31
   

Rovers on Mars

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2011 11:15 am
@edgarblythe,
The distance is too great to take enough supplies to create a self-sustaining "community" on mars.
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2011 06:34 pm
The next big rover is on its way to Mars. The "Curiosity" rover was launched today and is due to arrive in August of 2012.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2011 06:42 pm
@rosborne979,
Do you have any details of what science its carrying? I suppose itll take about what , 9 months to hit the surface of MArs.

Is the lander any different than the big air balloon "bouncers" like the last ones

Ive not been following this but I will now.
OOH, is there a website by which we can track it?
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2011 07:03 pm
over six feet tall
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2011 07:04 pm
@farmerman,
Try this link http://www.space.com/13677-nasa-mars-science-laboratory-rover-launch-complete-coverage.html
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2011 07:05 pm
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/11/27/us/MARS/MARS-articleLarge.jpg
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2011 07:19 pm
@edgarblythe,
Bigger than a Buick, this sucker i gonna come into the neighborhood at 20000 mph and then it will deploy what? No balloons I hope. Its got a lot of mass. Is this one using retro rockets?
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Nov, 2011 07:44 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

Bigger than a Buick, this sucker i gonna come into the neighborhood at 20000 mph and then it will deploy what? No balloons I hope. Its got a lot of mass. Is this one using retro rockets?
Yes, this one has a very different [re]entry system than the others. I believe this one uses a combination of chutes and retro's to control decent and to land it. Although I'm sure that landing it is going to be the most difficult and risky part of the mission by far.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Nov, 2011 05:16 am
@rosborne979,
Weve lost a few of these toys on landing and the Russians have lost every one of theirs.
Gottaa hope for the best cause were committed now.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Nov, 2011 09:37 am
August is a long wait, to even know if it is gonna work. I feel like a little kid on December 24TH.
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Nov, 2011 04:00 pm
@edgarblythe,
Me too Smile
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Nov, 2011 05:06 pm
@rosborne979,
you can always talk with" Voice in the Closet ".
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Nov, 2011 05:08 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
The distance is too great to take enough supplies to create a self-sustaining "community" on mars.


Why do you say that? All we need is the basics in creating O2 and rebreathing and several miles of mylar and we can start a small terraformed settlement
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Nov, 2011 05:32 pm
Wish they could put up a second. Think of the drag races they could have.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Nov, 2011 07:08 pm
@farmerman,
There's also the issue of food and water for survival.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Nov, 2011 04:26 am
@cicerone imposter,
when we terraform a small area, Id suggest that we build greenhousues. I never implied that it was gonna be a walk in the park but I int think that its beyond us to succeed.

A colony on MArs lpcated near all these "blueberry" patches can mine all the salts for water and oxygen. Theres ample water at the poles and in shadow areas. We only need a certain amount of water to start then we can recycle the bulk of it many times. Our vehicles would have to be much more reliable because periodic deliveries of supplies would be critical. (Sorta like the Roanoke Island Colony back here on Earth.)
We should practice these applied technologies by setting up a lunar colony for a "test case"
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Nov, 2011 04:42 am
For terran species to survive, not just humans, but plants an animals, any colony or greenhouse is going to need to be underground, at least initially, because of cosmic radiation. Because of the expense, sunlight could only be used indirectly to provide power--but to shield against cosmic radiation, the only effective method which would be affordable, in the beginning, would be to go underground.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Nov, 2011 05:01 am
@Setanta,
The biggest cosmic radiation is while on the trip to MArs. Ionizing nuclei of heavier elements like Fe wopuld kick the cosmic radiation level up to the millions of Mevs.

Once on the planet though, the really serious ionizing nuclei would be reduced by an additional amount (Ive never looked at any of the Rover Data for galactic cosmic radiation (GCR) But I think we could find a way to shield the bulk of the remaining GCR's by some sort of shielding . for gardening at least. Mylar is a good substance even if we put up a double layer and fill the interstices with some heavy gas like SF6. Theres plenty of sulfate compounds on teh MArtian surface and we can split off the sulfur while we make oxygen from the compound. Then theres flouride in salts that are similarly extracted by solar conversion.

I see a challenge not a serious impediment. (Im trying to sound profound like voice in the closet)

Very Happy Very Happy
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Nov, 2011 05:13 am
@farmerman,
OOOOH, I take that back. Seems the upper seven feet or so will be exposed to levels that could exceed 4 Mev/y/ft2r. That could be serious. It would take a lot of heavy shielding like a water jacket over the colony along with a SF6 layer.

Could we create an"at a point" magnetic field? Thats the biggest reason for the "enhanced radiation" . Or else we go and occupy deep craters at high latitudes.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Nov, 2011 06:01 am
@farmerman,
I was largely thinking in pragmatic terms of what the cost would be to boost necessary materials out of the gravity well and safely plop them down on Ares' Hide-away. Either sufficient shielding materials, or the materials to create a local magnetic field are probably going to be pretty damned expensive to boost out of the mother well. Once in microgravity, the cost of bossting them on a long slow trip to Mars won't be high. Landing them safely could require a lot of fuel, too.

In practical terms, going underground is the simplest, cheapest solution.
 

Related Topics

Propeller in Mars image - Discussion by gungasnake
EEEK! BEWARE Martian Spiders!! - Discussion by tsarstepan
Successful New Landing on Mars - Discussion by edgarblythe
Life on Mars - Discussion by gungasnake
NASA's Next Steps in the Journey to Mars - Discussion by OregonFlyBy
LIVELY MARS - Discussion by Setanta
NASA image: clear/obvious pyramid - Discussion by gungasnake
Foundations of Mars - Discussion by gungasnake
Mars bunker and sphinx - Discussion by gungasnake
India's Mars Orbiter Spacecraft - Discussion by Brandon9000
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Rovers on Mars
  3. » Page 31
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/03/2024 at 07:35:09