3 ms·

I used to be in two minds about this, but now I think I agree with you. Let's solve the problem of building a semi-self-sufficient colony on the rock in our own

by hugh3 16y ago

I used to be in two minds about this, but now I think I agree with you. Let's solve the problem of building a semi-self-sufficient colony on the rock in our own backyard before we try to solve the same problem on a rock a thousand times further away. All progress in space exploration has been made with baby steps. We flew men around the backside of the Moon three times before actually attempting a landing. Apollo 10 took a lunar lander within 40,000 feet of the lunar surface without landing. Whatever problems are going to arise with a Mars base I think it'd be better to solve 'em with a Moon base first. Apart from anything else it's easy to get home from the Moon if you need to evacuate, whereas easy transfers from Mars to Earth only crop up every eighteen months or so. Oh, and if you're not aware there's already a SpaceX flight to the Moon scheduled for 2013; one of the teams for the Lunar X-Prize (Astrobotic Technology) has booked one up.

rbanffy 16y ago
> Oh, and if you're not aware there's already a SpaceX flight to the Moon scheduled for 2013 Wow! That's really cool. What kind of mass can SpaceX put on the lunar surface? Anyone cares to do the math?
- hugh3 16y ago
  Luckily SpaceX has already done it for us. A Falcon 9 can supposedly put three tons on the Moon, or two tons on Mars: http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=space&id=news/asd/2011/02/08/01.xml&headline=SpaceX%20Lands%20Contract%20To%20Fly%20To%20Moon http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?cha... Not sure if that includes the fuel you'll need for a soft landing, though. For comparison, an Apollo lunar lander was fifteen tons including fuel. I'm guessing a Falcon 9 Heavy could manage that.
  - rbanffy 16y ago
    A Falcon 9 can put 9900 Kg on LEO. A 9 heavy can put 5 times as much. It's reasonable to extrapolate that to about 15 tons on lunar surface or 10 on Mars. As for Mars, you can use the atmosphere to shed some speed. You can't do the same on the Moon, but your speed will be lower, so, it may as well end up being the same.
InclinedPlane 16y ago
I'm not sure I agree. The technologies and expertise needed for a Mars mission are not necessarily the same as needed for a lunar colony. And the difficulty of setting up a Martian colony may actually end up being less than setting up a lunar colony (due to the ability to heavily use local resources on Mars, such as for generating fuel).
- hugh3 16y ago
  And the difficulty of setting up a Martian colony may actually end up being less than setting up a lunar colony (due to the ability to heavily use local resources on Mars, such as for generating fuel). There's a few ways in which Mars is an easier problem than the Moon, including fewer worries about micrometeorites. As far as fuel goes, though, if you can find a good supply of water on the moon then you can start fuelling your hydrogen-oxygen rockets, no worries. edit: Others have suggested making rocket fuel out of aluminium oxide if you can't find enough water: http://www.asi.org/adb/06/09/03/02/095/al-o-propellants.html http://www.asi.org/adb/06/09/03/02/095/al-o-propellants.html
  - InclinedPlane 16y ago
    You can land an automated vehicle on the surface of Mars with a small stock of Hydrogen and brew Methane/O2 fuel (an excellent rocket fuel with an existing infrastructure of components that use it) out of the atmosphere, without having to dig or mine or anything of the sort. Moreover, Mars has a much larger quantity of much more widely distributed water ice supplies, making it far easier to bootstrap a mostly indigenous propellant, water, and Oxygen production infrastructure. As far as cracking rocks to make Oxygen, that's such an expensive proposition in capital equipment and energy requirements that it's not on the table in terms of resources that will help bootstrap exploration and colonization or that will sustain a mostly self-sufficient local industry.

by hugh3 16y ago

rbanffy 16y ago

> Oh, and if you're not aware there's already a SpaceX flight to the Moon scheduled for 2013 Wow! That's really cool. What kind of mass can SpaceX put on the lunar surface? Anyone cares to do the math?

hugh3 16y ago
Luckily SpaceX has already done it for us. A Falcon 9 can supposedly put three tons on the Moon, or two tons on Mars: http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=space&id=news/asd/2011/02/08/01.xml&headline=SpaceX%20Lands%20Contract%20To%20Fly%20To%20Moon http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?cha... Not sure if that includes the fuel you'll need for a soft landing, though. For comparison, an Apollo lunar lander was fifteen tons including fuel. I'm guessing a Falcon 9 Heavy could manage that.
- rbanffy 16y ago
  A Falcon 9 can put 9900 Kg on LEO. A 9 heavy can put 5 times as much. It's reasonable to extrapolate that to about 15 tons on lunar surface or 10 on Mars. As for Mars, you can use the atmosphere to shed some speed. You can't do the same on the Moon, but your speed will be lower, so, it may as well end up being the same.

InclinedPlane 16y ago

I'm not sure I agree. The technologies and expertise needed for a Mars mission are not necessarily the same as needed for a lunar colony. And the difficulty of setting up a Martian colony may actually end up being less than setting up a lunar colony (due to the ability to heavily use local resources on Mars, such as for generating fuel).

hugh3 16y ago
And the difficulty of setting up a Martian colony may actually end up being less than setting up a lunar colony (due to the ability to heavily use local resources on Mars, such as for generating fuel). There's a few ways in which Mars is an easier problem than the Moon, including fewer worries about micrometeorites. As far as fuel goes, though, if you can find a good supply of water on the moon then you can start fuelling your hydrogen-oxygen rockets, no worries. edit: Others have suggested making rocket fuel out of aluminium oxide if you can't find enough water: http://www.asi.org/adb/06/09/03/02/095/al-o-propellants.html http://www.asi.org/adb/06/09/03/02/095/al-o-propellants.html
- InclinedPlane 16y ago
  You can land an automated vehicle on the surface of Mars with a small stock of Hydrogen and brew Methane/O2 fuel (an excellent rocket fuel with an existing infrastructure of components that use it) out of the atmosphere, without having to dig or mine or anything of the sort. Moreover, Mars has a much larger quantity of much more widely distributed water ice supplies, making it far easier to bootstrap a mostly indigenous propellant, water, and Oxygen production infrastructure. As far as cracking rocks to make Oxygen, that's such an expensive proposition in capital equipment and energy requirements that it's not on the table in terms of resources that will help bootstrap exploration and colonization or that will sustain a mostly self-sufficient local industry.