Boeing manages to launch starliner

[Suff]

Suff you throw out fantasy figures as if they are real - 200 launch days, 840 a year, 60,000 launches, multiple sea launches...

I am trying to give facts based on science, physics, astronomy, astrobiology, astrobotany etc. My points all stand, yours are no more than "what ifs".

OK, "what if" we had Kirk's Warp Factor Five? We could go to the Delta quadrant and kick the 5h1t out of the Cardassians, is that it? Mind you, the Romulans could come in and cloak / uncloak and screw things up.

Space travel, eh?

Real life is not Star Trek. Well I hope not. I have friend in the Theta region and she is not pleased.

Thing is this is all rooted in solid science and engineering. The problem is that you have accepted the last 50 years of doing virtually sod all except build a space station and send a few automated probes to other planets is all we can do or will ever achieve.

SpaceX comes along with the express mission of tearing down that fallacy and building a new paradigm. First they had to get to orbit. Falcon1, nearly broke the company. Second they had to get to orbit and make money. Falcon9 and NASA contracts for ISS resupply. Then they had to cut the price and increase the speed and reliability. Enter landing boosters and re-using them over and over again. Then they needed a real cash cow, not the rather unreliable government largess over the ISS. Enter Starlink and internet services which are the next best thing to science fiction.

This year SpaceX aims to launch 140 rockets to space. They are probably going to make it. These are rockets which mostly need to land their boosters on barges and take around 2 weeks to turn around and launch again.

Enter Starship. Launch from the tower, let the ship go, land on the tower again. Ship goes to LEO, does what it does then comes back and lands on the tower.

This is pure SF stuff at any other time.

You think that for SpaceX the logistics of marshalling ships and fuel and resources for 2 years ready for a 2 week launch window to Mars is unachievable? Everything they have done so far was unachievable. Honestly what is one more?

Thing is I will see this in my lifetime, given I don't expire in the next decade. I don't just need to be convinced, I will actually get to see it.

The cadence tells no lies. First launch of Starship, trashed the launch mount, lost the ship and booster in a tumble and it didn't blow up when told to. 1 year to launch. Second launch, Booster blew up after failing to boost back, ship made it to orbit and lost control, blew up. 4 months to the third launch. Third launch, Booster does everything correctly but piles in at 1000km/h instead of hovering, ship makes it to orbit and starts rolling, burns up on re-entry. Two months to the Fourth launch, booster does everything correctly and soft lands, ship does everything correctly and nearly, but does not, burn up on reentry.

Fifth launch will be around 1 month after they strip off the thousands of tiles and redo the thermal protection. They will try a booster catch on the 5th launch. If everything goes as expected with the catch and the re-entry the following launch could be one or two weeks.

Now that Artemis and SLS again? September 2025 isn't it?

Space is not just about science, it is about extreme engineering. SpaceX has it in spades.

[Workingman]

I mentioned Artemis because it is a joint venture between NASA, ESA, JAXA, DLR, ASI, ISA, CSA and SpaceX. I know that there is a lot of old stuff in it such as the SLS and Orion capsule. However, it also shows the difficulty of getting people on and off another body in the Solar System (not just the Moon) and it is the system the best scientists and engineers could come up with for them to study the overall problem(s) in great detail. I assume they know their stuff. I will also assume that in the future a Starship and not SLS/Orion will be used to transfer crews to the HLS and use it to go back and forth to the Moonbase.

BTW, the Starship HLS is a modified Starship, they have exactly the same physical dimensions and max thrust.

Now, if I also assume 200 launch days per year I am wondering what will be put into LEO and why? It will not be humans sitting up there for nearly two years before another nine month space flight as there are just too many unknowns as this article explains. I know, it's from NASA and you do not like NASA, but it is worth a read.

I have also not accepted anything, that's why I keep asking questions. Unfortunately I get few answers, especially to the atmosphere, liquid water and magnetosphere problems. I have looked all over online and though sites can explain the problems none of them offer any workable solutions. - key word "workable". It is so frustrating because without solutions life on Mars becomes impossible except for very short periods - days.

PS Sorry for the Kirk and Romulans stuff. It was late and I was tired.

[Suff]

No issue with the Kirk and Roumulans stuff, had a laugh....

Latest info from SpaceX is that the journey is expected to take 2-4 months. The difference between a high energy boost out of earth orbit with a refuelled rocket, capable of braking into Mars orbit and a very small probe or lander, with ion thrusters, because it has to take all fuel required for the entire journey with it from launch.

The other days of marshalling stuff in LEO will be about the 10m tonnes of cargo that has to go with it, the creation of massive fuel depots and also getting the ships required for the journey. Personally I think that the expendable tankers would be perfect, boosted to a higher orbit, as a much larger transfer vehicle. I don't think it will only be ships with 100 people in them. Just my thought, they need to get to Mars first and get back. This will be with Starship and a crew, probably less than 100 initially, possibly just to orbit it, although it is safer on the ground than in Space for so long.

For the life on Mars, it's going to have to be mostly underground. The atmosphere is heavily CO2, but because it has an atmosphere most of the scientific space work on atmospheric balance is only partially pertinent. I see these articles over time but I don't bookmark them.

Wikipedia states that.

Almost all water on Mars today exists as ice, though it also exists in small quantities as vapor in the atmosphere.[5] What was thought to be low-volume liquid brines in shallow Martian soil, also called recurrent slope lineae,[6][7] may be grains of flowing sand and dust slipping downhill to make dark streaks.[8] While most water ice is buried, it is exposed at the surface across several locations on Mars. In the mid-latitudes, it is exposed by impact craters, steep scarps and gullies.[9][10][11] Additionally, water ice is also visible at the surface at the north polar ice cap.[12] Abundant water ice is also present beneath the permanent carbon dioxide ice cap at the Martian south pole. More than 5 million km3 of ice have been detected at or near the surface of Mars, enough to cover the whole planet to a depth of 35 meters (115 ft).[13] Even more ice might be locked away in the deep subsurface

There is a thin atmosphere, water, carbon in the CO2, the basis of what is needed to support life.

The point is it will not be a paradise with green grass and open parklands. It will be a place where people survive through work for at least a century or more.

I don't think you are going to get a massively planned out solution for Mars any time soon. NASA (which I don't dislike BTW, I am just really frustrated with), have plans which are so limited that it will take 2 centuries to establish any kind of outpost there and even at that it would not be self sustaining.

Talking about my frustration with NASA, China is closing fast. Russia is not really in the game, India is also working hard on their space presence. But here's the rub. China and India are not chasing NASA, they are chasing SpaceX. If they get even close to SpaceX, they will leave NASA decades behind. It is why I'm so critical, they have been captured by the political environment. Starliner is just one example of that. A solution for the 90's built in the 2020's and basically a fallback which has far less relevance than current space developments.

Starship will launch again around about a month from now. Need more popcorn but the diet says NO.

[Workingman]

Suff, we know there is loads of water ice on Mars; I already mentioned it. Turning it into liquid water in quantity is the problem. Water vapour in the atmosphere is only one part of the 1.5% of the "other" rarer gases that make up the Mars atmosphere, and hydrogen and oxygen make up the most part of that. At 0.03% water vapour is virtually non-existent

The best I have found for turning water ice to water, which is what will have to be done, is one proposal that produces 100 litres of water in 500 hours (20 days). It might keep one person alive but it needs a drill, conveyor belt, solar panels, a microwave system, a condensation unit and storage. By comparison a survival kit solar still on Earth just sat in the sunshine can produce 1-2 litres of pure water per day.

It is a huge problem for all agencies wanting to go to Mars regardless of their nationalities. Astrophysics and astochemistry do not care who you are.

The atmosphere and magnetosphere problems. Let's just forget them, eh?

[Suff]

Yes water will be an issue and will drive location of the very first base.

Magnetosphere will be mitigated by underground living. Hence tunnelling equipment, Bots, and also earthmoving equipment which is never mentioned.

I have been of the opinion for some time now that the first intelligence on Mars will be artificial. It will be the job of the bots to create the sustainable environment for humans before they arrive.

[Workingman]

The lack of a magnetosphere will in no way be mitigated for long-term occupation by going underground. It does not exist.

In thew short term the food sources will be "upstairs" and will need shielding from UV, cosmic rays and given that water stuff, or they will die. That's why Mars is dead. Harvesting and replanting will have to be done by robots.

Anyone wanting to go for a walk or to work in building new units will need an insulated pressure suit, with shielding, and breathing apparatus. They will not see cows, sheep, pigs, chicken, horses, crows, blackbirds, herons, butterflies, wasps or ladybirds, just a barren landscape.

Nirvana / Shangri La it will not be.

[Workingman]

Suff, I am more interested in astronomy and cosmology than "going places".

However, if we are to go 'beyond', the Moon is the obvious place to start and Mars is second. Getting there and back, safely, is an absolute must and that is technologically possible, we think, even today. We both know that.

Colonisation of either I am not so sure... as yet. The physical differences between the three are enormous and their long-term effects on the human body are largely unknown - I gave a link.

Going further out we need to find a planet capable of sustaining life, and the work done on the Moon and Mars should help us with that. However, to get there we need to work on propulsion systems. The fastest we have so far is the Parker Solar Probe. It is fast, but it is also slow.

Today the fastest (theoretically) is a photon propulsion system at 10% the speed of light, but even that is slow. Proxima Centauri is 4ly away and Gliese is 40ly away, both are said to have "Goldilocks'" planets but we are not sure. 40 years and 400 years just to find out?

[Suff]

Nirvana / Shangri La it will not be.

Hence the advertising from SpaceX. Want to go to Mars? You will probably die on the way, if you survive on the way you will probably die on landing. If you survive the landing you will probably die on the planet before we can get you back. We don't expect any of the early missions to all make it.

Some people love the idea.

[Suff]

Colonisation is a stretch. Even for Mars. With current technology anything outside our solar system is a total non starter.

SpaceX are currently running the numbers and think they can do a 2 month transit to Mars with 4 months being the outside. The difference between a fully refuelled ship in orbit and one that has to carry its fuel out of orbit is dramatically different.

Really we will just have to suck it and see. But betting against the SpaceX engineers has been a losing game for literally everyone over the last two decades.