3 ms·
Unless you source the mass from something that's already orbiting, like the moon. Since we're mostly talking water, any moon water doesn't have to pay the rock
by ethbr1 3y ago
Unless you source the mass from something that's already orbiting, like the moon.
Since we're mostly talking water, any moon water doesn't have to pay the rocket tax to launch from Earth surface.
And for a recurring trip, it'd make way more sense to keep a larger transit ship continually in either orbit or transit, with smaller barebones Earth/Mars cargo/crew transfer craft at either end.
- PaulHoule 3y agoIt is hard to pencil out lunar materials being cheap, except maybe for use on the moon. If we're at the point where we are capable of in-situ utilization we probably have some kind of Starship-class rocket. The worst part of the "rocket tax" is not that you have to burn a lot of fuel or screw around with stages and refueling, but rather that you (1) throw the rocket away after one use or (2) it is a Great American Boondoggle like the Space Shuttle. I do like the picture though of a lunar mass driver that sends up regolith, metal, or something like that to a catcher at, say, the L1 point.
- Asraelite 3y agoA better option would be near-Earth asteroids. These require significantly less fuel to get to than the Moon and many are rich in ice. If you got really really lucky, you could even find one with an orbit similar to the Hohmann transfer path required to get to Mars and visit the asteroid en route. That way you don't even need to expend much fuel to transport the water to Mars; it's almost free. For a return trip you could use Phobos and Deimos for material. They are also extremely easy to land on.