New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society and MarsNews.com

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: This forum is accepting new registrations by emailing newmarsmember * gmail.com become a registered member. Read the Recruiting expertise for NewMars Forum topic in Meta New Mars for other information for this process.

#1 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » The Clean Slate Society Forums » 2008-05-09 05:42:20

Actually, this is exactly the main purpose of the project; coming up with fixes to current society's woes by working backwards from a theoretical clean-slate. In other words, imagining how you would go about improving on things within the context of a clean-slate society, and then figure out how you can get from here (the current mess) to there (the theoretical ideal).

The clean-slate society that is referred to here may never arise, but that is not the point of the project. Rather, it is simply to provoke thought on the matter (i.e. recognizing that current systems aren't ideal, and asking ourselves how they can be improved upon).

#2 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » The Clean Slate Society Forums » 2008-05-08 03:02:21

Heaps more stuff added. Some very interesting discussions going.

Why not throw in your own thoughts? Check us out at: http://cleanslate.editboard.com/topics-f2

Hope to see you there!

#3 Re: Human missions » Long duration Human space missions - Can we survive them? » 2008-03-28 02:46:24

Artificial gravity would be a wasteful and potentially dangerous addition to the craft.

Why?

#4 Re: Human missions » Design Reference Mission 5.0 » 2008-03-20 00:16:13

I'm pretty sure the human body can't tell the difference between gravity created naturally or artificially. Physically, they are both identical. Unless your talking about short radius arms. But for sufficiently long radii; I'm pretty sure the body will find it indistinguishable from natural gravity.

#5 Re: Planetary transportation » Running on Compressed Air? » 2008-03-20 00:04:37

True. When you are dealing with a nuclear power system, it is probably not worth the risk to rely on an active cooling system.

#6 Re: Planetary transportation » Running on Compressed Air? » 2008-03-18 23:01:40

What about using compressed CO2 in combination with an RTG? The excess heat could be used to expand the CO2 for more efficiency and power, while cooling the RTG at the same time without the need for large radiators. The CO2 would be compressed with an electric compressor running off the RTG. Sounds pointless but the benefit would be a more compact RTG system and better power density.

#7 Re: Human missions » Design Reference Mission 5.0 » 2008-03-18 22:38:27

cIclops, this is not wishful thinking; it is common sense. Strict adherence to scientific method is not a complete substitute for reason.

#8 Re: Planetary transportation » Running on Compressed Air? » 2008-03-17 22:46:41

I imagine average combustion pressures would be much higher though.

Has steam power been discussed here before?

#9 Re: Human missions » Design Reference Mission 5.0 » 2008-03-17 22:41:15

There are some indications that a combination of diet, exercise and medications may be sufficient, this approach would certainly be far cheaper than building a rotating spacecraft.

Cheaper perhaps, but far less effective.

Edit: Thanks again for the links, SpaceNut!

#10 Re: Planetary transportation » Dirigibles on Mars - A practical means of transport? » 2008-03-17 03:15:32

Balloons, blimps and airships are commonplace on Earth, but only two such vehicles have ever flown on another planet. In 1985, the Soviet Union's VEGA project successfully flew two small, wind-blown balloons in the upper atmosphere of Venus for two days.

Wow, I have never heard about this. Do you have any more info on this, SpaceNut? Would it be worth performing a similar experiment on Mars? What sort of information can be obtained?

#11 Re: Planetary transportation » New idea for Mechanical CounterPressure suit » 2008-03-17 02:58:48

Yes, joints always seem to be a difficult area. Perhaps such a suit could be made up of layers which slide over each other; thus allowing changes in shape while maintaining counter-pressure?

#12 Re: Planetary transportation » Running on Compressed Air? » 2008-03-17 02:52:52

I'm disappointed that the idea of mars cars powered by compressed CO2 is so quickly dismissed. Powering cars with a compressed version of the local atmosphere would be a simple and elegant method of propulsion; if it could be made to work. Is there anyone here that could look into the physics a little further?

#13 Re: Human missions » Design Reference Mission 5.0 » 2008-03-17 02:27:04

Good work, Robert. I seem to recall that VSE, when it was first announced, called for the remainder of ISS research to be directed more towards human life support systems and the like (to support future manned exploration efforts). How much more do we know about this? What sort of new technologies might be tested there before it is retired?

#14 Re: Human missions » NASA Exploration Roadmaps » 2008-03-17 02:13:29

Concerning that last comment; is Griffin just trying to scare the US into speeding the Lunar program (or perhaps hoping for re-focus towards Mars), or does he truly believe that China will beat the US?

#15 Re: Science, Technology, and Astronomy » The Clean-Slate City-State » 2008-02-02 16:17:38

Aren't these apocalyptic scenarios mainstream predictions?

#16 Re: Human missions » Minimal Gravity » 2008-01-22 00:08:20

Alternative Theory (not sure if I subscribe to it, but sounds intriguing):

"The human body will adapt to remain healthy in its environment.

Yes, a man in zero-g will experience muscle and bone loss, and his heart may shrink, but this is because large energy-hungry muscles aren't needed to get around in zero-g. If his body kept these things, what useful purpose would they serve in an environment where it is impossible to fall and you get around by floating instead of walking?

The astronauts encounter problems because the change from full-g to zero-g is so sudden. Their bones demineralize so fast that their bodies have trouble getting rid of the liberated calcium. But they survive the adaption process, and once adapted, live quite healthily in zero-g.

The confusion on this matter arises because the current definition of 'healthy' requires a minimum bone and muscle mass (among other things) based on observed norms, which of-course, are biased towards terrestrial living."

#17 Re: Unmanned probes » Cool places on Mars to land » 2007-12-20 03:44:54

You're not Ron Carlson the novelist, are you?

#18 Re: Human missions » Design Reference Mission 5.0 » 2007-11-19 01:03:48

no amount of testing can fully simulate that.

Yeah, but thoroughly testing it on the ground first isn't a bad idea. Better than not bothering at all.

#20 Re: Human missions » Design Reference Mission 5.0 » 2007-11-16 01:04:15

I agree. Considering Zubrins studies, what sort of mission could be achieved using three launches of the Ares V using the pre-developed Lunar EDS as the departure stage?

Perhaps the Lunar EDS could be scaled easily to meet MarsDirect requirements?

#21 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Ares V (CaLV) - status » 2007-11-15 04:04:46

aresvshuttlewc1.jpg
Image from: Reference Payload Capabilities (PDF 2MB) - 1 Oct 2007

A good illustration of the enormous capacity of Ares V in both weight and volume!

My research says that the one with the 12m shroud is too tall to fit through the VAB door. I think the height restriction is somewhere between 127 and 130 meters? Perhaps they are considering fitting the fairing cap post-VAB?

#22 Re: Human missions » Design Reference Mission 5.0 » 2007-11-13 00:35:34

cIclops is right. If all goes to plan, flying these Ares-V's should be just as routine as flying the Shuttle has been... We could easily fly 5 of these things a year, more if we consider that they are unmanned (less safety risk).

So the real question is, what shall we do with the excess launch capacity?

#23 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Conjunction & Opposition Launch Windows to Mars » 2007-09-16 05:07:35

Just scouting through a few sites brought up by google, it seems as though launch windows for opposition class missions occur between those of conjunction class missions. I guess this would make sense as conjunction and opposition refer to the position of Mars in its orbit?

So the available launch windows might look like this:

2021 (opposition)
2022 (conjunction)
2023 (opposition)
2024 (conjunction)
2025 (opposition)
2026 (conjunction)

Can anyone confirm this?

#24 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Conjunction & Opposition Launch Windows to Mars » 2007-09-16 04:47:30

Thanks cIclops.

What I intend to find is how far the launch window can be extended if given the option of earth departure at both conjunction and opposition.

The data on available launch windows for a conjunction class mission is excellent. Now I just need something similar for opposition class missions.

My intention is to graphically represent when launch opportunities open and close through the years 2020 to 2040, perhaps by using green and red bands of colour in a linear progression.

#25 Re: Interplanetary transportation » Conjunction & Opposition Launch Windows to Mars » 2007-09-15 21:22:39

I want to find out when the launch windows to mars for both conjunction and opposition class missions occur over the next ~50 years or so.

Has anyone here worked it out?

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB