5 ms·

A big rocket is probably the biggest obvious hurdle. What are other people doing to get us to mars that is better than musk's approach?

electriclove 2y ago
[flagged]
notahacker 2y ago
No, the big rocket is the easy bit which has been done many times before. Designing a mission involving 1000 days in space with no prospect of resupply is the hard bit. And it's the likes of ESA and NASA that have visibly been spending money on research and testing for that bit, not the very successful private launch vehicle supplier and LEO constellation operator.
- avmich 2y ago
  It's easy if you use additional payload available with bigger rockets. Just like invention of the rocket engine enabled all kinds of rockets, the ability of having a lot of payload available for the mission enables all kinds of solutions for existing problems. Robotbeat is correct.
  - notahacker 2y ago
    You need to determine what those solutions are before you figure out whether additional payload space is even necessary. I mean, if you just want more payload than is possible with the current largest launch vehicle, you send more rockets (and get redundancy for the return journey as a bonus!). Of course, there are mission design complications with sending multiple rockets, but there are also mission design complications involved in astronauts spending three years away from earth or even LEO that don't get handwaved away with extra mass too...
darkwizard42 2y ago
No, the biggest hurdle is having astronauts survive the journey (health and successful landing/departure of Mars). It would be over 3 years in space to round trip to Mars with current tech. We haven't had an astronaut in space continuously over ~1 year...the body suffers tremendously in a low gravity environment and you would have to handle SO many side effects and redundancies in life support etc.
- Robotbeat 2y ago
  Artificial gravity would address those issues. The big rocket (ie mass margin) also addresses life support redundancies (and allows you to use simpler, much more reliable methods like used on short duration spaceflights).
  - darkwizard42 2y ago
    Yes, and we have never built artificial gravity and tested it in space, much less its effects on the body. I think this validates how rocket tech is not the limiting factor on reaching Mars.
    - Robotbeat 2y ago
      It’s trivial to implement.

electriclove 2y ago

[flagged]

notahacker 2y ago

No, the big rocket is the easy bit which has been done many times before. Designing a mission involving 1000 days in space with no prospect of resupply is the hard bit. And it's the likes of ESA and NASA that have visibly been spending money on research and testing for that bit, not the very successful private launch vehicle supplier and LEO constellation operator.

avmich 2y ago
It's easy if you use additional payload available with bigger rockets. Just like invention of the rocket engine enabled all kinds of rockets, the ability of having a lot of payload available for the mission enables all kinds of solutions for existing problems. Robotbeat is correct.
- notahacker 2y ago
  You need to determine what those solutions are before you figure out whether additional payload space is even necessary. I mean, if you just want more payload than is possible with the current largest launch vehicle, you send more rockets (and get redundancy for the return journey as a bonus!). Of course, there are mission design complications with sending multiple rockets, but there are also mission design complications involved in astronauts spending three years away from earth or even LEO that don't get handwaved away with extra mass too...

darkwizard42 2y ago

No, the biggest hurdle is having astronauts survive the journey (health and successful landing/departure of Mars). It would be over 3 years in space to round trip to Mars with current tech. We haven't had an astronaut in space continuously over ~1 year...the body suffers tremendously in a low gravity environment and you would have to handle SO many side effects and redundancies in life support etc.

Robotbeat 2y ago
Artificial gravity would address those issues. The big rocket (ie mass margin) also addresses life support redundancies (and allows you to use simpler, much more reliable methods like used on short duration spaceflights).
- darkwizard42 2y ago
  Yes, and we have never built artificial gravity and tested it in space, much less its effects on the body. I think this validates how rocket tech is not the limiting factor on reaching Mars.
  - Robotbeat 2y ago
    It’s trivial to implement.