Could a manned mission to Mars (and back) be done NOW!?
Discussion
A question for the science section regulars. If funding was unlimited, public and private sectors partnered up, is it possible? Is current tech sufficient? How much would it cost and how long from drawings to watching a launch?
Having binged on many many discovery programmes and youtube stuff I am just curious as to the answer. Could an unmanned craft be sent ahead with supplies or fuel for the return journey be ready to lift off in say.. 12 months?
Thankyou ✌
Having binged on many many discovery programmes and youtube stuff I am just curious as to the answer. Could an unmanned craft be sent ahead with supplies or fuel for the return journey be ready to lift off in say.. 12 months?
Thankyou ✌
Pacman1978 said:
A question for the science section regulars. If funding was unlimited, public and private sectors partnered up, is it possible? Is current tech sufficient? How much would it cost and how long from drawings to watching a launch?
Having binged on many many discovery programmes and youtube stuff I am just curious as to the answer. Could an unmanned craft be sent ahead with supplies or fuel for the return journey be ready to lift off in say.. 12 months?
Thankyou ?
The only bit that's not been trialled up to now is a human-capable lander. Mars is tricky because the atmosphere is very thin but gravity is quite high - so you would likely still need to use boosters to land, and still need a lot of thrust to take off. Having binged on many many discovery programmes and youtube stuff I am just curious as to the answer. Could an unmanned craft be sent ahead with supplies or fuel for the return journey be ready to lift off in say.. 12 months?
Thankyou ?
The biggest question other than that is radiation shielding.
http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/real-martians-...
With 'unlimited' use of resources radiation shielding issues go away. You can just have a jacket of water around the habitable section of the craft. This is heavy and requires a more boosters but we have that 'unlimited' thing.
You are looking at about a 450 day round trip, I think this is possible we have had people in ISS/space for about that time, you would have to take more supplies and backup things than ISS has as it gets resupplied more often.
So getting there and back isnt an issue from a technical point of view.
We'd need a spacex kind of vertical landing rocket to actually get to the surface, the atmosphere isnt enough to slow down, and afik even with wings your velocity for enough lift would be higher than escape velocity.
But we have landed rockets like that now.
IMO we have the technology to do it, safely is questionable, but it was with the moon shots also.
You are looking at about a 450 day round trip, I think this is possible we have had people in ISS/space for about that time, you would have to take more supplies and backup things than ISS has as it gets resupplied more often.
So getting there and back isnt an issue from a technical point of view.
We'd need a spacex kind of vertical landing rocket to actually get to the surface, the atmosphere isnt enough to slow down, and afik even with wings your velocity for enough lift would be higher than escape velocity.
But we have landed rockets like that now.
IMO we have the technology to do it, safely is questionable, but it was with the moon shots also.
The safety issue won't go away its risky business, would a space X be the best way to go about this? ( you know other companies have shown this is possible before Space X got truly in to the business and have not invented a vertically landing Rocket) Hers's a Boeing version https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdqhGhfX62Y
And the space X red dragon will probably change from these artists drawings if called on to be the supplier but even so the concept is similar one vehicle for landing another for the return just like the Lunar lander
It would be good to wind forwards a century or two and see what actually happens
And the space X red dragon will probably change from these artists drawings if called on to be the supplier but even so the concept is similar one vehicle for landing another for the return just like the Lunar lander
It would be good to wind forwards a century or two and see what actually happens
Defcon5 said:
How does the water stop radiation?
(I question it as why don't they use water to sheild nuclear power stations etc instead of lead or whatever thy use)
They do. But mostly for spent fuel rods etc.(I question it as why don't they use water to sheild nuclear power stations etc instead of lead or whatever thy use)
For the kinds of radiation coming off spent nuclear fuel, every 7 centimeters of water cuts the amount of radiation in half.
https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/
"Water, already required for the crew, could be stored strategically to create a kind of radiation storm shelter in the spacecraft or habitat. However, this strategy comes with some challenges—the crew would need to use the water and then replace it with recycled water from the advanced life support systems."
http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/real-martians-...
Edited by RobDickinson on Monday 29th February 20:59
RobDickinson said:
"Water, already required for the crew, could be stored strategically to create a kind of radiation storm shelter in the spacecraft or habitat. However, this strategy comes with some challenges—the crew would need to use the water and then replace it with recycled water from the advanced life support systems."
Drinking water and replacing it with urine sounds pretty simple. The main issue is more likely to be the weight.Eric Mc said:
Simple answer - with unlimited budgets and massive long term political commitment (like in the Apollo days), yes, it could be done.
Yep, all it needs is money and willpower. And a motive.Most asteroids are outside Marses orbit.
Plus there is no 'hitching a lift' really.
If you have the delta v to catch/land on the asteroid you dont gain anything from sitting on it other than being next to a big rock. it doesnt give you any extra speed or momentum. You may as well have just boosted to your target.
Plus there is no 'hitching a lift' really.
If you have the delta v to catch/land on the asteroid you dont gain anything from sitting on it other than being next to a big rock. it doesnt give you any extra speed or momentum. You may as well have just boosted to your target.
ash73 said:
No chance with current tech, imo. I read somewhere an astronaut on a trip to Mars would receive the same radiation as a full CT scan every 5 days, if they use water for radiation shielding how can they drink it?
Given the 'unlimited budget' option we just take more water... How many liters of water a day do you think the average astronaut drinks? Plus it gets recycled. The landing on mars part is the hard bit.
A Saturn V or SLS class booster is capable of putting 100 tons directly into earth orbit or sending 30 tons to the moon. Using multiple launches of boosters like this, a collection of craft and orbit transfer stages could be assembled in earth orbit with two to four launches - depending on the techniques that were going to be used to get to Mars, land on Mars and come home from Mars.
Habitats and other expedition modules, including rovers, could be sent to Mars in advance of human landing parties.
Habitats and other expedition modules, including rovers, could be sent to Mars in advance of human landing parties.
ash73 said:
No chance with current tech, imo. I read somewhere an astronaut on a trip to Mars would receive the same radiation as a full CT scan every 5 days, if they use water for radiation shielding how can they drink it?
Where do you think all (well most of) that water goes...? It's a closed system.ash73 said:
Simpo Two said:
Where do you think all (well most of) that water goes...? It's a closed system.
If it's used for shielding it would be contaminated with radioactivity.Back in 1961, when Kennedy set the goal of landing men on the moon, loads of people, including some highly respected scientists, trotted out plenty of reasons why it would be very, very difficult - if not impossible. Some of their fears were well founded and some were just mad speculation.
Kennedy replied to these critics as follows -
"We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard; because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone".
Kennedy replied to these critics as follows -
"We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard; because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone".
ash73 said:
We didn't go to the moon with 1961 technology, his speech was followed by nearly a decade of intense R&D with an unlimited budget. The OP is asking about lift-off in 12 months.
The issue is not "is it possible?" but "how safe do you want it to be?"With the proposed Limitless resources- Yes, it is possible but perhaps not as safely as waiting a bit longer. In the 12months you can utilise every launch platform on the planet from every country capable of orbiting cargo (10 + 2x Private companies IIRC?) So you have the option of putting 1000+ tonnes in orbit, that's alot of shielding and supplies.
For that matter just launch some shielding, supplies and boosters to the ISS and send the whole thing!
As stated the issue is a safe landing and launch back to Mars orbit, Humanities record on landings is a 50% success rate and we've not launched before, so those would be on a wing and a prayer... but we could take a couple of landers and several crew to be on the safe side statistically ;-)
In reality the issue wouldn't be the unlimited resources it would be logistical- if you get get the majority of the worlds manufacturers and aerospace companies to unite and work in harmony for 12months the possibilities would be astounding :-)
IMO if the relevant agencies dropped tools on everything else now and worked on a Manned Mars mission with a Apollo type budget we could be there safely in 5yrs.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff