Private mission to mars:)

In bob haller writes:

On Feb 20, 6:40=A0pm, bob haller wrote:
http://spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=3D40141

WHAT: The Inspiration Mars Foundation, a newly formed nonprofit
organization led by American space traveler and entrepreneur Dennis
Tito, invites you to attend a press conference detailing its plans to
take advantage of a unique window of opportunity to launch an historic
journey to Mars and back in 501 days, starting in January 2018. This
"Mission for America" will generate new knowledge, experience and
momentum for the next great era of space exploration. It is intended
to encourage all Americans to believe again, in doing the hard things
that make our nation great, while inspiring youth through Science,
Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) education and
motivation.

The Inspiration Mars Foundation is committed to accelerating America's
human exploration of space as a critical catalyst for future growth,
national prosperity, new knowledge and global leadership.

Call me a pessimist but I'd be interested to see if they
actually launch one thing before they set off to Mars.

--
http://nebusresearch.wordpress.com/ Joseph Nebus
Current Entry: Meteors and Money Management http://wp.me/p1RYhY-qj
--------------------------------------------------------+---------------------

On 2/22/2013 8:27 AM, Joseph Nebus wrote:
Call me a pessimist but I'd be interested to see if they
actually launch one thing before they set off to Mars.


And if they don't launch anything and then set off for Mars, it would be
the first recorded attempt at Astral Projection that I know of....

:-)

Seriously, setting up the infrastructure in LEO would seem key if you
don't have a BDB* handy and they'll have only 5 years to prepare, with
at least the first two of these years already booked for COTS. So just
to GET to LEO they'll need to book *now* for 2017.

Sounds too aggressive to make the 2018 window, but not a 2035 window.
It'd be a lot easier and cheaper for an NGO then too because COTS to LEO
will either be well-established or non-existent. And if non-existent
then it's easy to determine the feasibility of an NGO proposal as well! :-(

Doubtful we'll learn any specifics at a 45min kickoff press conference,
but we should get an overall feel for their approach.

IMO: If you ditch the 'landing' part for either a flyby (rather
pointless IMHO) or 1 month orbital-only with minimal crew (1 or 2
person?) with tele-robotic landers then you probably dramatically reduce
the complexity/cost to where you *might* be able to pull it off with a
single F9H. However, the transhab+recovery issue remains the big time
one. And not a whole lot of time to test it... At 501 days you'd need to
get a Dragon on-orbit before the end of 2014 if you wanted to test it's
survivability, and frankly there are none to be had for that purpose.
I'm revising my thinking: this is pure pie-in-the-sky. Ain't no way this
is happening, unless it's a one-way suicide mission. Great lesson for
our kids... NOT!

Dave

*BDB = Big Dumb Booster

Of course this carefully worded press release says nothing about a
crewed mission.

There and back could be a reference to a fully robotic sample return
mission. If so a title like: "Mission For America" definitely seems
hyperbolic... How about "Mars For Dummies?"...

:-)

Dave

David Spain writes:

Of course this carefully worded press release says nothing about a
crewed mission.

There and back could be a reference to a fully robotic sample return
mission. If so a title like: "Mission For America" definitely seems
hyperbolic... How about "Mars For Dummies?"...

It's meant as a crewed fly-by mission on a free-return trajectory taking
501 days (for which Earth and Mars are in the right positions in 2018).

A long time for two people crammed into a modified Dragon capsule, for a
very brief encounter with Mars and a lot of boredom, but surely possible
with nothing but a Falcon Heavy to launch the thing. A bit pointless,
sure, but doable.


Jochem

--
"A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no
longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

On 2/24/2013 3:11 PM, Jochem Huhmann wrote:
It's meant as a crewed fly-by mission on a free-return trajectory taking
501 days (for which Earth and Mars are in the right positions in 2018).

We should know for sure if that is their plan by this time Wednesday.
But assuming you are right, I just don't see it. SLS/Orion won't be
ready in time, that leaves, practically speaking, only F9H and Dragon.
But Dragon hasn't even flown crewed LEO missions yet. There would be
almost no time to prepare a modified Dragon to do this in their allotted
time-frame, IMO. Certainly not enough time to space-qualify it for such
a long duration mission.

Apollo 8 was preceded by SEVERAL prior missions, all but one (excluding
Apollo 1) without crew. Each was an incremental hardware prove out and
took 11 months to complete from 1967-1968 prior to Apollo 8 in Dec.
1968. And this was with sole *dedicated* hardware and essentially only a
6 day mission elapsed time.

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/space...o?id=1967-113A
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/space...o?id=1968-007A
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/space...o?id=1968-025A
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/space...o?id=1968-089A
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/space...o?id=1968-118A

A long time for two people crammed into a modified Dragon capsule, for a
very brief encounter with Mars and a lot of boredom, but surely possible
with nothing but a Falcon Heavy to launch the thing. A bit pointless,
sure, but doable.


I think you'd have to sacrifice the only proven method for reaching a
distant body (such as the moon) using the incremental approach of Apollo
for a one-shot mission. Yes today you can simulate much more than you
could in the 1960s. However, you can simulate and simulate but at some
point you have to have real hardware flying in real space. And if you
start on Wednesday, you have just 4 short years to get started without
any dedicated hardware (which means you are competing with COTS for
resources).

And don't forget that they found issues even on the last uncrewed Apollo
6 mission. Frankly, I think this is an incredible (non-credible?)
stretch (to say the least)... To me this just sounds like a very
expensive way to get one to two people killed for a PR stunt.

Pointless? I agree with you completely. Reckless? I think you can make a
good case for that argument too. But hey, I'll try to keep an open mind
until I've heard what they have to say.

Dave

Dragon+Bigelow perhaps? Doesn't do *anything* for timing/testing
problems, but could I suppose help with matters of available space.

rick jones
--
Don't anthropomorphize computers. They hate that. - Anonymous
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

On 2/25/2013 4:31 PM, Rick Jones wrote:
Dragon+Bigelow perhaps? Doesn't do *anything* for timing/testing
problems, but could I suppose help with matters of available space.

rick jones


Well we know there is a mission to ISS to test a Bigelow component to be
flown via the Dragon. The BEAM experiment. So that forms one test...

Dave

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/st...m_feature.html

David Spain wrote:
Well we know there is a mission to ISS to test a Bigelow component
to be flown via the Dragon. The BEAM experiment. So that forms one
test...

Dave

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/st...m_feature.html

True, there is that. I assume there has to be *something* besides
just a Dragon capsule if for no other reason there's no way to hold
all the required consumables otherwise. Two people for 500+ days is a
fairly non-trivial quantity of space I should think. And even though
Dragon has solar panels, were they of sufficient size to generate
enough juice out at Mars?

rick jones
--
oxymoron n, commuter in a gas-guzzling luxury SUV with an American flag
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

David Spain writes:

On 2/24/2013 3:11 PM, Jochem Huhmann wrote:
It's meant as a crewed fly-by mission on a free-return trajectory taking
501 days (for which Earth and Mars are in the right positions in 2018).

We should know for sure if that is their plan by this time Wednesday.
But assuming you are right, I just don't see it. SLS/Orion won't be
ready in time, that leaves, practically speaking, only F9H and Dragon.

I've heard that SpaceX isn't interested which basically means it won't
happen.

And don't forget that they found issues even on the last uncrewed Apollo
6 mission. Frankly, I think this is an incredible (non-credible?)
stretch (to say the least)... To me this just sounds like a very
expensive way to get one to two people killed for a PR stunt.

Pointless? I agree with you completely. Reckless? I think you can make a
good case for that argument too. But hey, I'll try to keep an open mind
until I've heard what they have to say.

I agree it would be a crazy idea. No more crazy though than many other
private adventures in the past. If someone gets the money together and
two people are willing to risk everything to be first in the history of
mankind to see Mars with their own eyes -- why not?

But one Dragon for two people and 500 days would be not enough anyway,
for more than one reason. You could do it probably by using two Dragons
docked nose to nose, this gives not only more room for storage and more
room for the crew but also some real redundancy you would desperately
need here.

Getting all of this ready in less than 5 years from now though...


Jochem

--
"A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no
longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

In article ,
says...

David Spain wrote:
Well we know there is a mission to ISS to test a Bigelow component
to be flown via the Dragon. The BEAM experiment. So that forms one
test...

Dave

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/st...m_feature.html

True, there is that. I assume there has to be *something* besides
just a Dragon capsule if for no other reason there's no way to hold
all the required consumables otherwise. Two people for 500+ days is a
fairly non-trivial quantity of space I should think. And even though
Dragon has solar panels, were they of sufficient size to generate
enough juice out at Mars?

Not if they're going to do any recycling of H2O, CO2, and etc. similar
to what's done on ISS. The equipment to do this is fairly power hungry,
if I remember correctly.

Alternatively, if they stick to an "open" environmental control system,
I'd think the equipment would be simpler, use less power, and be less
prone to breakdown. Naturally, this would mean they've got to carry
more consumables, but for things like water, they'll need that anyway
for radiation shielding (either fresh or waste water will work for
this).

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer