SpaceX Is Sending a Red Dragon Spacecraft to Mars in 2018

Jeff Findley submitted this gripping article, maybe on Friday:
In article mn.a0507e05631cd288.127094@snitoo,
says...

asserted that:
LockMart has Mars plans too:



Lockheed Martin building an orbiting Mars base to send humans to Red Planet
by 2028:

"Unveiled at the Human to Mars space conference in Washington DC on
Wednesday 18 May, the Mars Base Camp is a space station designed to orbit
around the Red Planet, similar to the International Space Station (ISS),
only smaller.

The base camp will include a habitat with crew quarters as well as living
and working space, two Orion crew capsules containing the spacecraft's
command and control centre, as well as a laboratory for six astronauts."

See:

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/lockheed-ma...y-2028-1560982

As does Bigelow. The _Smithsonian_ magazine currently on the
newsstands includes an article on the Man and the Company, with
artwork. Bigelow is also looking at /landing/ B330 modules on Mars.

All of this is more "inspiring" than the asteroid retrieval mission,
where astronauts wouldn't venture beyond cis-lunar space to visit an
asteroid which was previously retrieved by an unmanned probe.

Yeah, but the asteroid visit is intended to test deep space designs and
processes while still having a remote chance of getting home when it
turns out that the designs aren't right.

/dps

--
Killing a mouse was hardly a Nobel Prize-worthy exercise, and Lawrence
went apopleptic when he learned a lousy rodent had peed away all his
precious heavy water.
_The Disappearing Spoon_, Sam Kean

In article mn.a59a7e05cdd6b143.127094@snitoo,
says...

Jeff Findley submitted this gripping article, maybe on Friday:
All of this is more "inspiring" than the asteroid retrieval mission,
where astronauts wouldn't venture beyond cis-lunar space to visit an
asteroid which was previously retrieved by an unmanned probe.

Yeah, but the asteroid visit is intended to test deep space designs and
processes while still having a remote chance of getting home when it
turns out that the designs aren't right.

You'd still test Orion and the HAB in cis-lunar space before sending the
things to Mars orbit (and possibly the moons of Mars). But we have to
have a decent *mission* beyond testing. Asteroid retrieval mission is a
lame mission, since Orion never leaves cis-lunar space.

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.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On Saturday, May 21, 2016 at 11:51:11 AM UTC-4, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article mn.a59a7e05cdd6b143.127094@snitoo,
says...

Jeff Findley submitted this gripping article, maybe on Friday:
All of this is more "inspiring" than the asteroid retrieval mission,
where astronauts wouldn't venture beyond cis-lunar space to visit an
asteroid which was previously retrieved by an unmanned probe.

Yeah, but the asteroid visit is intended to test deep space designs and
processes while still having a remote chance of getting home when it
turns out that the designs aren't right.

You'd still test Orion and the HAB in cis-lunar space before sending the
things to Mars orbit (and possibly the moons of Mars). But we have to
have a decent *mission* beyond testing. Asteroid retrieval mission is a
lame mission, since Orion never leaves cis-lunar space.

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.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

you might as well make whatever a SLS is supposed to do a good one.

since just the booster alone will cost a billion bucks

Jeff Findley suggested that ...
In article mn.a59a7e05cdd6b143.127094@snitoo,
says...

Jeff Findley submitted this gripping article, maybe on Friday:
All of this is more "inspiring" than the asteroid retrieval mission,
where astronauts wouldn't venture beyond cis-lunar space to visit an
asteroid which was previously retrieved by an unmanned probe.

Yeah, but the asteroid visit is intended to test deep space designs and
processes while still having a remote chance of getting home when it
turns out that the designs aren't right.

You'd still test Orion and the HAB in cis-lunar space before sending the
things to Mars orbit (and possibly the moons of Mars). But we have to
have a decent *mission* beyond testing. Asteroid retrieval mission is a
lame mission, since Orion never leaves cis-lunar space.

I'm not sure I follow the logic here ... if the difference between the
"still test" and the asteroid retrieval is the presence of the
asteroid, why does "Orion never leaves cis-lunar space" create
lameness?

If you're going to be hanging around cis-lunar for a while, why not
chip some rock, too?

/dps

--
"I am not given to exaggeration, and when I say a thing I mean it"
_Roughing It_, Mark Twain

In article mn.c0b17e058b82e499.127094@snitoo,
says...

Jeff Findley suggested that ...
In article mn.a59a7e05cdd6b143.127094@snitoo,
says...

Jeff Findley submitted this gripping article, maybe on Friday:
All of this is more "inspiring" than the asteroid retrieval mission,
where astronauts wouldn't venture beyond cis-lunar space to visit an
asteroid which was previously retrieved by an unmanned probe.

Yeah, but the asteroid visit is intended to test deep space designs and
processes while still having a remote chance of getting home when it
turns out that the designs aren't right.

You'd still test Orion and the HAB in cis-lunar space before sending the
things to Mars orbit (and possibly the moons of Mars). But we have to
have a decent *mission* beyond testing. Asteroid retrieval mission is a
lame mission, since Orion never leaves cis-lunar space.

I'm not sure I follow the logic here ... if the difference between the
"still test" and the asteroid retrieval is the presence of the
asteroid, why does "Orion never leaves cis-lunar space" create
lameness?

If you're going to be hanging around cis-lunar for a while, why not
chip some rock, too?

Possibly, if you characterize it as a test. But even that does not hold
up to close scrutiny.

Who pays for the quite expensive retrieval part of the mission? That
part would seem to be cheaper if the probe just stuck a chunk of the
rock into a smallish reentry vehicle and performed a reentry for
analysis in an earth bound lab. Skipping all of the delta-V needed to
put a huge rock into a high earth orbit would seem to make the unmanned
portion of this mission a lot cheaper.

ARM, as it is currently defined, just doesn't make any sense.

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.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On Tuesday, May 24, 2016 at 7:04:37 AM UTC-4, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article mn.c0b17e058b82e499.127094@snitoo,
says...

Jeff Findley suggested that ...
In article mn.a59a7e05cdd6b143.127094@snitoo,
says...

Jeff Findley submitted this gripping article, maybe on Friday:
All of this is more "inspiring" than the asteroid retrieval mission,
where astronauts wouldn't venture beyond cis-lunar space to visit an
asteroid which was previously retrieved by an unmanned probe.

Yeah, but the asteroid visit is intended to test deep space designs and
processes while still having a remote chance of getting home when it
turns out that the designs aren't right.

You'd still test Orion and the HAB in cis-lunar space before sending the
things to Mars orbit (and possibly the moons of Mars). But we have to
have a decent *mission* beyond testing. Asteroid retrieval mission is a
lame mission, since Orion never leaves cis-lunar space.

I'm not sure I follow the logic here ... if the difference between the
"still test" and the asteroid retrieval is the presence of the
asteroid, why does "Orion never leaves cis-lunar space" create
lameness?

If you're going to be hanging around cis-lunar for a while, why not
chip some rock, too?

Possibly, if you characterize it as a test. But even that does not hold
up to close scrutiny.

Who pays for the quite expensive retrieval part of the mission? That
part would seem to be cheaper if the probe just stuck a chunk of the
rock into a smallish reentry vehicle and performed a reentry for
analysis in an earth bound lab. Skipping all of the delta-V needed to
put a huge rock into a high earth orbit would seem to make the unmanned
portion of this mission a lot cheaper.

ARM, as it is currently defined, just doesn't make any sense.

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.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

well its a excellent test how to move a asteroid. one dayit might be necessary to save humanity

Spacex will use Falcon Heavy for 2018 Mars
Mission, then at least two Falcon Heavies
in 2020 and then a Mars Colonial
Transporter in 2022:

"Starting as soon as 2018, Musk’s SpaceX plans to fly an unmanned spacecraft to
Mars. The unmanned flights would continue about every two years, timed for when
Earth and Mars are closest in orbit, and, if everything goes according to plan,
build toward the first human mission to Mars with the goal of landing in 2025,
Musk has said.

But in an interview with The Post this week, Musk laid out additional details
for the first time, equating the spirit of the missions with the settlement of
the New World by the colonists who crossed the Atlantic Ocean centuries ago..
And he acknowledged the immense difficulties of getting to a planet that is, on
average, 140 million miles from Earth."

See:

http://nextbigfuture.com/2016/06/spa...-for-2018.html

wrote:
Spacex will use Falcon Heavy for 2018 Mars
Mission, then at least two Falcon Heavies
in 2020 and then a Mars Colonial
Transporter in 2022:

A use for slightly used F9 first stages perhaps? At one point it was
my understanding all the cores were supposed to be the same but
perhaps that has changed. It would be one way to make it cheaper -
assuming SpaceX accumulates more "not-so-gently-used" F9 first stages
they could make the two add-on boosters essentially "free" for a
company-paid flight of a Heavy.

rick jones
--
A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

On Sunday, June 12, 2016 at 11:26:46 AM UTC+12, Rick Jones wrote:
wrote:
Spacex will use Falcon Heavy for 2018 Mars
Mission, then at least two Falcon Heavies
in 2020 and then a Mars Colonial
Transporter in 2022:

A use for slightly used F9 first stages perhaps? At one point it was
my understanding all the cores were supposed to be the same but
perhaps that has changed. It would be one way to make it cheaper -
assuming SpaceX accumulates more "not-so-gently-used" F9 first stages
they could make the two add-on boosters essentially "free" for a
company-paid flight of a Heavy.

rick jones
--
A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?


That assume all the stages are equipped to take struts to support that configuration. But, it is a good observation nevertheless. The development cost of the struts (and crossfeed/throttle control) is vastly less than a totally new stage.