Author Topic: Mars by the 2030's  (Read 722 times)

AZRedhawk44

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,981
Mars by the 2030's
« on: May 06, 2013, 12:08:12 PM »
http://www.france24.com/en/20130506-nasa-says-setting-foot-mars-human-destiny

They talk about bridging the tech gaps that make it difficult to reach Mars with a manned space craft, as well as habitat problems.


I wonder:

We already have significant sized robots on Mars.

Could we send a bulldozer or purpose-built earth moving machine?  Something to mound up a large pile of dirt, extract water from wherever we can find ice there, locate calcium carbonate deposits, and make Martian concrete shells to go over large mounds of dirt?

Then another machine that is essentially a custom excavator, that hollows out the dirt inside the concrete shell?

All operations would have to be scripted series of tasks rather than live remote controlled tasks due to communication lag, but I bet given a year, it would be possible to erect a hollowed out structure the size of a large home.  3000 square feet or so.  Especially if the construction robotics were nuclear powered rather than solar powered. 

Or, if the dome habitat seems to labor intensive (pile dirt, cover with concrete, remove dirt)... create a stack of concrete bricks and begin laying out walls?  I happen to like the dirt mound method because the final product can then have the fill dirt layered over the top of the concrete roof and walls for additional radiation protection and insulation and protection from atmospheric leakage.

Give a handful of machines like this a 10 year head start, and you could have half a dozen completed shells that are just lacking a final airtight door (and atmosphere, and furnishings, and electricity, and...) and also probably the beginnings of a concrete launch pad for a Martian launch vehicle.
"But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist."
--Lysander Spooner

I reject your authoritah!

charby

  • Necromancer
  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29,295
  • APS's Resident Sikh/Muslim
Re: Mars by the 2030's
« Reply #1 on: May 06, 2013, 12:34:17 PM »
Calcium carbonate would mean that life existed at one time on Mars.
Iowa- 88% more livable that the rest of the US

Uranus is a gas giant.

Team 444: Member# 536

Boomhauer

  • Former Moderator, fired for embezzlement and abuse of power
  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,348
Re: Mars by the 2030's
« Reply #2 on: May 06, 2013, 12:36:38 PM »
Weight is an issue. If the dozer or excavator doesnt have a lot of weight its not going to be very effective for digging or earthmoving.

Another issue is maintence. Yeah the mars rovers have lasted longer than planned for but when you start talking construction equipment you start talking about wear and breakage due to the forces involved. While heavy equipment is designed with this in mind and is built to take the punishment it would be a different story for a rover dozer

« Last Edit: May 06, 2013, 12:42:44 PM by Boomhauer »
Quote from: Ben
Holy hell. It's like giving a loaded gun to a chimpanzee...

Quote from: bluestarlizzard
the last thing you need is rabies. You're already angry enough as it is.

OTOH, there wouldn't be a tweeker left in Georgia...

Quote from: Balog
BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD! SKULLS FOR THE SKULL THRONE! AND THROW SOME STEAK ON THE GRILL!

CNYCacher

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,438
Re: Mars by the 2030's
« Reply #3 on: May 06, 2013, 12:48:45 PM »
http://www.france24.com/en/20130506-nasa-says-setting-foot-mars-human-destiny

They talk about bridging the tech gaps that make it difficult to reach Mars with a manned space craft, as well as habitat problems.


I wonder:

We already have significant sized robots on Mars.

Could we send a bulldozer or purpose-built earth moving machine?  Something to mound up a large pile of dirt, extract water from wherever we can find ice there, locate calcium carbonate deposits, and make Martian concrete shells to go over large mounds of dirt?

Then another machine that is essentially a custom excavator, that hollows out the dirt inside the concrete shell?

All operations would have to be scripted series of tasks rather than live remote controlled tasks due to communication lag, but I bet given a year, it would be possible to erect a hollowed out structure the size of a large home.  3000 square feet or so.  Especially if the construction robotics were nuclear powered rather than solar powered. 

Or, if the dome habitat seems to labor intensive (pile dirt, cover with concrete, remove dirt)... create a stack of concrete bricks and begin laying out walls?  I happen to like the dirt mound method because the final product can then have the fill dirt layered over the top of the concrete roof and walls for additional radiation protection and insulation and protection from atmospheric leakage.

Give a handful of machines like this a 10 year head start, and you could have half a dozen completed shells that are just lacking a final airtight door (and atmosphere, and furnishings, and electricity, and...) and also probably the beginnings of a concrete launch pad for a Martian launch vehicle.

When I was a child they were talking about manned missions to Mars happening in 30 years.  Now I am in my 30's.

We have the ability to send manned missions to Mars right now, we just can't get them back.  So the question came up "Who want's a one-way ticket to mars?" Last I heard they had 10s of thousands of responses.
On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question.
Charles Babbage

TommyGunn

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7,956
  • Stuck in full auto since birth.
Re: Mars by the 2030's
« Reply #4 on: May 06, 2013, 12:55:56 PM »
When I was a child they were talking about manned missions to Mars happening in 30 years.  Now I am in my 30's.

We have the ability to send manned missions to Mars right now, we just can't get them back.  So the question came up "Who want's a one-way ticket to mars?" Last I heard they had 10s of thousands of responses.

A lot of people are anxious to escape earth ....  :rofl: [tinfoil]
MOLON LABE   "Through ignorance of what is good and what is bad, the life of men is greatly perplexed." ~~ Cicero

MillCreek

  • Skippy The Wonder Dog
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 20,011
  • APS Risk Manager
Re: Mars by the 2030's
« Reply #5 on: May 06, 2013, 12:59:55 PM »
A lot of people are anxious to escape earth ....  :rofl: [tinfoil]

I would sign up to be a pioneer on a new world in a heartbeat.  I wonder if they would take an experienced healthcare risk manager and an elementary school teacher, both in their mid-50's.  We have been talking about doing a year with the Peace Corps or some other service arrangement when we retire.
_____________
Regards,
MillCreek
Snohomish County, WA  USA


Quote from: Angel Eyes on August 09, 2018, 01:56:15 AM
You are one lousy risk manager.

zahc

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,801
Re: Mars by the 2030's
« Reply #6 on: May 06, 2013, 01:00:16 PM »
Won't the people get fried just from the radiation in the trip there? It was my understanding that the radiation dose on such a trip would mean almost certain cancer.
Maybe a rare occurence, but then you only have to get murdered once to ruin your whole day.
--Tallpine

AZRedhawk44

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,981
Re: Mars by the 2030's
« Reply #7 on: May 06, 2013, 01:00:26 PM »
Calcium carbonate would mean that life existed at one time on Mars.

It's naturally present in limestone, marble, chalk and some other minerals.
"But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist."
--Lysander Spooner

I reject your authoritah!

charby

  • Necromancer
  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29,295
  • APS's Resident Sikh/Muslim
Re: Mars by the 2030's
« Reply #8 on: May 06, 2013, 01:06:35 PM »
It's naturally present in limestone, marble, chalk and some other minerals.

Limestone/dolomite/calcite created from ancient dead animals.

Marble is metamorphic limestone/dolomite/calcite

Chalk is made from ancient dead animals.

Other minerals like gypsum? Maybe get some calcium from that, CaSO4. I think there is some sort of life that has to have occurred for it to form, I am drawing a blank.

I just finished a semester that dealt with calcium carbonate and using it to lime soil.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2013, 01:11:50 PM by charby »
Iowa- 88% more livable that the rest of the US

Uranus is a gas giant.

Team 444: Member# 536

Tallpine

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 23,172
  • Grumpy Old Grandpa
Re: Mars by the 2030's
« Reply #9 on: May 06, 2013, 01:15:50 PM »
Just drop off some settlers with blankets and hatchets  ;)
Freedom is a heavy load, a great and strange burden for the spirit to undertake. It is not easy. It is not a gift given, but a choice made, and the choice may be a hard one. The road goes upward toward the light; but the laden traveller may never reach the end of it.  - Ursula Le Guin

Scout26

  • I'm a leaf on the wind.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 25,997
  • I spent a week in that town one night....
Re: Mars by the 2030's
« Reply #10 on: May 06, 2013, 05:07:54 PM »
...maybe a herd.
Some of them make it, some of them....
« Last Edit: May 07, 2013, 10:11:57 AM by scout26 »
Some days even my lucky rocketship underpants won't help.


Bring me my Broadsword and a clear understanding.
Get up to the roundhouse on the cliff-top standing.
Take women and children and bed them down.
Bless with a hard heart those that stand with me.
Bless the women and children who firm our hands.
Put our backs to the north wind.
Hold fast by the river.
Sweet memories to drive us on,
for the motherland.

AJ Dual

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 16,162
  • Shoe Ballistics Inc.
Re: Mars by the 2030's
« Reply #11 on: May 07, 2013, 12:56:33 AM »
Recent radiation measurements from one of the landers/rovers during a solar storm showed that even Mars' anemic atmosphere shields from radiation much better than previously thought.

Enough that it mitigates a lot of the need to dig, at least right away. A permanent or long-term base would want to do so anyway to get as much or all of the radiation as possible. But whatever landed capsules or modules + atmosphere would be adequate, or even just a little soil on top of the modules with some baskets or mesh berms to hold it would do. Some designs also add shielding mass by sticking water tanks and as much gear in the ceiling/roof of the module as possible.

As far as the trip to Mars, the better the propulsion, the less flight time, the less radiation exposure.

To do that would mean some sort of nuclear propulsion, either one of the various direct nuclear rocket schemes, VASMIR or one of the other plasma thruster schemes, or ion engines powered by a nuclear reactor. Also, if the nuclear reactor is big enough and has spare watts, an electromagnetic shield could be produced by placing current through a conductive cage around the habitation modules of the ship would deflect charged particles from a CME just like Earth's field does. Although that would take a LOT of current. But maybe someone would get clever and send a extra-large reactor for a ship on a one-way trip that then gets used at a Mars orbit station, or maybe land it for base power, and it would have the Watts to spare....

Neutral particles could be handled in a couple of ways. Although in some circumstances with radiation, "not enough" shielding is worse than none. Really energetic radiation like cosmic rays, it's better to not "fight it" because if you try to shield from it, and it's not enough, it just creates more atoms for them to knock into, and create unhealthy secondary particles/radiation, while the original cosmic ray could zip right through a "thin" ship and your body and not affect anything. (Apollo moon astronauts reported being disturbed or woken from naps from the flash of the occasional cosmic ray passing through their eyeballs vitreous humor, or maybe directly exciting the optic nerve...  :P )

To save weight the reactor might be on a long boom or stalk, or have what's called a "shadow shield" that only shields the direction of the crew module, and all that could maybe shield them from a CME the reactor and it's shielding would be pretty dense/massive anyway, and orienting the ship so it's in the "shadow" of the most mass might work.

Or anything with lots of protons/Hydrogen would work well for neutral particle shielding. A "storm shelter" in the shadow of some water tanks, certain polymers, or even a liquid Hydrogen tank if the ship's design called for it. Although if the Neutrons are high energy enough, secondary gamma radiation can be produced, so again it's that balancing act that rears it's head again.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2013, 01:01:12 AM by AJ Dual »
I promise not to duck.

RoadKingLarry

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,841
Re: Mars by the 2030's
« Reply #12 on: May 07, 2013, 07:58:39 AM »
If we wait on the US.gov to foot the bill it will ever happen.
That money would be so much better spent on social programs anyway. [barf]
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

Samuel Adams