3 ms·

> By comparison it takes ~8km/s to get from Earth LEO to Moon LEO No, from Earth LEO some 3.1 km/s will get you to TLO, and then some ~1 km/s will take you to

by avmich 10y ago

> By comparison it takes ~8km/s to get from Earth LEO to Moon LEO No, from Earth LEO some 3.1 km/s will get you to TLO, and then some ~1 km/s will take you to Moon low orbit, so total about 4(+) km/s. 8 km/s is an approximate budget for a round-trip between low orbits.

Retric 10y ago
Sorry, butchered that. I was trying to say the figures are less exact depending on how hard you want to hit the earths upper atmosphere. ~8.2km/s if you want to end up in earth LEO ~8km/s if you want to get back to the earth. You can also save a little if your sending an unmanned craft and don't care how long it takes or skip low moon orbit.
- nojvek 10y ago
  I wonder if spaceX is going to send a permanent colony of bots on moon to make a base there. The latency is a lot lower than Mars and would make a good start. Sending a couple of humans around moon for tourism is a waste of resources.
  - greglindahl 10y ago
    Sending a couple of humans around the moon for tourism is a great R&D opportunity, paid for by someone else's money. See: Apollo 8 mission.
  - simonh 10y ago
    They're said they have no particular interest in going to the Moon as it wouldn't teach them anything useful about going to or living on Mars and would just be a distraction. Of course if someone else wants to contract them to do so and they can make a buck off it, that might be different.
  - vidarh 10y ago
    > Sending a couple of humans around moon for tourism is a waste of resources. One persons waste of resources is another persons revenue. They're not doing it for charity.
  - gozur88 10y ago
    They have paying customers. When you're in business to make money, you do what you can bill for. Though I don't know why anyone would want to spend a week locked in a tiny can like that, let alone pay big bucks for it. There's a limit to the discomfort I'd be willing to endure for bragging rights.
  - JshWright 10y ago
    The Moon is a terrible "start" for Mars. They are very different places, and require solving very different problems. In many ways, Mars is a lot easier (the atmosphere can do a lot of the work of slowing you down, you have the raw materials to make methane (the rocket fuel SpaceX will be using), etc). People tend to think of the Moon as a "staging point" on the way to Mars, but in reality, it would be a significant detour.
cptskippy 10y ago
So is it possible for them to launch multiple vehicles into Earth LEO, rendezvous with one another and then transfer to Moon LEO?

by avmich 10y ago

Retric 10y ago

Sorry, butchered that. I was trying to say the figures are less exact depending on how hard you want to hit the earths upper atmosphere. ~8.2km/s if you want to end up in earth LEO ~8km/s if you want to get back to the earth. You can also save a little if your sending an unmanned craft and don't care how long it takes or skip low moon orbit.

nojvek 10y ago
I wonder if spaceX is going to send a permanent colony of bots on moon to make a base there. The latency is a lot lower than Mars and would make a good start. Sending a couple of humans around moon for tourism is a waste of resources.
- greglindahl 10y ago
  Sending a couple of humans around the moon for tourism is a great R&D opportunity, paid for by someone else's money. See: Apollo 8 mission.
- simonh 10y ago
  They're said they have no particular interest in going to the Moon as it wouldn't teach them anything useful about going to or living on Mars and would just be a distraction. Of course if someone else wants to contract them to do so and they can make a buck off it, that might be different.
- vidarh 10y ago
  > Sending a couple of humans around moon for tourism is a waste of resources. One persons waste of resources is another persons revenue. They're not doing it for charity.
- gozur88 10y ago
  They have paying customers. When you're in business to make money, you do what you can bill for. Though I don't know why anyone would want to spend a week locked in a tiny can like that, let alone pay big bucks for it. There's a limit to the discomfort I'd be willing to endure for bragging rights.
- JshWright 10y ago
  The Moon is a terrible "start" for Mars. They are very different places, and require solving very different problems. In many ways, Mars is a lot easier (the atmosphere can do a lot of the work of slowing you down, you have the raw materials to make methane (the rocket fuel SpaceX will be using), etc). People tend to think of the Moon as a "staging point" on the way to Mars, but in reality, it would be a significant detour.

cptskippy 10y ago

So is it possible for them to launch multiple vehicles into Earth LEO, rendezvous with one another and then transfer to Moon LEO?