2 ms·
r^2, right? It'd be ~r^3 if vacuum represented significant path loss to light at the kinds of ranges we're talking about.
by zbrozek 4y ago
r^2, right? It'd be ~r^3 if vacuum represented significant path loss to light at the kinds of ranges we're talking about.
- ncmncm 4y agoRight. But solar insolation at Mars is, indeed, low, just by the r^2 phenomenon. 40%, IIRC. But you should be able to use perovskite panels and not worry about them getting wet, oxidized, or hot. Those can operate at up to 40% efficiency, gaining back the difference. And, they are very light. You ought to be able to keep dust off electrostatically. Not that anybody will ever live on Mars, or need methane there.