• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

A mission to Mars concept

I think that the concept is the completely wrong way to go about it. If successful, the end result would be another 'Apollo 11' footprints on Mars mission followed by "dang, we can't afford this ... Oh Well, now we've been there and done that, so let's scrap the infrastructure and try for the Asteroid Belt in another hundred years."

What we need it a steady vision, constant budget, and spiral of progress and technology.

First, we need a space station in LEO to learn to survive in space long term ... check, we have that (now let's stop reinventing the wheel and build on what we have).

Second we need a space tug capable of travelling from LEO to Lunar Orbit.

Third, a permanent manned station in Lunar orbit ... like a modern version of Skylab. This serves two purposes.
1. it allows more planetary science research, including practice at remote operation of explorers.
2. it provides a safe base from which to establish a permanent presence on the moon.
Among the technologies that a moon station will grant that an Earth Station doesn't is radiation shielding research and technologies (LEO is protected by the Earth's magnetic field, a Moon Station or Mars Mission will not be).

Fourth, build a permanent base on the moon. Think of this as a full scale test of 99% of the technology that will be needed to live on Mars. Frankly, when something goes wrong, being minutes away from an orbital refuge and days away from spare parts from Earth will be handy. Let's shake out the bugs where help is not a year away.

Fifth, repeat step three with a Mars Orbital Station, for all the same reasons as step three.

Sixth, repeat step four on Mars.

Along with the steady spiral, we should pursue a steady progression of who is involved. The first trail-blazer probably needs to be a government (several governments acting together would be even better). As the government pursues the next step, there should be a very gradual hand-off of the previous step to adventurer/tourists and then commercial ventures with the hope that these facilities may be partially or even fully self-funding. I think that an inflatable Bigalow habitat at the ISS with a big 'Welcome Sign' to anyone who wants to take a private trip to LEO on a commercial carrier is a great next step. It would seem to offer little harm and tremendous opportunity. Flight rates to LEO are the biggest obstacle to really using space in any meaningful way, so anything that boosts launch rates is good for everyone who wants/needs access to space.

There is no magic MD and PP that will make access cheap and easy, only higher flight rates will lower costs. Unfortunately, a flags and footprints trip to Mars will do more harm than good for the goal of humans living and working in space.
 
Buzz

atpollard said:
I think that the concept is the completely wrong way to go about it. If successful, the end result would be another 'Apollo 11' footprints on Mars mission followed by "dang, we can't afford this ... Oh Well, now we've been there and done that, so let's scrap the infrastructure and try for the Asteroid Belt in another hundred years."

What we need it a steady vision, constant budget, and spiral of progress and technology.

First, we need a space station in LEO to learn to survive in space long term ... check, we have that (now let's stop reinventing the wheel and build on what we have).

Second we need a space tug capable of travelling from LEO to Lunar Orbit.

Third, a permanent manned station in Lunar orbit ... like a modern version of Skylab. This serves two purposes.
1. it allows more planetary science research, including practice at remote operation of explorers.
2. it provides a safe base from which to establish a permanent presence on the moon.
Among the technologies that a moon station will grant that an Earth Station doesn't is radiation shielding research and technologies (LEO is protected by the Earth's magnetic field, a Moon Station or Mars Mission will not be).

Fourth, build a permanent base on the moon. Think of this as a full scale test of 99% of the technology that will be needed to live on Mars. Frankly, when something goes wrong, being minutes away from an orbital refuge and days away from spare parts from Earth will be handy. Let's shake out the bugs where help is not a year away.

Fifth, repeat step three with a Mars Orbital Station, for all the same reasons as step three.

Sixth, repeat step four on Mars.

Along with the steady spiral, we should pursue a steady progression of who is involved. The first trail-blazer probably needs to be a government (several governments acting together would be even better). As the government pursues the next step, there should be a very gradual hand-off of the previous step to adventurer/tourists and then commercial ventures with the hope that these facilities may be partially or even fully self-funding. I think that an inflatable Bigalow habitat at the ISS with a big 'Welcome Sign' to anyone who wants to take a private trip to LEO on a commercial carrier is a great next step. It would seem to offer little harm and tremendous opportunity. Flight rates to LEO are the biggest obstacle to really using space in any meaningful way, so anything that boosts launch rates is good for everyone who wants/needs access to space.

There is no magic MD and PP that will make access cheap and easy, only higher flight rates will lower costs. Unfortunately, a flags and footprints trip to Mars will do more harm than good for the goal of humans living and working in space.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you've been listening to Buzz Aldrin or read his new book.
 
There's no benefits to a lunar orbital manned station unless there's also a manned lunar surface station.

There are HUGE drawbacks to a lunar orbital station -
  • any science it can do can be done more cheaply by unmanned probes.
  • it's riskier than a lunar surface station long term due to more opportunities for catastrophic failure (an impact with the solar arrays dragging it into an elliptical orbit, rather than just killing power, for example)
  • It's too far for rescue, but close enough for people to expect rescue and to hear the radio pleas for help directly.
  • It's more of a health hazard than the surface station due to about 50% more exposure to solar wind and microgravity instead of 1/6G.

A lunar surface station is a good idea - it's explotable. It's also about 1/10 the payload as we can launch to LEO; at present, that means a peak (from the Falcon Heavy) of about 5 tons down. Lunar orbit, yes, it's about 15 tons to lunar orbit for a falcon heavy launched lunar orbital.

At least, for now, Elon Musk is devoted to getting us to life on Mars....
 
aramis said:
There's no benefits to a lunar orbital manned station unless there's also a manned lunar surface.
Click to expand...
Except as a technology test bed for deep space transport ... life support and shielding ... that will be needed for a trip to Mars.

I have read some interesting proposals that would place the first Mars station on one of Mars' moons. A lunar orbit station would also develop the technology for operating Mars rovers from such a Mars-moon base.

As an inflatable Bigelow with a storm shelter or a Skylab-like tricked out upper stage, it would also be reasonably affordable. Most of all, it could be done soon. Fueling interest in investing in the long-pole technologies needed to establish a permanent presence on the moon.

It may also be leveraged for lunar communications or lunar surveying or beamed energy for future lunar surface operations ... or a fuel depot and transfer station for the Earth-Moon space tug and Lunar Tourism.

But I generally agree that it is an intermediate step to a more permanent solution and not a goal unto itself ... if we have no intention to go to Mars or establish a manned outpost on the surface of the moon, then an orbital moon station has no real purpose.
 
Honestly there is nothing greater that I would like to see, than man to rewalk on the Moon and walk on Mars. We have the basic tech to that now, but it is the cost. We can't afford to do it ourselves any more. Even the trip to the moon to harvest H3, seems out of our reach for some reason. Everyone is far to short sighted to even see how much of a benefit harvesting H3 would be for the nation and the world. The end of the oil age would be here, but that would end certain folks money and power control and well they would rather see mankind go down the crapper so they can make more money than help the race.
 
Manned Orbital station

aramis said:
There's no benefits to a lunar orbital manned station unless there's also a manned lunar surface station.

There are HUGE drawbacks to a lunar orbital station -
  • any science it can do can be done more cheaply by unmanned probes.
  • it's riskier than a lunar surface station long term due to more opportunities for catastrophic failure (an impact with the solar arrays dragging it into an elliptical orbit, rather than just killing power, for example)
  • It's too far for rescue, but close enough for people to expect rescue and to hear the radio pleas for help directly.
  • It's more of a health hazard than the surface station due to about 50% more exposure to solar wind and microgravity instead of 1/6G.

A lunar surface station is a good idea - it's explotable. It's also about 1/10 the payload as we can launch to LEO; at present, that means a peak (from the Falcon Heavy) of about 5 tons down. Lunar orbit, yes, it's about 15 tons to lunar orbit for a falcon heavy launched lunar orbital.

At least, for now, Elon Musk is devoted to getting us to life on Mars....
Click to expand...

Actually, automated factories and mining on the surface could be controlled from orbit. Orbit is not only the test bed but the assembly point for this space craft. The capsules that get people there can be used for their evac.
Trips too the surface would not be very complex with low gravity. I'd say slightly easy assembly of mission ships and easier evac than from the surface.
 
Moon orbit

A space station orbit of the moon is also good for asteroid mining. Moving anything back to earth orbit is too risky. A nice moon orbit is safer, gives plenty of time to react if there are issues.
 
aramis said:
save a lot of delta-v to go to a lower orbit than Lunar.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately that has the same fatal flaw as an L1 or L2 fuel depot ... will the public react favorably when you tell them how much you want to spend to place a station in the middle of nowhere.

You might at least have a chance to sell placing a Bigelow habitat in lunar orbit ... especially if Musk and his kind are invited to bring tourists to lunar orbit ... or perhaps to service a large telescope behind the moon ... or as a first step to a moon base.

We need the space tug anyway, so a station to nowhere will probably not save that much money, and has a lot less wow factor.
 
atpollard said:
Unfortunately that has the same fatal flaw as an L1 or L2 fuel depot ... will the public react favorably when you tell them how much you want to spend to place a station in the middle of nowhere.
Click to expand...

I take it you don't live in the U.S.? The average person on the street understands science to such a low degree that you can get them to sign petitions to ban water (seriously). NASA could concoct a good story and they'd buy it. :file_28:
 
atpollard said:
Unfortunately that has the same fatal flaw as an L1 or L2 fuel depot ... will the public react favorably when you tell them how much you want to spend to place a station in the middle of nowhere.

You might at least have a chance to sell placing a Bigelow habitat in lunar orbit ... especially if Musk and his kind are invited to bring tourists to lunar orbit ... or perhaps to service a large telescope behind the moon ... or as a first step to a moon base.

We need the space tug anyway, so a station to nowhere will probably not save that much money, and has a lot less wow factor.
Click to expand...

A station orbiting the moon is exhorbitantly expensive for what little science it can do.

The bow shock is only 3-5 radii out. The moon is about 60 radii. Putting a station at 7-10 radii is going to be a hell of a lot cheaper. As in, close to 40% the cost per ton... which means 2.5 times the mass per lift... as in, being able to get 30 tons per Falcon Heavy, instead of 12. (or 5 to the lunar surface.)

And, at 7-10 radii, it's close enough that an escape pod can eject back to earth.

Controlling robots when the lag is only a second or two isn't worth the risk in lives.

Lunar orbit isn't a good destination. The Lunar surface is.
 
A recently proposed cislunar space station proposal:
Exploration Platform
This was well on its way to working itself into the U.S. baseline exploration plan until just recently. Note that it would only have crew on board sometimes. It acts as a waystation and fuel depot for human deep space exploration missions.

A recent proposal for lunar bases:
Bigelow Module Lunar Base

And a look at the Space-X plan for Mars:
Dragon Roadmap to Mars

My own opinion is that we need to stay the course on Orion/SLS, finish Commercial Crew, and start serious planning for ISS 2 before ISS is past its best-by date. I also think that the political players need to agree on a BEO mission for Orion/SLS.

Personally, I'm in favor of either lunar orbit or the captured asteroid mission for the first crew, then perhaps a Venus fly-by for the second crewed flight, which would have some pizazz while also being an engineering test flight nonpareil without the flight duration problems of Mars/Phobos.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
New Campaign Ideas
2
Replies
37
Views
1K
Spinward Flow
Spinward Flow
A
Jumpspace Institue
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
TamsinP
T
FreeTrav
[Freelance Traveller] SPECIAL REQUEST FOR ARTICLES - Sept/Oct 2024
Replies
10
Views
618
punkrabbitt
punkrabbitt
M
2300AD News - Progress on the Invasion campaign
Replies
3
Views
222
MongooseMatt
M
A
Mark Lucas' Deckplans
Replies
10
Views
277
AlHazred
A
Back
Top