New Mars Forums
You are not logged in.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Announcement
#976 Re: Human missions » Space Initive Launch Vehicle » 2004-09-07 21:10:12
I had a crazy idea for launching passengers and light cargo by using blimps to send up a spaceplace carrying 10 passengers or the equivilent refrigderator sized consoles for experiments to a high altitude, as high as possible, then use disposable, or even reuseable Pegasus sized boosters to get into orbit. It would probably look like the old HL-20 plans.
Kind of combining a couple of the X-prize ideas. The big question is how high the blimps can go (it'd have to be huge to get something that big up), and if the boosters can get it up to orbital velocity. Scramjets might be needed.
The nice thing about it is thered be little to no atmosphere to cut through, and you could enter into any orbit you want, only being limited buy the altitude the fuel in your boosters could get you to.
For heavy cargo we just send up a heavy lifter once a month and auction off "mass space".
#977 Re: Human missions » Space Initive Launch Vehicle » 2004-09-07 10:11:09
Until there is a large NEED to send huge numbers of people into space, then it doesn't make any sense to spend the many billions of dollars to make a fully reuseable ship.
Untill it can be done, people won't bother to think of ways it can be used.
We need to change the way of thinking from "If only we could do a, b, and c, we could do x, y, and z." to "Hey, now that we can do a, b, and c, we can not only do z, y, and z, but everything in between as well".
#978 Re: Human missions » hurricanes, should we have kept sl6 » 2004-09-07 10:04:23
We need more than one launch center so we can launch more stuff at the same time, and so no single event disrupts our access to space.
And it would help if they more than 6 or so feet above sea level as well. 
#979 Re: Human missions » Post central for information on CEV 2 - ...continue here. » 2004-09-04 18:16:35
The question is, how do we get the heavy metals from orbit to earth? Add on of those inflatable heat shields, aim for the desert and hope for the best?
#980 Re: Human missions » Post central for information on CEV 2 - ...continue here. » 2004-08-27 13:15:17
Plus the ISS is at an unfavorable orbital inclination. Any new station ought to be placed in an equitorial orbit to minimize the payload penalty. The Russians are building a Soyuz pad in French Guiana, which I imagine could be converted to launch manned vehicles as well.
Was there a reason it was placed in the orbits its in?
#981 Re: Human missions » Clunking to Mars - Are the needed parts already up there? » 2004-08-27 13:11:17
there both hefty file 32 and 22 megs respectively... please do feed back any comments to me.
Cheers
Those links appear to be dead.
#982 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » The Moon Treaty of 1979 - Turning Curse into a Blessing » 2004-08-27 13:07:26
I'd say that the outer space and moon treaties were established to prevent either Cold War advarsaries from using space and its resources to gain to much of an advantage over the other.
Given that that environment no longer exist, and that both the leading aerospace nations would profit from such changes, I'd bet that the required changes could be made.
#983 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » Major Extrasolar Planet Discovery - ...to be announced August 31! » 2004-08-27 12:40:22
One "M-class" planet coming up?
Wouldn't that be something! Probably not though.
Have to be a big one, anyway.
Well, what else could be described as "a significant and much-anticipated advance in the hunt for extra-solar planets."?
Perhaps its something relatively close, so its easier to see.
#984 Re: Human missions » Post central for information on CEV 2 - ...continue here. » 2004-08-27 10:49:03
It would be silly to trash the ISS untill a new station was up and running. Building them very close together would enable construction crews to work from and use some of the assets from the ISS to speed up construction.
#985 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » Major Extrasolar Planet Discovery - ...to be announced August 31! » 2004-08-27 08:40:32
One "M-class" planet coming up?
#986 Re: Human missions » Post central for information on CEV 2 - ...continue here. » 2004-08-27 08:26:24
There are other ways around the structural stress problem.
The problem is that the Soyuz/Shuttle is based at the very center of the of the station, with large truss peices sticking out like wings. The solution therefore, is to not just push at the ceter of the station. Place small thrusters at the end of the truss segments, and have them go off at the same time and appropreate rate to move them with the center part of the station instead of having them get dragged up.
A set of ion engines could probably keep the whole thing up permenantly without any outside help, other then refueling.
#987 Re: Human missions » Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft » 2004-08-25 20:58:23
Why do we need an outpost in LEO again? Maybe an unmanned fuel depot, but if we are going to the Moon and Mars and we built a rocket of decent size, there is no need for a space station.
No matter how much any heavy lift rocket can lift, there will still be a need for orbital assmebly beyond simple docking. And theres a good deal of science that can be done only in 0g.
I submit that the ISS may not be the best platform to do this, but its an asset, and a good place to start.
#988 Re: Human missions » Post central for information on CEV - iformation station for the spacecraft » 2004-08-25 20:35:13
I'd like to see them send up one on each end of the ISS with the CanadaArm (I'm not sure if they can have that and the HAB at the same time) to provide a construction station that can be used to assemble Lunar/Martian transit craft, service satillites (or the Hubble), ect.
I think it was determined that it would never work cause the the life support systems were not deisigned to operate permenantly, and the rocket fuel would start to burn through its tanks.
Of course, if your going to replace all that, perhapes as a testbed for technologies needed in future long term craft, then it would be worth it.
If theres one thing I find disturbing about the new plan, its that it ignoirs the requirement for an orbital outpost.
#989 Re: Unmanned probes » Mars steerable parachute » 2004-08-23 15:33:04
Just what Nasa needs to do, award another contract to the big guy's in the space biz. Did not the commissions final report say to use the private industry. I know that they recently asked for information on just that section of the report.
Boeing is private industry. But they are going to subcontract this out, balloning the cost.
#990 Re: Human missions » China The Dominant Superpower In 20 Years..... - What does this mean for US? » 2004-08-22 13:41:38
or else we could end up with a North and South China one communist, likely the south would be free, and the north not. That would not be too good.
We already have that with China and Tiawan.
#991 Re: Human missions » China The Dominant Superpower In 20 Years..... - What does this mean for US? » 2004-08-21 10:10:22
I wouldn't worry about China. The communists will be gone when the uncontrolled economic bubble there in bursts or they try to start something with Tiawan/US.
In the end they'll end up something like Japan, a valuable economic powerhouse and ally.
#992 Re: Human missions » The need for a Moon direct - and sustainabilty program » 2004-08-21 08:47:36
Since the goal is a self sustaining outpost, the only expense is the start up investment. We send them up with with what they need to extract/recycle air and water, and grow there own food.
Other than maintanance and crew swapping flights, there shouldn't be any additional cost. And ideally, they would be able to produce there own repair parts.
Of course those technologies will probably find plenty of profitable applications right on Earth, long before it ever turns a profit from the moon. Possibly enough to finance lunar operations.
#993 Re: Human missions » The need for a Moon direct - and sustainabilty program » 2004-08-20 18:45:04
Just to build the present day shuttle or Boeing 777 or 747 commercial jet liner it take tens of thousand of people at Boeing and another tens of people in many subcontractor that employ many more people. Even if you could cut that 20,000 to 30,000 thousand people down to only 2,000 to 3,000 people using new technology which are labor savers. It might be great down here to increase productive of the labor force, but it would still be too many people to be sending into space to make a colony self-sufficient. The reason that I use the shuttle and the Boeing 777 or 747 commercial jet liner as my example is, I know from personal experience what it would take to build those things. I have worked in the manufacturing department in making air craft or more pacifically, the landing gear and I know what it takes to build some thing like that. It called having infrastructure like government road to carry the resources or other business to help Boeing build there air craft, etc. Although you won't be committing that many people to one project, you will have to dedicate that many or more people to multiple sets of projects and if you can't do it, then you idea won't work.
Yeah, but how much of that could be automated?
You know what the great thing about Mars? No Labor Unions. 
Theres a lot of work to be done in the automating and miniaturizing manufacturing before we can have sprawling factories.
I think alot of it is going to be done be small machine shops. And of course to most important component, the software to run the machines and machines that make the machines, can all be writen on Earth.
It amazed me just how quickly we could solve and upgrade problems ont he rovers by simply beaming up a patch.
#994 Re: Human missions » The need for a Moon direct - and sustainabilty program » 2004-08-20 13:04:24
Quote Dook Aug, 20 2004 12;09
Robots working non-stop to build a long term space exploration for Humans into space? Where are you planning to send all these Humans?
Where do the people who control the Robots be when we are working on the Moon, Easy in offices located on Earth, doing shifts and handing over control of there robot to the next office in the chain as there shift finishes.
One thing we must do is to make the return to the Moon by people as effective as possible. And when we return it must be to stay and to exploit what is there. If we use robots to increase the Solar power grid and to actually build facilities and to mine the Moon this lets us use the more flexible Humans to actually do what they do best-THINK. As the robots are mining they will let the Humans do the surveying and exploration that is what we wish to do there, not the basics we should be overseers not grunts.
It would still require a limited human presence on the surface to do maintainance on the robots, and oversee construction. Besides, we'd want geologic survey teams anyway.
#995 Re: Human missions » The need for a Moon direct - and sustainabilty program » 2004-08-20 12:51:12
I never said we should have a mars base. In fact, I don't think there will be or should be any significant numbers of people on mars until it has an atmosphere. Up till then, scientists for visits of 6 mo to 1 yr.
Also, if we were to build a permanent base somewhere mars would be a much better choice than the moon. Just because it is close does not make it better. Mars has water, it has CO2 that can be converted to oxygen, and we can probably grow food in pressurized domes.
I think it will take several permenant installations and several thousand people, both requiring considerable surface and orbital infrastructure to support any serious terraforming operation.
And thats not to say that there can't be or shouldn't be mineral expolitation of Mars in its current state, or as it transitions. In fact I'd bet it would be far easier in its current state because of the lack of liquid water or biomass to cover it, or a thicker atmosphere to complicate moving such mineral resources off world.
Plus, as technology progesses, I have no doubt that a normal earth-like life on Mars will be more than possible long before terraforming is complete.
Anyway, regardless of what happens on Mars, any serious manned exploration of the solar system will require materials of such mass that are not practical to launch from Earth. The moon has everything needed to create such things, and with a bit a creativity, support human populations.
#996 Re: Human missions » The need for a Moon direct - and sustainabilty program » 2004-08-20 12:20:34
It's not relatively easy to have a permenant Mars base. How are you going to feed, supply water, and oxygen to all these people?
People design and implement techniques to use resources. All the resources are there on Mars. Solar cell manufacture would be the first step. From there, keep manufacturing everything needed. That is what people do on Earth, Mine and manufacture.
Much of the same can be on the Moon. There are differences obviously, but theres quite a bit of overlap in requirements between the two.
#997 Re: Human missions » The need for a Moon direct - and sustainabilty program » 2004-08-20 11:16:44
It's not relatively easy to have a permanent moon base. How are you going to feed, supply water, and oxygen, to all these people?
It's not relatively easy to have a permenant Mars base. How are you going to feed, supply water, and oxygen to all these people?
#998 Re: Life support systems » Long Term Health Effects - Life on a low grav, rusty planet » 2004-08-19 20:35:35
I'm going out on a limb, and state catagorically--unless proven wrong experimentally--that life lived on Mars will be longer in real time than on Earth, and on Moon even longer, due to less work, wear and tear on the heart muscle.
I'll bet any such benifits would be offset by the radiation exposure.
#999 Re: Human missions » The need for a Moon direct - and sustainabilty program » 2004-08-19 20:15:44
Finally, I wish to express my doubt in MarsDirect and Dr. Zubrin's plan... I don't think that MarsDirect is really any more than a Martian Apollo, as the entire system is just barely enough to get people to and from, and that is about all. The practical limitations of the Ares or other SDV vehicle demand that MarsDirect have very, very small mass margins, so small that any serious weight creep will doom the mission. So little useful hardware mass can be sent to Mars this way makes the whole proposition of dubious usefulness.
MarsDirect was never meant to be an ideal mission plan. But it is something we can afford today, and can implement with current technology. We have to reach a compromise, guys! Colombus didn't set off to colonize America; Hell, he didn't even set off to explore the continent. Rather, he just wanted to see if he could make it all the way to China. Colonization came after exploration, which only came after discovery. Colonization of Mars will probably not happen within our lifetimes. We must face this and set our sights on something we can achieve within our lifetimes. And MarsDirect may just be that something.
True exploration will take time, and on site infrastructure.
We need an outpost from which to launch further local expeditions. Anything that doesn't directly support that goal a waste of money.
#1000 Re: Human missions » The need for a Moon direct - and sustainabilty program » 2004-08-19 19:55:01
The Moon our our space industrial base. We might be able to pull of a Mars Direct type mission without going to the moon, but not much else.
Our long term future in space is dependent on the Moon. Theres no reason delay.
Was wondering if you could elaborate on exactly how the moon is our space industrial base?
Its the most economical source, given the gravity well, of minerals and fuel, as well as supporting a human population, for any future operations in space.
Asteroids may very well provide the minerals, but lack the ability support a population, and are a lot farthur away.
Mars has the minerals and the ability to support a population, but is far away and has an atmosphere, one we would be trying to thicken.