Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

Calliban · 2020-06-06 11:03:39

With a density of only 0.013kg/m3 at the datum surface, the Martian atmosphere would have very little drag effect on a rocket launched from its surface. The thought occured to me that it should be possible to launch rockets in which fuel and oxidizer are contained as low density compressed gases in flexible polymer bags, at non-cryogenic temperatures. The gases would force their way into the rocket combustion chamber without need for a pump and without any phase change within the engine, there shouldn't be any combustion instability issues. The resulting engine pressure would be low, no more than 1atm, as the feed pressure of the gases would be low. However, the stage itself would have very low density and would be constructed rather like the old rigid airships of the 1920-30s, with flexible gas bags contained in a thin metal frame with a fabric overcover. On Earth, atmospheric drag would make this unworkable. On Mars, one would need to exceed speed of sound before drag became significant, especially for a large vehicle with high volume to surface ratio.

One could even use air dynamic pressure from the atmosphere itself to help force propellant into the engine. Whilst a low pressure engine would be unworkable inefficient at Earth surface, the Martian surface pressure is almost zero. So a very low pressure engine would still offer acceptable exhaust velocity.

For reentry, the entire vehicle could be deflated and packed into a compact reentry vehicle.

Any thoughts?

Last edited by Calliban (2020-06-06 11:06:40)

SpaceNut · 2020-06-06 11:48:01

The balloon I think you are using as a light mass holding tank for use and supply of a gas that would expand and force the remaining rocket upward from the surface. If one has power to heat a chamber the gas pressure before exiting the rockets bell would allow for a higher capability of height and distance for the system.
The balloon could be cable drawn back into a small package as the volume of internal atmosphere is exhausted and as its internal pressure drops. The drawing in of the balloons volume would increase the remaining volumes pressure keeping the supply to the engine as higher as we can. The open shroud to which would be used for the balloon to hide in would need to be made as light as possible so as to keep the total rockets mass as low as possible.
Now if the balloon is made to hold co and o as a means to further cause the rockets engine to have a reaction when mixed in the chamber we would be adding to the capability o get to orbit.

Calliban · 2020-06-06 12:07:42

Essentially, this is a pressure fed rocket vehicle, with fuel gas and oxygen contained in pressurized bags, rather than as cryogenic liquids. The combustion chamber would be a thin metal shell and would probably be radiatively cooled. The vehicle would have large volume relative to its mass. That and the low chamber pressure make this concept workable only in low pressure environments.

tahanson43206 · 2020-06-06 12:40:08

For Calliban re new topic ...

I like the direction you are heading here, and hope your new topic is successful.

As a reminder, work has been done to show that a Hindenburg sized dirigible would function on Mars. Links to the work are recorded elsewhere in the forum.

Hopefully you can find them by searching for "Hinderberg"

As I recall, the person reporting the results had taken into account the reduced atmospheric density of Mars, as well as the reduced gravitational pull, to arrive at a prediction that a vehicle of the dimensions of the Hindenburg could carry a meaningful payload, while also carrying its structure, engines and fuel.

In connection with your interesting proposal .... I am reminded of the work of John Powell, of JPAerospace, who has been working on ever higher balloon flights for a number of years. His work is difficult and challenging on Earth, but it might prove immediately useful on Mars, since the takeoff conditions come close to matching the conditions for Powell's upper landing platform.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2020-06-06 14:24:02

So going from a normal liquified volume of a fuel to a gaseous bag means using gas expansion to volume calculators
https://www.aqua-calc.com/calculate/wei … -blank-gas

https://sciencing.com/calculate-liquid- … 22250.html
http://www.airproducts.com/products/Gas … xygen.aspx

Material mass needs to be considerably less than a normal metal tank or its just not going to be worth the effort...

I am thinking that the payload shroud will be made large enough to contain the balloon fuel tanks once collapsed. of launch to orbit will supply the force to collapse the flexible fuel tanks back into the shroud as it continues on the way to orbit. Guide cables are present to ensure that the system flexes correctly into the shape as needed as it becomes empty of fuel.

One can make use of the Red dragon bounding for the amount of mass for the capsule to trade for the mass of these tanks adjusting for what engine you chose to get it back to orbit for the tank sizes for the insitu fuels being used. One would want landing tanks to stay normal and be refueled on orbit once delivering any surface payload to orbit.

SpaceNut · 2020-06-07 15:48:53

Sort of thinking of a balloon that is accordion in nature covered with a Kevlar bag to keep shape and to give protection.
20-cm-balloon-lantern-vintage-rose-accordion-paper-to-hang-for-a-springtime-decor.jpg

Not sure if we can get away with vinyl or some other plastic for the balloon Blatter but that can be worked out just like its final shape.

Sort of similar to the Bigelow inflatables for construction which from what I remember reduces mass by at least 1/3 that of similar metal structures.

tahanson43206 · 2020-06-07 18:12:03

For SpaceNut re bellows image ... Nice!

For Calliban .... This suggestion goes back to some work that kbd512 was leading. At the time he was leading discussion of EML of objects from Earth, and it was observed at the time that a long thin cylindrical vehicle would present a small cross section to atmosphere compared to a "normal" vehicle. Your vision here could be enhanced a bit with images such as the one that SpaceNut found, but (perhaps) with a bit more of your thinking expressed.

So, I'll toss out a word picture of what I am imagining, as a follow on to SpaceNut's bellows image ...

A ** very ** long, very slim cylindrical vehicle, with a nose designed to withstand heating by the Mars atmosphere during ascent, would be filled with compressed gas per your design, bounded by fabric walls constrained by straps attached to a metal core running the length of the vehicle.

Elon Musk and his Starship design time are showing what can be done with a traditional strong (but thin) wall of a cylindrical vehicle.

In contrast, I am ** seeing ** a central core (pipe) load bearing element for the vehicle, with a nose cone for ascent, and fabric walls of the fuel storage volume.

I'll have to go back sometime to see if your topic here contained any elements that could be used to make a business case, but I doubt it << grin >>. There might be a business case for an ** extremely ** inexpensive launch vehicle that could put ** really valuable ** objects into orbit, for retrieval by deep space vehicles, such as the one that GW Johnson has just described in his Phobos Landing topic.

Edit#1: I ** think ** that part of the business case you might be making is that it is a ** lot ** less energy costly to pack loose molecules into a balloon "tank" than it is to liquefy them and then have to deal with the engineering challenges that go with materials in that state.

(th)

Last edited by tahanson43206 (2020-06-07 18:20:21)

SpaceNut · 2020-06-07 18:28:41

The unit once delivered to mars orbit would land using a base platform that would not be part of a reused launch vehicle for mars. The central core rod that once tanks are filled is a telescoping type that would allow doughnut shaped tanks to go from the base to the top of a nose cone when tanks are filled with the fuel. Along the way to orbit the tanks pressure is monitored and the central rod is collapsed so as to maintain the pressure required to fuel the engines at the rate for consumption.

More tomorrow after Calliban has time to digest what we have added...

tahanson43206 · 2020-06-07 19:22:26

For SpaceNut re #8 ... you're on a roll here! I had not though of the telescoping core idea, but it reminds me of some work I did when JoshNH4H was talking about towers of various kinds. I worked out a design for 3D printing of a telescoping lift. That design could be adapted for this very interesting alternative application.

The prototypes are still on display at Shapeways, and I am still waiting to come up with the funds to print them << sigh >>

https://www.shapeways.com/product/UXDZP … 0&li=shops

The white colored set of cylinders are designed to fit inside the black ones. The fit is deliberately designed to be tight to sustain gas pressure during use.

Since I haven't printed a set of these, I don't know if they will actually work, but at least folks can see what the discussion is about.

***
I'd like to add a thought that came to me after the initial posting and before your interesting idea ... The vehicle for Mars launch most definitely does NOT need to be built to the standards necessary for launch from Earth. It's not clear how far weight/mass can be trimmed, but Calliban's topic here seems (to me at least) to open the door for some really creative thinking about how to reduce mass to the absolute minimum needed to put ** really valuable cargo ** into Mars orbit.

The telescoping core "pipe" could be made of carbon (or a predominantly carbon containing material). And there ** is ** plenty of Carbon on Mars.

Edit #1: OK ... now it's coming together ... Your bellows idea lends itself to combination with your telescoping core idea ...

The pressure of the Mars atmosphere on the nose cone could collapse the core and the bellows of the gas "tanks" to deliver fuel to the engines.

In that case, the payload/cargo section would be just above the motors, to insure the center of mass stays low as the vehicle ascends.

it might be even easier to implement Calliban's idea on the Moon. The gases would (presumably) be different ... perhaps Oxygen and Hydrogen from lunar water.

(th)

Calliban · 2020-06-07 20:45:28

The more I think about it, the concept of a low pressure balloon rocket is inherently flawed. Any propellant tank, whether it contains gases or liquids, is a pressure vessel. The mass of a pressure vessel is proportional to both volume and internal pressure. So using low pressure stored gases in huge but thin inflatable balloons, doesn't seem to offer much advantage. For an ideal gas, if you halve the volume, you double the pressure. The mass of the pressure vessel and contents remains the same, but it will be more compact and will suffer less drag.

The best option would be to use propellant that is a dense liquid at relatively low pressures, at or near room temperatures. The mass ratio of any tank containing a condensed liquid will always be far superior to any compressed gas fuel. Propane is a liquid at about 9bar at room temperature. N2O is also a liquid under modest pressure at room temperature. So a N20-propane fuelled rocket could be pressure fed, with propellant contained in polymer or ordinary carbon-manganese steel tanks at modest pressure. The combustion chamber could be steel, ablatively lined or even water cooled. The combustion chamber pressure need not be any more than 10bar to achieve a good pressure ratio in the thin Martian atmosphere.

All the makings of a simple and low cost rocket that could be built on Mars.

Last edited by Calliban (2020-06-07 20:49:57)

tahanson43206 · 2020-06-07 21:05:56

For Calliban re #10

Giving up so soon!

I'm disappointed ...

You had inspired SpaceNut and perhaps others to start thinking about entirely new spacecraft design for the unique Mars environment, and you seem to have fallen back to the tried and true "ways of doing things" within 10 posts.

I suppose it is better to kill off a wasteful initiative before it consumes too much time and energy.

I had logged in to try to add to the vision of a vehicle with a spine of metal or strong carbon, and tankage of fabric walls which do not carry vehicle load.

The idea of shrinking the vehicle due to pressure on the nose cone seemed like a clever way to insure pressure on the tanks.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2020-06-08 06:52:46

For Calliban ... this is a follow up to #11

There may be a compromise ... If we imagine using kerosene, you've got your tried and true liquid fuel, which would go in the tanks of traditional design just above the engine, and be loaded at room temperature (or whatever the Mars field temperature may be). The Oxygen, on the other hand, can be stored in SpaceNut's bellows fabric container in gaseous state, arranged in a cylindrical form around a strong collapsible spine, with the nose cone doing the forcing during the stages of flight when atmospheric pressure on the nose cone is greatest and the need for pressure to drive the reaction is greatest.

This has been a text only discussion so far, but you **are** an engineer, so drawings and animations are in your toolbox.

While I am **far** from an expert in use of 3D design tools, I might be able to help you get started if you have not dabbled in the free versions.

It is even conceivable that we might be able to collaborate on development of some images to show SpaceNut what you have in mind, assuming this topic has not come to a screeching halt.

Edit #1: This is a **real** stretch, but we do have a ** real ** rocket designer in the forum. If we can interest GW Johnson in taking a look at the idea, he might be able to help with the rocket equation aspects of designing a vehicle with a high proportion of carbon in the structure, to employ liquid fuel (methane) and gaseous oxidizer (oxygen), in a vehicle with a spine carrying load instead of the tried-and-true external walls, which have been the design vision since the Chinese made gunpowder rockets thousands of years ago, or hundreds for sure.

Edit #2: It is ** possible ** that kbd512 might be willing to help with the Mars-centric design aspect of use of Carbon for the collapsible spine and for the SpaceNut bellows for the Oxygen.

SpaceNut can be expected to contribute in unpredictable ways << grin >>

There might even be others who are waiting for the right time to add a detail or two.

An example of a detail to be added is how to make kerosene (or some other liquid) from Mars atmosphere.

There is going to need to be Hydrogen for making of methane, which I assume would be a precursor to manufacture of kerosene.

(th)

Last edited by tahanson43206 (2020-06-08 07:07:18)

tahanson43206 · 2020-06-08 09:14:49

For Elderflower re kerosene manufactured on Mars ...

I'm hoping this focus might be of interest to you.

Can you put together a short summary of what would be required to accomplish that, in support of Calliban's topic here?

Calliban has indicated an interest in use of liquid fuel, and kerosene (or other choice you may recommend) is a candidate which could (theoretically) be manufactured on Mars using atmosphere for carbon and in situ water for hydrogen.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2020-06-08 19:02:31

I am sure that a variety of fuels will be used in time but we should work with what can be made on mars just like what can be made for a rocket systems which double up the use types of equipment that we want on mars initially.

Fuels have different ratios for the best burn and then you need to look at the engine inlet requirements for flow pressure to feed them while in use.

Of course the materials will change to those that are needed to overcome the material properties required for holding the fuel type that is in it.

tahanson43206 · 2020-06-09 06:56:46

For SpaceNut re #14

Calliban created this topic with an inspiring idea to try to design a rocket for Mars which uses gas in an unliquefied state for a vehicle to reach orbit.

Subsequently he pulled back from the original (perhaps overly ambitious) vision, and this topic is at risk of expiring if we (and I mean the two of us) are unable to help Calliban to renew his vision in an altered state.

I think the original vision is worth pursuing, if the goal is to find the least expensive design that is unique to the Mars environment.

The ** specific ** focus of this topic (as I understand it) is the possibility of saving energy by storing oxidizer in compressed form. Your vision of a bellows lends itself to realization of the concept, but (of course) the concept has to be adapted to the situation for it to be practical.

In order for the concept to move from vision to work plan, it is necessary and appropriate to select specific components to be incorporated into the design. The specific choices help to narrow the range of uncertainty facing the designer.

I have inquired about kerosene, and would like to see an estimate of the energy requirement to make kerosene on Mars. However, it may turn out that another fuel containing hydrogen and carbon can be made in liquid form (at ambient temperatures) less expensively (in terms of energy). By helping Calliban to find a fuel for his vehicle, we can reduce the uncertainty he faces in designing a hybrid rocket for the Mars situation.

In particular, we have the potential of a complete break from the Earth based concept of carrying mass support in the outer shell of the vehicle.

In thinking about the spine concept overnight, I realized that it is not necessary to collapse the spine. What ** is ** necessary is to collapse the fabric enclosure for the compressed oxidizer. Thus, the nose cone of the vehicle could comprise a small component over the cockpit and cargo space, and a larger ring shaped component over the gaseous oxidizer fabric "tanks".

As the vehicle ascends, oxidizer would be supplied initial to the engines using simple pressure applied to the gas before launch.

However, as the vehicle ascends, atmospheric pressure on the ring shaped part of the nose cone could be enlisted to apply pressure to the oxidizer bladder, helping to keep up the pressure needed for the reaction.

The math to model these various stages of the ascent is significant, and here is another example of how a CFD (Computation Fluid Dynamics) capability in this forum would be helpful.

(th)

Last edited by tahanson43206 (2020-06-09 06:58:23)

tahanson43206 · 2020-06-09 08:41:38

This quotation is from GW Johnson's Rocket Design topic.

tahanson43206 wrote:

For GW Johnson re #79 and Calliban's gaseous oxidizer topic
My guess is that Calliban may regret having offered the balloon propellants idea at all, since he very quickly realized its impracticality.
However, SpaceNut picked up on it (as is his role as site evangelist) so off we go to the races, or at least, to the first hurdle.
The first hurdle may have been overcome, because with Calliban's caveat, the vision seems to have changed so that the fuel is liquid.
We are then left with the question of the oxidizer, and specifically whether it is practical to consider storing the oxidizer as a gas.
It is that question which (I think) your post addresses.
I am going into this with a ** very ** low expectation of a successful outcome, because the considerations you have (very kindly) laid out are significant and (to me at least) daunting.
I'll lead into whatever this thought process is going to be, by reminding the readers of the forum who may chance upon this topic unawares, that on Earth, the use of a gaseous oxidizer with a liquid fuel is a fairly well established art.
However, as GW Johnson has reminded us, there exist NO examples of pressure fed vehicles on Earth that feed oxidizer into a combustion chamber.
There ** are ** examples of pressure fed vehicles, but those are NOT using combustion. Instead, the stored energy of the compressed gas is fed to mechanical systems that translate the potential energy of the bouncing gas molecules into piston movement which feeds into rotary motion.
Those examples use extremely ** high ** pressure in the "propellant" tank and that is NOT the situation that Calliban's topic is about.
However, on Earth, gaseous oxidizer is fed into combustion chambers under pressure sufficient to meet the needs of the engines.
The mechanism by which gaseous oxidizer is prepared for combustion is primarily mechanical (to the best of my knowledge (*)).
A long established mechanism is the use of a piston to achieve needed pressure levels. In more recent times, rotary compression equipment has proven capable of achieving the needed pressures required by the engine combustion process.
Thus, I am led to inquire (the word propose seems overly ambitious) if Calliban's vision might be realized by adding a turbine pump to the mix.
I think that a means of applying external pressure to the oxidizer bladder remains a useful capability, and the sliding nose cone ring is a possible mechanism.
Assuming for a moment that a turbine pump can supply oxidizer to the engine (it would be more accurately described as a jet engine) at a rate sufficient to achieve orbit from a ground launch at Mars, we are now left with the question of whether it is (energy) cost effective to depart so dramatically from the Earth-way-of-doing-things.
I'll copy this post and drop it into Calliban's topic, for the sake of continuity there.
(*) Caveat to statement about gas fed into engines ... It is a stretch, but fuel cells do in fact accept gaseous oxidizer and fuel. However, that example seems inapplicable to Calliban's topic.
(th)

tahanson43206 · 2020-06-09 08:49:08

For Calliban re topic ...

If you are still engaged with this topic, please (if you can) compute the mass of oxygen (in gaseous form) that would be needed to lift a vehicle to orbit from the surface of Mars, given the structure of the vehicle to include a turbopump to deliver the liquid fuel (eg, kerosene) and another to deliver the oxidizer at the required pressures.

The volume that would be needed will (of course) depend upon the pressure that can be safely maintained by a stout fabric enclosure.

I am presuming (for the sake of the novelty of the idea) that the core or spine of the vehicle will be made of carbon, although how practical that might be is very much open for evaluation by others in the forum better qualified.

The purpose of this topic (as I understand it) is to evaluate the potential of gaseous oxidizer as a component of a home-brew launch-to-orbit system unique to the environment of Mars.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2020-06-09 16:48:56

The payload carried to orbit would rider in the top of the shroud.

Picture guide cables running passes in the loops on the external part of the inflatable tanks to the rockets base section from just under the payload shrouds under side to draw the inflatable into a collapsed size such that it fits inside the payload shroud. The winch drawing in of the cables can be used to add additional pressure to the stack up during flight which mounts in the engine pod at the bottom of the stack..

80070-1-original-itzatube-large-36-inch-inflatable-inner-tube-mp.jpg

Making the sections individual for the fuels to be placed into like a sack with hoops on the external attachment points for the cable to be drawn through. The oxidizers could be in a set of inner tubes inner opening or vice versa depending on sizing of each for the mix of fuels required to get to orbit.

I am using the pool to show the collapsible fabric which holds the inflateable tanks as it is filled with the ribs showing the place for the cables to be drawn through.

Of course the cables could be made from Kevlar strands just as easily as the fabric sack that holds the unit all together for flight.

Of course the engine section needs to be drawn all the way up to mating with the bottom of the payload shroud.

tahanson43206 · 2020-06-09 17:22:36

For SpaceNut re #18 ...

Thanks for these interesting images and suggestions!

I hope Calliban is inspired to continue developing this topic! The two of us can carry the ball part of the way, but we need the Topic Manager to keep the momentum going.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2020-06-09 17:47:53

What would be probable fuel types for insitu mars creation?

Co + O
Ch4 + o2
H2 + O

Are there others for mars?

We know some of these are gaseous to liquid depending on temperature and pressures for sure but what we need is to get numbers for parts of this in order to solve to what can be done once you know the fuel, engine, pod mass, payload cone mass... for each fuel combination. With that we know what it will take for fuel to get a give mass to orbit. From there we go to what volume must the container be for the fuels mass.

SpaceNut · 2020-06-09 18:01:01

Well I googled my own question and here is the first link in bing..
http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=7822

That's almost to funny..

tahanson43206 · 2020-06-09 18:40:50

For SpaceNut .... congratulations on securing a presence in Bing!

In the middle of the sequence you showed (id=7822) RobertDyck suggested a compound of Silicon and Hydrogen ... I was curious about the abundance of Silicon, so asked Google:

17 December 2015
Very high silicon content surprises Mars researchers
MARS DISCOVERY Even though humans have yet to set foot on Mars, we have already been digging and drilling beneath its surface. New results from the Mars rover Curosity show that some rocks in Gale Crater have a high content of the element silicon. Since the accumulation of silica typically require a combination of both heat and water, this place might once have been a good habitat for bacteria. The results have just been presented by the Danish Mars researcher Jens Frydenvang at a NASA press conference in San Francisco.

I was curious to know what's involved in manufacture of trisilane ... Google sent me to a patent that may be instructive ... I just glanced at it ...

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20080175784

I'm still wondering what would be involved in making kerosene from scratch. I'm pretty sure on Earth it is distilled from harvested petroleum.

It might be more trouble than it's worth.

In the series at id=7822, I ** think ** it was Elderflower who reminded the audience of CO/O2 as a (comparatively) simple set of chemicals for a low ISP launcher.

As a reminder, the purpose of ** this ** topic (as I understand it) is to explore the potential of feeding gaseous chemicals to a Mars unique launcher.

It would appear that turbine pumps can deliver gaseous chemicals to a combustion station at sufficient pressure to sustain combustion.

What is not at all clear (to me for sure) is whether enough gaseous chemicals can be stored in a vehicle to achieve orbit.

Here is a government sponsored study of production of liquid and gaseous oxygen. It dates to 1980, but should be valid today.

https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/6574363

(th)

SpaceNut · 2020-06-09 19:16:24

Turning Mars Methane into kerosene on mars is more than plausible.. Synthesized 'solar' jet fuel: Renewable kerosene from sunlight, water and carbon dioxide

Although the solar-driven redox cycle for syngas production is still at an early stage of development, the processing of syngas to kerosene is already being deployed by companies, including Shell, on a global scale. This combined approach has the potential to provide a secure, sustainable and scalable supply of renewable aviation fuel and more generally for transport applications. Moreover, Fischer-Tropsch derived kerosene is already approved for commercial aviation.

Mars with regards to source chemicals will not have this problem as Coking occurs at a critical temperature with kerosene, if the kerosene contains contaminants such as sulfur; it's a function of having enough kerosene flow to prevent hot spots within the engine, probably in the throat and combustion chamber, and having really clean fuel.

tahanson43206 · 2020-06-09 20:57:49

For SpaceNut re #23

Thank you for your follow up on this question!

I'd like to set up manufacture of kerosene as one of the key activities for My Hacienda.

i'll have to check the Registry to be sure we don't already have a plot assigned.

The details of how to make kerosene (following the links you provided) can be added to the plot record assigned to that activity.

There would (presumably) be a constant demand for a stable liquid form of stored energy on Mars.

Edit#1: Here is a possible reason for Calliban's hesitation to pursue the gaseous oxidizer idea:

I asked Google to compare the volume of liquid oxygen to the gaseous equivalent.

The liquid compound is about 1,000 times denser than the gaseous oxygen. The volume of the gaseous oxygen depends upon temperature, pressure as well as the mass of the compound.
How to Calculate Liquid Oxygen to Gaseous Oxygen - Sciencing

It would appear that the energy invested in liquefying oxygen for the Mars launcher might be well worth the trouble of trying to keep oxygen liquefied while building up the quantity needed for a launch.

I assume the 1000:1 ratio is a ballpark estimate, but it is sobering.

Edit#1: The discovery of the 1000:1 ratio of volume of gaseous oxygen to the equivalent mass of liquid oxygen may explain why Calliban threw in the towel so quickly. However, if you feel up to it SpaceNut, we can try to find out what the situation would be if someone were in need of reaching orbit and the oxygen liquefaction machinery was offline.

A good place to start would be if we can persuade GW Johnson to provide a figure for the amount of liquid oxygen he would need to lift his reusable lander back to orbit. Once we have that figure, we can then work with the same mass of gaseous oxygen to see how far we could squeeze it within the limits of practical fabric.

(th)

Last edited by tahanson43206 (2020-06-09 21:26:49)

SpaceNut · 2020-06-10 19:57:21

I think this is similar in shape to what I am thinking of and we can work from the same set of numbers as the documents contain all parts and pieces to which we are looking to make substitutions for. For the cable winch I think the unit that has flown to mars on the skycrane would be a starting point for that part of the system.

Hercules reusable Mars lander

https://sacd.larc.nasa.gov/files/2018/1 … -Paper.pdf

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi … 006324.pdf

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi … 005557.pdf

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2020-06-06 11:03:39

Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#2 2020-06-06 11:48:01

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#3 2020-06-06 12:07:42

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#4 2020-06-06 12:40:08

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#5 2020-06-06 14:24:02

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#6 2020-06-07 15:48:53

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#7 2020-06-07 18:12:03

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#8 2020-06-07 18:28:41

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#9 2020-06-07 19:22:26

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#10 2020-06-07 20:45:28

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#11 2020-06-07 21:05:56

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#12 2020-06-08 06:52:46

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#13 2020-06-08 09:14:49

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#14 2020-06-08 19:02:31

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#15 2020-06-09 06:56:46

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#16 2020-06-09 08:41:38

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#17 2020-06-09 08:49:08

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#18 2020-06-09 16:48:56

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#19 2020-06-09 17:22:36

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#20 2020-06-09 17:47:53

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#21 2020-06-09 18:01:01

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#22 2020-06-09 18:40:50

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#23 2020-06-09 19:16:24

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#24 2020-06-09 20:57:49

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

#25 2020-06-10 19:57:21

Re: Compressed gas balloon rocket for Mars launch

Board footer