[ExI] one way ticket to mars
Eugen Leitl
eugen at leitl.org
Tue Apr 23 14:44:37 UTC 2013
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 07:16:45AM -0700, spike wrote:
> >...Novel propulsion seems to make travel in 30-40 days feasible...
>
> Disagree. The only thing we have even vaguely plausible for a non-Hohmann
> transfer orbit is fission nuclear, assuming any reasonable extrapolation of
Do you disagree that
http://www.space.com/8009-rocket-engine-reach-mars-40-days.html
is a near-future technology?
> today's tech. Nuclear is better, but not enough better to give us fast
> rides. I argued 20 years ago that a really good alternative is really not
> on our horizon. That was not popular, but turned out to be right. It is
> farther away today than it was then. It's chemical rockets for us, and 8
> months trip to Mars, any time in the next 50-ish years. Damn. {8-[
I don't expect that's going to happen with manned missions.
Machines are patient, people are not.
> >... and return is even easier (chemical rocket launch from Mars, and
> aerobraking
> reentry) so even less need for one-way.
> _______________________________________________
>
> I hope you are right. I am betting on semi-autonomous 3D printers and
> assemblers (not nano) building a habitat ahead of the astronauts.
There has been considerable progress with lunar regolith simulant
lately http://news.wsu.edu/pages/publications.asp?Action=Detail&PublicationID=34094
There's an actual project to build an inflatable module with
meteorite/radiation shield printed from regolith.
Plus, with electrostatic and magnetic separation dry processes
are not much of a limitation.
More information about the extropy-chat
mailing list