But these new space explorers will need billions of dollars to get them aloft then billions more to keep a colony alive anywhere they might land. Never in the past has such a daunting task has been done. Going where there is nothing to use to stay alive unlike here on Earth we have many places that can support life even if there was no one there. Perhaps humans can develop ways to keep the sun burning and stop it from enlarging. It would be something that in the future could be possible especially when we look at what we have achieved already. I'm not against space exploration but right now I think robotic spacecraft will be the best way to learn what we need to know.
Umm..this has so little to do with what I was trying to do here.. but ok..since it hasn't moved anywhere anyhow: The survival of species gets maximized by spreading as far and as wide as it can.. Since we're on the clock (for statistical ELE probabilities and whatnot) we should try and get colonies elsewhere.. Also, any of those colonies could be created using a different structure than the one in place here on earth.. No borders, nor national differences, and all willing and able to add something... As such, Mars could be colonized as a new model for Earth itself.. In fact, many of the problems we face here, could be undone by doing exactly that.. And the billions it would need to get there...well...over here on earth they'd otherwise be spent on bailouts and whatnot.. So..yes, it's not only semi-viable but also a wise choice in survival strategy.. I'd say as much as 100M would do to get it started..(if NOT BUYING everything needed within spec from the lowest bidder..) Actual jobs created just for the purpose of manufacturing such a vessel, and using newer tech to get it into orbit.. (Like a combo maglev cannon with more efficient SRB's and such..the maglev or maybe railgun system for initial speed would shave off considerable cost in fuel and increase the payload for at least 10 fold...carbon-nano-tubing would increase the initial pressure created by the SRB's so greater efficiency from the fuel within..etc..) Then when it's all set, first trip, voluntary long stayers..3 months travel there..landing..unloading of 'mechs' that enable people to move a lot of dirt and rock in order to build an underground cave large enough for a small but viable eco system.... (minimum recquirements are weeds, for CO2 to carbon and O2 and a few trees..maybe even hydroculturally kept..) (but my instinct tells me plant it..water it..use loose soil from Mars itself, in combo with some microbes from earth and lots of compost made from weeds..since there's water there, it could also be used..) And from one underground biosphere, to two underground biospheres..etc..) Ofc..basic infrastructure would be slightly different there than here..but it would be right from the start.. Electric cars (or rather rail system..since there won't be that much to begin with..and also, since underground you can't tolerate fire hazards, an automated fire suppression system, atmosphere masks at the ready....) Also, once the planst start gathering stuff from the soil, there would also be room for foodcrops soon thereafter.... Hell, if they'd like I could do it by myself...(and yes..to me Earth is becoming a more and more insane place..so yeah..any chance to leave..GREAT..) .
Politics and economics are the two horrible variables that have held us up so far. But irrespective of both, we are not meant to stagnate on this fart arse little blue orb.
Well, you revived a 13 year old thread. First post on Jan 18, 2002. It was 12 years old when you 1st revived it. That's an unrealistic fantasy. The money for your project will come from Earth: a place with borders, national differences. The thing I find funniest about these pie in the sky dreams of colonizing Mars, and I mean everybody's not just yours is this: When you look All Mars missions that have succeeded in the past, you are looking at a very small number. Not including any Mars missions from USA, there is about an 18% success rate. That's an 82% chance of failure and failure on a Mars mission equals death. Russian Roulette is a 1 in 6 chance of death, or 16.667% and a 83.333% of living. You have far better odds of surviving Russian Roulette. Looking at only Mars missions from the USA, there is a 28.571% chance of failure or 71.429% of success. Looking at all global missions combined, 43.182% success rate and 56.818% failure. Basically, heads you live & tails you die.
Pie in the sky dreams? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! A few said that when Kennedy gave NASA a decade to get us to the Moon. To say its "pie in the sky" or "unrealistic" is being totally pessimistic in the most extreme form. It was the same Earth, the same place with borders, and national differences that also constructed the ISS. Small by comparison but it does show that when science leads the way, that we can live together without borders. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Missions to Mars are always dangerous, but success rates have improved in recent times. I remember in the late 50s, almost every day a rocket blew up somewhere in an attempt to reach outer space. I 'm satisfied though that we will always have plenty that will "push the envelope" to achieve a dream......NASA, Tau Zero, 100 Year Star Ship Co, Mars One. All lead by reputable folk. They all have my total respect in there efforts to achieve a dream. "A pessimist is one who makes difficulties of his opportunities and an optimist is one who makes opportunities of his difficulties". Harry S Truman:
kk..granted 0.1C might be a bit of a stretch.. But it was just a figure (since 1 C is so unattainable..) But even at lower speeds, sooner or later you'd get there.. I'd say a generational vessel..complete ecosystem..yes large and slow..but even at 0.001C it would be only 430 years..roughly 10 generations..which would also allow for the weeding out social problems like a one people all share etc something..all being equal... In any case..the sources of fuel would be sunlight (at first mostly), and then some type of nuclear fuel.. (for power generation, not the drives..) Initial speed would have to be mostly combustibles (or even explosive).. The thing is..the ion tech that has much greater fuel/thrust ratio's are only in it's infancy now.. (although I do have a few ideas on that..) Slingshot trajectory through the solar system for the first year, and although the speed increase wouldn't be much, when taking into account it happens over the better part of a year, still very significant.. and yes..I did get a lil personal at some point, but I just hate being belittled.. besides..it's only theoretical no ?
On the success of Mars missions...they were all automated and/or remotely operated.. There is no adaptability there.. If I'd be on ship I'd KNOW exactly how I'd need to fix stuff, since I'd also have built it.. (which to me is the ONLY way to go, don't trust other people to have the same standards as me..) (the upside to a mild OCD I guess..) The only thing's that I woudl have to worry about are micrometeors punch holes in the ship.. Radiation waves..and large scale mechanical malfunctions.. Not the computers, since I'd use a simplified version of old PDP-8's with many spare parts.. (I'd say about 1000, but using mini transistors..for the main mechanical operating system..) Only regular computers for the advanced softwares..all low-power.. A serious vault with radiation shielding to keep any of that from frying..) Mainboards spared..inside that vault,a as well as spare procs..the weight added would be only little like 50 kg, and that makes for a pile of parts.. In combination with a sort of 'deflector' (DO NOT SAY STAR TREK !!!) I thought up that woudl appear like a big 'sail' made of carbon nanotubing, that will help avoid those micrometeorites..that in combination with anti-kinetic foam (reusable/refillable) shield.. (it would be deployed in space, and is about 50 metres thick, but weighs very little in comparison..) But that's just me think squarely ahead..
PDP's are the most underrated piece of tech ever made.. Yes they suck for large scale computing, but when it comes to reliability and sturdyness, so not.. I'm seeing a 'network' spread all around the ship, so that even when half the ship goes down, there will still be a connection from the cockpit/control area to the engines and steering etc.. Since each would be like a small hub in that network`any power surges, would frie the pdp and as such would prevent the rest of them also being fried.. As well as using only low voltage equipment all over, eliminating the need for high voltage systems, and if the need would arise to have any high voltages, only end transformers..like 12V to 110V.. And so on and so on.. The thing is not adding more stuff with a chance for failure, it's about using the stuff that you have.. Ion propulsion through solar, low tech computing for guidance, and maybe a laptop like system for 'convenience'.. The PDP's handle the data distribution and command queue's to the guidance system.. networked indicators... hmm..4 work arms...a better 'flight' suit instead of that thing they got at NASA.. (Ion propulsion /w 3 small emergency SRB's..yes..very small, but very usefull..) I'd use one of the arms to quickly maneuvre into psoition, and then detach using the ions to have freedom to work.. magnetic lined to the arm.. yeah yeah..I know..flights of fancy...but in my head perfectly do-able..
btw..getting stuff into orbit isn't as difficult as it seems.. it's called a cargogun... where you get verything up to mach 2.5 before it reaches the surface, and with such an initial speed additional propellant needs a much lower fuel/payload ratio.. This only works for 'dead' cargo though...steel, fuel cannisters, oxygen cannisters.. Also, a small but segmented biosphere for oxygen food reclamation.. Yes..veggies only.. There woudl still be CO2 scrubbers etc, but those would only be needed as a backup system and or reclamation support system.. .
Treating waste like produce is a much better way for long time space travel.. Also..if it can be done in 3 months, or maybe even 6 months... People have been know to live in space for that time.. Mars has not much of an atmosphere, so downlooking and seeing a good spot to land, calculating where to drop the cargo on site, in combination with remote guidance on site.. Not doable from here, but in orbit around Mars, very possible.. After landing I'd have a biosphere underneath the rock of Mars within 1 month tops.. Ever seen a mech work ? (like an exoskeleton, but bigger and capable of moving tons of stuff in the matter of minutes..) (solar powered..yes..with an extension cord...) At first i'd seal it completely, with two airlocks..one further into the exacvation, and one to the outside.. Then from the working biospehere, I'd surplant simple weeds into siad excavation.. (humus and microbe propagation..) Mix that in with small bits of mars-soil..and see where ti goes from there.. maybe a few things are needed to make mars soil usefull, but that's where the old noggin comes in.. (my noggin that is..) I'd say 3-6 moths travel, and 3 months tops before fully operational and sitting happily waiting till my software comes in from earth..playing games and petting the cats.. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! - I ISH SUPER !!!
After the landing the ship itself could remain in function as a very complex orbital sattelite.. (or maybe it could even travel back on a dead stick course..) Ofc..someone would have to go up there and take command of it, once it gets near here again.. I'm thinking it owuld be a little leaky and such, but that won't matter there's no life aboard anyways.. All it has to do is get back here for re-use.. Getting a space shuttle up there, to apply it's maneuvring capabilities.. (but..I'm thinking the PDP's can keep it from getting far of course..)
If people would say "you can't make a cave big enough in that amount of time..." I'd say..uh-uh..and the earth is flat.. I'm not no bozo..using laser/maser/ultrasonics you can slice stuff out like really quick.. And unlike demolitions to get something like that (which would also increase it's instability) it's re-usable.. also on the mech.. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e3/Ellen_Ripley_Cargo_Loader.jpg yes..it's from a movie..no..that doesn't mean it's fictitious..it's an actual machine.. a working machine..and the direct result of other people's 'flights of fancy'.. Imagine that witha laser/maser/ultrsonic device, cutting away large amounts of rock.. (and with the right kind of thinking, those nice and square rock pieces, could also be used as a building material for outside structures..much like a pyramid.. Not as big as an actual pyramid, but still..pretty safe and very durable.. an electric car system, maybe even a rail...for transport to the pole.. Local steel fabrication.. I'm thinking Mars has iron from it's own.. But in nay case, once I'd be there, using the same principle as the ground based cargocannon, a space based cargo cannon could deliver cargo to the still orbiting space ship.. Wanna know if it works ? Let the guys at NASA build a small version..shoot a tracking device towards Mars.. All it has to do is send a PING..let's see how close we can get it... Imagine a crago like this for a full version.. 1 m3...the ouside being mostly steel (lways usefull) the inside consiting out of blocks of needed basic materials, like refined silicon, seeds, processors or whatever, all made into nice and square shapes.. like a cargo bonbon..I think after 3 months I could have made enough fuel for the descent vehicle, to go back in orbit again, and by the time the cargo-cube would get there, I'd intercept it using (parts of) the main ship.. !YAY! fresh supplies...I hope they found room for my PaySafe vouchers..
- makes mental note.. Take FISH along..for the cat...no..not for during the voyage, for creating new fish on Mars.. Kitty needs food too..also..when using the rock of Mars itself to yeild some stuffs, any organics that are able to assimilate any type of Mars soil, woudl yield more bio matter.. So if there would be a 0.1% yield from using the Mars soil, to yield more bio matter (fish), it would be an increase.. Also.. undeground iglo style.. using the square blocks, somewhat cut into shape to create an underground iglo, instead of trying to take a lot of concrete there..
if the rock is too brittle, heat it to the melting point..then shape it.. that would take longer though..but given solar power..still doable..
it wouldn't make much a of a difference for making the underground cave.. using the laser to heat the rock up to melting point in order to make it airtight.. even regular sand can do..
I'd so try and see if rocks can be crushed into usable soil.. what is soil ? the most part is very tiny bits of rock, and the rest is humus.. So..the creation of humus on mars would be essential to survival.. growing weeds yields oxygen.. the only problem would be a large amount of carbon.. hmm.. - writes down 'next cargo cannon delivery..compacted carbon 8 m2..'
I don't think there's gonna be much problem taking carbon from here..we got too much of it anyway.. Also..a big fat chunk of ice now and again for the ion engines would also be nice.. Any leftovers = drinks on me..
Anyone have the recipe for cola light ? it's patent doesn't extend beyond the earth, so I can make some..
nope..no booze..I don't drink alcohol....it kills the brain.. COFFEE BEANS !!! ( I'll need those too..) Frozen milk..or maybe a cow and a bull ?.. They'd be in hibernation though.. Securely stored.. They could eat some of the weeds..and produce milk (and or offspring..) On second thought..just one cow, and some bull 'specimen'..in vitro..
