in the harsh space environment. These materials are chosen to ensure that the sails can capture sunlight effectively and provide continuous thrust as long as sunlight is available.
Wikipedia
+1

My understanding is that a plastic film such as mylar is given a think coating of Aluminum to make it reflective.

The chemical formula for Mylar?
https://www.xometry.com/resources/sheet/what-is-mylar/
Quote:

C10H8O4
The chemical formula of Mylar is based on polyethylene terephthalate (PET), which has the formula C10H8O4. Mylar is made from stretched PET, which consists of repeating units of ethylene terephthalate linked through ester bonds. Additionally, PET is a type of thermoplastic polyester that is widely used for its durability and versatility.

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

A classic polyimide is Kapton, which is produced by condensation of pyromellitic dianhydride and 4,4'-oxydianiline.[1]

I think that Kapton may have the usual suspects but may also have a small amount of Nitrogen in it's chemical structure.

The point is if a factory could be established that could make solar sails at a non-Earth/Moon location these might be able to fly to the Earth/Moon orbits and be rendered into what the Moon somewhat at least lacks.

If coming from Mercury, then a mass driver from Mercury would have to supply a factory in orbit. The sunlight would really push the sails.

IF coming from Deimos/Phobos/Mars, or the Asteroid Belt, then some sort of boost method might be used to start the flight and then the sails would use photon propulsion to finish the flight.

So that would be a way to mix the Organics of other worlds with the materials of our Moon.

I think that could work out, particularly if the process was mostly robotic.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-02-11 18:43:00)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#262 2026-02-17 13:02:39

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

This has a little entrainment value: "Utube SpaceX's Brilliant Solution to Build A Colony: Starship Mars Cycler!, 2h ago"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H59x0ycdZws

The article supports cyclers at first and then says that maybe it will be possible to send people to Mars in a one-month period.

Both ideas have appeal but are easier to say than to do.

The idea of the Mars Cycler has been around for some time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_cycler
Image Quote:
Quote:

A Mars cycler is an elliptical orbit (green) that crosses the orbits of Earth (blue) and Mars (red), and encounters both planets at the points where it crosses their orbits, although not necessarily on every orbit. (Not to scale.)

In the video earlier in this post they seem to suggest that the Moon could "Host" materials for the cycler, be the major supplier for materials for it. This could make sense, if indeed someone can make a mass driver to launch Satellites as it seems SpaceX/Xai hope to do.
Chemical burn fuels are scarce for it though, from the Moon. Oxygen is possible. Metal propellants as well.

But I noticed that the green path in the diagram for the cycler seems to brush the Asteroid Belt.

Here is perhaps a good article: https://pages.astro.umd.edu/~dphamil/HO … than_0.pdf

It does look to me that the Cycler would not only be useful for Earth<>Mars, but also might be useful to access the inner Asteroid Belt.

So, would it be possible to make a Host Station in a relatively circular orbit that has the proper timing to intersect a cycler at aphelion?

Such a station being fairly near the inner asteroid belt might feed from it.

This is what they might feed on: https://www.nasa.gov/solar-system/aster … roid-belt/ Quote:

The 138 new asteroids range from the size of a bus to the size of a stadium — a size range in the main belt that has not been observable with ground-based telescopes.

Threre may be a distribution of types: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-type_asteroid
Quote:

They lie most often at the outer edge of the asteroid belt, 3.5 au (520 million km; 330 million mi) from the Sun, where 80% of the asteroids are of this type,[2] whereas only 40% of asteroids at 2 au (300 million km; 190 million mi) from the Sun are C-type.[3] The proportion of C-types may actually be greater than this, since C-types are much darker (and hence less detectable) than most other asteroid types, except for D-types and others that lie mostly at the extreme outer edge of the asteroid belt.

So, perhaps between encounters with a cycler they might either have a robot bring a small object to process to them or they might wander to it to process it. In this then the size of stations would grow and also the number of stations.

At 2 AU the sunlight is to be 1/4 that of what it is in Earth orbit. So, mirrors should work fine to concentrate the sunlight.

Into this I will add a Deimos/Phobos/Mars Semi-Cycler. In my view this would be a platform that can slide into orbit of Mars repeatedly using ballistic capture. It will need propulsive methods to assist it in this. But it can launch and then do a flyby of Earth or maybe a 2.0 AU, space station, before passing by Earth again and then reparking in Mars orbit.

The purpose of it parking in Mars orbit would be to take on supplies, and repairs periodically. On launch it's intention would be to seek the orbit of a cycler with Propper timing, and to add supplies to it. It might do a pass of a 2.0 AU space station, but I don't yet have that thought out well enough to say.

The 2.0 AU stations might send materials to Mars by various means, for supply to the Semi-Cyclers.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-02-17 13:36:27)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#263 2026-02-19 07:44:41

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

I want to bring something here from also: "Index» Business Proposals» Data Centers (Including Off World)"
https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 30#p238130
https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 35#p238135

The physical logic for Earth is in contrast with the physical logic of the Moon.
Since the focus in space is at least for a time shifted to the Moon, the logic of hardware will be different.

For Mars, Starship made of Stainless Steel, also works as you need the heat shield. But for the Moon Aluminum or Carbon might be attractive.

Granted, there is some good logic in sending a Starship to stay on the Moon. If it came to the Moon with cargo and would then be converted to some use on the Moon as habitat. Putting a regular Starship with full faps and heat shield, on the Moon is possible, but not that adaptive.

There are two logics for the binary world Earth/Moon. (We are not allowed to call Earth/Moon a binary planet, but I thin binary world is allowed).

It is hoped that over time, activity on the Moon will shift to use of local resources as much as possible.

But at least for initial setup, you might have a "Startup Method". While it might be impressive if you could make a gun out of rocks, it may be more practical to bring one, at first. I understand that guns are not the tool of importance on the Moon, but from a historical notion of the pioneer, this logic is obvious. Eventually you may make tools out of rocks, but at first it may be better to bring the starter tools, to accelerate Lunar development.

Blue Origin and others have plans to make a variety of "Tools", like solar panels out of Moon rocks. But these may be low quality, at least without brining special chemicals to the Moon.

NASA wants to bring a nuclear reactor to the Moon, and of course it will be a long time before nuclear fission reactors can be made from the rocks of the Moon. Imported Nuclear reactors would be a good initiation tool, but have entanglements in National and International relationships.

SpaceX/Elon Musk\G. Shotwell, seem to want to rely on solar panels on the Moon, but do not specify import or Insitu for the method to render them into existence on the Moon.

I am looking to expand the utility of delivery methods to the Moon both for full import method or a hybrid. A Hybrid method may include bringing, some of the materials to make and energy producing device to the Moon. I often look for such a option.

Looking at Starship, I also am thinking of external cargo. I am looking at "Drop Cargo" as one such method. Typically we think of Moon Cargo as being carried inside of a Starship. But a Lunar Starship could have pairs of cargo attached to its outsides, that would be dropped just prior to landing the ship.

The Starship has vastly more engine power than what it needs to land on the Moon. At least that is what I understand.

I am looking at such drop cargo as a startup pathway to get very useful materials to the Moon with a lower cost: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 24#p238124
Quote:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urea-formaldehyde

So, "Airbags" filled with Urea-formaldehyde, might be dropped from a landing ship just prior to landing.
If done wrong, this might lead to a collision on landing, if the cargo bounces back at the ship as it is landing.
But if done correctly, you reduce the dry mass of the ship just prior to landing, and so reducing the landing method rigors. (Landing Legs).

Such a content of "Urea-Formaldehyde" could have many uses on the Moon. Easy use would be to make a radiation shield for a Starship placed on it's side. You may be able to mix to materials with Lunar Regolith to make such a radiation shield.

Various other pathways would exist for this material to be useful. You could extract the component chemicals, and perhaps produce some Urea and water. Then use that to cement regolith into solid objects, using microbes.

The Carbon and Hydrogen could be reformed to sponsor Mushroom growth and also mycelium to again glue regolith into blocks. Or Mushrooms and mycelium to make things not including regolith.

But also other things could be included into the foam inside of the "Airbag". Chlorides of Metals and other substances perhaps. Maybe in small packets inside of the foam.

We may hope to get Chlorine from Moon rocks, but as with many things, at least at first bringing the substance makes for a faster startup of capabilities on the Moon. The Metals of other substances might serve to "Dope" things like Solar Calls to make on the Moon.

I am under the impression that "Salt Mining" using Chlorine could allow a lower temperature extraction of Iron from regolith. The Chlorine supposedly can be recycled to go ahead and get more Iron in that manner.

I think that the above process may liberate the Oxygen which is tied to the Iron. Another method to extract Oxygen from Iron in Regolith is to use Hydrogen and Heat. This process is said by some to be regenerative, as Lunar regolith does contain small amounts of Hydrogen, and the process may recover that as well as the Hydrogen initially available.

It can be noted that the "Airbag" foam will contain Carbon and if salts are added will include substances allowing Iron to be made into Steels for some kind.

My impression is that Aluminum may be harder to extract from the Lunar Regolith.

So, I am interested in the Terran-R rocket for that reason. My impression is that the Terran-R will be made primarily of Aluminum, and will not have the ability to re-enter the Earth's atmosphere without burning up. We are going to have to limit the amount of materials that we burn up in the atmosphere, and the Terran-R is still a useful object, (Probably) once in LEO.

If Starship could refill the Terran-R, it could likely go part-way to the Moon at least from LEO. I don't have the numbers on tankage for it.
But we could "Wish" to get it to the Moon with at least a drop cargo. The Drop-Cargo being the Foam filled airbags I have previously mentioned.

Even without putting landing legs on the Terran-R, if it has the fuel and does not malfunction it may be able to get such airbags close to the surface of the Moon, release them and then crash. IF you put landing legs on a Terran-R, perhaps they could be propulsive. As drop tanks or perhaps, solid rockets.

For instance, if Starship could bring solid rocket legs to LEO and they be attached to the Terran-R, the legs can burn to help get the assembly to the Moon. The shells empty of propellant may still serve as crushable landing legs. The landing legs might be of Aluminum, but that is not typically preferred.

Here is a depiction of a possible instance of such a use:

In LEO, a Starship brings the solid booster landing legs to attach and the drop foam bags. Perhaps another Starship refills the Terran-R.

The Terran-R burns the landing legs to empty, using its engine to steer, (I hope).

The Assembly prepares to land on the Moon. At a suitable altitude the "Drop Bags" drop. The Terran-R attempts to land using its Metha-Lox engine(s), and uses the burned-out leg boosters as crushable landing Legs.

Hard to say if the Terran-R ever is reused after that or becomes a source of useful metals.

So, a partnership between two types of ships makes sense to me.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-02-19 09:05:34)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#264 2026-02-19 09:54:12

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

Per the just previous post:

So, the idea is that the tubular legs will double as solid rocket boosters.

The solids will burn to empty while pushing the assembly towards the Moon.

After they burn out, they deploy to be angled, and the hinges are of compressible metal mesh??? Shock absorbing.
as shown in the right-side picture.

The Drop-Bags were dropped prior to landing ejected sideways by some means.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-02-19 09:56:52)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#265 2026-02-21 09:11:32

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

I was inspired by a utube video in part about how NASA uses hydrogen containing compounds as radiation shielding on Orion, and that Starship can afford to carry some of that such as Poly........

Anyway, I am looking a little further about external cargo on ships such as foam filled bags. And multi-use of components.

An advantage of external cargo foam bags, is that they might be filled in LEO, and so not have normal constraints on fairing size for lift to LEO.

On the Left a Nose-Bag composed of several parts, might give radiation shielding and also ride on the nose.

I have previously thought of solid rocket boosters that would be used to propel a ship to the Moon (In part), and in the right drawing show how the burned out solids could perhaps be used as landing legs. Some of the padding of the Nose-Bag might then be attached to those as cushioning feet.

Probably this requires the means to make these metamorphic changes in Lunar orbit prior to a landing attempt.

The Nose-Shield may be of value for traveling through the Van Allen Belts, and also if there is a solar eruption in flight. Also helpful for reducing total astronaut exposure to radiation.

Upon landing it may be that the Landing feet could be removed and used as a resource for radiation protection or some other need.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-02-21 09:18:02)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#266 2026-02-22 10:12:45

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

So, far up until now for the greater part orbital reuse of space junk is not significant. So, rockets have been focused on the payload.

I don't know that it will ever emerge, but a non-cargo mass to orbit concept might emerge eventually. That is if the 2nd stage materials are regarded as having sufficient value for reuse, 2nd stages without payloads might be considered.

For instance, a non-reusable Starship might be built so that it has no payload but increased dry mass. The economic circumstances for this may never emerge, but I just want to contemplate such a thing. In the case of Starship, we are largely considering Stainless Steel as the material, but if you increase the amount of dry mass you allow, you might substitute other materials with a lower performance so that the Starship was not as Mono-Material in nature.

And this would only make sense, if the value of the materials in orbit were sufficient. This could be true, if you intended to help build hardware with a good payoff such as Starlinks and Data Centers.

I guess we might think of the current Starship under development as a High Breed Racehorse. Tuned to do the almost impossible.

But what I am suggesting is a Mule, not showy, but of economic importance.

So, although it is hoped to get some stuff from the Moon, this might get stuff to orbit earlier, and perhaps of materials not obtainable from the Moon.

And as the 2nd stage is intended for a one-time launch from the surface of the Earth, it can be built without the constrictions that reuse imply.

So, you might get away with including more Aluminum, Lithium, and Carbon for example. These substances are lighter anyway. You might make the propellant tanks still largely of Stainless Steel but then might make much of the rest of the ship of other materials which often may be lighter.

As for the Raptors, perhaps those would be returned to the surface of the Earth, with 2nd stages that are capable of return. Reusable Starship and the 2nd stage of Stoke Space look like possibilities.

Some suggestions have it that a onetime Starship could lift 250 tons of payload. So, perhaps you lift 250 tons of what you need, and then you take the ship apart.

The propellant tanks might be put into space stations as pressurized volume. Of course, they then need actional mass to make them habitable. The Avionics and engines to be brought down to Earth perhaps. Then the rest of the dry mass and the cargo mass, may be recycled. It seems that Aluminum might be the most easily recycled. Perhaps the upper part of the ship if of Aluminum, could be converted into radiators for Data Centers.

Anyway, I think that the Superheavy, once established as useful and reliable, might be largely as it is now, of Stainless Steel. And I think it might be usable to lift 2nd Stages for other rocket vendors who may or may not have Stainless Steel as the major component.

I am thinking of sized-up versions of Terran-R (Aluminum), Rocket Lab (Carbon), and Stoke Space 2nd Stage (Stainless Steel???).

Anyway as conversation, it is not wrong to ask these questions about such possibilities. At least I think that it is OK.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-02-22 10:34:59)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#267 2026-06-17 19:31:26

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

What was probably an appropriate interruption in a discussion in another topic, leads me to transplant materials from that conversation here, as I think this will be very important.

Calliban: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 13#p239813
Void: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 18#p239818
Calliban: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 23#p239823
Void: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 25#p239825
Calliban: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 26#p239826
Void: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 31#p239831

*Because of a concern that the conversation was drifting I have transplanted the conversation to here. I would be happy to interact with the other members on this.

I want to show a new tool, that I think could be made from a Starship. Slowly awareness has risen in my mind that water and its containers and nuclear power may do much for accessing other worlds.

Crudely Drawn "Water Ships":
(Probably Raptors are removed).

The basic idea is that some notions have emerged about Nuclear Propulsion.
1) I recall from G. W. Johnson that a nuclear thermal rocket could work with water. (I have also read that it is about 1/2 as good as is Hydrogen, and about equivalent to Combustion types of propulsion.

2) If you look into this thread: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 25#p239825
With the inclusion of Nuclear Electric, various other forms of propulsion using water are possible.

* I have read that Nuclear Rocket methods can be functional for 10-15 years without refueling.

A set of problems exist in traveling to Mars. Radiation, Micro-Gravity Diseases, Landing Methods, refilling methods.

What I have in mind is a convoy, of the above devices which are not intended to land on Mars.

I am not sure, but I would hope that they could be bundled with a propulsion unit(s) at times, and released to spin at some of the times.

Just on a guess 1 week thrusting, 1 week spinning.

Keep in mind that this is a first proposal, subject to improvements I would hope.

The "Raft" assembled could be given an initial thrust from a high Earth Orbit by some sort of boosters, such as nuclear thermal.

Then to do intermittent thrusting and spinning along the way, using power from Nuclear Electric reactors, to provide a thrust from one or more of the methods mentioned in #2.

During thrusting water would be drained sequentially from 1. then 2, then 3, then 4 if needed.

During the spin events without major thrust, humans would seek to regain fitness.

Arrival at Mars would not be an Aerobraking event. You would have a means to access Phobos or Deimos if that was planed for.

Landers would be of any type suitable and could include a type of Starship. They would travel along.

Now the refilling can be water, although you will need to make some propellants on the surface of Mars, most likely.

Since you have several Nuclear-Electric Reactors, I would hope that some refueling of landers could be done in orbit, from water, perhaps CO2, and perhaps even Oxygen from one of the Moons. If you had brought some RP-1 with you Merlin engines might have a place.

More of the process for refilling will be to collect and purify water and lift it to orbit to refill the water ships.

I guess that the return to Earth/Moon would primarily be Nuclear-Electric with water.

Ending Pending

Even doing this there is no reason you could not send robotic landers to the surface and devices to the orbits of Mars prior to a crewed mission.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-06-17 20:11:57)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#268 2026-06-18 09:34:04

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

A quote from the previous post:

Crudely Drawn "Water Ships":
(Probably Raptors are removed).

This may be a progression of voiding of water space to fill with air, as travel continued:

Where the tankage may have additional walls between parts of the Oxygen Tank and the Methane tank, Ports to allow full utilization of all parts of the tanks propellants.

But when two ships might be converted into a water ship, doors might be sealed to keep the water in the outer perimeter in flight.

So, you might start with the crew extremely cramped into the image from the previous post. But by using door "Plates" with gaskets, parts can be isolated sequentially. As the propellant (Water) is used up, additional spaces can be filled with air, allowing the crew to have more space per person as the flight to or from Mars continues.

Over time additional furnishings could be moved into the enclosures from a storage they may have had outside of the "Water Ship".

As the mission gets closer and closer to its destination Mars or Earth, more water is used up and so less radiation protection exists.

So, you have to juggle around radiation storms as to when you have to be in more protected compartments.

As this ship might do multiple thrusting events on its path, its orbit might resemble a Argon/Xenon electric rocket method, to some extent.

So, a hope would be that a spin gravity of 1/6 or 1/3 g would be sufficient to preserve reasonable health.

I have suggested that the water ships have to be decoupled from the method of thrust, to produce synthetic gravigy, but maybe that is not true.

Here is a "Stack":

Not shown might be a storage enclosure for extra parts and equipment, and also landers, if you are going to Mars.

Perhaps it will be possible to spin the "Stack" while thrusting. If so then you have good radiation protection and micro-gravity treatments.

So, you may use elements of sudden thrust, if you were to have a tug, give this "Stack" a boost out of Earth/Moon orbit, or you may do spiral thrusting, and perhaps a Ballistic Capture to Mars.

I am not sure, but a return to Earth might involve a flyby of Venus, so that you could do a similar Ballistic Capture to the Earth/Moon.

Using Ballistic Captures will extend the time of the journey, but since radiation protections and Microgravity protections may be very good, that is less of a concern than for other methods of space travel.

Refilling these "Water Ships" at Mars could involve water Direct from Mars, and then perhaps when things get more advanced, Hydrogen from Mars and Oxygen from Phobos or Deimos.

I am thinking Hydro-Lox propulsions, but Metha-Lox is not ruled out. Carbon may be present in the moons of Mars and is present from Mars itself.

While previous notions have all of the propellant cooking as happening on the surface of Mars, I think since the Nuclear Electric power supply will not be thrusting it may be used to cook propellants in orbit, relieving some of the strain on the effort to cook up propellants on the surface of Mars.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-06-18 10:04:02)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#269 2026-06-19 08:22:08

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

I dug up some specs about the SpaceX (My phone/computer did), Lunar Starship.

Query: "For Starship, what is the ratio of Methane to Oxygen?"
Quote:

Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
Methane-to-Oxygen Ratio in Starship
For SpaceX’s Starship and its Raptor engines, the propellant mixture is liquid methane (CH₄) and liquid oxygen (LOX) in a 3.6:1 ratio of oxygen to methane research.mobiusriskgroup.com+1.
This means that for every 3.6 parts of liquid oxygen, there is 1 part of liquid methane by mass. In percentage terms, this is roughly 78% oxygen and 22% methane Wikipedia.
Why this ratio matters
Fuel-rich: The stoichiometric ratio for complete combustion of methane is about 4:1 (oxygen to methane), so Starship’s 3.6:1 ratio is slightly fuel-rich, leaving extra methane in the exhaust for additional thrust NASASpaceFlight.com.
Engine efficiency: This mixture supports the Raptor’s full-flow staged combustion cycle, maximizing specific impulse (around 330–380 seconds depending on altitude) Wikipedia+1.
Propellant mass: In a full Starship/Super Heavy stack, about 92% of the total mass is propellant, with methane making up roughly 62% of that research.mobiusriskgroup.com.
In summary:
Oxygen : Methane = 3.6 : 1 (oxygen-to-methane), or Methane : Oxygen = 1 : 3.6.

Query: "For Starship, what is the volumetric ratio of Methane to Oxygen?"
Quote:

Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
For SpaceX’s Starship, the volumetric ratio of methane to oxygen is 3.6:1 (oxygen-to-methane), which is equivalent to a methane-to-oxygen volumetric ratio of about 0.278:1 research.mobiusriskgroup.com+1.
How this ratio is determined
The Raptor engines on Starship use a methalox propellant mix of liquid methane (CH₄) and liquid oxygen (LOX).
The mixture ratio is defined as the mass of LOX per unit mass of CH₄. For Starship, this is 3.6:1 (LOX:CH₄) research.mobiusriskgroup.com+1.
Since methane is denser than oxygen, the volumetric ratio is lower than the mass ratio. At standard conditions, methane has a molar mass of ~16g/mol and oxygen ~32g/mol, so a 3.6:1 LOX:CH₄ mass ratio corresponds to roughly a 3.6 × (16/32) = 1.8:1 LOX:CH₄ molar ratio, which translates to about 0.56:1 LOX:CH₄ volume ratio. However, in cryogenic form (subcooled liquid), the density difference is even more pronounced, so the actual volumetric ratio is closer to 0.278:1 (methane:LOX) research.mobiusriskgroup.com.
Why this matters
This ratio is chosen to balance thrust, efficiency, and combustion stability in the Raptor’s full-flow staged combustion cycle Wikipedia.
It is fuel-rich compared to the stoichiometric ratio of 4:1, which helps with engine reliability and performance NASASpaceFlight.com.
The ratio is maintained throughout flight by the tank design and feed systems, ensuring complete combustion and optimal specific impulse (~330–350s) Chimniii.
In summary:
Mass ratio: LOX : CH₄ = 3.6 : 1
Volumetric ratio: CH₄ : LOX ≈ 0.278 : 1 research.mobiusriskgroup.com+1

Pause.................

So, I argue that for the support of spacecraft traveling to and from the Moon, a water-ship is desired. If it can robotically transfer water from LEO to a Lunar Proximate position, then at that position, a "Kitchen" can be set up to produce LOX and even Liquid Hydrogen.

Also desired is methods to create and store Oxygen on the surface of the Moon.

I read that when it lands a Starship needs to bring 100 tons of propellants to the surface of the Moon, so 78 Tons of LOX and 22 Tons of Methane.

So, if instead of Starship carrying all of that from ~LEO, it could receive LOX from the Lunar Proximate "Kitchen", and then also from the Lunar Surface "Kitchen", it should be possible to reduce the burden of LOX. Not to Zero, you would be playing a risky game to try to land with zero LOX, but lets say 90% of the 78 Tons you normally have to land with. So, you might land with 7.8 Tons of LOX in reserve, and need to be tanked up on the surface of the Moon to go back to orbit. That could greatly increase the amount of Cargo you could land, presuming you are using a ship that would go back to Orbit.

From the previous post, quote:

Here is a "Stack":

For this purpose in support of Moon efforts, you may be able to use solar instead of Nuclear, as likely people will not ride on the way to a Lunar Proximate position, where the "Kitchen" might be.

Both the Lunar Proximate "Kitchen" and the Lunar Surface "Kitchen" may have extensive boil off protections, since they will not be doing propulsive inertia changes of any magnitude.

the "Kitchens" might support both Metha-Lox and Hydra-Lox needs, but less likely Methane.

But you could bring Carbon on the "Water-Ship".

A Starship or Blue/Other-Ship might arrive at the Lunar Proximate "Kitchen" with 5-10 % propellant reserves and be "Topped Off" for a Moon landing.

OK, I added a "Carbon Bin":

So, this would at least be possible for the Lunar Proximate "Kitchen" to process.

And of course I think that it would be possible to drop some sort of Carbon out of a landing ship prior to landing. So, just maybe that could provide to make Methane and other things on the surface of the Moon.

It might be claimed that Carbon will be found at the poles of the Moon, but that would be hard to access, and would not be as available to the Equator where a mass driver might exist.

Pause.......

In reality though I think many Starships should land with no intention of returning to Orbit. At least while a Lunar industrial capability is being developed and expanded.

Query: "Water for space propulsion"

Quote:

Like
Dislike
Water can be used as a safe, versatile propellant in space through chemical or electric propulsion systems, offering potential for small satellites and deep-space missions.
How Water Propulsion Works
Water-based propulsion systems generally operate in two main ways:
Electrolysis and Chemical Propulsion: Water is split into hydrogen and oxygen using electricity in a process called electrolysis. The resulting gases can then be burned in a rocket engine to produce thrust. NASA’s Pathfinder Technology Demonstrator-1 (PTD-1) CubeSat uses this method, harnessing solar energy to power the electrolysis system and generate thrust for orbital maneuvers, de-orbiting, or collision avoidance
NASA
NASA
. Similarly, startups like General Galactic are developing satellites that use water electrolysis to produce hydrogen and oxygen for both chemical and plasma-based propulsion
Gizmodo
Gizmodo
.
Electric Propulsion (Plasma Thrusters): Water can also be converted into plasma, a highly energetic state of matter, and accelerated using electric fields to generate thrust. The Water-based Electric Thrusters (WET) project at the University of Bologna demonstrates this approach, which is particularly suitable for small satellites and deep-space missions due to its efficiency and low power requirements (500–1000 watts),
Interesting Engineering
Interesting Engineering
. This method allows for in-space refueling using water sourced from celestial bodies, reducing the need to carry large fuel loads from Earth.
Advantages of Water Propulsion
Safety: Water is non-toxic, non-flammable, and easier to handle than traditional rocket fuels
NASA
NASA
.
Abundance: Water is widely available in space, including on the Moon, asteroids, and other celestial bodies, enabling potential in-situ resource utilization
Interesting Engineering
Interesting Engineering
.
Environmental Impact: Water-based propulsion produces fewer harmful emissions compared to conventional chemical rockets
Interesting Engineering
Interesting Engineering
.
Versatility: Systems can provide both steady, efficient thrust (electric/plasma) and short, powerful bursts (chemical combustion), depending on mission needs
Gizmodo
Gizmodo
.
Small Satellite Applications: CubeSats and SmallSats benefit from compact, low-power water propulsion systems like resistojets, which are easy to control and maneuver in orbit
GlobalSpec
GlobalSpec
.
Current and Experimental Systems
NASA PTD-1 CubeSat: Demonstrates water electrolysis propulsion in low-Earth orbit
NASA
NASA
.
WET Plasma Thrusters: University of Bologna project for deep-space missions using water plasma
Interesting Engineering
Interesting Engineering
.
General Galactic Satellite: Plans to test both chemical and electric water propulsion in orbit
Gizmodo
Gizmodo
.
AQUARIUS Resistojet: Tested on the EQUULEUS mission by JAXA and the University of Tokyo, using water as a propellant for precise orbital maneuvers
GlobalSpec
GlobalSpec
.
Conclusion
Water-based propulsion represents a promising, sustainable alternative to traditional rocket fuels. By leveraging electrolysis, plasma acceleration, or resistojets, spacecraft can achieve safe, efficient, and potentially refuelable propulsion. This technology is particularly advantageous for small satellites, orbital maneuvering, and long-duration deep-space missions, potentially transforming the economics and logistics of space exploration
NASA
NASA
+3
.

So, by various means of propulsion, including the use of Hydrogen, water Steam, or combustions involving Hydrogen, Oxygen, and perhaps Carbon, a water ship might move itself to a Lunar Proximate position, where a "Kitchen" could exist.

At first the water has to come from Earth, but later, perhaps it can come from the Moon.

Pause...........

A Watership then deployed could provide synthetic gravity and radiation protection for crew in a Lunar Proximate location near a "Kitchen".

*It needs to be understood that the Lunar landings and initial base setup, would not come second, but these services would be established later, over time.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-06-19 09:26:32)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#270 2026-06-19 10:12:13

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

So, continuing from the previous post, if SpaceX can send and land Starships to the Mars surface, that is just fine. I would not want to get in the way of that.

But a Watership could be of assistance, and could also provide access to 3 worlds. Deimos/Phobos/Mars.

So, now, I suggest that if you got a Watership to the orbits of Mars, you might make a container for it to enclose and partially expand its capabilities and to give it greater protection.

And of course I am going to this: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/as … 45363/full
Image Quote:

You might start with a Carbon Net as described. It may counter-spin to the spin of the Watership, and be of very low g forces, and be a floor for robots to work on.

Regolith from one of the moons might be processed. Iron, and Oxygen are probably going to be released if you heat it in a vacuum. If there is Carbon, then perhaps CO or CO2 will also be released. The remainder might be sintered into objects that could be fastened to the Carbon net.

Over time the radiation protection may become sufficient to protect the humans in the Watership, and most of the compartments can then be filled with air.

The Net might be reenforced with Iron/Steel metal structures and the g forces might be increased if desired.

So then if that could be expanded, we would be on our way to harnessing 3 new worlds.

As for water, initially it might come from Mars, but later perhaps Hydrogen can come from Mars, and Oxygen from the regolith of the two moons.

It is not at all assured, but there may be a source of water ice or hydrated minerals in the regolith of these moons.

In that case Watership's could be refilled in orbit to return to the Earth/Moon perhaps with a flyby of Venus.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-06-19 10:32:45)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#271 2026-06-19 21:53:14

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

While Mars is a very desirable target, our Moon is the driest world of any size that could donate water.

I have not been a nuclear advocate in the past, but now I am. Looking at the asteroid belt, what we want is all there. Water in abundance, and probably nuclear fuels.

List of Exceptional Asteroids again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_e … _asteroids
Quote:

List of exceptional asteroids

While Ceres is interesting I am very focused on 10 Hygeia. I think it could be a first place to try a space elevator, if for no other reason than to see if it can be done. If it can then you might do it for Ceres, and then some of the smaller worlds like Luna and Maybe Mars. Maybe someday Earth.

So, another tool I am interested in is an Anchored Cycler. That might be a ship that would approach 10 Hygeia at the high point of its solar orbit but may have an orbital frequency of 1/2 or 1/3 of a year for 10 Hygeia. That would bring such a platform much further into the inner solar system, as it would have an elliptical orbit.

My reach exceeds my grasp on this. Here is a very rough start on a 2 companion method for 10 Hygeia:

I am assuming mirrored partners red and blue as the companions. I am also presuming that a Phantom platform would be built at the L3 location for 10 Hygeia around the sun. (Opposite side).

I think triplets might work in an interesting way I am going to take a quick look and then go to bed.

Query: "Length of Mars year?"
Quote:

Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
A year on Mars lasts approximately 687 Earth days, or about 1.88 Earth years.
Mars takes 686.971 Earth days to complete one orbit around the Sun, which is nearly twice as long as an Earth year due to its greater distance from the Sun and slower orbital speed (Mars’ semi-major axis is about 1.52 AU)
www.spacecentre.nz
www.spacecentre.nz
+1
. In terms of Martian days, or sols, a Mars year is about 668.6 sols, since a sol is slightly longer than an Earth day at 24 hours, 39 minutes, and 35 seconds
Wikipedia
Wikipedia
+1
.
Martian Seasons and Orbit
Mars has an axial tilt of 25.19°, similar to Earth's 23.44°, which gives it seasonal changes like spring, summer, autumn, and winter
Wikipedia
Wikipedia
+1
. However, its orbit is more eccentric (0.0934) than Earth's, causing the lengths of its seasons to vary significantly. For example, southern hemisphere summers are shorter and hotter, while northern hemisphere summers are longer and cooler
Universe Today
Universe Today
.
Implications for Timekeeping
Because a Martian year is longer, NASA and scientists use sols and Martian calendars to schedule rover missions and scientific observations. For instance, the Curiosity rover’s primary mission was planned for one Mars year (687 Earth days) to account for seasonal changes and solar energy availability
NASA
NASA
. The concept of a sol helps avoid confusion with Earth days, and timekeeping systems like the Mars Sol Date (MSD) are used for scientific consistency
Wikipedia
Wikipedia
.
In summary, a Mars year is almost twice as long as an Earth year, lasting 687 Earth days or 668.6 sols, with seasons influenced by its axial tilt and orbital eccentricity, which are critical for both planetary science and mission planning.

2036/3 = 678.6666666666667

So, the 10 Hygeia year seems to be very close to 3 Mars Years.

687*3 = 2,061 So that is 3 times the year of Mars.

Spooky. Is it possible that some resonance with Mars, disturbed by other objects causes many of the major asteroids to be at about 3 AU?

I am actually thinking of artificial worlds like O'Neill Cylinders in various orbits.

The points at about 3 AU as the Aphelion, and near Mars as the Perihelion of the orbits. Near is a relative term, I have no correct idea of what the orbits would be.

But what I am thinking of is that orbits that near or cross Mars orbit might be suitable, and then cross up into the asteroid belt. Good chances I have something wrong.

But for all the stupid I may be doing, the ~3 to 1 orbital ratio of Mars to many of the Major Asteroids is interesting.

It's late.

Ending Pending

I can't pass this up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIgFyquuWdI
Quote:

NASA's New Electromagnetic Thruster for Mars (May 2026)
Star Quest Hub
Star Quest Hub

They are working with Lithium as a propellant, while I am hoping/wishing that water could be used by some device with Nuclear power and high Thrust???

But it looks like they may get there with the Lithium eventually.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-06-19 23:32:39)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#272 2026-06-20 08:53:25

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

Post 271 may have been a bit premature. I wanted to take a look at what might be next after Mars.

Back to 270 then: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 63#p239863
Quote:

And of course I am going to this: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/as … 45363/full
Image Quote:
You might start with a Carbon Net as described. It may counter-spin to the spin of the Watership, and be of very low g forces, and be a floor for robots to work on.

I think that the ship shown in the upper part of the quote, could be manufactured from Starships, and that Nuclear and Solar power could be included into it. The original water could come from Earth. Then upon arrival to Mars, water or Hydrogen could be brought to orbit from Mars itself.

If we have to assume that Phobos and Deimos are "Dry", even so, the process of building a shell around the ship may be within reach.

The plantation owners have a habit of telling the slaves, "If you run away the Indians will kill you!". That is because in an agricultural
economy the servants are your robots, presuming you can use verbiage and violence to control them. So, we can presume that certain information will be presented to us having distortions.

The true nature of Phobos and Deimos for instance. Generally, we are told that things out in space are bone dry, and unsuitable. We can expect that story to be the presented one, until it becomes useful to the plantation owners to use those locations in plantations of some sort.

There has not been enough study of Phobos and Deimos. But I will presume that they are "Bone Dry", as it is possible that they are.

The work of the ~70's by people like G. O'niell, was an example of hopeful thinking to sort of make an outline of how to work with artificial hollow worlds, I suppose.

Query: "Amount of regolith to protect humans on the Moon from radiation?"
Quote:

Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
Amount of Lunar Regolith Needed for Radiation Protection
To protect humans on the Moon from harmful radiation, lunar regolith shielding is typically in the range of 2–3meters thick when covering the entire habitat or base New Scientist. This depth is sufficient to significantly reduce the annual radiation dose from the ~500mSv/yr unshielded surface level to levels considered safe for long-term habitation.
Why this thickness?
Radiation sources: On the Moon, astronauts are exposed to galactic cosmic rays, solar particle events, and secondary radiation from particle impacts agentcalc.com.
Shielding effectiveness: Studies show that 2–3m of regolith can reduce the effective dose equivalent to levels that allow mixed crews to stay safely on the surface New Scientist.
Engineering trade-offs: While thicker layers (e.g., 3m) are more protective, they require large-scale excavation and construction, which impacts logistics and cost agentcalc.com.
How much regolith?
The exact mass depends on:
Habitat surface area (m²)
Regolith density (loose surface regolith is ~1.5–1.8g/cm³; compacted regolith is denser) agentcalc.com
Example: For a 100m² habitat with 2m of loose regolith, the mass is roughly 100×2×1.6kg = 320kg/m², or 32tonnes for the whole area.
Practical approaches
Full-surface coverage: 2–3m of regolith over the entire habitat New Scientist.
Mixed shielding: Combining regolith with other materials (e.g., water, polymers) can improve efficiency and reduce required thickness MDPI.
Cave or lava tube shelters: Natural underground structures can provide equivalent or better shielding with less excavation New Scientist.
In summary: For a safe, long-term lunar base, plan for 2–3meters of regolith shielding over the habitat, with the total mass depending on the area and regolith density. This approach balances radiation protection with engineering feasibility.

So, I am going to presume that for orbits of Mars the solution may be approximately the same.

So, then we start by putting the ship inside of a Carbon Net Cocoon. We still have Nuclear Power, I presume, donated from Earth.
But we can begin to attach a shell of solar panels to the outside of this Cocoon. The Cocoon might be rotated at a very low speed, to provide a small amount of synthetic gravity into it.

In processing materials from Phobos and Deimos, we hope to extract some substances, and then perhaps to make the remaining "Slag" into sort of patio tiles to array inside of the Cocoon held in place partially by a small amount of synthetic gravity. I presume that metals extracted from the "Ore", can be used to help fix both the solar panels on the outside and the patio bricks on the inside.

At this point the Cocoon is not that much good for radiation protection but will moderate temperatures inside and also help for protection from impactors.

By this time however the Cocoon has a floor that things can be attached to and that Robots might "Walk" on.

So, you would just keep processing Ore, and thicken the walls of the Cocoon with "Slag" block structure, probably linked using metal fixtures.

When the radiation protection was good enough you may start building additional habitat on the floor of the Cocoon, to perhaps grow food or other produce. The Cocoon would not be pressurized, but it could have pressurized structure in it, newly built.

Although I like Starship, I am very interested in Stoke Spaces 2nd Stage.
https://www.stokespace.com/nova/
Image Quote:
The claims quote:

Refit, refuel, refly
Our reusable upper stage features a liquid, regeneratively cooled metallic reentry heat shield with an integrated modular liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen (LH2/LOX) rocket engine. It’s robust, resilient to damage, and operates with passive failure modes.
Designed for minimal refurbishment between flights, our second stage unlocks rapid turnaround and offers:
Direct access to GTO, TLI, and other high-energy orbits
Unlimited engine restarts
Return from orbit to launch site: precision, powered vertical landings

Is this Heresy? Well, my hope is that the little version of NOVA will work, and that they will eventually supersize it and put it on Superheavy by SpaceX. So, not wrong, just different.

Such a ship if lifted from Earth by the assistance of Superheavy, towed to Mars, may be used to convey water and then Hydrogen to Mars orbits, I hope. To start with water. But when the "Ores" of Phobos and Deimos begin to produce Oxygen, then it might be possible to lift Hydrogen and immediately combine it with Oxygen to produce water.

So, then you have the stuff of life in orbit but also a propellant, "Water". I believe that 11% of water is Hydrogen?
Quote:

Like
Dislike
Water contains approximately 11% hydrogen by mass, calculated from its molecular composition and atomic masses.
Step-by-Step Explanation
Water has the chemical formula H₂O, meaning each molecule contains two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom. To determine the mass percent of hydrogen, we use the atomic masses of the elements:
Hydrogen (H) ≈ 1.008 atomic mass units (amu)
Oxygen (O) ≈ 16.00 amu
Since there are two hydrogen atoms in water, the total mass of hydrogen in one molecule is:
2 × 1.008 = 2.016 amu
The total mass of a water molecule is the sum of the hydrogen and oxygen masses:
2.016 + 16.00 = 18.016 amu
The mass percent of hydrogen is then calculated by dividing the mass of hydrogen by the total mass of water and multiplying by 100:
(2.016 ÷ 18.016) × 100 ≈ 11.19%
This shows that about 11% of the mass of water comes from hydrogen, while the remaining ~89% comes from oxygen
Sciencing
Sciencing
+2
.
Key Points
The calculation is based on mass, not the number of atoms. Although there are more hydrogen atoms than oxygen atoms in water, oxygen is much heavier, so it contributes more to the total mass.
This mass percent is consistent for any sample of pure water, whether it is a single molecule or a large volume, because the ratio of hydrogen to oxygen is fixed in H₂O
libretexts.org
libretexts.org
+1
.
Understanding mass percent is essential for stoichiometry, chemical reactions, and determining empirical formulas in chemistry
Vedantu
Vedantu
+1
.
By using the molecular formula and atomic masses from the periodic table, chemists can reliably determine that hydrogen makes up roughly 11% of water by mass.

So, then we might have a major watering hole. 11% being Hydrogen then 89% is Oxygen from Phobos and/or Deimos. Then if digging into Phobos and Deimos, finds water ice or Hydrated Minerals, the game switches up a great deal.

It may also be that Phobos and/or Deimos will have Carbon in them. So, then refilling for Raptor and similar will be possible. Otherwise, you have to get your Carbon from Mars.

Once you may have established a production facility in orbit, you could just keep on expanding it.

While there are those who want to cook all the propellants on the surface of Mars, capturing "Atoms" as best convenient to Mars orbits then puts them in the reach of both Local Solar Power and Nuclear Electric Power that the Earth may send/sell to Mars.

Having an orbit refilling base(s) in orbit then may give a position to begin expanding into the asteroid belt.

And that will be beyond major in providing things that could be used to good purposes.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-06-20 09:40:38)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#273 2026-06-20 10:06:03

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

Returning to the Asteroid Belt: https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 68#p239868
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_belt
Image Quote:

I thought I saw a number in association with Mars, some major asteroids having almost three times as long a year as Mars. I think that there may be a number there it may not be exactly 3. So, Jupiter and its Trojans pull the Asteroid belt to higher orbits, and does the Asteroid belt stabilize the Mars orbit? at about 1/3 that of the average of the Asteroid belt?

Mars then has an influence on our Ice Ages?

Quote:

Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
Mars’ Role in Shaping Earth’s Ice Ages
Recent research suggests that Mars, despite being small and distant, can influence Earth’s long-term climate cycles — including the timing of ice ages.
How Mars Influences Earth’s Climate
Scientists at the University of California, Riverside, led by Stephen Kane, ran large-scale computer simulations of the solar system to test whether Mars’ gravitational pull could affect Earth’s orbital and axial changes. They found that removing Mars from the model caused two major climate cycles to disappear — a 100,000‑year cycle and a 2.3‑million‑year cycle — while a 430,000‑year cycle driven mainly by Venus and Jupiter remained Earth.com+1.
These cycles are part of the Milankovitch cycles, which describe slow changes in:
Eccentricity – the shape of Earth’s orbit (more circular or more stretched)
Obliquity – the tilt of Earth’s axis
Precession – the direction Earth’s axis points
Changes in these parameters alter how much sunlight reaches different latitudes, influencing summer temperatures and ice sheet growth EarthSky+1.
Why Mars Matters
Mars is about half Earth’s diameter and one‑tenth its mass, but its orbit is far enough from the Sun that it exerts a stronger gravitational influence on Earth than if it were closer Astronomy Magazine. In the simulations, increasing Mars’ mass made the affected cycles shorter, showing that even small mass changes can shift climate rhythms Earth.com.
Evidence in the Geologic Record
Ocean sediment layers and ice cores contain rhythmic patterns matching these cycles. The disappearance of certain rhythms when Mars is removed in models suggests that Mars’ gravitational tugs are a key factor in preserving these signals in Earth’s deep-time climate history Astronomy Magazine+1.
Summary
While Mars is small, its position and mass mean it can modulate Earth’s orbital and axial variations, directly affecting the timing and intensity of ice ages. This adds Mars to the list of planetary influences on Earth’s climate, alongside the Sun, Moon, Venus, and Jupiter.

So, I am interested in a possible idea of putting 3 platforms in the asteroid belt, synchronous with Mars.

From post #271:

2036/3 = 678.6666666666667
So, the 10 Hygeia year seems to be very close to 3 Mars Years.
687*3 = 2,061 So that is 3 times the year of Mars.
Spooky. Is it possible that some resonance with Mars, disturbed by other objects causes many of the major asteroids to be at about 3 AU?
I am actually thinking of artificial worlds like O'Neill Cylinders in various orbits.

I started by thinking that you might anchor to a particular asteroid such as 10 Hygeia, but perhaps 3 collections of artificial worlds with orbit synchronized with the orbit of Mars that might be a "Best" location. I would be happy to be corrected.

So, probably massive amounts of water are available from various asteroids, and also the spectrum of minerals.

So, if you have 3 platforms in somewhat circular orbits, at approximately 3 AU, it will not take that much thrusting to bring water and minerals to these platform locations.

Then is it possible to have some sort of cycler spaceships that can be synchronous to the 3 platforms?

Using such may allow quick transfers of humans on and off the cyclers.

But then if water can be used as a plasma thrust method, you might be able to move materials to these cyclers with efficiency.

Query: "Water plasma Thrusters in Space?"
Quote:

Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
Water Plasma Thrusters in Space
Water plasma thrusters are an emerging class of electric propulsion systems that use water as a propellant, converting it into plasma and accelerating it to produce thrust. They are being developed for use in small satellites (SmallSats), deep-space missions, and even in-space refueling scenarios.
How They Work
The Water-based Electric Thrusters (WET) concept, led by the University of Bologna under Horizon Europe, involves:
Vaporizing water into a gaseous state.
Ionizing the vapor to create plasma — a high-energy state of matter with free electrons and ions.
Accelerating the plasma through an electric field to generate thrust Interesting Engineering+1.
This process is similar to other electric thrusters (e.g., Hall-effect or ion thrusters) but uses water instead of traditional propellants like hydrazine.
Advantages
Abundant fuel: Water can be sourced from the Moon, asteroids, or even onboard spacecraft, enabling in-space refueling Interesting Engineering+1.
Low environmental impact: No harmful emissions compared to chemical rockets GreekReporter.com.
Low power needs: Some designs operate at 500–1000 watts, making them ideal for SmallSats with limited power budgets Interesting Engineering.
High specific impulse: For example, Miles Space’s Poseidon M1.5 thruster achieved 4,800 seconds specific impulse at just 1.5 watts of power, enabling long-duration, low-thrust missions SpaceNews.
Examples and Testing
Miles Space Poseidon M1.5: A cubesat-sized thruster producing 37.5 mN of thrust over five minutes at ultra-low power SpaceNews.
Momentus Space & Astro Digital: Testing water plasma thrusters on the El Camino Real mission SpaceNews.
Tethers Unlimited Hydros-C: Uses electrolysis to split water into hydrogen and oxygen for electrothermal propulsion SpaceNews.
NASA Pathfinder Technology Demonstrator: Scheduled to test Hydros-C on the ISS before deployment SpaceNews.
Applications
Orbit transfer and station-keeping for satellites.
Deep-space missions requiring long-duration, low-thrust propulsion.
In-space refueling for extended missions.
SmallSat deployment where power and mass are critical.
Outlook
If successful, water plasma thrusters could reduce launch costs, enable longer missions, and support a sustainable space economy by using local water resources. Current research focuses on improving plasma stability, efficiency, and integration into spacecraft systems before widespread adoption Interesting Engineering+2.
In short, water plasma thrusters are a promising, eco-friendly propulsion technology that could transform how spacecraft move through space — especially for small and deep-space missions.

So, water is sort of magic, as you might use it as a plasma for thrust, but also if desired might do Hydra-Lox thrust as well when you wanted to. And you could also use high temperature steam as a thrust method.

And a Water Ship as I have thought about can provide a lot of protections for humans and their AI/Robots.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-06-20 10:30:47)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#274 2026-06-20 20:02:55

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

The question is could you lift water to Mars orbit for a relatively small price?

SpaceX is hoping for $200.00/kg or better. And that is in using both the Superheavy and Starship. On Mars it may be hoped that you can do SSTO, and therefore perhaps have a lower price.

The most optimistic number I have seen for Starship is $10.00/kg from Earth to LEO. My bet would be no, but still for Mars maybe.

Presuming an electric supply, either nuclear or solar in orbit, this may be a better way to refill a ship for return to Earth from Mars than to do the major refilling on the surface of Mars.

As for trips up and down, if a ship can be refilled in orbit to go back down, then you don't have to fill it's tanks full on launch from the surface.
In fact, you could have smaller tanks and so then less dry mass.

As it is closer to "Apples to Apples" than is Metha-Lox, I want to see if the volume game is better with water lifted to orbit or Liquid Oxygen and Liquid Hydrogen.

I am not stipulating chilled LOX so that is a bit of a fault.

Query: "What weighs more a volume of water or a volume of Liquid Oxygen?"
Quote:

Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
Which Weighs More: A Volume of Water or a Volume of Liquid Oxygen?
A volume of liquid oxygen weighs more than the same volume of water because it is denser.
At standard conditions for liquid oxygen (about -183°C and 1atm), liquid oxygen has a density of about 1.141g/mL, while water has a density of about 1.000g/mL Answers+1. This means that for the same volume, liquid oxygen is roughly 15% heavier than water.
For example:
1 liter of water weighs about 1.00kg.
1 liter of liquid oxygen weighs about 1.14kg CoolConversion.
This difference occurs because, although oxygen molecules (O₂) are lighter than water molecules (H₂O) in terms of molecular mass, liquid oxygen is compressed into a much denser state than gaseous oxygen, and its density exceeds that of liquid water.
Summary:
If you have equal volumes of water and liquid oxygen, liquid oxygen will weigh more due to its higher density.

So, it is LOX 1.14 to water 1.00 (Not considering chilling the LOX).

But I think I might multiply 1.14 * .89 = 1.0146 As water is 89% Oxygen.

I expect Hydrogen to compare poorly with water though.

Query: "What weighs more a volume of water or a volume of Liquid Hydrogen?"
Quote:

Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
Water vs. Liquid Hydrogen: Which Weighs More?
A volume of water weighs far more than the same volume of liquid hydrogen.
Why?
Water density: At its maximum density (4°C), water has a density of about 1.0g/mL (1,000kg/m³) calculatorsoup.app.
Liquid hydrogen density: At its normal boiling point (~−252.8°C), liquid hydrogen has a density of about 0.0708kg/L (70.8kg/m³) biologyinsights.com+1.
This means water is roughly 14× denser than liquid hydrogen.
Example comparison:
1 liter of water weighs 1kg (≈2.2lb).
1 liter of liquid hydrogen weighs only 0.0708kg (≈0.157lb) biologyinsights.com.
Even a cubic meter of water weighs 1,000kg, while the same volume of liquid hydrogen weighs just 70.8kg biologyinsights.com.
Key takeaway:
For the same volume, water is vastly heavier than liquid hydrogen because hydrogen atoms are much lighter than oxygen and hydrogen atoms in water. This is why liquid hydrogen storage tanks are so massive — the fuel itself is extremely light, and the tank’s weight often exceeds the fuel it contains biologyinsights.com.

So, my fuzzy dust bunny brain wants to 1000/70.8 = 14.12429378531073 times the volume for the fuel tank. But of course Hydrogen is only 11% of the content of water.

But I guestimate that water is reasonable and even favorable for the tankage dry mass relative to two tanks one LOX and one Hydrogen. And the weight of the tanks may be worse for the LOX and Liquid Hydrogen as they are Cryogenic.

In other words, I think it might be easier to lift water from the surface of Mars and store it then if you need to crack it into propellants.

However, if you supersize a Stoke Space NOVA (2nd Stage) and use it on Mars, (And it works), you could do some of both lift Water and lift LOX and Hydrogen.

If it works I also suggest that SpaceX investigate if they could collaborate with Stoke Space. If they could use Superheavy to loft it to LEO,
It could carry water or Carbon up, and upon landing would not need the catch tower, and might be suitable to land on a barge at sea.

Yes the Starship is a good machine, but this one might be able to do somethings better in some cases.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-06-20 20:37:19)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

#275 2026-06-21 09:24:17

Void: Member; Registered: 2011-12-29; Posts: 9,621

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

So, a bit of a review of Deimos and Phobos.

It is very uncertain that the certainty is certain.

Query: "Composition of Deimos?"
Quote:

Like
Dislike
Deimos is primarily composed of carbon-rich rock, with a surface covered in dark, porous regolith and traces of hydrated minerals.
Surface and Material Composition
Deimos is a small, irregularly shaped moon with a mean radius of about 6.2 km and a triaxial ellipsoid shape measuring roughly 16 × 12 × 10 km
Wikipedia
Wikipedia
+1
. Its surface is gray and very dark, reflecting only about 7% of sunlight, which is consistent with a carbonaceous composition similar to C- or D-type asteroids
Encyclopedia Britannica
Encyclopedia Britannica
+2
. The surface is covered with a thick layer of fine regolith, which partially fills craters and gives Deimos a smoother appearance compared to Phobos
Encyclopedia Britannica
Encyclopedia Britannica
+1
. This regolith is highly porous, with a radar-estimated density of approximately 1.47 g/cm³
Wikipedia
Wikipedia
+1
.
Internal Structure
Deimos appears to be undifferentiated, meaning it lacks a distinct metallic core or layered interior. Its low density and small size suggest it never experienced significant heating or melting, unlike larger moons or planets
astronoo.com
astronoo.com
. The moon may contain organic-rich materials and hydrated silicates, indicating the presence of water in trace amounts, particularly in shadowed regions of craters
astronoo.com
astronoo.com
.
Mineralogical Insights
Spectroscopic studies suggest that Deimos's surface may include mafic minerals such as olivine and pyroxene, along with dark components like amorphous carbon or Fe-bearing materials produced by space weathering
oup.com
oup.com
. The exact composition is still under investigation, and future missions, such as JAXA's MMX sample return mission, aim to provide more precise data
oup.com
oup.com
.
Origin Implications
The carbonaceous and low-density nature of Deimos supports the hypothesis that it may be a captured asteroid from the outer main belt, although alternative theories suggest it could have formed from debris resulting from a giant impact on Mars
astronoo.com
astronoo.com
. Its composition closely resembles that of primitive asteroids, reinforcing the capture scenario
marspedia.org
marspedia.org
+1
.
In summary, Deimos is a small, carbon-rich, porous moon with a regolith-covered surface, traces of hydrated minerals, and an undifferentiated interior, making it similar in composition to certain asteroids in the solar system
Wikipedia
Wikipedia
+3
.

Query: "Composition of Phobos?"
Quote:

Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
Phobos is primarily composed of carbon-rich, porous material similar to C-type and D-type asteroids, with a surface dominated by regolith, dark minerals, and possible subsurface ice.
Surface and Spectral Composition
Phobos has a very dark, low-reflectivity surface with an albedo of about 0.06–0.07, making it one of the least reflective bodies in the Solar System
Wikipedia
Wikipedia
+1
. Spectral observations indicate the presence of carbonaceous material, similar to carbonaceous chondrites, and its surface shows similarities to D-type asteroids, which are dark and often rich in organic compounds
MDPI
MDPI
. Laboratory analyses suggest that the surface may contain amorphous carbon, Fe0, and FeS-bearing minerals, likely produced by space weathering
oup.com
oup.com
. There is also evidence for mafic minerals such as olivine and pyroxene, though the presence of hydrated minerals is still debated
oup.com
oup.com
.
Physical Properties and Internal Structure
Phobos is a small, irregularly shaped moon with dimensions of approximately 13 × 11 × 9 km and a mean radius of 11 km
Wikipedia
Wikipedia
+1
. Its bulk density is low (~1.9 g/cm³), indicating significant porosity and suggesting it may be a rubble-pile structure rather than solid rock
Wikipedia
Wikipedia
+1
. This porosity has led to hypotheses that Phobos could contain subsurface ice, although the surface regolith appears largely anhydrous
Wikipedia
Wikipedia
. The surface is heavily cratered, with the largest crater, Stickney, measuring 9–10 km in diameter, and is covered with grooves and streaks likely related to impacts and tidal stresses
Wikipedia
Wikipedia
+1
.
Origin Implications
The composition of Phobos supports two main origin hypotheses: it may be a captured primitive asteroid, particularly a C-type or D-type asteroid, or it could have formed from debris ejected by a giant impact on Mars
oup.com
oup.com
. Its spectral similarity to carbonaceous chondrites and low density favor the captured asteroid scenario, while orbital dynamics are consistent with a giant impact origin
oup.com
oup.com
. Future missions, such as JAXA’s MMX sample return mission, aim to provide direct measurements to resolve these questions
oup.com
oup.com
.
Summary
In essence, Phobos is a dark, carbon-rich, porous moon with a regolith-covered surface, potential subsurface ice, and a composition closely resembling C-type and D-type asteroids. Its mineralogy includes carbonaceous material, Fe-bearing minerals, and possibly olivine and pyroxene, while its low density and high porosity suggest a rubble-pile internal structure. Understanding its composition is crucial for insights into Mars’ history, asteroid capture processes, and future exploration missions
Wikipedia
Wikipedia
+2
.

A UAE probes results seem to disagree and suggest that Deimos is composed largely of volcanic rock splashed off of Mars:
Query: "UAE probe analysis of composition of Deimos? "
Quote:

Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
UAE Probe’s Analysis of Deimos’ Composition
The UAE’s Emirates Mars Mission (EMM), also known as Hope, has provided the first detailed close-up observations of Mars’ smaller moon Deimos, revealing composition and structure that challenge the long-held theory that it is a captured asteroid.
Key findings from EMM’s instruments (EMUS, EMIRS, EXI)
Thermal infrared (EMIRS) data show Deimos’ surface is rough at small scales and covered in fine regolith, similar to Phobos and Earth’s Moon. The composition appears consistent with dark, volcanic rock typical of Mars’ surface The NAU Review.
Spectral analysis (EMUS) of reflected sunlight found a flat, featureless spectrum with no strong signatures of carbon minerals or organics. This rules out a D-type asteroid origin, which is carbon-rich and expected if Deimos were captured from the asteroid belt Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics.
First-ever far-side observations from the March 10, 2023 flyby revealed regions never before studied, showing surface textures and reflectance properties consistent with Martian rock The NAU Review+1.
Implications for origin
The results strongly suggest Deimos formed from debris left over after a giant impact on Mars, rather than being a captured asteroid. This supports a planetary origin for both Deimos and Phobos, meaning they are “chips off the old Martian block” JSTOR Daily+1.
Why this matters
It shifts the debate from “captured asteroid” to “coalesced Mars debris,” offering a new model for moon formation in the solar system.
The findings may help explain how Mars’ moons came into orbit and how such moons form in general.
Further study is needed to determine the exact impact mechanism and timing that produced Deimos and Phobos Advanced Science News.
In short, UAE’s Hope mission has shown that Deimos’ composition matches Mars’ own surface rock, not asteroid types, pointing to a shared origin with the Red Planet.

* In any case, the two moons are composed of atoms of some sort. Any material which is needed and not available from the moons is likely available from Mars.

In any case an option that could be available is this:

If nuclear powered stacks kept being sent to the orbits of Mars, and if both a radiation shell and solar panels could be constructed from materials of Phobos and Demos, at some point sufficient industrial capacity could exist so that the "Martians" could begin making "O'Neill" inspired space structures. No mass driver needed.

It is hard to say but perhaps they could even make data centers and process data for Earth and themselves.

And I think that the case for beaming power down to the surface of Mars may be rather good. The dust storms are really the major problem but not all the time.

Query: "Beaming power down to Mars from Orbits?"
Quote:

Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
Beaming Power from Orbit to Mars
Beaming power from orbit to Mars is a concept in space power beaming — the wireless transfer of electrical energy over long distances using focused electromagnetic waves, typically microwaves or lasers spacevoyageventures.com+1.
How It Works
Transmitter: A power source in orbit (e.g., a solar-powered satellite) converts electricity into a directed beam of microwaves or lasers.
Beam: The beam travels through space, requiring precise aiming and beam control to minimize losses.
Receiver: On Mars, a rectenna (rectifying antenna) or specialized photovoltaic cell captures the beam and converts it back into usable electricity spacevoyageventures.com+1.
Microwave systems are more mature, often using 2–6GHz frequencies with phased-array antennas, while laser systems can achieve higher power densities but need wavelength-specific receivers spacevoyageventures.com.
Why It’s Useful for Mars
Overcomes solar limitations: Mars has long nights and dust storms that can block solar panels, making beamed power a reliable alternative NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS).
Supports permanent outposts: Continuous power delivery enables human bases or robotic operations in permanently shadowed regions NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS).
Reduces payload mass: Instead of carrying large onboard generators, orbiting stations can supply power remotely www.satnow.com.
Enables deep space missions: Similar concepts could power landers, rovers, or even future interplanetary bases NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS).
Challenges
Beam focusing over 200million km: Maintaining a tight, loss-minimized beam over interplanetary distances is technically demanding.
Efficiency losses: Atmospheric interference, beam divergence, and receiver alignment affect overall efficiency.
Safety and regulations: High-power beams must be contained to avoid interference with Earth-based systems or spacecraft.
Power source size: Orbiting stations need large, efficient power plants (solar arrays, nuclear) to generate enough energy for beaming.
Current Research
NASA and other agencies have explored beaming for the Moon and Mars, including powering landers and rovers from orbit NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS). Advances in rectenna technology, phased-array antennas, and laser diodes are improving efficiency and safety spacevoyageventures.com+1.
In summary: Beaming power from orbit to Mars is a promising, though still developmental, approach to provide continuous, reliable energy for Martian missions, especially in low-light or permanently shadowed areas, by using focused microwave or laser beams to deliver electricity without physical wires spacevoyageventures.com+2.

In more current times the idea could exist to have various lander types to access the surface of Mars.

The two examples we have now are the Starship and possibly the NOVA from Stoke Space. Perhaps SpaceX will eventually create a Mini-Starship, and with Stoke Space create a Maxi-NOVA.

Lots of uncertain times before that will happen.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2026-06-21 09:59:14)

Is it possible that the root of political science claims is to produce white collar jobs for people who paid for an education and do not want a real job?

Offline

Like button can go here

Pages: Previous 1 … 9 10 11 12 Next

Board footer

Jump to

Atom topic feed