1 hour ago, DD_Arthur said:

 you simply can’t separate the investment from the engineering

 

Yes you can.

We can discuss how SpaceX are doing this, the design of the Raptor engine, how it differs from the first generation Raptor engine. We can discuss all aspects of how Spaceship is designed, the catching mechanism, the fuel and on and on and on. How the "chopstick" catching mechanism will work, if we think its worth the weight saving or if SpaceX should be using landing legs. If they should be launching from Boca Chica given the proximity to people or if they should move. Whether the end to end refuelling is optimal or if the new method, belly to belly, makes more sense. Of course we don't have to talk about financing and how much taxation is involved. We've done all that before, we are well aware of members opinions in that regard.

 

1 hour ago, DD_Arthur said:

The engineering? The most efficient way would be to build an earth orbiting factory to manufacture components that would then be boosted off to Mars individually to an orbiting receiving centre that would then process them down to the surface.

 

 

There you go, you've just done it without mention of financing and taxation.

No, I don't see your suggestion as more efficient. You would need a multitude of SpaceX Spaceship flights to orbit in order to build your  "Earth Orbiting factory" in the first place. You don't need to do that. There no need to do that when the same flights can be launched, ship refuelled in orbit and then travel to Mars. And why a receiving station when the arriving vessels can simply land. No point offloading at a receiving station when you have to get the cargo down to the surface anyway. 

 

Quote

This negates any sort of space ‘ship’ for the transit of components between distant planets.

 

How does it negate a spaceship? You need spaceships to get into orbit to build your "orbital Factory" and then you need spaceships to transport the cargo to Mars. And then you need space ships to build your "orbiting receiving station" and space ships to take the cargo down to the Mars surface. The Cargo doesn't get from Earth orbit to Mars on its own. And it doesn't get from your "Mars receiving station" to the surface on its own as it would burn up in the atmosphere.

I'm not a fan of your idea. And I think SpaceX qualified engineers and space scientists ( they employ some of the worlds best) would be doing that if it was a better idea.   🙂

 

42 minutes ago, birdguy said:

Will animals be transported to Mars?  Like swine and cattle so they can raise pork and beef?  Or will the colonists all have to be vegetarians?  What about pets?

 

Well clearly a full scale Mars dome,  providing a very comfortable exitance, is in the future. Decades away. What they will be doing then is nothing like the first Martian visitors will experience.

We know that all manner of vegetables can be grown on Mars. When a Mars Dome becomes a reality and there are hundreds of thousands of people living and working on Mars then feeding them will have been a technology that has developed over time. If its protein you are concerned about then yes, perfectly feasible to provide enough protein from vegetable sources, Insect protein is another option, and ultimately, by the time our Mars Dome is in full swing, there may well be animals there. As for pets, I've no idea, I cant predict what the regulations will entail, its 30 years way in "Elon time" and probably more like 50 in real time. 

Edited February 18, 20224 yr by martin-w

36 minutes ago, martin-w said:

f its protein you are concerned about then yes, perfectly feasible to provide enough protein from vegetable sources

So I assume a pork roast or a Porterhouse steak will be things of the past for Martians.  I'm not interested in vegetable protein.  I'm wondering if they will be able to bite down on a thick, juicy, steak.

Noel 

3 hours ago, DD_Arthur said:

Sorry Martin, I understand. However, the reality is you simply can’t separate the investment from the engineering  and the way we do things at the moment I cannot see any private sector entity stumping up the cash required over the sort of timescales we’d be talking about.  The investment risk involved is too much.

You can separate the investment from this thread.....and that's what Martin is looking for.

29 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Same human conflicts we have seem unlikely given we’re in space and there is a qualification process.

Dream on Rob.  When I was a first sergeant I selected people I thought would work well together for project teams.  There was always conflict.  Sometimes minor and sometimes to the point where I had to replce someone.  

Noel

In the long run, there will be a need for an orbiting assembly station.  This will be necessary in order to build very large spacecraft that would be too heavy to practically launch from the surface.

Dave

2 hours ago, martin-w said:

I'm not a fan of your idea. And I think SpaceX qualified engineers and space scientists ( they employ some of the worlds best) would be doing that if it was a better idea.   🙂

 

Fair enough but if they’re going to use one vehicle to make a direct, surface to surface flight with all the compromises that involves, I suggest the ‘best brains’ plan is based on a fundamentally flawed premise.

16 minutes ago, DD_Arthur said:

Fair enough but if they’re going to use one vehicle to make a direct, surface to surface flight with all the compromises that involves, I suggest the ‘best brains’ plan is based on a fundamentally flawed premise.

It removes the complexity and risk of sorting out how to build spacecraft in orbit that we currently don't have experience with. I'm sure in the long run larger spacecraft built in orbit would be better and more efficient, but going through the development process for that would likely delay the initial trips to Mars.

2 hours ago, birdguy said:

So I assume a pork roast or a Porterhouse steak will be things of the past for Martians.  I'm not interested in vegetable protein.  I'm wondering if they will be able to bite down on a thick, juicy, steak.

Noel 

 

No problem, we will have perfected synthetic meat by then. It'll taste just the same. And as I say, who can predict? Maye well be live animals on mars in the future for all we know. You carnivore you. 

52 minutes ago, DD_Arthur said:

Fair enough but if they’re going to use one vehicle to make a direct, surface to surface flight with all the compromises that involves, I suggest the ‘best brains’ plan is based on a fundamentally flawed premise.

 

Not one vehicle no. And not really a compromise. The SpaceX vison is not just full reusability, but rapid reusability. The plan is for multiple spaceship launches per day.

SpaceX can already knock out prototypes with rapidity. The delay at the moment before the first orbital flight is mostly the FAA. Once the prototype stage is over, multiple Spaceships will be manufactured rapidly. Three launches per day are envisaged. Payload is 150 tons, and may be increased. 450 tons per day is quite something. Just imagine the logistics of not just sending a cargo ship to Mars but having to man, maintain and provision a full scale factory in orbit... 

 

Quote

SpaceX has been developing the technologies over several years to facilitate full and rapid reusability of space launch vehicles. ... SpaceX's long term goal is that both stages of their orbital launch vehicle will be designed to allow reuse a few hours after return.

https://fortune.com/2022/02/11/elon-musk-spacex-starship-update-rocket-orbit/

Edited February 18, 20224 yr by martin-w

29 minutes ago, goates said:

It removes the complexity and risk of sorting out how to build spacecraft in orbit that we currently don't have experience with. I'm sure in the long run larger spacecraft built in orbit would be better and more efficient, but going through the development process for that would likely delay the initial trips to Mars.

 

Who knows what sort of technology we will have in the future. Reaction Engines in the UK are developing an air breathing rocket engine as we speak, that will enable take-off from a runway, orbital flight and landing on a runway. A true spaceplane. With that sort of efficient means to get into orbit the prospect of orbital construction becomes much easier. Rapid reusability,  efficient propulsion, no longer would we require the quantity of of propellant we need now. 

4 hours ago, birdguy said:

Will animals be transported to Mars?  Like swine and cattle so they can raise pork and beef?  Or will the colonists all have to be vegetarians?

Unlikely since, as I understand it, there are more efficient ways of creating protein food than raising cattle, etc. Long term survival on Mars will depend on the highest efficiency of food production as will as energy generation, breathable air generation, recycling, etc. 

22 minutes ago, martin-w said:

Not one vehicle no. And not really a compromise. The SpaceX vison is not just full reusability, but rapid reusability. The plan is for multiple spaceship launches per day....

Yes I understand it will be more than one ship😃.

Fast turnaround on a return trip to Mars seems rather meaningless. 

20 minutes ago, dmwalker said:

Unlikely since, as I understand it, there are more efficient ways of creating protein food than raising cattle, etc. Long term survival on Mars will depend on the highest efficiency of food production as will as energy generation, breathable air generation, recycling, etc. 

The resources alone required to raise cattle, or other livestock, would be prohibitive, especially early on. Another factor would be how cattle react to the lower gravity. How would it affect the meat produced?

1 hour ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

if there were a military analogy, it would be more like trying to qualify to be active Blue Angels team member.

There probably won't be many people going to Mars then.

Noel