Author Topic: What mission after MSL ?  (Read 153635 times)

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: What mission after MSL ?
« Reply #20 on: 08/08/2012 03:24 pm »
Maybe, ultimately, the descent stage could be something like the old Mariner bus - the basis of many different specialised landers.

there fixed it for you

Offline butters

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2399
  • Liked: 1692
  • Likes Given: 597
Re: What mission after MSL ?
« Reply #21 on: 08/08/2012 03:47 pm »
We can't have more planetary science because HSF and space astronomy ate the budget.

Offline Norm38

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1696
  • Liked: 1272
  • Likes Given: 2317
Re: What mission after MSL ?
« Reply #22 on: 08/08/2012 03:56 pm »
The next Mars lander needs to push the envenlope and provide risk reduction for manned missions.  It should land 2MT minimum, more if possible.

Don't laugh.  If we're to put boots on Mars, we have to be able to land equipment and supplies weighing much more than that.  The next mission should drive the technology forward and help close the gap to manned mission requirements.

2, then 4, then 8MT.  That's the roadmap, that's where we need to get to.

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15286
  • Liked: 7822
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: What After Curiosity?
« Reply #23 on: 08/08/2012 04:04 pm »
Hoping for dozens of smaller, cheaper robots sent to a variety of environments. Some maybe specialized for certain tasks, a kind of common bus. Mass produce these machines, these one off production runs are so incredible expensive!
Mabey put them on falcons as well.

I do not see a multiBillion $ mission in the foreseeable future.

You are committing a common mistake: choosing an architecture rather than goals, and then fitting the architecture to the goals.

Simply put, there is no science requirement for lots of small rovers. And small rovers cannot carry many instruments or do much, or go very far. So your solution would produce a bunch of useless objects that cannot really accomplish anything worthwhile. Plus they would max out the DSN.

Google "Planetary science decadal survey" and read the science goals and the mission studies.
« Last Edit: 08/08/2012 04:30 pm by Blackstar »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: What mission after MSL ?
« Reply #24 on: 08/08/2012 04:40 pm »


2, then 4, then 8MT.  That's the roadmap, that's where we need to get to.

That isn't viable roadmap using landed mass.  Data drives requirements.  Also need to stay within existing launch vehicle capabilities.

Offline manboy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2086
  • Texas, USA, Earth
  • Liked: 134
  • Likes Given: 544
Re: What After Curiosity?
« Reply #25 on: 08/08/2012 04:46 pm »
What kind of Mars rovers will there be after Curiosity? Will they be even larger or is Curiosity already too large and expensive to be in one piece (despite this great successful start)?
There's a couple concepts for a launch date of 2020/2022 (see image below). Curiosity is pretty much the largest rover we can land on Mars with currently EDL technology. The technology developed for Curiosity allows us to land smaller rovers with more precision.

Here's the Mars Program Planning Group presentation given on July 2012.
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/672319main_MPPG%20NAC%20REV%2010.pdf
« Last Edit: 08/08/2012 04:55 pm by manboy »
"Cheese has been sent into space before. But the same cheese has never been sent into space twice." - StephenB

Offline manboy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2086
  • Texas, USA, Earth
  • Liked: 134
  • Likes Given: 544
Re: What mission after MSL ?
« Reply #26 on: 08/08/2012 04:50 pm »
MRO is going on its 12 to 13 years by 2018, Odyssey will most certainly be derelict, as replacement will be essential. Heck two orbiters or even a formations of small com sats would be really nice.     

No need for com sats if there's nothing on the ground.
You could also say there's no need for anything to be on the ground if you can't get the info back to Earth.
"Cheese has been sent into space before. But the same cheese has never been sent into space twice." - StephenB

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: What mission after MSL ?
« Reply #27 on: 08/08/2012 05:08 pm »
MRO is going on its 12 to 13 years by 2018, Odyssey will most certainly be derelict, as replacement will be essential. Heck two orbiters or even a formations of small com sats would be really nice.     

No need for com sats if there's nothing on the ground.
You could also say there's no need for anything to be on the ground if you can't get the info back to Earth.

All the landers can communicate directly to earth

Offline Brian Copp

  • Member
  • Posts: 28
  • TX
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What mission after MSL ?
« Reply #28 on: 08/08/2012 05:24 pm »
MRO is going on its 12 to 13 years by 2018, Odyssey will most certainly be derelict, as replacement will be essential. Heck two orbiters or even a formations of small com sats would be really nice.     

No need for com sats if there's nothing on the ground.
You could also say there's no need for anything to be on the ground if you can't get the info back to Earth.

All the landers can communicate directly to earth

The data transfer rate is much slower that way.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: What mission after MSL ?
« Reply #29 on: 08/08/2012 05:33 pm »
MRO is going on its 12 to 13 years by 2018, Odyssey will most certainly be derelict, as replacement will be essential. Heck two orbiters or even a formations of small com sats would be really nice.     

No need for com sats if there's nothing on the ground.
You could also say there's no need for anything to be on the ground if you can't get the info back to Earth.

All the landers can communicate directly to earth

The data transfer rate is much slower that way.

that wasn't the issue being countered.

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: What mission after MSL ?
« Reply #30 on: 08/08/2012 06:21 pm »
Instead of another science mission, it would be awesome to see a cheaper engineering R&D mission with goals similar to SMART-1.
The two candidate technologies off the top of my head to be tested would be laser comms, and some sort of ISRU payload. Anything else ?
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline lbiderman

  • Going where no Uruguayan has gone before
  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 281
  • Buenos Aires - Argentina
    • Mars Society Argentina
  • Liked: 64
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: What mission after MSL ?
« Reply #31 on: 08/08/2012 06:32 pm »
Instead of another science mission, it would be awesome to see a cheaper engineering R&D mission with goals similar to SMART-1.
The two candidate technologies off the top of my head to be tested would be laser comms, and some sort of ISRU payload. Anything else ?

Laser comms was going to be tested on the Mars Telecommunication Orbiter, but that was scrapped. I donīt think that weighs that much, I can probably be integrated onto a planned orbiter. ISRU is more interesting, but that weighs a lot: you probably would need a specialized lander. Too expensive without science.
"If I wanted to lead a bunch of robots that could only follow orders, I would have joined the Army!"
Captain Alvarez (Uruguay Marine Corps) in Congo (MONUC Deployment), March 2007

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: What mission after MSL ?
« Reply #32 on: 08/08/2012 06:54 pm »
ISRU is more interesting, but that weighs a lot: you probably would need a specialized lander. Too expensive without science.
Without tech R&D missions ever undertaken the assertion of "ISRU is too heavy" is kind of self-fulfilling prophecy.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline Herb Schaltegger

Re: What mission after MSL ?
« Reply #33 on: 08/08/2012 07:44 pm »
ISRU is more interesting, but that weighs a lot: you probably would need a specialized lander. Too expensive without science.
Without tech R&D missions ever undertaken the assertion of "ISRU is too heavy" is kind of self-fulfilling prophecy.

The chemical reactions (e.g., CO2 reduction) are quite well-known, as is the technology to do the reactions, and thus the weight and power required.  All of that can be (and has been) extensively tested on Earth. There is no need to go to Mars to do that.
Ad astra per aspirin ...

Offline go4mars

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3748
  • Earth
  • Liked: 158
  • Likes Given: 3463
Re: What mission after MSL ?
« Reply #34 on: 08/08/2012 07:46 pm »
ISRU is more interesting, but that weighs a lot: you probably would need a specialized lander. Too expensive without science.
There is some discussion of this earlyish in the Red Dragon thread.  Including a video of a very tiny methane rocket.  I suspect it could be inexpensively built and shoe-horned into the Red Dragon drilling mission (if that happens).  Along with a geophone and some small weather station stuff (and related computer(s)). 
Elasmotherium; hurlyburly Doggerlandic Jentilak steeds insouciantly gallop in viridescent taiga, eluding deluginal Burckle's abyssal excavation.

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15286
  • Liked: 7822
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: What mission after MSL ?
« Reply #35 on: 08/08/2012 08:16 pm »
I suspect it could be inexpensively built and shoe-horned into the Red Dragon drilling mission (if that happens).  Along with a geophone and some small weather station stuff (and related computer(s)). 

Can we see your engineering trades and your cost estimates with confidence levels?

Offline neilh

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2365
  • Pasadena, CA
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 149
Re: What mission after MSL ?
« Reply #36 on: 08/08/2012 08:18 pm »
I suspect it could be inexpensively built and shoe-horned into the Red Dragon drilling mission (if that happens).  Along with a geophone and some small weather station stuff (and related computer(s)). 

Can we see your engineering trades and your cost estimates with confidence levels?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/suspect (see verb definition 3)
Someone is wrong on the Internet.
http://xkcd.com/386/

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21450
  • Likes Given: 428
Re: What mission after MSL ?
« Reply #37 on: 08/08/2012 08:36 pm »
ISRU is more interesting, but that weighs a lot: you probably would need a specialized lander. Too expensive without science.
There is some discussion of this earlyish in the Red Dragon thread.  Including a video of a very tiny methane rocket.  I suspect it could be inexpensively built and shoe-horned into the Red Dragon drilling mission (if that happens).  Along with a geophone and some small weather station stuff (and related computer(s)). 

What about a popcorn popper too?
Jeesh. 





Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: What mission after MSL ?
« Reply #38 on: 08/08/2012 08:38 pm »
All of that can be (and has been) extensively tested on Earth. There is no need to go to Mars to do that.
By that token, flying to Mauna Kea and doing integrated field testing is also entirely unnecessary and just a frivolous expense ? Because we all know that technology always works perfectly in a different environment ?

In fact, NASA TRLs 6-8 might as well not exist at all.

 :-\
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline Kaputnik

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3079
  • Liked: 722
  • Likes Given: 821
Re: What mission after MSL ?
« Reply #39 on: 08/08/2012 09:03 pm »
Given that the principles behind ISRU can be (and have been) demonstrated on Earth, I would have thought that the only purpose of an in-field demonstrator would be to verify a particular system. It wouldn't make much sense, IMHO, to test a sub-scale version which would basically be a different design.
"I don't care what anything was DESIGNED to do, I care about what it CAN do"- Gene Kranz

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1