Land rights on moon/mars

Let inmates scheduled for execution to be the first volunteers,.

if they survive they are let out of prison, or given some great benefits while serving their time.

like a larger cell, better food, a nice large screen color tv , congual visits.

I am strongly against executions by any means, its only state sponsored murder.

On Thursday, April 14, 2016 at 3:28:26 AM UTC+12, bob haller wrote:
Let inmates scheduled for execution to be the first volunteers,.

if they survive they are let out of prison, or given some great benefits while serving their time.

like a larger cell, better food, a nice large screen color tv , congual visits.

I am strongly against executions by any means, its only state sponsored murder.

Animal studies are complete;

http://www.surgjournal.com/article/S...085-5/abstract

Human trials have been approved and are ongoing. Progress is steady. Since 2014 when UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh receives a patient who has suffered a cardiac arrest after some kind of traumatic injury (gunshot, stabbing, etc.), and hasn't responded to normal methods of restarting their heart will try suspended animation. Because there's currently no other kind of treatment, and because these kinds of wounds are nearly always fatal, the surgeons don't need consent to carry out the suspended animation.

The technique will be used on 10 patients, with the outcome compared against 10 people who didn't undergo suspended animation. Samuel Tisherman, the surgeon who is led the trial, showed suspended animation works and as they refine their technique the superiority of suspended animation will be very clear -- at which point, there is enough firm data to roll out suspended animation to other hospitals.

For now, the patient has to be between 18 and 65 years old, have a penetrating wound, such as a knife, gunshot or similar injury, suffer a cardiac arrest within five minutes of arrival in the hospital and fail to respond to usual resuscitation efforts.

It is one thing to carry out EPR in an ordered laboratory but quite another to do it in a busy emergency centre. The first challenge is for medical staff to insert a catheter into arteries to flush all the blood out of the patient. The blood is replaced by giving the patient 2-3 litres a minute of saline solution at a chilly 10°C. The procedure has to be completed within 20-30 minutes to have a chance of working.

Once the patient is in a suspended state, a surgeon will repair the wound to prevent any bleeding when blood circulates again. This repair process is impossible to carry out successfully on an animated patient with such a wound. Finally, a heart-lung bypass machine is used to restart the blood flow and warm the patient up. The medical team will keep the patient slightly cooler than normal, at around 34°C, for 12 hours. Then the team bring the patient round.

Successful human trials will take the perfected technique out into the field. A paramedic will put a dangerously ill patient into a suspended state until they can be taken to a specialist hospital for treatments that improve survival rates. The system will be used on the battlefield to evacuate injured soldiers improving survival rates there. Portable systems use new technology that miniaturises and automates equipment developed in Philadelphia. This includes the development of smart catheters that use ultrasound and micromotors to guide themselves correctly into blood vessels.

Success at this level is expected this year 2016. Within two years by 2018 medical trials with prison inmates will be approved. These inmates need not be on death row, but face long prison times.

"History is rife with unethical experiments on inmates. But with proper safeguards prisoner studies may hold the key to the accurate representation of vulnerable groups and lead to health benefits," this according to 2 July 2014 article in Scientific American.

More detailed analysis here;

http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11692/eth...ving-prisoners

By 2020 researchers believe there will be sufficient evidence to show that suspended animation techniques are no more dangerous than long term exposure to a crew cabin during a Mars trip. At this point, it isn't whether or not suspended animation will be used, it is how best to use it. Putting people asleep before launch, and awakening them months after landing once robots have completed construction of a base, involves minimum mass. However, more traditional approaches make use of the process as well! What do you do with a mortally injured astronaut during a Mars trip? Suspended animation is merely an extension of the techniques that are saving lives every day in hosptials.

In article ,
says...

On Thursday, April 14, 2016 at 3:28:26 AM UTC+12, bob haller wrote:
Let inmates scheduled for execution to be the first volunteers,.

if they survive they are let out of prison, or given some great benefits while serving their time.

like a larger cell, better food, a nice large screen color tv , congual visits.

I am strongly against executions by any means, its only state sponsored murder.

Animal studies are complete;

http://www.surgjournal.com/article/S...085-5/abstract

Human trials have been approved and are ongoing. Progress is steady. Since 2014 when UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh receives a patient who has suffered a cardiac arrest after some kind of traumatic injury (gunshot, stabbing, etc.), and hasn't responded to normal methods of restarting their heart will try suspended animation. Because there's currently no other kind of treatment, and because these kinds of wounds are nearly always fatal, the surgeons don't
need consent to carry out the suspended animation.

The technique will be used on 10 patients, with the outcome compared against 10 people who didn't undergo suspended animation. Samuel Tisherman, the surgeon who is led the trial, showed suspended animation works and as they refine their technique the superiority of suspended animation will be very clear -- at which point, there is enough firm data to roll out suspended animation to other hospitals.

For now, the patient has to be between 18 and 65 years old, have a penetrating wound, such as a knife, gunshot or similar injury, suffer a cardiac arrest within five minutes of arrival in the hospital and fail to respond to usual resuscitation efforts.

It is one thing to carry out EPR in an ordered laboratory but quite another to do it in a busy emergency centre. The first challenge is for medical staff to insert a catheter into arteries to flush all the blood out of the patient. The blood is replaced by giving the patient 2-3 litres a minute of saline solution at a chilly 10°C. The procedure has to be completed within 20-30 minutes to have a chance of working.

Once the patient is in a suspended state, a surgeon will repair the wound to prevent any bleeding when blood circulates again. This repair process is impossible to carry out successfully on an animated patient with such a wound. Finally, a heart-lung bypass machine is used to restart the blood flow and warm the patient up. The medical team will keep the patient slightly cooler than normal, at around 34°C, for 12 hours. Then the team bring the patient round.

Successful human trials will take the perfected technique out into the field. A paramedic will put a dangerously ill patient into a suspended state until they can be taken to a specialist hospital for treatments that improve survival rates. The system will be used on the battlefield to evacuate injured soldiers improving survival rates there. Portable systems use new technology that miniaturises and automates equipment developed in Philadelphia. This includes the
development of smart catheters that use ultrasound and micromotors to guide themselves correctly into blood vessels.

Success at this level is expected this year 2016. Within two years by 2018 medical trials with prison inmates will be approved. These inmates need not be on death row, but face long prison times.

Of course they do. They're selling their research progam. But not all
research pans out, especially when "scaled up".

"History is rife with unethical experiments on inmates. But with proper safeguards prisoner studies may hold the key to the accurate representation of vulnerable groups and lead to health benefits," this according to 2 July 2014 article in Scientific American.

More detailed analysis here;

http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11692/eth...ving-prisoners

By 2020 researchers believe there will be sufficient evidence to
show that suspended animation techniques are no more dangerous than
long term exposure to a crew cabin during a Mars trip. At this
point, it isn't whether or not suspended animation will be used, it
is how best to use it. Putting people asleep before launch, and
awakening them months after landing once robots have completed
construction of a base, involves minimum mass.


I read the article. You keep harping on these very short term trials on
a a total of ten trauma patients. This is not the same thing as putting
a healthy human being in "suspended animation" for long periods of time
(months to years). This technique may work out just fine for short term
trauma patients, compared to the alternatives.

But, there may be issues using this long term and until we do the
research, we won't know what those are. The one key issue in my mind is
that you might be depriving healthy people of months or years of their
conscious lives if this technique does not also extend their life. This
would be wholy unethical, IMHO. This is a huge unknown that you have
not addressed.

However, more
traditional approaches make use of the process as well! What do
you do with a mortally injured astronaut during a Mars trip?
Suspended animation is merely an extension of the techniques that
are saving lives every day in hosptials.

The above may be applicable to research on trauma patients, assuming it
can be scaled up to months. For trauma patients on earth, this is a
short term state while trauma surgeons fix the damage as best they can.
Unless there is a trained trauma surgeon on a manned Mars mission, the
research on earth may not apply either.

Things that are different, just aren't the same. You still don't get
that.

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.

2007 Paper

https://www.fredhutch.org/en/news/re...5/04/roth.html

2011 Talk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RybYSMEkReM

2013 Talk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPlQFs4G1fk


In the 2013 talk, Mark says among other things;

Put a mammal in a 10 C environment and it will remain at 37 C. Put in 80 ppm H2S and the core temperature of the mammal drops to 13 C. It can stay there indefinitely. Get rid of the H2S and its core temperature will rise back to 37 C none the worse for wear. During hibernation its oxygen consumption drops to 10% of basal rate,

Let's go back to critical care medicine for a moment. You die in critical care because you don't perfuse your tissues with sufficient quantities of oxygen. You die when your demand exceeds your supply of oxygen. By reducing demand for oxygen, survival is assured when supply is low. Animals put into 5% normal level of oxygen die in 10 minutes. Animals exposed to H2S for 20 minutes prior, can sustain 3% normal levels for 6 hours with no problem. Which proves our point.

H2S can be used to help extend life in critical care and thus have tremendous value. We created a liquid solution that is an IV infusion product that is used in research. Mediline shows over 60 papers at 20 research centers.

Heart attack: You give hydrogen sulfide at the point of balloon angioplasty.. Then you're going to test aortic volume following ischemic event. You're defining the infarc size - and with H2S on board you have over 60% reduction. 2.2 fold increase in ejection volume. Human trials have just ended Phase 1 safety study. Infusing people with H2S to see they're okay. They're okay. We are now (2013) entering four parallel phase ii multi-center trials, of H2S, in Europe and the US.

Soldiers dying in battle from blood loss could be extended and have them live, and DARPA is working with H2S to improve battlefield casualty survival to 80% from 2%.

H2S has the capacity to survival limits against a variety of insults that might otherwise kill you. Constant exposure you live longer. 70% longer. Extraordinarily thermal tolerant of high heat and low heat.

* * *

So, going from 0.800 kg per day to 0.0240 kg per day of oxygen and going from 1.56 kg of food per day to 0.0624 kg per day - . 259 day trip to Mars metabolically takes 7.77 days. Air, water and blood nutrients can be supplied automatically during hibernation.

Being awake and aware during departure from Earth, and then awakening on day 86, day 173, and day 259 Mars arrival, to permit six hours of exercise, cleansing, eating, treatment, and vehicle check out -and landing, takes the equivalent of 10 days supply during the transit.

http://history.nasa.gov/monograph21.pdf

You spend another 120 days on Mars before returning along another 259 day trip to Earth. Being awake for two days on the Mars surface, and awakening six times for six hours, and then returning to Earth, and using the same technique during the return as was used during the outbound flight, makes it possible with a small craft.

A 7 ton payload & structure must attain 7.1 km/sec leaving Mars' surface to return to Earth. This requires 4.11 tons of hydrogen and 22.58 tons of oxygen. Contained in four containers of the same size these are spheres (3.3 m) 11 ft in diameter. To make this much hydrogen and oxygen from water found on mars requires 365 kW of continuous power. If from solar sources, we need four times this amount. We need 36,947 litres of water. That's 308 litres per day. A litre every five minutes. A cube 3.33 meters on a side.

Entering Mars orbit, through aerobraking, landing on Diemos instead of Mars, first, and using water on Diemos to refuel the ship for return and to fuel rocket belts to land on Mars and return!

http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/t..._company.shtml

You're also in sunlight 100% of the time, so solar panels are worth about 4x more on orbit than on the surface of Mars. This reduces the size of the solar panel to 70.7 kW to make the propellant needed to fly from Diemos back to Earth.

A 98 kg astronaut in a long duration biosuit, with a 192.6 kg propellant tank, can leave Diemos, land anywhere on Mars, and return to Diemos. So, creating propellants for that, permits 7 astronauts to make many landings on Mars and return to Diemos over the 120 days.

On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 4:11:33 PM UTC+12, William Mook wrote:
Entering Mars orbit, through aerobraking, landing on Diemos instead of Mars, first, and using water on Diemos to refuel the ship for return and to fuel rocket belts to land on Mars and return!

http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/t..._company.shtml

You're also in sunlight 100% of the time, so solar panels are worth about 4x more on orbit than on the surface of Mars. This reduces the size of the solar panel to 70.7 kW to make the propellant needed to fly from Diemos back to Earth.

A 98 kg astronaut in a long duration biosuit, with a 192.6 kg propellant tank, can leave Diemos, land anywhere on Mars, and return to Diemos. So, creating propellants for that, permits 7 astronauts to make many landings on Mars and return to Diemos over the 120 days.


DEIMOS CHARACTERISTICS
Semi-major orbit axis: 23,459 km (14,577 mi)
Orbit eccentricity: 0.00052 (nearly circular)
Orbit inclination: 1.82 deg
period: hrs, 17 min, 55 sec
Diameters: 7.5km x 6.0km x 5.5km
Rotation: synchronous (convenient for observing Mars)
Density: approx. 2 gm/cm3 (which means lots of water ice)
Mass: 2.0 x 10^12 tonnes
Mean surface gravity: approx. 10-3g (near zero gee)
Escape velocity: approx. 10 m/sec (easy to land and escape)

Deimos (the outer moon of Mars) should have water ice at depth. Deimos is accessible every 26 months, just as Mars is.

Velocity Changes for Missions in the Mars system
Mission.................................. delta-V (km/s)
Mars to Low Mars Orbit (LMO) 4.4
LMO to Phobos....................... 0.54
LMO to Deimos....................... 0.87
LMO to Mars........................... 0.05 (aerobrake & touchdown)
LMO to escape........................ 1.43
LMO to Earth return................ 3.42
Deimos to Phobos................... 0.74
Deimos to LMO or Mars........... 0.67
Deimos to escape.................... 0.56
Deimos to Earth return............ 2.55

A comparison of delta-Vs in km/sec follows.


Deimos is easier to reach and get back from than the moon or Mars and it very likely has copius water supplies on it. So, this is the gateway between Earth and Mars, if we land a power supply there. We can do this today with today's launchers, especially once suspended animation is perfected along the lines described by Mark Roth.

http://www.wired.com/2013/07/lunar-flying-units-1969/

We use rocket belts and long duration spacesuits to navigate from our base at Diemos to the Martian surface and back. We also use rocket belts to travel between Diemos and Phobos.

So we arrive at Diemos, and since we sent an automated probe at an earlier time, we know there is propellant waiting for us upon our arrival.

So, a 159 ton payload in LEO (three Falcon Heavy Launches) - two consisting of a 50 tons of propellant and 3 tons of structure - 7.7 tons of LH2 - two 4.72 m diameter spheres and 42.3 tons of LOX - one 4.14 m diameter sphere - 13.58 m long stack - with a solar powered cryogenic recycler for long-term storage in a super-insulated tank.

http://enu.kz/repository/2009/AIAA-2009-5331.pdf

The 50 ton solar powered propellant tanks are orbited and monitored for 18 months prior to departure. So, the technology is tested before use. The first spacecraft the propellant tanks feed weighs 53 tons - and attaches to both - and carries the engines that use this propellant. The system is capable of 5.05 km/sec. Which is sufficient to travel from LEO to Diemos in 270 days during synodic alignment.

Refilling the LOX/LH2 stage with 15.4 tons of hydrogen and 84.6 metric tons of LOX from 138,600 litres of water, with 38.6 surplus oxygen.

215,000 watts of continuous power developed on Diemos refills the 100 ton propellant in 120 days. Now, only 2.55 km/sec so only 44.05 tons of propellant are needed, and at this rate of production 55.95 tons of surplus propellant are available.

Now, an astronaut in a long-duration spacesuit, and rocket belt, that masses 98 kg that carries 233 kg of propellant - a total 331 kg. This means 169 one person trips could be made to the surface of Mars and back to Diemos. Divided by 7 passengers this is 24 trips for each traveller.

So, a Dragon capsule arriving with crew of 7 in suspended animation, at an automated base on Diemos, with solar powered propellant production which refilled propellant tanks, provide 7 astronauts with the ability to visit the surface of Mars 24x each of the 7 - with return to the Diemos base after each trip.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/brucedor.../#3a179d5f716a

http://www.wired.com/2010/01/gallery-mars/

On Monday, April 25, 2016 at 7:55:51 PM UTC+12, William Mook wrote:
On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 4:11:33 PM UTC+12, William Mook wrote:
Entering Mars orbit, through aerobraking, landing on Diemos instead of Mars, first, and using water on Diemos to refuel the ship for return and to fuel rocket belts to land on Mars and return!

http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/t..._company.shtml

You're also in sunlight 100% of the time, so solar panels are worth about 4x more on orbit than on the surface of Mars. This reduces the size of the solar panel to 70.7 kW to make the propellant needed to fly from Diemos back to Earth.

A 98 kg astronaut in a long duration biosuit, with a 192.6 kg propellant tank, can leave Diemos, land anywhere on Mars, and return to Diemos. So, creating propellants for that, permits 7 astronauts to make many landings on Mars and return to Diemos over the 120 days.


DEIMOS CHARACTERISTICS
Semi-major orbit axis: 23,459 km (14,577 mi)
Orbit eccentricity: 0.00052 (nearly circular)
Orbit inclination: 1.82 deg
period: hrs, 17 min, 55 sec
Diameters: 7.5km x 6.0km x 5.5km
Rotation: synchronous (convenient for observing Mars)
Density: approx. 2 gm/cm3 (which means lots of water ice)
Mass: 2.0 x 10^12 tonnes
Mean surface gravity: approx. 10-3g (near zero gee)
Escape velocity: approx. 10 m/sec (easy to land and escape)

Deimos (the outer moon of Mars) should have water ice at depth. Deimos is accessible every 26 months, just as Mars is.

Velocity Changes for Missions in the Mars system
Mission.................................. delta-V (km/s)
Mars to Low Mars Orbit (LMO) 4.4
LMO to Phobos....................... 0.54
LMO to Deimos....................... 0.87
LMO to Mars........................... 0.05 (aerobrake & touchdown)
LMO to escape........................ 1.43
LMO to Earth return................ 3.42
Deimos to Phobos................... 0.74
Deimos to LMO or Mars........... 0.67
Deimos to escape.................... 0.56
Deimos to Earth return............ 2.55

A comparison of delta-Vs in km/sec follows.


Deimos is easier to reach and get back from than the moon or Mars and it very likely has copius water supplies on it. So, this is the gateway between Earth and Mars, if we land a power supply there. We can do this today with today's launchers, especially once suspended animation is perfected along the lines described by Mark Roth.

http://www.wired.com/2013/07/lunar-flying-units-1969/

We use rocket belts and long duration spacesuits to navigate from our base at Diemos to the Martian surface and back. We also use rocket belts to travel between Diemos and Phobos.

So we arrive at Diemos, and since we sent an automated probe at an earlier time, we know there is propellant waiting for us upon our arrival.

So, a 159 ton payload in LEO (three Falcon Heavy Launches) - two consisting of a 50 tons of propellant and 3 tons of structure - 7.7 tons of LH2 - two 4.72 m diameter spheres and 42.3 tons of LOX - one 4.14 m diameter sphere - 13.58 m long stack - with a solar powered cryogenic recycler for long-term storage in a super-insulated tank.

http://enu.kz/repository/2009/AIAA-2009-5331.pdf

The 50 ton solar powered propellant tanks are orbited and monitored for 18 months prior to departure. So, the technology is tested before use. The first spacecraft the propellant tanks feed weighs 53 tons - and attaches to both - and carries the engines that use this propellant. The system is capable of 5.05 km/sec. Which is sufficient to travel from LEO to Diemos in 270 days during synodic alignment.

Refilling the LOX/LH2 stage with 15.4 tons of hydrogen and 84.6 metric tons of LOX from 138,600 litres of water, with 38.6 surplus oxygen.

215,000 watts of continuous power developed on Diemos refills the 100 ton propellant in 120 days. Now, only 2.55 km/sec so only 44.05 tons of propellant are needed, and at this rate of production 55.95 tons of surplus propellant are available.

Now, an astronaut in a long-duration spacesuit, and rocket belt, that masses 98 kg that carries 233 kg of propellant - a total 331 kg. This means 169 one person trips could be made to the surface of Mars and back to Diemos. Divided by 7 passengers this is 24 trips for each traveller.

So, a Dragon capsule arriving with crew of 7 in suspended animation, at an automated base on Diemos, with solar powered propellant production which refilled propellant tanks, provide 7 astronauts with the ability to visit the surface of Mars 24x each of the 7 - with return to the Diemos base after each trip.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/brucedor.../#3a179d5f716a

http://www.wired.com/2010/01/gallery-mars/

Periapsis................... 23455.5 km
Apoapsis................... 23470.9 km
Semi-major axis........ 23463.2 km (6.92 Mars radii)
Eccentricity............... 0.00033
Orbital period........... 1.263 d (30.312 h)
Average orbital speed 1.3513 km/s
Inclination.................. 0.93° (to Mars's equator)
................................... 1.791° (to the local Laplace plane)
................................... 27.58° (to the ecliptic)

0.144509 0.50 0.68
0.572254 0.67

If we take Diemos' orbit at 1 unit, then 1/6.92 units (Mars' surface) is 0.144509. Adding 1 to this number and dividing the sum by 2 obtains 0.572254 which is the semi-major axis of the orbit that just touches Mars' surface and Diemos. We know the orbital speed of Diemos is 1.3513 km/sec.

So, using the Vis-Viva equation we have;

V = 1.3513 * SQRT( 2/1 - 1/0.572254) = 0.679052 km/sec.

So the dV = 1.3513 - 0.6791 = 0.6722 km/sec.

At Diemos.

At Mars' surface we have

V = 1.3513 * SQRT(2/0.144509 - 1/0.572254) = 4.699046 km/sec.

Mars' orbital velocity at this altitude is

V0 =1.3513 * SQRT(1/0.144509) = 3.554711 km/sec.

The difference is

dV = 1.44335 km/sec


With proper design of our suits, we can use aero braking to do the bulk of the slowing, and glide to the surface, and use our rocket belt to slow further. I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f56QRCwpBYI

http://www.universetoday.com/102289/...in-the-movies/

We can figure how long it will take to get from Diemos to Mars atmosphere using Kepler's laws;

The orbital period using Kepler's law, is 30.312 * ( 0.572254 ^ 1.5 ) = 30.313 * 432896 = 13.21945 hours

Dividing this in half, we have 6.560973 hours = 6 hours, 33 minutes, 39.5 seconds.

So, we have 11 hours on the surface, and 13 hours in transit, and 24 hours on the station before the next 'flight' So, this is 24 days of surface activity per astronaut during the 120 day stay. With seven astronauts on board, and two astronauts per site, we have pairs of astronauts leaving every 36 hours from Diemos station. And one of the seven rotates out every 4.5 days - with different pairs paring up - over the 120 day period at Mars. Over 80 different sites visited on Mars over the first visit.

6.04 km/sec total delta vee to get down from Diemos and back. Using rockets with a 4.6 km/sec exhaust speed we have

u = 1 - 1/exp(6.04/4.6) = 0.7310

p = 1 - 0.7310 = 0.2690

TOW = 98 / 0.2690 = 364.3 kg
propellant = 364.3 - 98.0 = 266.3 kg

Pulling two gees max on a suit requires 532.6 kgf. Now a modified Draco thruster produces about 45 kgf so you'd need about a dozen of these - three on four folding / articulated thruster arms - quad rotor fashion - to produce this much thrust - and the ability to throttle back. Unfortunately, the Draco requires massive changes to operate as a cryogenic rocket. This can be done, since the Pintle fed engine when TRW owned it (Before SpaceX acquired it) did fire as a LOX/LH2 rocket. Also, this pressure fed hypergolic rocket, when converted to a pressure fed LOX/LH2 rocket, with igniter, is really heavy. So, a lightweight reliable LOX/LH2 pump would be nice. haha - if Musk had built a hydrogen fueled car instead of a battery car he would have avoided Lithium shortages and solved the problem of small tank storage and small pump sets available cheaply.

Another approach would be to use MEMS - micro -electro - mechanical systems - to produce rocket arrays. These produce about 50 lbs force per square inch (50 psi) or 3.523 kgf per square cm. So, a total of 151.2 sq cm. Divide by four we have 37.8 cm2 per arm - or a wafer diameter of 69.4 mm.

http://cap.ee.ic.ac.uk/~pdm97/powerm...53_Epstein.pdf

Six propellant tanks - three per arm - two hydrogen one oxygen - two spheres LH2 0.52 mm diameter and one LOX 0.46 mm diameter - carry 10.25 kg LH2 and 56.34 kg LOX per arm.

We could test all this out at Earth's moon! Using the 50 ton tanks - putting them on orbit - for an orbital test - and once successful, putting up the Diemos station- to orbit the moon. Then sending a Dragon capsule with 7 astronauts on board to meet up with the Diemos station.

Then land on the moon using the same rocket belt technology. And return everything to Earth to refurbish, reuse, and fly to Mars to use there.

Depending on technology readiness, we can test Mark Roth's suspended animation technique with some of the crew on the three day journey out and the three day journey back.

2.38 km/sec is the escape velocity of the moon. 1.683 is the moon's orbital velocity near its surface. 3.366 km/sec to land on the moon and return. This is almost half the 6.04 km/sec the rocket belts are capable of. The point is, from an orbiting station, it is possible to land on any spot on the moon with this delta vee.


The interesting thing about the LOX/LH2 propellant tanks is that they can be assembled to launch themselves. 8 units consisting of two LH2 spheres and one LOX sphere can put a 9th unit on LEO.

two 4.72 m diameter LH2 spheres carrying 7.7 tons of LH2 and one 42.3 tons of LOX - one 4.14 m diameter sphere - 13.58 m long stack.

Seven elements in a hexagonal array, with cross-feeding, and an eighth element atop the central one, in line.

(1) (2)
(3) (4) (5)
(6) (7)

So, 1 & 6 feed 3, 2 & 7 feed 5, 5 & 3 feed 4. 8 sits atop 4, and the payload (9) sits atop 8.

1,2,6,7 drain to feed the 7 engines and separate at 2.50 km/sec. 3 and 5 feed the three engines beneath 3,4 and 5, and get up to 4.68 km/sec. 7 pushes the stack up to 6.42 km/sec. 8 pushes 9 up to 9.35 km/sec.

These are ideal speeds. 1.3 km/sec is lost due to air drag and gravity losses. This gets the same 53 tons to LEO that the Falcon Heavy does. It has a 477 ton take off weight.

477 tons x 2 is 954 tons force divided by seven this is 136.28 tons force per base element. A set of MEMS wafers 277 mm wide assembled into a ring at the base of the 4720 mm diameter rocket - surrounding an aerospike nozzle masses only 140 kg.


207.9 tons of LH2 are required which in turn requires 434.5 kW of continuous power. Purchased at $0.18 per kWh this costs $1.47 million. This supports three launches and two deep space tanks - over 2.15 years.

LOX is forward LH2 so, the top of each element is 4.14 m in diameter and the base is 4.72. The nose is a sphere 2.07 m radius, and a slight truncated cone that's 3.75 degrees slope angle connecting the 4.14 m diameter LOX sphere and the 4.72 m diameter LH2 sphere over a height of 4.43 m. A 4.72 m diameter cylinder that's 6.79 m tall connects the two LH2 spheres, and projects to the ground. An aerospike is attached to the aft hydrogen tank and surrounded by a ring of MEMS rockets that direct their exhaust against the spike.

http://www.gizmag.com/polymer-aeroge...le-nasa/23955/

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/ca...0060056194.pdf

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/04/05/composite-tank/

http://heroicrelics.org/info/s-ii/s-...loded-view.jpg

The 4.72 m diameter hemisphere combined with the 6.79 m tall cylinder of the same diameter, with another 4.72 m diameter hemisphere at the back, creates a pressure vessel for Diemos base. Far smaller than Skylab, larger than the Dragon capsule.

Of course advanced fabrication methods, using robot swarms make assembly simple, and allow incorporation of some advanced features, especially surrounding the solar power setup.

A Falcon Heavy 'R' puts up 53 tons of payload, and costs $600,000 to launch.. Of this total, 37,312 kg is payload bound for Diemos. At 373 kg per person, this is enough for 100 people, in suspended animation! Awakened at arrival at Diemos base.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPlQFs4G1fk

They arrive at an expanded Diemos base, and use of fuel made on Diemos from ice on Diemos to use a rocket belt to land anywhere they like, and return - and use air and and food grown on Diemos, to thoroughly enjoy Mars, and each other, at Diemos and on Mars surface.

Those who grow bored or troubled, suspended animation awaits - prior to return to Earth and glory.

This phase of development precedes one way travel to Mars. Future generations will call this the golden age of Mars development.

At 100 passengers and $600,000 per launch, for $6,000 per passenger, and another $14,000 in hardware, and $5,000 in consumables at Diemos base, a total of $25,000 - gets you to Mars, 120 days at Diemos base, and 60 visits to Mars surface, to choose your eventual purchase of Mars for another $250 per hectare. Launch positions have a $25,000 minimum at the beginning of a 2.1 year synodic period, and rise in price to something like $35,000 for 'premium' positions just a few days prior to the fleet departing. Super premium positions allow those who desire it to stay awake with the fleet commander and crew - at a price determined by market bidding.

At $25,000 per passenger, it is likely that ALL of the 30,000 wingsuit enthusiasts would pay to go to Mars. At 100 per ship, this requires 300ships. If done in one synodic period, this is 3 launches per week!

This last stage of selling property on Mars on a first come first served basis, drives the entire operation forward and is the reason SpaceX will sell all the services and hardware at cost.

Mars has a surface area of 144.92 million sq km. That's 14.492 billion hectares. At $250 per hectare the planet has a notional value of $3,623.1 billion. A ten year development programme - based on a creative interpretation of the OST along the lines I've described here earlier, following the first trip of seven people to Mars aboard a Falcon Heavy launch vehicle and Dragon capsule, using suspended animation. So SpaceX has the potential to earn $3,623.1 billion over ten years selling Mars to 15% of the world's population who holds $440,000 billion in liquid assets. We're talking less than 1% market penetration to sell the planet for $3.6 trillion.

Of course once that's done, you have a demand for more services to develop the planet don't you?

The space age has begun!

You heard it here first.