insufficient lifting capabilitythis topic is basically equivalent to "Manned Mars mission using SpaceX Delta 4 Heavy?"
Commercial launchers are starting to become real. Whether or not SpaceX fails, someone else will step up to the plate. I suspect we will have true competition in the commercial launcher business within the next 10-15 years. This will bring launch costs down dramatically, but probably only for commercial class payloads of 25 tonnes or less.
You know how Zubrin said that we should have plastics production and metal processing on Mars? Does anyone know how much a small plastics production unit would weigh? What about a reaction chamber for metal processing? Mars has plenty of iron, carbon, oxygen, and maybe enough hydrogen in water.
Quote from: randomly on 10/03/2008 09:05 pmPersonally I'd go for a one way trip.I can bet you a million dollars that you won`t go for a one way trip.
Personally I'd go for a one way trip.
Quote from: scienceguy on 10/05/2008 02:09 amYou know how Zubrin said that we should have plastics production and metal processing on Mars? Does anyone know how much a small plastics production unit would weigh? What about a reaction chamber for metal processing? Mars has plenty of iron, carbon, oxygen, and maybe enough hydrogen in water.Where are you going to get the hydro carbons for plastic production from? You will need to create the hydro carbons out of water and carbon with something akin to how the germans made gas out of coal during WW-II, but you would have to break down atmospheric CO2 down first. Mars Al production might be less energy intensive
Zubrin had it all worked out in his book. Hydrogen, brought from Earth, plus heat, pressure, catalysts and Martian carbon dioxide would reform into water and carbon monoxide. Electrolyze the water to recover the hydrogen gives you syngas, which then can be reformed into methane or any number of large hydrocarbon chains.
I can bet you a million dollars that you won`t go for a one way trip.
Quote from: Eerie on 10/03/2008 09:42 pmI can bet you a million dollars that you won`t go for a one way trip.I wish you were right.
So we should refresh the question, would you be willing to become a colonist?
Quote from: beb on 10/06/2008 04:40 pmZubrin had it all worked out in his book. Hydrogen, brought from Earth, plus heat, pressure, catalysts and Martian carbon dioxide would reform into water and carbon monoxide. Electrolyze the water to recover the hydrogen gives you syngas, which then can be reformed into methane or any number of large hydrocarbon chains. It would be more mass efficent to transfer the Hydrogen as methane to mars than it would be to transfer as water. The methane molecule holds 4 hydrogens for every carbon ( which is also lighter than oxygen ) vs. the 2 hydrogens that each Oxygen holds. Plus you would save all the expense/energy needed to electrolyze the water molecules. Though why you would do either is beyond me, mars has plenty of carbon and oxygen in various forms.
All I can say is it would take a lot of F9-Hs to pull it off likely five to ten of them for each mission.
As for making a colony I don't think it should be attempted until you have proven reliable cargo transport between Earth and Mars.
Other important issues to work out before a large colony is possible is raising crops and live stock on Mars.Unlike the new world Mars has nothing to offer in food resources the first colonists will have to depend on supplies from Earth.Has anyone made a working biosphere yet? I know it was attempted a few years back but the experiment had mixed results.Mars can supply oxygen,water and soil so the system doesn't have to be 100% closed as biosphere 2 was attempting to be.
There's really not much reason to plan a one way trip. The nice thing about a two way trip is that you have more options available when things go wrong.
Plus you're going to want to return material from Mars anyway.
I have a plan. Mount a private minimalist manned expedition to Mars that includes a bogus return capability. Land with great fanfare and, after the cheering stops, pretend to try to lift off. "Oh, golly! My rocket failed! Help! Save me!" We are just the sort of country wouldn't spend a few hundred billion to save itself from perdition, but would do so to rescue some fool got himself stranded on Mars.
I think most regenerative life support systems have been based upon comparatively simple chemical and biological processes (e.g. using algae rather than an entire ecosystem).
I have a plan. Mount a private minimalist manned expedition to Mars that includes a bogus return capability.
Quote from: madscientist197 on 10/07/2008 01:11 pmI think most regenerative life support systems have been based upon comparatively simple chemical and biological processes (e.g. using algae rather than an entire ecosystem).Just ask anyone who maintains a salt water tank about those... Quite a bit goes into keeping those "open loop" systems going. I keep joking with one friends who has two that the DEA is going to knock on his door because of how much electricity he uses running the tanks.