[extropy-chat] Re: Are dwarfs better for long duration spaceflight?

[Mike Lorrey]

--- David Lubkin <extropy at unreasonable.com> wrote:

> Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> >The tough problem is that when you are mass producing something, you
> >are doing so in order to earn a profit by doing so. Making space
> >science pay for itself, such as geological assays and surveys do, is
> >the key to doing what you want.
> 
> Part of that answer could be communications-relay spacecraft.
> 
> There's a group that's adapting the Internet protocols for the 
> specific characteristics involved with an environment where even a 
> ping will take hours and an aging host may have too little remaining 
> power to waste resending mangled packets.
> 
> Perhaps they should look at (if they aren't already) adapting the 
> routing protocols and building a space-worthy router that can become 
> a standard module included in every spacecraft, manned or unmanned, 
> regardless of mission.

Well, spin-off technologies is nice, but I'm talking about space
science making its data valuable to the market. Discovering whether a
compound is present somewhere is nice, but doing an assay of how much
of it is there and exactly where and in what form is a long way to
doing a business case for recovering that compound for economic use for
industry, colonists, etc.

For example, figuring out how much He3 is on the moon is great info,
except while theoretically its a great fusion fuel, there is no fusion
industry as yet, or even proven fusion technology. However, figuring
out how much water there is on the moon, and where, or on Mars, is of
immense economic value. The latest Mars probe being sent of last week
or so is going to generate data of immense economic value: a global
survey of the presence of water to a significant depth using radar.
That data is going to decide the feasibility of colonizing and even
terraforming Mars.

Probes surveying asteroids and comets for water, potential rocket
fuels, iron, etc will also be of immense value, but the probes must be
designed by a group intent on surveying them as if they were planning
on mining the object. Right now probe design is dictated by those who
are not industrially oriented.

> 
> I'd also love to see more standards for describing and merging sensor
> data, so that we can gradually build a grid of multi-purpose 
> buoys-cum-lighthouses throughout the system and then extending 
> beyond, perhaps one every light-hour for starters.

With miniaturization, putting out hundreds or thousands of nano-probes
operating in a network should be as expensive as launching one big
probe like Cassini. However, more than the computers need to be
miniaturized. Thrusters (this is happening), reaction wheels less than
3" dia. (haven't seen mini-sized ones yet), and instruments, like
spectrometers, etc. that are hand held or smaller. Ideally you want to
pack a dozen instruments, a supercomputer, a solar electric propulsion
system, tracking, guidance, maneuvering systems, and communications
into a volume of less than a cubic foot at launch, weighing less than
30 lbs. 

If you want to mass produce them, they need to be VCR sized made of
similar scale components. You want to launch them and disperse them in
space just like cluster bombs disperse anti-personnel weapons. 

Taking a Proton launcher as an example, which has a 26 foot long by 12
foot dia payload fairing, should be able to fit 2600 of such probes in
it, though its load limit is 44,100 lbs to LEO, that would limit us to
about 1470 30 lb probes. As the Proton costs an estimated $30 million
per launch, the per probe share of launch costs would be merely
$20,048.00. If we could reduce probe mass to under 16.8 lbs, the
maximum volume could be used to launch all 2600 probes for a per probe
launch cost of just over $11,538.00. If probe volume can be reduced to
a 6 inch cube (w/ proportionate mass reduction), per probe launch cost
would be under $1460.00.

Then the question becomes how costly would the probes be to make? A
production run of thousands is significantly less than what PC or
router makers are used to. All components would need to be standardized
units off the shelf, like PC components, yet be space-ratable. I'm
thinking of a PC maker I know of that sells industrial and EMI shielded
PC systems and components. His prices are typically two to four times
the prices of consumer grade units. On a rough guestimate, I'd say each
probe would cost no less than $10k each and no more than $50k each.

Know any angels that want to help out with such a project?

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
Founder, Constitution Park Foundation:
http://constitutionpark.blogspot.com
Personal/political blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail 
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour: 
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html