Quote from: DLR on 02/23/2013 10:35 amI also think two astronauts would be streching it. A one-man mission should be feasible though. I was about to say the same thing. Why is everyone assuming a two person crew?
I also think two astronauts would be streching it. A one-man mission should be feasible though.
Quote from: DLR on 02/23/2013 10:35 am A one-man mission should be feasible though. Technically, yes, from from a human point of view that would be very challenging. 500 days is much longer than even non-stop solo circumnavigations (typically 10 months or less) or the longest solo stints in the polar regions (none I know of more than 12 months).
A one-man mission should be feasible though.
Because ignoring basic requirments for volume is like ignoring requirements for consumables.
One person alone for this duration is uncharted territory for a complex missions. One person is less likely to cope with technical problems than two.
Then two Dragons docked nose-to-nose - one is the Command & Earth re-entry vehicle, the other purely for Hab & Logistics (lots of Hi-density polyethylene for shielding, too). But both Dragons have 'Long Trunks' with that trunk space dedicated to being a service module; containing oxygen, nitrogen & water tanks, helium pressurization tanks, about six tons of hypergolic propellants and a single restartable engine. Dual Launch each vehicle on a Falcon Heavy (from two Pads, but what interval?) and directly to escape velocity on very similar trajectories. The two craft then rendezvous and dock nose-to-nose after discarding their Earth Departure stages. On to a Mars Flyby...
And sorry to be so pragmatic - but if one crew member died of a heart attack, stroke or whatever - then the remaining person could carry on the mission. But with a one person crew dying? No mission. But on a two person crew: what would they do with the body!!
Quote from: MATTBLAK on 02/23/2013 11:04 amAnd sorry to be so pragmatic - but if one crew member died of a heart attack, stroke or whatever - then the remaining person could carry on the mission. But with a one person crew dying? No mission. But on a two person crew: what would they do with the body!!Dinner.
Four launches.From the Cape: Tito and friend in a Dragon Capsule and trunk with a logistics module behind it.From Texas: logistics module, with possible lander.From Vandenburg: 2 launches, one Falcon heavy with VASMIR engines and fuel, solar panels etc. Two, Falcon XX with a BA3300 habitat module.......................BA3300 has 3300 cubic meters of volume, even with a fly-by only mission, should be enough volume to keep everyone sane.
"Yes, my poor deceased crew person was a person of exceptional taste... BURP!"
Bigelows have yet to be tested with human crews and their overall test program is painfully slow and drawn out - I don't know if anything significant can be finalized and declared operational with them in the fairly short time frame Mr Tito has. Although Dragon's haven't flown crew yet either - that part of their development is well underway. Also; borrowing from the 'kissing Orions' idea adds redundancy with two hulls, heatshields etc. Besides; 2x Orions would offer the better part of 20 cubic meters of habitable volume - not bad for a crew of two.
I think they should aim for a lunar orbit mission first. (assuming its manned). Mars is far too ambitious in the time frame.However they may have something new. The press conference will tell.
Quote from: R7 on 02/21/2013 12:09 pminspirationmarsfoundation.org and .com were registered .. today .. by a norwegian fellow. Member of Mars expedition or fast domain name entrepreneurship?Foundation was registered in Delaware end of january this year. So it looks like more like a domain grabber than someone involved. I'm sure, the foundation has already the domains they wanted.
inspirationmarsfoundation.org and .com were registered .. today .. by a norwegian fellow. Member of Mars expedition or fast domain name entrepreneurship?
[That other poster is] making an absolutist comparison when a relative comparison is called for.
Would I take that ride to Mars with a 1% chance of death? Certainly yes.
501 days? Levi's sponsorship? Remember, you heard it here first.
Quote from: guckyfan on 02/21/2013 05:05 pmI am interested to learn what is so special with the 2018 date.It is because of the planetary alignment, so you can do a free return flight.something like in this picture.
I am interested to learn what is so special with the 2018 date.
Quote from: Chalmer on 02/21/2013 05:20 pmQuote from: guckyfan on 02/21/2013 05:05 pmI am interested to learn what is so special with the 2018 date.It is because of the planetary alignment, so you can do a free return flight.something like in this picture. There's no time frame on that picture. Attached is a chart from HSMAD, showing the timeframe of a similar mission.Larson & Pranke suggest 946 days, but hey: I suppose they aren't the experts either.
Just noticed this series of relevant tweets from Mike Loucks (a friend of mine who's one of the coauthors on the IEEE paper) describing the trajectory they're looking at a bit:https://twitter.com/Astrogator_Mike/status/305154592260374528https://twitter.com/Astrogator_Mike/status/305154592260374528/photo/1https://twitter.com/Astrogator_Mike/status/305155051947708417https://twitter.com/Astrogator_Mike/status/305155051947708417/photo/1https://twitter.com/Astrogator_Mike/status/305155492009897986https://twitter.com/Astrogator_Mike/status/305155492009897986/photo/1https://twitter.com/Astrogator_Mike/status/305156162469376000https://twitter.com/Astrogator_Mike/status/305156162469376000/photo/1Basically no they're not doing a Venus swingby, but the perihelion almost gets down to Venus orbit.~Jon
Quote from: guckyfan on 02/21/2013 02:41 pmWould I take that ride to Mars with a 1% chance of death? Certainly yes.I'm sure you would, but then, there's no shortage of unqualified volunteers. OTOH, there is a shortage of qualified employees who could serve.
You can't just use a conjuction-class trajectory as the basis for this mission; those are based on minimizing the delta v to stop at Mars and get going again. This mission does not stop at Mars, and in fact gets a considerable gravity assist from the planet.
Reduces the need for consumables and space while maintaining ... the human aspects.