Nuclear Mars Spacecraft???

[john_316]

Ok not to really change alot in the posts but I just was thinking about this lately. Just churning brain cells into pencil shavings...<br /><br />A manned Mars Vessel with a crew of not 4 or 6 but 14. The vehicle would provide enough food and water for a 90 travel to and 90 day travel from period, and enough consumables for a orbit of upto 30 to 90 days before returning home.<br /><br />The craft would be powered by 2 nuclear reactors that are NERVA like, not Ion propulsion. Speed needed here to ensure 90days out and a 90days back mentallity<br /><br />The crew would utilize several ET tanks along a frameworked keel. The Keel of the vessel would extend to to the command section, so that it can contain or mount the supplies it needs and some of the fuel required for the nuclear engines.<br /><br />A crew compartment would be divided into several segments which include 2 Inflatable habitats one forward and one centerline for crew occupation en route.<br /><br />The command section would be twice as large as the Shuttle internals and include a passage way to several nodes which would connect the inflatable habitats, and several decent modules on the outrigging and other essentuals.<br /><br />I am thinking a ship weight in the area of 350+ Tons but I think with all the extras the ship could be at about 500+ tons. I think that it would be very large but very robust in its mission. But I also see some extra nodes like that of ISS such a CanadaArm that can go back and forth on the the keel of the vessel to the command section and several solar arrays for cheap electricity as well and for back up if something goes wrong.<br /><br />I would envision the Mars landers to be prepositioned by Earlier launches and at a rendezvous point in Mars orbit or carried onboard. I could see a modified DC-X lander used for Mars desent and accent. Only 8 of the 14 man crew would actually land on the surface. Thus providing 2 landers for operations and 3rd lander for an emergency. <br /><br />As foolish as

 

[crix]

I'm thinking that the US might eventually pursue a Mars mission like you mentioned as its first mission to Mars. If we have a new heavy lifter and a good nuclear thermal propulsion system developed then I think it is likely we are going to commit to *doing* Mars full out with redundancies and a larger crew and two nuclear reactors. <br /><br />It will come down to our successes on the Moon. If the public backs those and gets excited about manned space travel again then I can see them supporting NASA to create the Mars mission that NASA would prefer: one that is safe and has a almost a 100% chance of success.<br /><br />I would definately like to see a bad-ass million kilogram mother ship launch to mars as the first. I think we are familiar enough with space that we know it's not magic and pixie dust up there. What lies above our atmosphere is a brutal vacuum filled with high-energy radiation and cold, inhospitable planets. The Moon and Mars are no utopias. I think if we decide to go there it is not because of any idealistic preconceptions but because we realize the value of expanding to new lands. And we should make sure we've got a nice big, warm and cozy ship to do it right. We're human and this is a first step for humanity. I don't think we'll be in a race again just to get there for bragging rights. Of course that will be part of it and I think the VSE likely will bring Americans to Mars before citizens of other countries, but this will not be the purpose of going. If the purpose is truly long-range then I believe we may actually go with a nice , big, ship full of redundencies.