9 ms·
Four Mars missions are launching next year
- wtracy 7y agoIs anyone exploring modeling an unmanned sample return mission after Zubrin's Mars Direct plan? It seems like something that could be done with little fundamentally new technology. Demonstrating the real-world application of the synthesis and use of fuel off-planet would be a major milestone in space exploration. To top it off, bringing back the first samples from Mars would be a major feather in the cap of any nation or corporation.
- ExodusOrbitals1 7y agoLittle new technology, but a substantial financial cost. One would need a much heavier Martian probe that would include return stage for the lander.
- mLuby 7y agoIs ISRU refueling really ready for this? (Methane I assume, as hydrogen sounds much harder.) To me, getting that set of technologies to an operational level is one of the biggest reasons to go (back) to the Moon. It's cheaper to send demonstrators there, and easier to troubleshoot them. Once we can do ISRU refueling reliably, the solar system will become dramatically more accessible (to robots, and eventually humans).
- Robotbeat 7y agoYes, because we are sending an ISRU demo on the Mars 2020 rover which will convert the CO2 atmosphere into oxygen and carbon monoxide (which could be used as a fuel). You'd have to use a completely different type of ISRU for the Moon, and mining for it on the Moon (i.e. scraping a permanently shadowed crater near a lunar pole) is a lot harder than on Mars where you can just suck in some of the atmosphere. There's not nearly as much commonality as you might think.
- wtracy 7y agoI didn't know about the ISRU test on Mars 2020, that's very exciting!
- LeifCarrotson 7y agoI thought the typical Martian ISRU called for heating soil to extract water vapor and using the hydrogen in that to make fuel. Oxygen is still interesting, for sure, but that robotic mining sounds a lot more difficult.
- Robotbeat 7y agoThe carbon monoxide can also be used as rocket fuel. Not commonly considered, but it'd simplify a lot of things.
- wtracy 7y agoZubrin's plan is specific to Mars in that it relies on chemicals present in the Martian atmosphere. The only equivalent option I know of for the moon would be to collect water ice and break it down to oxygen and hydrogen. The process involved would be quite different.
- Rebelgecko 7y agoNASA has been working on it, more or less, for at least a decade. I think the latest (and IMO much less risky) proposal doesn't involve any in situ fuel creation.
- boxfire 7y agoThe Mars 2020 mission is taking core samples and caching them for a follow on sample return mission to pick up and send back to earth.
- azernik 7y agoNASA's Mars 2020 is set to collect samples and place them in a capsule for later pickup; NASA and ESA have announced collaboration on a separate sample return mission to pick up the samples left behind. Lets them save collection hardware weight on the return mission.
- tectonic 7y agoIf you like this issue of Orbital Index, please consider subscribing for free. Orbital Index is a weekly newsletter about the space industry. https://orbitalindex.com/ https://orbitalindex.com/
- lucb1e 7y agoThat sounded a lot like an ad. I was about to ask whether you are affiliated, but it turned out to be easy to find that you're one of the authors.
- tectonic 7y agoThat's correct! We launched on HN about 4mo ago and now have right around 600 subscribers. It's an unfunded side project for Ben and myself.
- ryanmercer 7y agoBy your command.
- bediger4000 7y agoIt's worthwhile watching the launch of the Chinese Long March vehicle: https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2019/06/china-first-sea-launch-long-march-11-seven-satellites/ https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2019/06/china-first-sea-laun... They appear to shoot the entire vehicle out of a cannon-like container, then air-ignite the booster. I can't think of another launch vehicle that does this. The US did this sort of launch for the Sprint anti-ballistic missile: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msXtgTVMcuA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msXtgTVMcuA
- Isamu 7y agoVery cool. >They appear to shoot the entire vehicle out of a cannon-like container, then air-ignite the booster. They have an interesting launch platform, maybe they are trying to limit the damage to equipment? As it is their strategy seems relatively gentle to their launch platform. This could give them faster turnaround on launches.
- maxxxxx 7y agoDon't submarine missiles work like this?
- Sharlin 7y agoMost man-portable anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles work like this as well, for obvious reasons.
- bediger4000 7y agoYes, but man-portable, AA and anti-tank missiles, and sub-launched ballistic missiles, are not carrying quarter-of-a-billion dollar satellites. Typically, you don't want launch vehicles to have to withstand heavy loads not related to actually flying vehicles into orbit. Ground support stuff is not supposed to impose design loads, but I would imagine that firing the launch vehicle out of a cannon would actually impose high enough loads to cause engineers to design to those loads.
- Robotbeat 7y ago
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- loblollyboy 7y agoThis is like that time when king gizzard released 5 albums in one year
- e40 7y agoEven if people around here think humanity isn't really prepared for a Mars mission yet, what's clear to me is there are nations on this planet that will take far more risks that, say, NASA was prepared to take back in the days of our first space program. I'm not passing judgement, just saying I think it's clear, even if NASA had the funds to go to Mars, we wouldn't be the first to Mars. Maybe not even second or third. And in this politically charged world we seem live in currently, there are likely interesting times ahead.
- abledon 7y agosobering run down of the realities when living on mars: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqKGREZs6-w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqKGREZs6-w The layers of soil we'd have to cover our buildings in really got me!
- aeternus 7y agoTunnels are a much better solution. More radiation protection and built-in structural integrity. Just use giant LCD panels for natural light shafts for windows.
- zamalek 7y ago> Just use giant LCD panels for natural light shafts for windows I read about tech a few years back that simulates the entire atmosphere in about 5cm. Photos of rooms with these lights looked like skylights. "Real" sunlight is probably very important for mental health.
- nirav72 7y agoI always wondered why Mars is first on the list for exploration. why not develop the tech to mine astroids and then use the resources for building up human presence on Mars. Plus, the economic benefits alone would drive many private entities to jump into it
- afro88 7y agoI think it stems from environmental and doomsday concerns on Earth.
- TeMPOraL 7y agoMars is a more interesting scientific target; cislunar space is a more interesting industrial target. Mars is where we should explore; Earth-Moon system is where we should expand to and build permanent space presence.
- davedx 7y ago> why not develop the tech to mine astroids and then use the resources for building up human presence on Mars Because we have all the resources we need on Earth to build a base on Mars, and if we make good use of ISRU ("live off the land") on Mars, we can get a lot of what we need right there. See for example synthesising methalox from Martian resources; marscrete; making glass and other chemical processes... Zubrin's "Mars Direct" book goes into many details here. Building a reusable booster capable of launching vehicles that can do the Mars transfer is much more economical than building intermediate stages like orbital gateways or asteroid mines. That's not to say mining asteroids is a bad idea though -- there are other companies looking at this too!
- de_watcher 7y agoIt involves launching an untested zero-g mining and manufacturing facilities from Earth. It also needs shielding if we use people there. Mars has gravity and can use our normal mining and manufacturing, it's straightforward to dig in with shovels for shielding. Launching from Mars is easier, so it's a probable path to the belt. I don't see economical viability for the Earth in any of these scenarios. Maybe only the straight breakthrough in zero-g autonomous mining and return of precious metals from the belt to Earth.
- ncmncm 7y agoWhat, again? With so many going to, already at, or already been to Mars, it seems like they should be able spare a probe for Venus. Mars will never be a place anyone sane would want to be. But Cloud City floating 50 miles above Venus! Who could resist?
- azernik 7y agoCloud City would have no access to raw materials for ISRU, and still have to deal with (low-pressure-gradient) sealing and wind forces. In terms of engineering, easier to build a self-contained environment in a place where the only environmental interactions are heat loss and some dust, and where you can use local materials to make oxygen, concrete, and metals.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago> Cloud City would have no access to raw materials for ISRU Arguably, it would, it would just require the collector to take a dip in the denser parts of the atmosphere. It might be tricky though, and generally the less moving parts a misson has, the better.
- jacobush 7y agoWhat worries me about Cloud City is the sulfuric acid gas in the atmosphere. Is it so hard to handle as I imagine?
- ncmncm 7y agoConcentrated sulfuric acid is shipped freely in polyethylene bottles. Polyethylene is just carbon, hydrogen and oxygen, all available at altitude.
- ncmncm 7y agoCloud City has easy access to unlimited amounts of carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, and sulfur, and plenty of solar energy. Balloons dipping lower could pick up other needed trace materials. Balloons don't need to deal with wind forces. They go where the air goes. More important, though, is that on Mars you're in Nowheresville. Cold, dusty, airless, dim, with possibly unhealthily-low gravity.
- pseingatl 7y agoHow much law do we take with us? And whose? See, marslegalcode.org
- luxuryballs 7y agoBut why? Such a waste of money, it’s too far away, and there’s nothing there. It’s like the ultimate snake oil investment. The ROI must be awful. Just think about the cost to get there and the chance of anything of value coming back... a big time net loss no doubt. I wish I could buy the hype but I’m just not seeing it.
- BellBivDeVoe 7y agoWhy sail across the ocean? The new world is just wilderness and indigenous people. Why move west, across the Mississippi? It's just open prarie and Indians. Why go camping? It's just dirt and bugs and carcinogens from cooking fires. Why climb mountains? People get killed all the time in horrible accidents.
- thelittleone 7y agoI can't speak for the science value but these missions do inspire people. I often sit with my two sons and watch launches and missions, or set an alarm to see the ISS fly over. They're fascinated that we're able to send machines to Mars and that people are inside that tiny space station flying overheard.
- lnsru 7y agoSpace race is going further: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Race https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Race It’s a wonderful way to demonstrate power without starting a war.
- taneq 7y agoThe ROI for the first few successful missions will, long term, be a significant portion of an entire planet. That's a pretty decent ROI.
- ncmncm 7y agoThere is apparently an economic theory behind this argument. But I doubt it's been published. Who do the inheritors of Mars sell it to? And what do they swap for it?
- 7y ago