TECH 39 Days to Mars - NASA selects companies to develop Vasimr engine.

[Housecarl]

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...ies-develop-super-fast-deep-space-engine.html

Could we get to Mars in 39 DAYS? Nasa selects companies to develop super fast deep-space engine
Company in Texas has been asked to develop its revolutionary engine
Ad Astra's Vasimr engine could apparently get to Mars in 39 days
It is one of 12 advanced technology projects to be funded by Nasa
Others include new types of habitation and small deep space satellites

By Jonathan O'Callaghan for MailOnline

Published: 09:50 EST, 1 April 2015 | Updated: 21:53 EST, 1 April 2015
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Comments 209

Nasa has selected a variety of companies to work on projects to create advanced space technologies, including faster methods of propulsion.

Other projects to be worked on include improved habitats for humans, and small satellites to explore deep space.

And one of the companies in the 12 Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextStep) says they have an engine that could get humans to Mars in just 39 days.

Scroll down for video

The Vasimr engine - which uses plasma as a propellant - is being developed by the Ad Astra Rocket company in Texas.

Their engine shot to fame a few years ago when it was revealed that it could drastically reduce the journey time to Mars from months to weeks - although it may require a nuclear power source.

And following the successful test of a prototype in 2013, it seems Nasa is now considering it for use on a future mission to Mars.

‘We are thrilled by this announcement and proud to be joining forces with Nasa in the final steps of the technology maturation,’ said Dr Franklin Chang Diaz, Ad Astra’s Chairman and CEO, in a statement.

‘We look forward to a very successful partnership as we jointly advance the technology to flight readiness.’

Over three years, Nasa will give the company about £6.8 million ($10 million) to get the engine almost ready to fly in space.

This will be achieved with a demonstration of their new prototype, the VX-200-SS, which will be able to fire continuously for more than 100 hours.

A previous test in 2013 saw Ad Astra complete 10,000 successful high power firings of a Vasimr prototype.

However, this involved short duration bursts for less than a minute. Proving the engine works for more than 100 hours will be key to it one day being used on a spacecraft.

With this and other technologies, Nasa said in a statement they want to develop exploration capabilities around the moon, and at Mars.

‘Commercial partners were selected for their technical ability to mature key technologies and their commitment to the potential applications both for government and private sector uses,’ said William Gerstenmaier, associate administrator for Human Exploration and Operations at Nasa Headquarters.

‘This work ultimately will inform the strategy to move human presence further into the solar system.’

Three advanced electric propulsion projects, including Vasimr, will develop engines that operate in the 50 to 300 kilowatt range.

By comparison, current electric propulsion used by Nasa - such as the ion engine on the Dawn spacecraft - operates at less than five kilowatts.

Meanwhile, seven companies have been picked to work on the habitats that will house astronauts as they make their way to Mars in the 2030s.

While the Orion capsule will take astronauts to and from Earth, it can only sustain a crew of four for 21 days.

To make the journey to Mars, expected to last anywhere from several months to three years, astronauts will need to live in some other structure.

Nasa will be hoping one of the projects it is funding will find a way to house the astronauts for the grueling journey to and from the red planet.

Nasa is also asking companies to development capabilities to sustain a crew of four for 60 days in cis-lunar space - between Earth and the moon - with the ability to scale up to Mars missions.

The companies selected include Bigelow Aerospace, who are creating an inflatable habitation module - a prototype of which will be attached to the ISS in 2018.

And finally, two companies have been selected to develop small satellites - CubeSats - to launch as secondary paylods on the first flight of Nasa’s huge Space Launch System rocket in 2019.

As the rocket is so powerful, it will give these CubeSats a rare opportunity to explore deep space, as opposed to remaining in Earth orbit.

 

[Knoxville's Joker]

moon mars visits could be a possibility in my lifetime. Though one has to ask, is this coming out now because the black projects are now too large to hide? Or is this a case where the government needs to commercialize things to get more R&D money to get things developed faster?

 

[SquonkHunter]

39 Days to Mars - NASA selects companies to develop Vasimr engine.

If this actually works, it could be the big breakthrough that will make manned extra-planetary travel feasible. We already have the remainder of the technology needed to do so. It was always the great amount of time required for such journeys that made it impractical to execute. Many months worth of rations take up a lot of space and weight. This could reduce the amounts needed considerably. Damn, how I wish I were 20 again. If I was, no one could keep me away from joining such a project - even if it was a one way trip. Sigh.

 

[Blacknarwhal]

moon mars visits could be a possibility in my lifetime. Though one has to ask, is this coming out now because the black projects are now too large to hide? Or is this a case where the government needs to commercialize things to get more R&D money to get things developed faster?

The government has printing presses. It routinely misplaces more money than any ten of us will see in a lifetime. Why would it need to commercialize anything?

 

[Housecarl]

The government has printing presses. It routinely misplaces more money than any ten of us will see in a lifetime. Why would it need to commercialize anything?

How much taxes would a 300 meter wide nickel iron asteroid be worth?

We already know how much it would be worth to being able to intercept and redirect one that big or bigger than that on a collision course with Earth.

 

[TheSearcher]

moon mars visits could be a possibility in my lifetime. Though one has to ask, is this coming out now because the black projects are now too large to hide? Or is this a case where the government needs to commercialize things to get more R&D money to get things developed faster?

VASIMR has never, ever been a black project. It is an obvious technology that I've seen in operation, it just needs to be fully developed. The company listed in the OP is a private R&D operation run by one of the most respected and most-flown astronauts, who is also a brilliant physicist. He beat his head upon the wall of NASA bureaucracy so long that he finally left behind his career as an astronaut to pursue this on his own.

He's been out there for a couple of decades slowly building the technology, and VASIMR may now get its chance.

 

[Blacknarwhal]

How much taxes would a 300 meter wide nickel iron asteroid be worth?

We already know how much it would be worth to being able to intercept and redirect one that big or bigger than that on a collision course with Earth.

Enough money to cover the derivatives bubble AND the uncovered pension problem?

 

[Housecarl]

If this actually works, it could be the big breakthrough that will make manned extra-planetary travel feasible. We already have the remainder of the technology needed to do so. It was always the great amount of time required for such journeys that made it impractical to execute. Many months worth of rations take up a lot of space and weight. This could reduce the amounts needed considerably. Damn, how I wish I were 20 again. If I was, no one could keep me away from joining such a project - even if it was a one way trip. Sigh.

When you put such a plasma propulsion system together with a "habitat" assembled of the new inflatable pods formed together in a ring/torus so even for a 39 day trip the crew can be under some gravity both on the way and when they get there and park the ship in Mars orbit, and you've then got the building blocks for opening up the solar system. The only last trick is the power source for the system.

Inflatable habitation volumes in space
US 6439508 B1
http://www.google.com/patents/US6439508

 

[Melodi]

Without being too "woo-woo" this does make me wonder simply from a sci-fi fans perspective if the Elites have also realized that one of the only ways to deal with some of the really serious problems on our planet right now would be have at least local space colonization (or even people aspiring to it) as a flow-off safety valve; especially to deal with the most highly ambitious and adventure minded of "the underlings?" It has seemed ludicrous to me that in 50 years almost no serious space exploration with a mind towards colonization has taken place; of course the other new situation is that the Chinese are ready to do this on their own and this may be forcing the West forward in this direction. My hunch is the basic technology (at least on paper) has been there for a very long time but the will to implement it has not been there. Then there is the problem that this sort of thing is dangerous and the American public (especially Americans) have for years seen any space accident as a set back that stops programs for years, as opposed to the attitude of declaring the fallen to be national heroes; grant the families a modest pension and fete them as The Brave and The Good with the best seats at football games (along with families who lose loved ones defending the US in War); and after a brief review (usually a few months) to determine what went wrong getting back in the saddle and back to work.

Exploration of new worlds from crossing the sea to Australia 50,000 years ago to colonizing Mars isn't "safe," but it seems to be in human genetics to keep doing this sort of thing and trying to breed it out of people hasn't worked so well; much better to get started on the future and the Chinese (and probably India, Brazil and Russia know this). The US and Europe can get their hind ends in gear or be left in the Terran dust.

 

[Blue 5]

Wasn't there a press release recently that indicated Lockheed's Skunk Works guys had developed a fusion generator that fits on a flatbed truck? As I recall, they were looking for "partners" to develop uses for it. This would be a good use for it, methinks...

 

[Blue 5]

I found the link!

FOR FAIR USE/RESEARCH PURPOSES

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/15/us-lockheed-fusion-idUSKCN0I41EM20141015

Lockheed says makes breakthrough on fusion energy project

(Reuters) - Lockheed Martin Corp said on Wednesday it had made a technological breakthrough in developing a power source based on nuclear fusion, and the first reactors, small enough to fit on the back of a truck, could be ready for use in a decade.

Tom McGuire, who heads the project, said he and a small team had been working on fusion energy at Lockheed's secretive Skunk Works for about four years, but were now going public to find potential partners in industry and government for their work.

Initial work demonstrated the feasibility of building a 100-megawatt reactor measuring seven feet by 10 feet, which could fit on the back of a large truck, and is about 10 times smaller than current reactors, McGuire told reporters.

In a statement, the company, the Pentagon's largest supplier, said it would build and test a compact fusion reactor in less than a year, and build a prototype in five years.

In recent years, Lockheed has gotten increasingly involved in a variety of alternate energy projects, including several ocean energy projects, as it looks to offset a decline in U.S. and European military spending.

Lockheed's work on fusion energy could help in developing new power sources amid increasing global conflicts over energy, and as projections show there will be a 40 percent to 50 percent increase in energy use over the next generation, McGuire said.

If it proves feasible, Lockheed's work would mark a key breakthrough in a field that scientists have long eyed as promising, but which has not yet yielded viable power systems. The effort seeks to harness the energy released during nuclear fusion, when atoms combine into more stable forms.

"We can make a big difference on the energy front," McGuire said, noting Lockheed's 60 years of research on nuclear fusion as a potential energy source that is safer and more efficient than current reactors based on nuclear fission.

Lockheed sees the project as part of a comprehensive approach to solving global energy and climate change problems.

Compact nuclear fusion would produce far less waste than coal-powered plants since it would use deuterium-tritium fuel, which can generate nearly 10 million times more energy than the same amount of fossil fuels, the company said.

Ultra-dense deuterium, an isotope of hydrogen, is found in the earth's oceans, and tritium is made from natural lithium deposits.

It said future reactors could use a different fuel and eliminate radioactive waste completely.

McGuire said the company had several patents pending for the work and was looking for partners in academia, industry and among government laboratories to advance the work.

Lockheed said it had shown it could complete a design, build and test it in as little as a year, which should produce an operational reactor in 10 years, McGuire said. A small reactor could power a U.S. Navy warship, and eliminate the need for other fuel sources that pose logistical challenges.

U.S. submarines and aircraft carriers run on nuclear power, but they have large fission reactors on board that have to be replaced on a regular cycle.

"What makes our project really interesting and feasible is that timeline as a potential solution," McGuire said.

Lockheed shares fell 0.6 percent to $175.02 amid a broad market selloff.


(Editing by Jeffrey Benkoe)

 

[Richard]

Mars can never be colonised, all you need do is read up on the basic characteristics of the planet then 5 minutes later you will realise why, it would be much easier making the at present uninhabitable areas of Earth suitable for human life.

 

[Housecarl]

Without being too "woo-woo" this does make me wonder simply from a sci-fi fans perspective if the Elites have also realized that one of the only ways to deal with some of the really serious problems on our planet right now would be have at least local space colonization (or even people aspiring to it) as a flow-off safety valve; especially to deal with the most highly ambitious and adventure minded of "the underlings?" It has seemed ludicrous to me that in 50 years almost no serious space exploration with a mind towards colonization has taken place; of course the other new situation is that the Chinese are ready to do this on their own and this may be forcing the West forward in this direction. My hunch is the basic technology (at least on paper) has been there for a very long time but the will to implement it has not been there. Then there is the problem that this sort of thing is dangerous and the American public (especially Americans) have for years seen any space accident as a set back that stops programs for years, as opposed to the attitude of declaring the fallen to be national heroes; grant the families a modest pension and fete them as The Brave and The Good with the best seats at football games (along with families who lose loved ones defending the US in War); and after a brief review (usually a few months) to determine what went wrong getting back in the saddle and back to work.

Exploration of new worlds from crossing the sea to Australia 50,000 years ago to colonizing Mars isn't "safe," but it seems to be in human genetics to keep doing this sort of thing and trying to breed it out of people hasn't worked so well; much better to get started on the future and the Chinese (and probably India, Brazil and Russia know this). The US and Europe can get their hind ends in gear or be left in the Terran dust.

Studies were done on this using leveraged Apollo technology going back to the early 1970s by NASA Ames Research Center and have been continued to be worked upon. Most of it is available on line.

As that Russian meteor real close call from 2013 showed, there is a need to get an early warning system and interceptor capability to deal with Earth orbit crossing asteroids.

Dr. Gerald O'Neill's, and others, concepts for space colonization going hand in hand with the construction of solar power transmitting satellites, mining the Moon and asteroids for materials with current oil prices and new nuclear power concepts are still a way out but IMHO could eventually become the route for it.

 

[Melodi]

Mars can never be colonised, all you need do is read up on the basic characteristics of the planet then 5 minutes later you will realise why, it would be much easier making the at present uninhabitable areas of Earth suitable for human life.

Well, that's been said about everything from flying machines to humans living in the Antarctic in the past - you could be right but my hunch is that while "Terraforming" ideas our still way-way out there; people living in domed cities and farming under enclosed shelters will simply depend on the soil, microbes, possible residual life (that may be dangerous to humans etc) but as a lot of the early Sci-Fi pioneers noted, the asteroids have a lot of commercial value. While governments or public-private (even military in the case of China etal) may be used to get into the Solar System; corporations are going to get excited if they start smelling serious money; Mars at the very least is likely to be an way-station for folks spending months or more likely years mining asteroids inside of small ships. After that, even a totally enclosed bubble port would look good as a free-trade zone/rest stop; and once there people are very likely to figure out how to get further out onto the planet.

From my following of recent science, one big reason the focus is now on Mars (if a quicker way can be managed to get there) is that Mars has a lot more natural water than the moon (the moon as a little but mostly at the poles) and seems to have been a fully functioning planet with real oceans and probably at least plant life at one time (point one is certain, the life thing is still under investigation) before something (possible a collision or near miss from another space body) tore off the atmosphere. The most recent missions have located what seems to be HUGE amounts of frozen water just below the surface that may still flow at times during the Martian Summer and some evidence of continued geological activity.

All of this makes Mars while not an ideal "second Earth" at last a lot more likely to made at least moderately habitable with restrictions; at least no worse than the Polar substations on Earth and potentially a lot more than that - no one will be quite sure until the first brave humans (Chinese, Russians, Americans or whomever) actually land there and take a serious look around from the safety of their landing pods and Martian rovers.

And again, China is GOING To do this unless they are blown up in a third world war or have some other unforeseen collapse that removes their capability to do so; I think they are also somewhat interested in Moon Colonies especially as a mater of what they consider national defense; a lot of authors have speculated just what would be needed as far as weapons on the moon to pose a real threat to those on Earth and not all are intended for laughs like Iron Sky (one of my favorite movies - but intended as comedy none the less).

 

[Housecarl]

Mars can never be colonised, all you need do is read up on the basic characteristics of the planet then 5 minutes later you will realise why, it would be much easier making the at present uninhabitable areas of Earth suitable for human life.

Very true, between radiation, water, and gravity its easier to set up on Antarctica, the middle of the Sahara or what's been suggested for ocean "floating" islands.

IMHO, if we go to Mars, it will be more akin to the research stations we have on Antarctica now than the full blown "colonization" that's often discussed.

 

[Dennis Olson]

Mars can never be colonised, all you need do is read up on the basic characteristics of the planet then 5 minutes later you will realise why, it would be much easier making the at present uninhabitable areas of Earth suitable for human life.

What, you mean like Detroit?

 

[Housecarl]

What, you mean like Detroit?

Actually Dennis, the city of Detroit is a real good example.

Infrastructure, water, power and transportation, in place, surrounding area is no where near as economically smashed/depressed. Most of the issues can be really be boiled down/traced to the failure of the local political culture.

I was talking with a coworker last week about the changes that are going to be happening in San Francisco with the internet companies moving in "gentrifying" the place and the likely changes in city politics that it is going to eventually create.

 

[Jubilation T. Cornpone]

Mars can never be colonised, all you need do is read up on the basic characteristics of the planet then 5 minutes later you will realise why, it would be much easier making the at present uninhabitable areas of Earth suitable for human life.

Of course not. It would be a suicide mission, and for what?
I guess we can't find enough ridiculous things that we can
spend money that we don't have on.
It will never happen, but the fantasy that it will,
will keep many scientists and engineers off the welfare rolls
for decades. So I guess that's the silver lining.

 

[Rastech]

Mars would make an ideal base and distribution hub for exploiting the resources of the Asteroid Belt.

Even the freighter routes round the Solar System were worked out in the 1960's, as was most of the basic technology needed to do it all.

I'd rather live between the planets, than on one. There's loads of raw materials up there ready, to be able to make very good habitat, along with plenty of water.

 

[alchemike]

I've never really understood how a thrust driven craft could even move once it's outside of the earth's influence.
Doesn't thrust require something to push against??? What does it push against in interplanetary space???
I always thought electromagnetic propulsion of some sort would be the only way to move in space.

o)<

mike

 

[TerryK]

I've never really understood how a thrust driven craft could even move once it's outside of the earth's influence.
Doesn't thrust require something to push against??? What does it push against in interplanetary space???
I always thought electromagnetic propulsion of some sort would be the only way to move in space.
o)<
mike

NO!!!! it doesn't.
for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. So shoot some rocket fuel exhaust out the back at real high speed and you move forward.
You are in effect pushing against the exhaust gasses.
One of Newton's laws.

 

[The Mountain]

I've never really understood how a thrust driven craft could even move once it's outside of the earth's influence.
Doesn't thrust require something to push against??? What does it push against in interplanetary space???
I always thought electromagnetic propulsion of some sort would be the only way to move in space.

o)<

mike

EM propulsion *is* thrust, just not chemical. And no, any kind of rocket doesn't need anything external to "push" against. It's basic Newtonian physics: for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Like the recoil from a gun, the thing the thrust is "pushing" against it the vehicle itself.

 

[TerryK]

Our rockets today are nothing more than pimped out versions of the thousand year old Chinese rockets. The burn chemical fuels to produce a lot of exhaust gasses that push it through space.
Chemical energy is very low energy.
Rocket propulsion efficiency is measured in what is called specific impulse.
Specific impulse of chemical rockets is limited to < about 400 sec.
Specific impluse of electrical propulsion such as ion or plasma is measured in the thousands of sec.

 

[TheSearcher]

Well, that's been said about everything from flying machines to humans living in the Antarctic in the past - you could be right but my hunch is that while "Terraforming" ideas our still way-way out there; people living in domed cities and farming under enclosed shelters will simply depend on the soil, microbes, possible residual life (that may be dangerous to humans etc) but as a lot of the early Sci-Fi pioneers noted, the asteroids have a lot of commercial value. While governments or public-private (even military in the case of China etal) may be used to get into the Solar System; corporations are going to get excited if they start smelling serious money; Mars at the very least is likely to be an way-station for folks spending months or more likely years mining asteroids inside of small ships. After that, even a totally enclosed bubble port would look good as a free-trade zone/rest stop; and once there people are very likely to figure out how to get further out onto the planet.

From my following of recent science, one big reason the focus is now on Mars (if a quicker way can be managed to get there) is that Mars has a lot more natural water than the moon (the moon as a little but mostly at the poles) and seems to have been a fully functioning planet with real oceans and probably at least plant life at one time (point one is certain, the life thing is still under investigation) before something (possible a collision or near miss from another space body) tore off the atmosphere. The most recent missions have located what seems to be HUGE amounts of frozen water just below the surface that may still flow at times during the Martian Summer and some evidence of continued geological activity.

All of this makes Mars while not an ideal "second Earth" at last a lot more likely to made at least moderately habitable with restrictions; at least no worse than the Polar substations on Earth and potentially a lot more than that - no one will be quite sure until the first brave humans (Chinese, Russians, Americans or whomever) actually land there and take a serious look around from the safety of their landing pods and Martian rovers.

And again, China is GOING To do this unless they are blown up in a third world war or have some other unforeseen collapse that removes their capability to do so; I think they are also somewhat interested in Moon Colonies especially as a mater of what they consider national defense; a lot of authors have speculated just what would be needed as far as weapons on the moon to pose a real threat to those on Earth and not all are intended for laughs like Iron Sky (one of my favorite movies - but intended as comedy none the less).

Very well said. For asteroid resource exploitation, Mars and the asteroids make a much better pairing of locations than Earth and Asteroids, for two reasons: Travel distance and gravitational pull. The main asteroid belt is just flat closer to Mars, period. And the energy requirements for leaving the Martian system is much lower, as the gravity is so much less. Setting up a transport hub at Mars, and really early on, at one or both of its moons, makes for a good waystation to send resources back to Earth.

As for the moon, well, people are going to continue laughing off the military utility of that high ground until someone, likely China, claims it as territory. Then the wailing and gnashing of teeth will begin "Oh, why oh why did we let this happen"?

 

[Richard]

What, you mean like Detroit?

no on second thoughts it will be easier to colonise Mars or the Sahara Desert

 

[Haybails]

I see that this was posted on "April Fools Day". I'm not saying it's a joke, just curious if it was a joke or not. 39 days just seems amazing to me (but, then again, I'm not a rocket scientist).


HB

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...ies-develop-super-fast-deep-space-engine.html

Could we get to Mars in 39 DAYS? Nasa selects companies to develop super fast deep-space engine
Company in Texas has been asked to develop its revolutionary engine
Ad Astra's Vasimr engine could apparently get to Mars in 39 days
It is one of 12 advanced technology projects to be funded by Nasa
Others include new types of habitation and small deep space satellites

By Jonathan O'Callaghan for MailOnline

Published: 09:50 EST, 1 April 2015 | Updated: 21:53 EST, 1 April 2015
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Comments 209

Nasa has selected a variety of companies to work on projects to create advanced space technologies, including faster methods of propulsion.

Other projects to be worked on include improved habitats for humans, and small satellites to explore deep space.

And one of the companies in the 12 Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextStep) says they have an engine that could get humans to Mars in just 39 days. <snipped for brevity>

 

[TheSearcher]

I see that this was posted on "April Fools Day". I'm not saying it's a joke, just curious if it was a joke or not. 39 days just seems amazing to me (but, then again, I'm not a rocket scientist).


HB

I know for a fact that this is not a joke.

 

[Richard]

Well, that's been said about everything from flying machines to humans living in the Antarctic in the past - you could be right but my hunch is that while "Terraforming" ideas our still way-way out there; people living in domed cities and farming under enclosed shelters will simply depend on the soil, microbes, possible residual life (that may be dangerous to humans etc) but as a lot of the early Sci-Fi pioneers noted, the asteroids have a lot of commercial value. While governments or public-private (even military in the case of China etal) may be used to get into the Solar System; corporations are going to get excited if they start smelling serious money; Mars at the very least is likely to be an way-station for folks spending months or more likely years mining asteroids inside of small ships. After that, even a totally enclosed bubble port would look good as a free-trade zone/rest stop; and once there people are very likely to figure out how to get further out onto the planet.

From my following of recent science, one big reason the focus is now on Mars (if a quicker way can be managed to get there) is that Mars has a lot more natural water than the moon (the moon as a little but mostly at the poles) and seems to have been a fully functioning planet with real oceans and probably at least plant life at one time (point one is certain, the life thing is still under investigation) before something (possible a collision or near miss from another space body) tore off the atmosphere. The most recent missions have located what seems to be HUGE amounts of frozen water just below the surface that may still flow at times during the Martian Summer and some evidence of continued geological activity.

All of this makes Mars while not an ideal "second Earth" at last a lot more likely to made at least moderately habitable with restrictions; at least no worse than the Polar substations on Earth and potentially a lot more than that - no one will be quite sure until the first brave humans (Chinese, Russians, Americans or whomever) actually land there and take a serious look around from the safety of their landing pods and Martian rovers.

And again, China is GOING To do this unless they are blown up in a third world war or have some other unforeseen collapse that removes their capability to do so; I think they are also somewhat interested in Moon Colonies especially as a mater of what they consider national defense; a lot of authors have speculated just what would be needed as far as weapons on the moon to pose a real threat to those on Earth and not all are intended for laughs like Iron Sky (one of my favorite movies - but intended as comedy none the less).

Melodi, I don't think you've even remotely considered the difficulties of setting up a colony on Mars, the conditions are far worse than Antarctica or the Sahara, undersea or mountainous areas of earth, the main problem is the almost compete lack of an atmosphere not to mention the monumental cost and difficulty of sending equipment to Mars.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Mars

 

[TheSearcher]

Melodi, I don't think you've even remotely considered the difficulties of setting up a colony on Mars, the conditions are far worse than Antarctica or the Sahara, undersea or mountainous areas of earth, the main problem is the almost compete lack of an atmosphere not to mention the monumental cost and difficulty of sending equipment to Mars.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Mars

People live underwater for months at a time, the crews of the space station, the shuttle, the Russian stations and Soyuz, and the Moon have all survived and performed their duties without the benefit of an indigenous atmosphere. They take it all with them. On Mars, we have copious materials to make whatever oxygen is needed to breathe, we just need to bring nitrogen to keep oxidation at normal levels for safety reasons. Your boogeyman is weak.


We already know how to do this sort of thing, it's just a matter of resources and will.

 

[The Mountain]

People live underwater for months at a time, the crews of the space station, the shuttle, the Russian stations and Soyuz, and the Moon have all survived and performed their duties without the benefit of an indigenous atmosphere. They take it all with them. On Mars, we have copious materials to make whatever oxygen is needed to breathe, we just need to bring nitrogen to keep oxidation at normal levels for safety reasons. Your boogeyman is weak.


We already know how to do this sort of thing, it's just a matter of resources and will.

Compressors, heaters, water, and seeds. That alone would provide O2, though it would take a little while to get up to usable quantities. Adding in humans increases the availability of moisture and CO2. Having gravity, as well as some degree of atmospheric pressure would be a luxury.

 

[FaithfulSkeptic]

Well, that's been said about everything from flying machines to humans living in the Antarctic in the past - you could be right but my hunch is that while "Terraforming" ideas our still way-way out there; people living in domed cities and farming under enclosed shelters will simply depend on the soil, microbes, possible residual life ...

... and finding ways to overcome that pesky little problem of mismatched gravity. Unless, of course, we can genetically reengineer the human body to cope. Hey, as long as we're talking science fiction ...

 

[Tom McDowell]

Our Engine

http://www.adastrarocket.com/aarc/VASIMR

The Variable Specific Impulse Magnetoplasma Rocket (VASIMR®) engine is a new type of electric thruster with many unique advantages. In a VASIMR® engine, gas such as argon, xenon, or hydrogen is injected into a tube surrounded by a magnet and a series of two radio wave (RF) couplers The couplers turn cold gas into superheated plasma and the rocket’s magnetic nozzle converts the plasma thermal motion into a directed jet.

Principles of Operation

The primary purpose of the first RF coupler is to convert gas into plasma by ionizing it, or knocking an electron loose from each gas atom. It is known as the helicon section, because its coupler is shaped such that it can ionize gas by launching helical waves. Helicon couplers are a common method of generating plasma. After the helicon section, the gas is now "cold plasma", even though its temperature is greater than the surface of the Sun (5800 K). The plasma is a mixture of electrons and ions (the atoms they were stripped from). The newly formed electrons and ions carry charge and may then be contained by a magnetic field shielding the rocket core from the plasma. The second coupler is called the Ion Cyclotron Heating (ICH) section. ICH is a technique used in fusion experiments to heat plasma to temperatures on the order of those in the Sun's core (10 million K). The ICH waves push only on the ions as they orbit around the magnetic field lines resulting in accelerated motion and higher temperature.

Thermal motion of ions around the magnetic field lines is mostly perpendicular to the rocket's direction of travel and must be converted into directed flow to produce thrust. The rocket uses a magnetic nozzle to convert the ions orbital motion into useful linear momentum resulting in ion speeds on the order of 180,000 km/hr (112,000 mph).
VASIMR® Engine Compared to Other Electric Thrusters

The VASIMR® engine has three important features that distinguish it from other plasma propulsion systems:

The VASIMR® engine has the ability to more widely vary its exhaust parameters (thrust and specific impulse) in order to optimize mission requirements resulting in the lowest trip time with the highest delivered payload for a given fuel load.

The VASIMR® engine uses electromagnetic (RF) waves to create and energize the plasma within its core. In this way, the VASIMR® engine has no physical material electrodes in contact with the hot plasma. The lack of electrodes results in greater reliability, longer life, and enables a much higher power density than competing ion and Hall thruster.

The VASIMR® engine is able to process a large amount of power, meaning that it can then generate a larger amount of thrust. This larger thrust capability promises to make the VASIMR® engine useful for moving large payloads around low Earth orbit, transferring payloads from the Earth to the Moon, and transferring payloads from the Earth to the outer solar system. The VASIMR® technology is also highly scalable, meaning that higher power versions can be easily designed; making human missions powered by electric propulsion a reality
Power Sources

One of the key challenges in developing the VASIMR® engine is supplying power to it. A high-power electric thruster requires a lot of electricity, and generating that in space may require some engineering innovations. Below is a discussion of two options.
Solar Power

Solar power can be efficiently used for near-Earth VASIMR® missions, such as drag compensation for space stations, lunar cargo transport, and in-space refueling. Recent advances in solar array technology show a significant increase in solar power utilization (up to an order of magnitude).

Nuclear power

A nuclear reactor has a very large amount of energy per unit mass; a reactor core has the highest energy density of any useful energy source on earth. This high energy density and scalability make nuclear reactors an ideal power source in space. A nuclear-electric powered spacecraft could dramatically shorten human transit times between planets and propel robotic cargo missions with a very large payload. Trip times and payload mass are major limitations of conventional and nuclear thermal rockets because of their inherently low specific impulse (less than 1000 seconds). A VASIMR® propelled, nuclear-electric powered spacecraft promises to make fast human missions a reality.

===
First Flight Unit

http://www.adastrarocket.com/aarc/VF-200

The VF-200TM engine is the first flight unit of the VASIMR® engine. It will be tested on the International Space Station (ISS) where the thrust and performance can be measured without the limitations of ground-based space simulation chambers. The VF-200 will consit of two 100 kW thruster units side-by-side.

The VF-200TM engine is being designed to reach the steady-state operating temperature to prove that it is capable of operating indefinitely for future missions. It will use electrical power from the ISS to charge a large battery pack capable of powering the thrusters for approximately 15 minutes at full power. This project will serve as a “pathfinder” for the ISS National Laboratory by demonstrating a new class of larger, more complex science and technology, payloads.

Concept of the VASIMR® Aurora ISS payload, including VF-200TM engine, mounted on the International Space Station

===

How Fast Could (Should) We Go to Mars?

http://www.adastrarocket.com/aarc/NEP-Mars

Comparing Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) with the Nuclear Thermal Rocket (NTR) and Chemical Rocket for Sustainable 1-year human Mars round-trip mission

The human habitat must allow good health and strength for surface work on arrival: 62,000 kg per DRA 5.0. Helio transfers must be fast enough to allow at least 30 days on the surface.

Propellant requirements practically eliminate all options except for nuclear electric.


NEP vs NTR for a long-stay DRA-5.0-like mission. In flight round-trip mission time from low Earth orbit (LEO)

Reducing the round-trip in-flight time on a human mission to Mars reduces the radiation dose to the crew (vertical arrow), which increases with trip time. The green curves show the total round-trip in-flight time vs the NEP rocket’s power for various values of α ranging from 1 to 10 (α is a measure in kg/kW of how “light” the nuclear reactor and engine package could be). For each α there is a minimum trip time and a corresponding power level that satisfies the mission requirements. The horizontal red dashed line shows round-trip time using an NTR. Nuclear electric space reactors with α <10 do not yet exist, but compelling designs have been proposed by recognized experts worldwide . These must be developed to enable fast missions to Mars and a robust human exploration of the solar system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IdcOWVm_Ov4

NEP-VASIMR Human Mission to Mars
Published on Aug 14, 2013

30 MW VASIMR human mission from LEO to Mars was designed, assuming DRA 5.0 payload and initial mass requirements (http://www.adastrarocket.com/aarc/NEP)

From the link via the OP:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...ies-develop-super-fast-deep-space-engine.html

HOW LONG WOULD A MANNED MARS MISSION TAKE?

Owing to the orbits of Earth and Mars, there are specific windows of opportunity when a mission can take place.

Our planets come as close to each other as 33.9 million miles (54.6 million km), but can be as distant as 250 million miles (400 million km).

For this reason spacecraft to Mars, such as the Curiosity rover, have to launch in certain windows when the planets are aligned.

The next window is open from January 2016 to April 2016, and will see the launch of two more missions to the red planet.

For a future manned mission, they will need to launch out in one of the windows and return in another.

Just getting there will take up to nine months. The astronauts will then be there waiting for a year until they can come back, again taking up to nine months - a total of around three years.

Whether an engine such as Vasimr could shorten the time it would take to cover the distance, though, remains to be seen.

===

The Video:

NASA astronaut explains science behind Vasimr engine

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHXBe4NneHA

NASA astronaut explains science behind Vasimr engine
nigthy@idiot
nigthy@idiot
4
70 views
Published on Apr 1, 2015

NASA astronaut explains science behind... - YouTube
Video for NASA astronaut explains science behind Vasimr engine▶ 6:30
www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzZoz9ylB-4
3 mins ago - Uploaded by DmailTEam
NASA astronaut Franklin Chang-Diaz explains science behind Vasimr engine. NASA astronaut Franklin ...
NASA astronaut explains science behind Vasimr engine ...
www.dailymail.co.uk/.../sciencetech/.../*NASA-astronaut-explains-science...
8 hours ago - NASA astronaut Franklin Chang-Diaz explains science behind Vasimr engine.
Nasa to develop engine that could get to Mars in ... - Daily Mail
www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/.../Coul*d-Mars-39-DAYS-Nasa-selects-co...
3 hours ago - Nasa has selected a variety of companies to work on advanced space projects, ... NASA astronaut explains science behind Vasimr engine ...
NASA astronaut explains science behind Vasimr engine
www.video11.com/science/nasa-astronaut-e*xplains-science-behind-vasim...
2 mins ago - NASA astronaut Franklin Chang-Diaz explains science behind Vasimr engine.
The 123,000 MPH Plasma Engine That Could Finally Take ...
www.popsci.com/.../123000-mph-plasma-eng*ine-could-finally-take-astr...
Oct 13, 2010 - A 200-kilowatt prototype of the Vasimr engine test-fires inside a ... wanted to be an astronaut at the age of seven, when his mother explained the ... He got a letter back saying that to fly with NASA, he must be an American citizen. ... His plasma-physics doctorate, his singular focus on spaceship engines, his ...
Plasma Rocket Could Travel to Mars in 39 Days - Phys.org
phys.org › Astronomy & Space › Space Exploration
Oct 6, 2009 - A 10- to 20-megawatt VASIMR engine could propel human missions to Mars in ..... The key here is that Franklin C-D was one of NASA's star Astronauts (5 ... What's not explained here is the physics of where this seeming free ...
Former Astronaut Launches Kickstarter Bid for Plasma ...
www.space.com/22258-plasma-mars-rocket-d*ocumentary-kickstarter.html
Aug 6, 2013 - But as Ad Astra's Kickstarter video explains, VASIMR could also bring greater ... Best Space Books and Science Fiction of All Time ... NASA Astronaut Already Feels at Home in Space as 1-Year Journey Begins ... for quite a while an up to now, there are no actual space based versions of his engine working.
Veteran astronaut seeks funding to boost plasma engines ...
sen.com/news/veteran-astronaut-seeks-fun*ding-to-boost-plasma-engines
Ad Astra Rocket Company, which is headed by a former NASA astronaut who shares ... A diagram explains the basics of how the VASIMR plasma engine works.
NOVA | Plasma Rockets - PBS
www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/plasma-rocke*ts.html
Jan 19, 2011 - With a "small sun” for an engine, a new rocket might be able to zip us to ... What if astronauts could take an express voyage to Mars—one that ... A new rocket called VASIMR, powered by a million-degree plasma instead of traditional ...... Hear David Morrison of NASA's Lunar Science Institute explain why ...
Ion engine could one day power 39-day trips to Mars - New ...
www.newscientist.com/.../dn17476-ion-eng*ine-could-one-day-power-39...
Jul 24, 2009 - There's a growing chorus of calls to send astronauts to Mars rather than ... have already used ion engines, including NASA's Dawn spacecraft, ... But a new engine, called VASIMR (Variable Specific Impulse ... Scientists at Ad Astra began tests of the engine's second stage ... Margaret Boden explains why ...
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9


===


.

 

[TerryK]

I see that this was posted on "April Fools Day". I'm not saying it's a joke, just curious if it was a joke or not. 39 days just seems amazing to me (but, then again, I'm not a rocket scientist).
HB

Constant or long term low thrust is much more effective at achieving high velocities than most people realize.
The astronauts on the shuttle experiences around 3 Gs for a few minutes during liftoff , Those on Apollo or Gemini experienced around 6 Gs for a couple of minutes I believe.
However a constant thrust that provided 1G of acceleration for half the trip to Mars with 1G of deacceleration for the last half, would result in a Mars trip of about 2 days.
1G for 24 hours is beyond our technology right now, but .1 g might be possible with this new propulsion system.
Even .01 g would truly open up the solar system.

 

[TerryK]

... and finding ways to overcome that pesky little problem of mismatched gravity. Unless, of course, we can genetically reengineer the human body to cope. Hey, as long as we're talking science fiction ...

Actually Mars gravity is about 38% of earths so it wouldn't be a problem at all for humans.
After several generations you might find humans growing taller and with weaker bones because of the light gravity.
In the mean time we could jump almost 3 times as high or as far as on earth, and lift almost 3 times the mass.
A bullet would also travel quite a bit further on Mars than on Earth. After a thousand years or so Mars people would be so adapted to Mars gravity that they probably couldn't live on Earth.

The atmosphere on Mars is 95% carbon dioxide compared to .04 % on earth, and the average atmospheric pressure on Mars is about .1 psi compared to around 14.7 on earth so humans would need to live in a pressurized environment. With a little pressurization it should be easy to grow plant life on Mars which would in turn produce Oxygen.

 

[Haybails]

As mentioned above, I'm not a rocket scientist, nor do I have any specific knowledge about surviving off-planet. I just wanted to mention that just last week I read the relatively new book "The Martian" (by Andy Weir) and found it a fascinating fictional account of some of the struggles and solutions of this hypothetical astronaut's survival after being left on Mars.

It contains some quite thorough reality based (and I presume - or so I've been told - scientifically sound) solutions to some potential troubles encountered while trying to survive on Mars.


HB

 

[FaithfulSkeptic]

Actually Mars gravity is about 38% of earths so it wouldn't be a problem at all for humans.
After several generations you might find humans growing taller and with weaker bones because of the light gravity.
In the mean time we could jump almost 3 times as high or as far as on earth, and lift almost 3 times the mass.
A bullet would also travel quite a bit further on Mars than on Earth. After a thousand years or so Mars people would be so adapted to Mars gravity that they probably couldn't live on Earth.

The atmosphere on Mars is 95% carbon dioxide compared to .04 % on earth, and the average atmospheric pressure on Mars is about .1 psi compared to around 14.7 on earth so humans would need to live in a pressurized environment. With a little pressurization it should be easy to grow plant life on Mars which would in turn produce Oxygen.

Even staying there for a couple of years would create some serious problems for returning to earth, unless of course you'd keep up with a stringent exercise program. I suppose if you wore a "heavy" suit all the time that might help, but there's other muscles ( heart ) that would be difficult to overload for compensation.

In the end, it's fascinating to think about, but really ... what's the point? If we want to test our abilities to live in extreme conditions and hardship, we have plenty of available locations right here on earth: Death Valley, Antarctic, Sahara desert, Detroit.

 

[TheSearcher]

Even staying there for a couple of years would create some serious problems for returning to earth, unless of course you'd keep up with a stringent exercise program. I suppose if you wore a "heavy" suit all the time that might help, but there's other muscles ( heart ) that would be difficult to overload for compensation.

In the end, it's fascinating to think about, but really ... what's the point? If we want to test our abilities to live in extreme conditions and hardship, we have plenty of available locations right here on earth: Death Valley, Antarctic, Sahara desert, Detroit.

There are a host of reasons:

MASSIVE natural resources exist in the asteroid belt alone.
Living in multiple places in the solar system makes our species a harder target in terms of extinction.
Living in extreme environments brings back dividends for living in less harsh environments.
Exploration is a human instinct.
Being able to give the Earth the finger and leave is the ultimate expression of the libertarian existence.

 

[Melodi]

Melodi, I don't think you've even remotely considered the difficulties of setting up a colony on Mars, the conditions are far worse than Antarctica or the Sahara, undersea or mountainous areas of earth, the main problem is the almost compete lack of an atmosphere not to mention the monumental cost and difficulty of sending equipment to Mars.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Mars

I think you don't know me or my history very well - or that of many of my geek and engineer friends who are trained in the hard sciences - you said NEVER Happen; I say this particular technique may or may not work but humans are capable of facing and meeting great challenges. Some things are more likely that others (interstellar travel is a lot more iffy unless the techniques for "folding" space actually pan out and/or Warp drive turns out to actually be possible and no one is sure on that one yet) but simple constructing artificial living conditions has already been done in Space for limited periods of time. What no one knows for sure is how long people can actually hang out there before they have a lot of difficulty, so far in zero G, there are a lot of nasty effects after a year or so; which is another reason why space colonies on actual planets, even enclosed ones on larger bodies make a lot of practical sense.

 

[Faroe]

I think you don't know me or my history very well - or that of many of my geek and engineer friends who are trained in the hard sciences - you said NEVER Happen; I say this particular technique may or may not work but humans are capable of facing and meeting great challenges. Some things are more likely that others (interstellar travel is a lot more iffy unless the techniques for "folding" space actually pan out and/or Warp drive turns out to actually be possible and no one is sure on that one yet) but simple constructing artificial living conditions has already been done in Space for limited periods of time. What no one knows for sure is how long people can actually hang out there before they have a lot of difficulty, so far in zero G, there are a lot of nasty effects after a year or so; which is another reason why space colonies on actual planets, even enclosed ones on larger bodies make a lot of practical sense.

I actually think colonization is already going on. We have a "breakaway civilization" that has been involved in this stuff since at least WWII.

 

[Richard]

I think you don't know me or my history very well - or that of many of my geek and engineer friends who are trained in the hard sciences - you said NEVER Happen; I say this particular technique may or may not work but humans are capable of facing and meeting great challenges. Some things are more likely that others (interstellar travel is a lot more iffy unless the techniques for "folding" space actually pan out and/or Warp drive turns out to actually be possible and no one is sure on that one yet) but simple constructing artificial living conditions has already been done in Space for limited periods of time. What no one knows for sure is how long people can actually hang out there before they have a lot of difficulty, so far in zero G, there are a lot of nasty effects after a year or so; which is another reason why space colonies on actual planets, even enclosed ones on larger bodies make a lot of practical sense.

Nothing in your history or you will make absolutely any difference to the points I make, which are based on scientific and intellectual reality rather that the fantasy world which you inhabit in your writings, everything you say on this topic is absolute garbage and based on your wishful thinking and star trek type scripts, in fact this post of yours is the worst I have ever seen. Who are your engineer friends, you don't have them this is part of your fantasy world, you make so many assertions based on a great mass of so called "expert" friends that you know personally in every field possible, that I simply do not believe you are anything than a complete fantasist, living in a world of your own imagination.

Prove to me by scientifically proven analyses that life on Mars is remotely possible.

OK what is your history and what is YOU and how do I find out what it is? Sources required? Let me know your history and I will be able to find out one way or t'other.

Quite honestly you do not have geek or engineering friends trained in the hard sciences, this is part of your fantastic justification for your posts which are based on having esoteric knowledge of all subjects of supposed ultimate knowledge justified by this incredible network of experts that are unchallengeable.