<p>I've been told it would take 5 years to go to Mars from Earth. I've read articles that say 6-8 months at the most.</p><p> For the 2030 mission, will it take that long? </p>
- Status
<p><font size="2">Welcome to SDC.</font></p><p><font size="2"><font size="2">MarsDrive</font></font></p><font size="2"><p><font size="2"><font size="2">Gas core reactor rocket</font></font></p><p>Knowlegde is power</p></font> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#993300"><span class="body"><font size="2" color="#3366ff"><div align="center">. </div><div align="center">Never roll in the mud with a pig. You'll both get dirty & the pig likes it.</div></font></span></font> </div>
<p>There's no simple answer to your question really, it all depends on mission structure with regard to velocity, transfer type, gravity assists, duration on surface, etc, etc. All of these is still a subject of great debate. </p><p>More specificly I can point to an example such as Zubrin's Mars Direct plan that calls for a 550 day stay on Mars and 180 day transfer time both ways. Whether this is the best idea is a subject of much discussion. Almost 2 years on the surface sounds daunting, but when you consider that the distance between Mars and Earth is differing from 38 million km at the nearest (opposition) and 400 million km when it's on the other side of the Sun (conjunction) it becomes apparant that such considerations are plausible. </p><p>It should be said that a 5 year transit is definately not an option, and would put so great constraints on the mission, not to mention risks for the crew, that it would make no sense to go in the first place. I suspect that the number stems from an Apollo like approach without utilizing aerobreaking techniques or gravity assist. </p><p>Unless we're just gonna do a brief visit (flag n' footprint) much points to around 6-900 day total mission time with 180-240 day transits. The crux of the matter seems to be that the faster you choose to go, the riskier the the aerocapture manouver will get. Not using aerobraking will essentially double the amount of fuel you'd have to bring and consequently severely impair the mission options and viability. </p><p>I recommend Zubrin's "A Case for Mars" as he goes into these considerations in great detail.</p><p> </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "<font color="#0000ff"><em>The choice is the Universe, or nothing</em> ... </font>" - H.G Wells </div>
<p>Oh, and by the looks of things I'm afraid you can forget about a 2030 manned mission to Mars. I'd be happy if I live to see it, and I'm just 35. </p><p> </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "<font color="#0000ff"><em>The choice is the Universe, or nothing</em> ... </font>" - H.G Wells </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Welcome to SDC.MarsDriveGas core reactor rocketKnowlegde is power <br />Posted by boris1961</DIV></p><p>The VASIMR propulsion system is in development. A flight type unit is planned to be tested on the ISS in a few years.</p><p>http://www.adastrarocket.com/VASIMR.html<br /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>The VASIMR propulsion system is in development. A flight type unit is planned to be tested on the ISS in a few years.http://www.adastrarocket.com/VASIMR.html <br />Posted by shuttle_guy</DIV></p><p><font size="2">Thanks S_G, in my zeal for nuclear engines I always seem to forget VASIMIR. As far as powerful engines go, I'm sure we'll see a VASIMIR mission long before we see a nuc mission.</font></p><p><br /><br /> </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#993300"><span class="body"><font size="2" color="#3366ff"><div align="center">. </div><div align="center">Never roll in the mud with a pig. You'll both get dirty & the pig likes it.</div></font></span></font> </div>
<p>The AdAstra press release.... </p><p>http://www.adastrarocket.com/AdAstra-NASA_PR12Dec08.pdf</p><p><strong>RESS RELEASE 121208, December 12, 2008 </strong><br /> <br /><em><strong>NASA and Ad Astra Rocket Company sign <br />Agreement for flight test of the VASIMR™ <br />rocket engine aboard the International <br />Space Station. </strong></em></p><p>[Houston, TX. For immediate release] – The <br />National Aeronautics and Space Administration <br />(NASA) and Ad Astra Rocket Company of Webster, <br />Texas have entered into a Space Act Agreement that <br />could lead to conducting a space flight test of the <br />Variable Specific Impulse Magnetoplasma Rocket <br />(VASIMR&trade
engine on the International Space <br />Station (ISS). The VASIMR™ engine is a new <br />plasma–based space propulsion technology, initially <br />studied by NASA and currently under commercial <br />development by Ad Astra. The agreement was fully <br />executed on December 8, 2008. It was signed on <br />behalf of NASA by its Associate Administrator for <br />Space Operations, William H. Gerstenmaier and on <br />behalf of Ad Astra Rocket Company by its President <br />and Chief Executive Officer, Dr. Franklin R. Chang <br />Díaz. It is the third agreement entered into by the <br />parties since June, 2005 relating to the VASIMR™ <br />technology development. <br /> /> /></p>The primary technical objective of the project is to <br />operate the VASIMR™ VF-200 engine at power <br />levels up to 200 kW. Engine operation will be <br />restricted to pulses of up to 10 minutes at this power <br />level. Energy for these high-power operations will <br />be provided by a battery system trickle-charged by <br />the ISS power system. These tests will mark the first <br />time that a high-power, steady-state electric thruster <br />will be used as part of a manned spacecraft. Ad <br />Astra is developing the VF-200 payload entirely <br />with funds from private investors. The partnership <br />described in this agreement represents a <br />collaboration between NASA and a private entity <br />never before attempted. <br /><p>>> </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
engine on the International Space <br />Station (ISS). The VASIMR™ engine is a new <br />plasma–based space propulsion technology, initially <br />studied by NASA and currently under commercial <br />development by Ad Astra. The agreement was fully <br />executed on December 8, 2008. It was signed on <br />behalf of NASA by its Associate Administrator for <br />Space Operations, William H. Gerstenmaier and on <br />behalf of Ad Astra Rocket Company by its President <br />and Chief Executive Officer, Dr. Franklin R. Chang <br />Díaz. It is the third agreement entered into by the <br />parties since June, 2005 relating to the VASIMR™ <br />technology development. <br /> /> /></p>The primary technical objective of the project is to <br />operate the VASIMR™ VF-200 engine at power <br />levels up to 200 kW. Engine operation will be <br />restricted to pulses of up to 10 minutes at this power <br />level. Energy for these high-power operations will <br />be provided by a battery system trickle-charged by <br />the ISS power system. These tests will mark the first <br />time that a high-power, steady-state electric thruster <br />will be used as part of a manned spacecraft. Ad <br />Astra is developing the VF-200 payload entirely <br />with funds from private investors. The partnership <br />described in this agreement represents a <br />collaboration between NASA and a private entity <br />never before attempted. <br /><p>>> </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div><p>VASIMR sounds like a perfect application for Electrostatic Confinement fusion. </p><p>http://www.emc2fusion.org/</p><p>If you have not seen it before, watch the "Should Google go Nuclear" video of Dr. Bussard explaining how it works.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><span class="postbody"><span style="font-style:italic"><br /></span></span></p> </div>
Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Knowlegde is power <br />Posted by boris1961</DIV><br /><br />LMAO! That is a hillarious mistake! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="3">You wanna talk some jive? I'll talk some jive. I'll talk some jive like you've never heard!</font></p> </div>
The best forum for any and all information and discussions on Polywell developments (and then some) is at www.talk-polywell.org . <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>The VASIMR propulsion system is in development. A flight type unit is planned to be tested on the ISS in a few years.http://www.adastrarocket.com/VASIMR.html <br />Posted by shuttle_guy</DIV><br /><br /> </p><p>There is good article in SCIENTFIC AMERICAN called New Dawn for Electric Rockets by Edgar Y. Choueiri</p><p>FEB 2009 issues 8 or 9 pages.</p>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Oh, and by the looks of things I'm afraid you can forget about a 2030 manned mission to Mars. I'd be happy if I live to see it, and I'm just 35. <br /> Posted by arkady</DIV></p><p>I don't think it will take that long, so I'm gonna keep hoping it's 2030 or somewhere around there.</p><p> Thanks for the information guys! </p>
<p> </p><p>As the rapidly-failing governor for my home state famously said, "Get your ahss to Mahhs."</p><p> </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
<p>Im in the middle of "The Case for Mars" right now as it happens (and yeah, it does suggest 6months each way as a reasonable option as someone already said)</p><p>Two years on the surface sounds like a great idea given the effort to get there. I read "A man on the Moon" just recently and what really struck me after all that effort to get to the moon is how the astronauts only had a handful of hours running around like madmen to get everything on their lists done. And then we quit the entire project and stepped ten years backwards (wrt to the moon). Totally crazy.</p><p> </p>
How long did it take the Viking probes to reach Mars again? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Women are from Venus, men are from Mars... oh sure, give us the one with all the monsters! </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>How long did it take the Viking probes to reach Mars again? <br /> Posted by LangdonAlger</DIV></p><p><font size="2">Here is a useful link.</font></p><p><font size="2">The two probes were launched about a month apart -- in August and September of 1975. They arrived at Mars the following summer, remaining in orbit for sometime collecting imagery that was used in deciding where to land the landers. </font></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#0000ff"><strong>Just tell the truth and let the chips fall...</strong></font> </div>
<p>From this link</p><p>http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/090126-astronauts-bone-strength-loss.html</p><p>A 14 percent decrease in bone "strength" in a 6 month period. I think this alone would kill a planned 5 year transit time. Even the 2-3 year plan talked about may prove to be to injurious to astronauts in the long run.</p>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>From this linkhttp://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/090126-astronauts-bone-strength-loss.htmlA 14 percent decrease in bone "strength" in a 6 month period. I think this alone would kill a planned 5 year transit time. Even the 2-3 year plan talked about may prove to be to injurious to astronauts in the long run. <br />Posted by samkent</DIV></p><p><font size="2">Space is possibly the most hostile environment to life there is. The best method to limit the dangers is to limit your exposure. The best way to limit exposure is to limit the time you are in space by increasing the speed of space craft. VASIMIR is one method to speed up ships, Nuclear Engines is another.<br /></font></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#993300"><span class="body"><font size="2" color="#3366ff"><div align="center">. </div><div align="center">Never roll in the mud with a pig. You'll both get dirty & the pig likes it.</div></font></span></font> </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>From this linkhttp://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/090126-astronauts-bone-strength-loss.htmlA 14 percent decrease in bone "strength" in a 6 month period.</DIV></p><p>That assumes they are in zero gravity the whole time. Until we have VASIMR or something like it, I think the only reasonable way to make the trip is in a rotating vehicle that creates at least Mars-level gravity inside. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><span class="postbody"><span style="font-style:italic"><br /></span></span></p> </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>That assumes they are in zero gravity the whole time. Until we have VASIMR or something like it, I think the only reasonable way to make the trip is in a rotating vehicle that creates at least Mars-level gravity inside. <br /> Posted by ThereIWas2</DIV></p><p>Absolutely true, and also each ship will need a "safe harbor" in case of sun storms! But one of the best methods to ensure missions success is the total redundancy of multiples ships with the space capacity in each to take on the crews and supplies of at least two crippled ships.</p><p>After all, there will be NO Apollo 13 types of rescues with a single ship millions of miles away from the Earth!</p><p>And Murphy's Law applies with a vengeance to space travel, just observe what sometimes happens to even robotic expeditions that go so far! </p><p>This is another reason why the moon is so very important. The raw materials to build expeditions to Mars with multiple ships, and still be able to do that relatively inexpensively are found on the surface of the moon. Thus enabling the ability to not have to bring everything up out of the relatively huge gravity well of the Earth.</p>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>The VASIMR propulsion system is in development. A flight type unit is planned to be tested on the ISS in a few years.http://www.adastrarocket.com/VASIMR.html <br /> Posted by shuttle_guy</DIV></p><p>If the VASIMR test unit on the ISS is a success, how easy/difficult will it be to scale it up to serve as primary propulsion for a Mars mission? And what is the ISP range of VASIMR compared to a conventional NERVA-style engine, which is around 950, if I recall correctly...</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>From this linkhttp://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/090126-astronauts-bone-strength-loss.htmlA 14 percent decrease in bone "strength" in a 6 month period. I think this alone would kill a planned 5 year transit time. Even the 2-3 year plan talked about may prove to be to injurious to astronauts in the long run. <br /> Posted by samkent</DIV></p><p>If we can use a tether to spin the Mars Habitat Vehicle with the booster to create artificial gravity, we could minimize the bone loss issue, at least until the astronauts arrive on the surface. We know a lot about the biological consequences of extended microgravity missions, but no one really knows what effect spending a year or two in a .38 gravity will do to the human body.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
Several years to Mars takes less energy than one year to Mars. My guess is we will not take 5 years to go to Mars as the humans are not reliable over that long a time. Also the timing is very critical for longer, low energy missions. At an average speed of a million miles per day, it takes less than 100 days to get to Mars, and the timing is much less critical. In case of trouble there are lots of options for taking longer with less energy. Neil
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>If the VASIMR test unit on the ISS is a success, how easy/difficult will it be to scale it up to serve as primary propulsion for a Mars mission? And what is the ISP range of VASIMR compared to a conventional NERVA-style engine, which is around 950, if I recall correctly... <br /> Posted by crazyeddie</DIV></p><p>The ISP range of VASIMR goes up into the tens of thousands. A parallel problem with making it larger however is getting a big power source. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><span class="postbody"><span style="font-style:italic"><br /></span></span></p> </div>
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
A video made by me about space and the loneliness in the universe- Started by drakotol
- Replies: 54
-
NASA's Voyager 1 spacecraft finally phones home after 5 months of no contact
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 11
-
-
Russian cosmonauts make quick work of space station spacewalk
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 0
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram