Burt Rutans plans for a manned mission to Mars

I am sure Burt has thought quite hard about what would be required to
reach Mars (and possibly return).
Has he released any details to the public about what he would design
and build given the money. I have heard that he would like to be able
to go to the Moon himself and he has also said that he thinks a return
mission to the Moon is not really any easier (in deltaV terms) than a
mission to "Mars or a return mission to one of its moons.
If you have heard of his discussion on this subject please let it be
known. I know he often answers questions at such events as Oshkosh or
the Space conferences.
Maybe Burt would like to personnally reveal some of his thoughts.

"steve" wrote in message
oups.com...
I am sure Burt has thought quite hard about what would be required to
reach Mars (and possibly return).
Has he released any details to the public about what he would design
and build given the money. I have heard that he would like to be able
to go to the Moon himself and he has also said that he thinks a return
mission to the Moon is not really any easier (in deltaV terms) than a
mission to "Mars or a return mission to one of its moons.
If you have heard of his discussion on this subject please let it be
known. I know he often answers questions at such events as Oshkosh or
the Space conferences.
Maybe Burt would like to personnally reveal some of his thoughts.

Burt's approach seems to be very incremental. His next big space project
would seem to be building a commercially viable follow-on to SS1 for use in
the potential suborbital tourism market. Because of this, I doubt he has
much in the way of "plans" for getting to Mars.

Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.

"steve" wrote:
I am sure Burt has thought quite hard about what would be required to
reach Mars (and possibly return).

Why?

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

Burt gave a talk on the subject at Oshkosh and was saying that he
considered it crazy that we had made no progress in landing a man on
Mars and that it should be made a high priority. It was something he
wanted to see happen in his lifetime.
I would think that he must have at least worked out what is required
for such a mission and with his contacts I would think that if anyone
outside of government could bring this all together he would be the one.

"steve" wrote in
ups.com:

Burt gave a talk on the subject at Oshkosh and was saying that he
considered it crazy that we had made no progress in landing a man on
Mars and that it should be made a high priority. It was something he
wanted to see happen in his lifetime.
I would think that he must have at least worked out what is required
for such a mission and with his contacts I would think that if anyone
outside of government could bring this all together he would be the one.

Not necessarily. Let's take a look at Rutan's speech at the ISDC last
weekend. In that speech, he asserted 1) that safe, cheap spaceflight to
Earth orbit (or the moon, or beyond) requires "breakthrough technology"
that doesn't yet exist, 2) that he doesn't even know what those
breakthroughs might be, and 3) if he *did* know, he wouldn't be wasting his
time and money with suborbital tourism.

Given that, I doubt he's wasted much time working on requirements for Mars
missions. In fact, given that his ISDC speech mostly talks about the moon
rather than Mars, I think his Oshkosh speech was also about the moon and is
being misquoted.

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/618/1

quote
"I’m telling you, if I do get to the Moon in my lifetime," he said,
recounting one of his goals, "if that happens then, it will be because of
breakthroughs that make the kinds of differences that we saw with
suborbital manned flight capability."

Moreover, Rutan said that he doesn’t even know what that breakthrough
technology that would greatly lower the cost and increase the safety of
human flights to the Moon, or even Earth orbit, might be. "If I knew what
those breakthroughs were, I wouldn’t fiddle around with suborbital space
tourism, period," he said. "I don’t see anything out there right now that I
would put my own money into as the solution for affordable, safe-enough
private transport to orbit."
/quote
--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

"steve" wrote in message
ups.com...
Burt gave a talk on the subject at Oshkosh and was saying that he
considered it crazy that we had made no progress in landing a man on
Mars and that it should be made a high priority. It was something he
wanted to see happen in his lifetime.
I would think that he must have at least worked out what is required
for such a mission and with his contacts I would think that if anyone
outside of government could bring this all together he would be the one.

Low launch costs would go a *long* way to making *anything* in space a
reality. Unfortunately, the US EELV's are in financial trouble, partly due
to the lack of customers. At the same time, NASA is planning on building
and flying two new shuttle derived launch vehicles (CEV and CaLV), but at
the flight rate they need for their proposed lunar missions, launch costs
won't drop by much for NASA either.

What's needed is for one of the small startup launch providers to prove
successful in lowering launch costs. Hopefully lower launch will stimulate
demand which will provide for economies of scale which will lower launch
costs even more... You get the picture. Basic economics at work.

Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.

There is one potentially cheap way of getting into orbit that is just
about possible to achieve with current materials and that is the
rotating space elevator. This requires a long cable approx 1000km
length attached to either a large mass at one end in low Earth orbit or
twice the length without the mass (double ended).
This cable rotates at such a speed that even though at the Cg is at
orbital speed the lower end is travelling at a much slower speed
allowing sub-orbital craft and even potentially aircraft to transfer
mass which will then be transported upto orbital speed by the cable.
Powering the whole cable, could be achieved by electro means or plasma
drives.

This will be built within the next decade I believe.

"steve" wrote:

:There is one potentially cheap way of getting into orbit that is just
:about possible to achieve with current materials and that is the
:rotating space elevator. This requires a long cable approx 1000km
:length attached to either a large mass at one end in low Earth orbit or
:twice the length without the mass (double ended).
:This cable rotates at such a speed that even though at the Cg is at
rbital speed the lower end is travelling at a much slower speed
:allowing sub-orbital craft and even potentially aircraft to transfer
:mass which will then be transported upto orbital speed by the cable.
:Powering the whole cable, could be achieved by electro means or plasma
:drives.
:
:This will be built within the next decade I believe.

Yeah? How do you think they'll get it up?

If we can lift enough mass to put up a space elevator we don't need a
space elevator.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn

"steve" wrote:
I would think that he [Rutan] must have at least worked out what is required
for such a mission and with his contacts I would think that if anyone
outside of government could bring this all together he would be the one.

ROTFLMAO.

Whatever you are smoking, it must be really good.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

On Fri, 12 May 2006 03:34:02 GMT, Fred J. McCall
wrote:

"steve" wrote:

:There is one potentially cheap way of getting into orbit that is just
:about possible to achieve with current materials and that is the
:rotating space elevator. This requires a long cable approx 1000km
:length attached to either a large mass at one end in low Earth orbit or
:twice the length without the mass (double ended).
:This cable rotates at such a speed that even though at the Cg is at
rbital speed the lower end is travelling at a much slower speed
:allowing sub-orbital craft and even potentially aircraft to transfer
:mass which will then be transported upto orbital speed by the cable.
:Powering the whole cable, could be achieved by electro means or plasma
:drives.
:
:This will be built within the next decade I believe.

Yeah? How do you think they'll get it up?

It would most likely be constructed in space, from lunar or asteroidal
materials -- so a decade does seem rather optimistic.

However, sending it up by a bootstrap process is not as far-fetched as
you might imagine. The rotating elevator has one great, overwhelming
advantage over rockets: positive feedback. You can start with a very
small modular system that can't lift very much and requires the
payload to be boosted to near orbital speed before it hooks it; but if
the payload is more elevator modules, the system quickly becomes more
powerful, able to lift more payload and/or from a lower boost speed.

Because even the very small initial system's lifting capacity is
enormously larger than any contemplated rocket-based system -- it can
lift a payload several times a _day_ -- if it is initially devoted
entirely to strengthening itself, in a very short time it would be
able to lift a 10-ton payload from the back of a subsonic aircraft. A
short time after that, it would be able to lift a standard 40-foot
shipping container full of stuff right off the ground. More arms can
then be added to make a "pinwheel," tripling or quadrupling its
lifting capacity, to thousands of tons per day.

If we can lift enough mass to put up a space elevator we don't need a
space elevator.

?? ROTFL!! "If we can send enough men and supplies and equipment and
rails and crossties all the way across the continent to build a
railroad, we don't need a railroad."

-- Roy L