Re: Mars expeditions (was Re: Proposed sample return mission to Phobos)

Joe Strout wrote:
I'd like to emphasize the importance of Mars' moons. They are easier
to get to than Earth's Moon

Hang on there. I can't agree with this statement. They *sometimes* require slightly less delta-V to get to than our Moon, but most of the time require substantially more, and even when they require less, that doesn't mean they're easier to get to. A week long round trip is significantly easier than a 2-year round trip, despite it needing a bit more fuel.

That's not as true on Earth though. We get quite a lot of our goods and services via shipping, and they take relatively long periods to reach us.

The point about Phobos is that the return delta-v is lower so material goods that can be made there are going to be cheaper than from the Moon.

I think this tendency to blithely equate "less delta-V" with "easier" steps from our current situation of having to lift all propellant off the Earth. Once we're getting our propellants in space -- from ANY source -- or establish a much lower-cost means of getting them off the Earth, then we won't need to worry so much about squeezing every last bit of delta-V out of each mission, and can optimize for other things, like logistics. This would apply, for example, once we start making use of lunar oxygen.

Thing is, if I recall correctly, lunar oxygen would be produced by expensive electrolysis processes. Water has an extremely low extraction costs, and with care can be made even lower. Water looks to be a sweet spot in many ways- cheap to extract, self ferrying, and useful as a material in other ways as well, such as for radiation shielding.

[Mars' moons] have plentiful resources and commanding
presence above Mars. They are our bridge into the future. Luna is like
Iceland, Mars and it's moons are like New York.

That's an exaggeration, I think. Phobos and Deimos probably do have quite a lot more volatiles than our Moon, and I wish they were in Earth orbit. But they're not; our Moon is, and it has substantial useful resources too (particularly oxygen, and possibly hydrogen too).

Nobody is disagreeing with that, but at the moment Phobos looks to be a better bet for initial ISRU, the equipment costs would be much, much lower than that necessary to create lunar oxygen for example, and there's no high delta-v landing or takeoff maneuvers so you can use ion drives which are slow, but cheap and reliable.

Moreover, geographically speaking, if we're northern Europe and the Moon is Iceland, then Mars and its moons would be more like Argentina, and we're at a stage in history where no boat has ever sailed further than the Mediterranean.

Bad analogy, we've sent boats out past Pluto, I think Phobos is within mankind's tech!

Sure, it may be resource-rich and maybe there's an easy current that will eventually get you there, but it's such a very long way away that a manned expedition at this point would be insanely dangerous.

I agree, I think mining would be best done semi-robotically; I wouldn't fancy digging rock in a spacesuit with lots of sharp rocks flying around, so in practice machinery is the only way to go. People can do what they do best, make decisions about which rocks to tackle, where to mine. That doesn't necessarily have to be done in realtime, and 100% usage of the mining equipment perhaps isn't essential either.

Meanwhile, we've got Iceland right next door which maybe isn't as rich, but still has large amounts of things we need. It only makes sense to develop that first.

Not if you don't have the coal to steam over there. Phobos probably has the 'coal', then you can steam over.

We need to assay places to find the best places to go. Maybe the Moon is it in spite of current appearances, but the current samples we have of the moon aren't particularly encouraging.

Robots still won't be able to breed. The point of going to space is
settlement and development, right? Otherwise, why bother?

Well, I certainly can't argue with that!

We need to realise we're in the 21st century, robotic slaves (automation in factories) are our tools, they make our cars, our rockets and many of our goods. To really open space we need all the leverage we can get. Phobos looks like it could be leverage.

Best,
- Joe
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Mars expeditions (was Re: Proposed sample return mission to Phobos)
    ... to get to than Earth's Moon ... require slightly less delta-V to get to than our Moon, ... Iceland, Mars and it's moons are like New York. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Mars expeditions (was Re: Proposed sample return mission to Phobos)
    ... to get to than Earth's Moon ... require slightly less delta-V to get to than our Moon, ... significantly easier than a 2-year round trip, ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: No ice on Moon?
    ... place than the Moon is is, except for it's gravity well. ... either the Moon or Mars (in terms of Delta-V at least) and have ...
    (sci.space.history)
  • Re: Electrogravitics is Reality!
    ... we do live on a planet called Earth and it is ... orbited by a moon, and we can build things called rockets to access it ... That's fantasy too. ... SRBs increase cost, increase danger, and are a bad idea. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Noahs age?
    ... I arrived at evolution ... God does not lose his Creator status if his methods were a bit more ... moon is moving away from earth. ... is that at one time it was closer to earth than it is now. ...
    (alt.religion.christian)
Quantcast