Quote from: Dalhousie on 03/24/2017 09:58 amQuote from: guckyfan on 03/24/2017 06:47 amI just argue from the timeline given. I am aware that the timeline will slip, like everybody is. But presently they are working towards it. That does not leave any room. 2020 for Red Dragon. 2022 for the unmanned ITS. That timeline means the 2020 Red Dragons are direct precursors for the first colony flights. Remember there is the need to build substantial capacity for fuel production at that first landing site. They don't do that randomly for any number of locations until they like one for settlements.That does not mean they would not abandon the first site if it for some reason turns out to be untenable but it would be a major and costly setback.I don't just assume Elon Musk is only talking nonsense about his plans.When it comes to timelines, he talks nothing but nonsense. There is also a huge difference between a Red Dragon mission which could feasibly launch in 2020 (although may well slip to 2022 based on record) and the ITS fantasies.So let's stick to Red Dragon landing sites.Red Dragon is hardly less of a fantasy. SpaceX will pursue ITS until it goes bankrupt, at which point Red Dragon missions will stop, too.Not long ago, folks would say VTVL and Red Dragon were fantasies. And ITS is the reason for these Red Dragon missions anyway.
Quote from: guckyfan on 03/24/2017 06:47 amI just argue from the timeline given. I am aware that the timeline will slip, like everybody is. But presently they are working towards it. That does not leave any room. 2020 for Red Dragon. 2022 for the unmanned ITS. That timeline means the 2020 Red Dragons are direct precursors for the first colony flights. Remember there is the need to build substantial capacity for fuel production at that first landing site. They don't do that randomly for any number of locations until they like one for settlements.That does not mean they would not abandon the first site if it for some reason turns out to be untenable but it would be a major and costly setback.I don't just assume Elon Musk is only talking nonsense about his plans.When it comes to timelines, he talks nothing but nonsense. There is also a huge difference between a Red Dragon mission which could feasibly launch in 2020 (although may well slip to 2022 based on record) and the ITS fantasies.So let's stick to Red Dragon landing sites.
I just argue from the timeline given. I am aware that the timeline will slip, like everybody is. But presently they are working towards it. That does not leave any room. 2020 for Red Dragon. 2022 for the unmanned ITS. That timeline means the 2020 Red Dragons are direct precursors for the first colony flights. Remember there is the need to build substantial capacity for fuel production at that first landing site. They don't do that randomly for any number of locations until they like one for settlements.That does not mean they would not abandon the first site if it for some reason turns out to be untenable but it would be a major and costly setback.I don't just assume Elon Musk is only talking nonsense about his plans.
I think you are mistaken on several counts. When proposed jointly by NASA and SpaceX Red Dragon was clearly feasible with technology either proven or under development and within the framework of current budgets.
The justification of Red Dragon is not ITS with which it has almost nothing in common. Red Dragon is a way of commercially transporting payloads to Mars.There are plenty of ITS threads. Let's focus on Red Dragon here.
Quote from: Dalhousie on 03/25/2017 05:40 amI think you are mistaken on several counts. When proposed jointly by NASA and SpaceX Red Dragon was clearly feasible with technology either proven or under development and within the framework of current budgets. Yes and it involved a number of proposed NASA missions using Red Dragon capabilities, none of which were followed up on so far.Quote from: Dalhousie on 03/25/2017 05:40 amThe justification of Red Dragon is not ITS with which it has almost nothing in common. Red Dragon is a way of commercially transporting payloads to Mars.There are plenty of ITS threads. Let's focus on Red Dragon here.This is where you go wrong IMO to an extent that is completely incomprehensible to me. The Red Dragon missions as proposed by SpaceX are an integral part of their Mars plans. Precursors to ITS missions. Just look at the slides of the IAC announcement by SpaceX. They are part of the Mars timeline.That does not rule out the possibility that NASA could purchase Red Dragon flights for their own missions in the future. Even once ITS has landed, that covers just one location. There are no doubt many locations that could still be explored by robot missions.
I understand the skepticism that SpaceX will succeed. I do NOT understand the skepticism that SpaceX is actually serious about their stated intentions. They may be crazy, but they're sincere.Red Dragon is about ITS and settling Mars. Full stop.
...It plain enough. Red Dragon has been marketed specifically as a commercial systems for flying paying payloads to Mars.ITS could never happen, could be a complete failure, or could be delayed for a decade or more with little impact on the Red Dragon program.
Quote from: Dalhousie on 03/25/2017 07:53 am...It plain enough. Red Dragon has been marketed specifically as a commercial systems for flying paying payloads to Mars.ITS could never happen, could be a complete failure, or could be delayed for a decade or more with little impact on the Red Dragon program.You omitted the possibility that ITS could be a success. Red Dragon is a precursor flight or flights for the follow-on ITS program -- Dragon has minimal utility in its present configuration other than the vehicles will already be paid for by crew and cargo flights. It will fly until a dedicated design Mars spaceship replaces it.
Quote from: AncientU on 03/25/2017 11:37 pmQuote from: Dalhousie on 03/25/2017 07:53 am...It plain enough. Red Dragon has been marketed specifically as a commercial systems for flying paying payloads to Mars.ITS could never happen, could be a complete failure, or could be delayed for a decade or more with little impact on the Red Dragon program.You omitted the possibility that ITS could be a success. Red Dragon is a precursor flight or flights for the follow-on ITS program -- Dragon has minimal utility in its present configuration other than the vehicles will already be paid for by crew and cargo flights. It will fly until a dedicated design Mars spaceship replaces it.I think the point is, as far as currently known, SpaceX is specifically seeking a site for landing a Red Dragon. That's it....for now.Unless Elon Musk speaks loudly and specifically, we can only presume the Arcadia/Amazonis Planitia site is for the first Red Dragon. The 2nd and onward Dragons could fly to the top of Olympus Mons, or ITS to the bottom of Hellas Planitia likewise as far as we know. Inversely the site could be useful for a colony...but there's no confirmation, only interest for the first Red Dragon landing site. The only other given is that the Red Dragon technically could land most places on Mars if the vendor is willing. We can guess, not much else.End of line.
Wooster, who is involved in Mars mission planning in addition to his “day job” as manager of guidance, navigation and control systems on SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft, said that site selection is based on several criteria. One is access to large quantities of ice near the surface that could, ultimately, support human settlements.Another is to be close to the Equator and at a low elevation for solar power and better thermal conditions. “It’s probably hard to find that along with ice,” he acknowledged, so the focus has been on four locations at latitudes no more than about 40 degrees from the Equator.
Those landing sites are of particular interest, he said, for SpaceX’s long-term vision of establishing a human settlement on Mars, but he said the company wouldn’t rule our sending Red Dragon spacecraft elsewhere on the planet to serve other customers. “We’re quite open to making use of this platform to take various payloads to other locations as well,” he said. “We’re really looking to turn this into a steady cadence, where we’re sending Dragons to Mars on basically every opportunity.”
Red Dragon's stated purpose (besides building SpaceX's Mars EDL tech--for ITS) is to test ISRU technology, specifically some kind of water extraction. They need this ISRU for ITS, no other reason.
There are no "commercial" payloads to Mars except SpaceX's own ISRU payloads to prepare for ITS. That's 95% of the purpose of Red Dragon.
Quote from: redliox on 03/25/2017 11:58 pmQuote from: AncientU on 03/25/2017 11:37 pmQuote from: Dalhousie on 03/25/2017 07:53 am...It plain enough. Red Dragon has been marketed specifically as a commercial systems for flying paying payloads to Mars.ITS could never happen, could be a complete failure, or could be delayed for a decade or more with little impact on the Red Dragon program.You omitted the possibility that ITS could be a success. Red Dragon is a precursor flight or flights for the follow-on ITS program -- Dragon has minimal utility in its present configuration other than the vehicles will already be paid for by crew and cargo flights. It will fly until a dedicated design Mars spaceship replaces it.I think the point is, as far as currently known, SpaceX is specifically seeking a site for landing a Red Dragon. That's it....for now.Unless Elon Musk speaks loudly and specifically, we can only presume the Arcadia/Amazonis Planitia site is for the first Red Dragon. The 2nd and onward Dragons could fly to the top of Olympus Mons, or ITS to the bottom of Hellas Planitia likewise as far as we know. Inversely the site could be useful for a colony...but there's no confirmation, only interest for the first Red Dragon landing site. The only other given is that the Red Dragon technically could land most places on Mars if the vendor is willing. We can guess, not much else.End of line.Selection criteria are specifically for settlement per SpaceX. Please don't ignore the only data point we have been provided.
QuoteWooster, who is involved in Mars mission planning in addition to his “day job” as manager of guidance, navigation and control systems on SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft, said that site selection is based on several criteria. One is access to large quantities of ice near the surface that could, ultimately, support human settlements.Another is to be close to the Equator and at a low elevation for solar power and better thermal conditions. “It’s probably hard to find that along with ice,” he acknowledged, so the focus has been on four locations at latitudes no more than about 40 degrees from the Equator.There is interest in sending Red Dragons to other sites for paying customers, but that isn't why this site selection is being done.
QuoteThose landing sites are of particular interest, he said, for SpaceX’s long-term vision of establishing a human settlement on Mars, but he said the company wouldn’t rule our sending Red Dragon spacecraft elsewhere on the planet to serve other customers. “We’re quite open to making use of this platform to take various payloads to other locations as well,” he said. “We’re really looking to turn this into a steady cadence, where we’re sending Dragons to Mars on basically every opportunity.” http://spacenews.com/spacex-studying-landing-sites-for-mars-missions/
Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/26/2017 04:37 amRed Dragon's stated purpose (besides building SpaceX's Mars EDL tech--for ITS) is to test ISRU technology, specifically some kind of water extraction. They need this ISRU for ITS, no other reason.However the experiment is realsitically be supplied by NASA who have the experitise here. Which means that its has broader application than SpaceX fantasies.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 03/25/2017 03:31 pmI understand the skepticism that SpaceX will succeed. I do NOT understand the skepticism that SpaceX is actually serious about their stated intentions. They may be crazy, but they're sincere.Red Dragon is about ITS and settling Mars. Full stop.So are Mars one.