Mars drama takes new turns

Patrick Coyle, Seale, AL — Mon, 28 May 2007 01:04:44 GMT

While I am a long time supporter of manned space flight, I cannot help but admire the work of those two robot explorers on the Martian surface. The work that those two vehicles are doing is a testament to the hard work of the teams that designed and built them. Congratulations to Steven Squyres and his team, past and present, for the fine work that they have done.

Mars drama takes new turns

Vern P. Hampton, CT — Mon, 28 May 2007 01:15:05 GMT

Remember...we went to the moon, before ever building a space station. Kennedy, knew there would be risks in his goal and Grissom's, White's, and Chaffee's lives paved the way for our ongoing quests into the unknown.I agree with Mr.Zubrin that using the moon as a 'tollbooth' doesn't accomplish anything other than create another whole level of opportunities for error, complications and cost. If we as a people can't make it to Mars on a direct flight, then we shouldn't go at all. I would love to see one of the rovers returned from Mars someday. Maybe hang it next to the Spirit of St. Louis in the Smithsonian, as a symbol of what CAN be done.

Mars drama takes new turns

Des Emery, St. Tmomas, ON, Canada — Mon, 28 May 2007 03:14:56 GMT

Hi, Alan - I have taken your advice and joined spacebloggers even though I'm not anywhere close to being a genuine spaceman, aside from being a stf fan from way before the genre became reality.

'Opportunity and Spirit' have been unqualified success stories for the Space Program to make good news. I expect their inventors have analyzed their respective exploits already, especially their extra-long lives, and have realized that more of them dispatched to Mars will return that much more information. At present, we can use their longevity rather than develop more sophisticated rovers for the next trip, and concentrate on getting the footprint of a human being on the Martian sands (even if the winds erase them early).

Mars drama takes new turns

Michael Miller — Mon, 28 May 2007 03:32:20 GMT

You state victoria crator is a quater mile wide (800 meters) I believe a quarter mile is much closer to 400 meters. Just curious as to the true size of the crater?

[AB: Phew, thanks for pointing that out. I've corrected the conversion. Good thing I'm not in charge of a Mars probe. But in case you're wondering, the reference to the 230-foot depth (70 meters) is correct.]

Mars drama takes new turns

Douglas Grace — Mon, 28 May 2007 06:43:56 GMT

All the kudos as deserved. Still can not help but think what we would have accomplished if not built by the lowest bidder.

Mars drama takes new turns

Jim , Level Plains , AL (in Iraq) — Mon, 28 May 2007 08:21:46 GMT

With the oppertunity to go to mars occuring in my lifetime it is a true testament to the capabilities of man. Oh how I would love to be on that trip.

Mars drama takes new turns

Sam McKerall, Gulf Shores, Alabama — Mon, 28 May 2007 11:43:21 GMT

What if it wasn't the wind that cleaned the solar panels?

Mars drama takes new turns

Stellvia, UK — Mon, 28 May 2007 11:44:49 GMT

With respect to Zubrin, the Arctic bases don't have reduced gravity, vacuum, ionizing radiation, electrostatic charging, violent changes in temperature or the physical, chemical and biological hazards of regolith. Any or all of these are potentially lethal to explorers. The Arctic bases can be useful experience, but at some level they're just play-acting for space exploration.

If you train for Mars, you get Mars. If you train for the Moon, you get every airless rocky body in the system (and there are a LOT of them).

Mars drama takes new turns

Herb R. Wells, Canyon Lake, Texas. — Mon, 28 May 2007 14:35:39 GMT

NASA keeps the spirit of exploration alive and the hope that tomorrow will bring a better life for all humanity. Curiosity and ingenuity keep alive the opportunity of finding solutions to the terrible self-inflicted miasma of war. With out women and men of science the earth has no future. Thank you NASA for continuing the quest for life.

Mars drama takes new turns

Joshua Zev Levin, Ph.D. — Mon, 28 May 2007 15:34:02 GMT

I have a much different vision of how to get to Mars, and beyond.

Magnetic Levitation (MagLev) Launch from earth can be used to send payloads into earth orbit or to the moon with much smaller rockets. This would used Magnetic Levitation to keep the payload off the launch rail, eliminating friction; and linear inductive or synchronous propulsion to accelerate the payload.

Ideally, you would want a "hockey-stick" profile to the launch site, such that when going from West to East, you have slowly rising land followed by a "ski jump" of rapidly rising land. A fellow named Mike Moore (not to be confused with Michael Moore) has identified a suitable location in New Mexico. I countered with an even grander idea for Old Mexico, going across three states and up the Sierra Madre Orientale, with any aborted missions winding up in Gulf of Mexico, not on land.

Once we settle on the moon, we can build a MagLev Launch system to send payloads at fantastic speeds to other planets in the solar system, and to nearby stars and solar systems. Such a system might circle the moon, be powered by solar panels, and use both repulsive magnetism (for the first part of payload acceleration), followed by attractive magnetism (for the second part). Launch would simply be turning off the MagLev, and letting the payload tangentially zoom into space.

My guess is that such a system could probably propel manned missions to Mars in one-third the time that rockets would, cutting one-way travel to Mars to only two months, but not affecting the time of the return trip. Can anybody work out the math?

Mars drama takes new turns

steve smyth lynn ma — Mon, 28 May 2007 16:49:06 GMT

Finally, something real...and it comes from NASA...they didn't call it North American Space Adminstration for nuthin', Kids. Space Entrepeneurs can spend all they want...it's good for the economy, and gives Folks something to talk about...not very many Folks, mind you...but, those who care have a forum...that's all, Folks! Do not kid yourselfs...unless we step way beyond their capabilities, so that there's no choice but to deal with us...Space is Closed...NASA is Administering it for us...their stamp is on the whole shebang...and SpaceShipOne ain't gonna change nuthin'.

Mars drama takes new turns

Thomas Ashby, Calgary — Mon, 28 May 2007 17:11:50 GMT

Thanks for covering this Alan. I'm still waiting for calcium carbonate formations. My bet is they don't exist there. If Mars was ever a water planet you would think that maybe at some point CaCO3 would accumulate. On earth calcium is eroded from rocks and carried to the sea where HCO3- is present and reacts.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993GBioC...7..927M

Marine organisms are another source for deposition. The recent discovery of silica is interesting in that diatoms (silica encased unicellular organisms)may have had something to do with it's presence. Maybe not. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diatom

Did Mars ever have an oxygen atmosphere?

Mars drama takes new turns

Jesse Martinez,San Antonio, Tx — Mon, 28 May 2007 17:26:11 GMT

If one looks at the big picture. Human expeditions to other solar bodies consists of two main endeavors. Of course the intellectual and technological aspect of such "trip", but we must also consider the precursor to such an event. Just as difficult, if not harder, is aligning the political and social parties which will always be a part of the equation. There must be a want and need by said groups. There must be a backing by the public as well as those we elect. For now, this is a world and governmental event. But one day it will be privatized. That's when, I believe, we as mankind will make leaps and bounds in our primal need. To Explore The Unknown!

Mars drama takes new turns

Mike Sampere, Palm Bay, FL — Tue, 29 May 2007 00:04:00 GMT

I applaud Vern Hamilton's message, that if and when we mount a manned space flight to Mars, the Rovers are retrieved and returned to Earth to be displayed at the Smithsonian Institute. It certainly trumps a bag of "moon rocks". What a spectacular display of our record of Exploration! I also must agree with Mr. Stelvia from the UK, that a manned flight to Mars is the esential next step rather than going back to the Moon to construct a "way station" in preparation for the major mission. If it is determined that we should go to Mars, lets not build in unnecessary barriers to the trip. Just the problem of shielding the astronauts from the potentiallly lethal effcts of two or more years of exposure to cosmic rays is daunting enough. Don't get me wrong, because I have been a "Gyro Gear Loose" kid since well before the first Explorer satelite was launched from the Redstone Arsenal in 1958. Yes, go to Mars, but also remember the health of the crew that we are sending.

Mars drama takes new turns

John T. Cullen, San Diego, California — Tue, 29 May 2007 03:53:48 GMT

My instinct is to avoid the rush and showboating of a single direct flight to Mars. The logical next step after such a stunt, assuming it works, would be never to go again--as happened with the moon. The point is not that we have to use the moon as a stepping stone. The point is that we should carefully construct a safety net between here and Mars, and maybe the stepping stones are nothing more than prepositioned lifeboats. It would be inhumane to send people out to die for lack of a few puffs of air. Actually, it would be fairly typical of how human affairs are run, so we should avoid going the wrong route.

Mars drama takes new turns

steve smyth lynn ma — Tue, 29 May 2007 13:42:12 GMT

send compost...it'll be ready about the same time we are...actually, at this speed, it'll probably have taken over the Martian landscape, rotted, and turned to oil by then...hmmm!

Mars drama takes new turns

Steve Haack, Lincoln, NE — Tue, 29 May 2007 13:53:24 GMT

Now that we know how well these machines work in the Martian environment, why don't we pop one up there every year? Well worth the money.

Mars drama takes new turns

jimmie brewer pensacola fl. — Tue, 29 May 2007 14:05:09 GMT

I would really like to know more on the black hole

Mars drama takes new turns

Michael — Tue, 29 May 2007 15:16:24 GMT

Um, doesn't NASA stand for National Aeronautics and Space Administration, not North American Space Administration as one previous comment stated?

Mars drama takes new turns

H. C. PETLEY — Tue, 29 May 2007 16:25:28 GMT

The Moon first makes very good sense in establishing a longterm commitment to inhabiting the high frontier. Mr. Zubrin's cavalier approach is not much more than an engineering stunt, which can be accomplished, but not sustained. Sustaining a colony will require a very long training/learning curve that CANNOT be accomplished in "The Arctic". Conditions on The Moon and on Mars are far more severe than any Earthly environment. As Mr. Stellvia tells us, there is a lot to accomplish in technology and experience before we can successfully establish habitation on any of the outer planets. (just consider the common HVAC requirement!) First crawl, then walk...isn't that the way to go?Mr. Cullen has it right in that stepping stones are essential for securing safety. And,not so incidentally, The Moon is far more than "a pile of rocks"! It is a vast mineral resource containing all manner of materials for us to make use of in our attemps to colonize. Not only H3 but repositories of magnesium, titanium, aluminun, silicon, as well as oxygen bound up in a variety of mineral compounds.

Mars drama takes new turns

Tom — Tue, 29 May 2007 16:34:32 GMT

People starving all over the world. Is it God's will for us to spend all this money on this type of exploration. Show me. We are destroying the world we live in, scientists trying to re-create life ?

where is the sanity in this ?

What really is necessary but Food, water, and to love one another, help one another. or are we lost in greed and recognition of our deeds ?

Personally I would like to see my tax dollars feed and help someone.

Mars drama takes new turns

Bedford, Texas — Tue, 29 May 2007 17:11:22 GMT

I have with great interest kept up with Spirit and Opportunity on their great journeys. I feel that they have their own little personalities with such tenacity and desire to do a job well done. This is, I am sure from the many human interactions that went to make up their resolve. Many thanks to them both along with their human counterparts. You all continue to amaze me!

Mars drama takes new turns

steve smyth lynn ma — Tue, 29 May 2007 17:35:02 GMT

michael...I guess you are right about the name...it's been ages since the words meant anything but SPACE ADMINISTRATION to me...it never set well...the whole idea of administering space...contract it, manage it, make it within the grasp of administrative types...Space is still The High Ground...administered, managed, et al by NASA.

Mars drama takes new turns

John, Murray KY — Tue, 29 May 2007 18:45:17 GMT

Mike "Gyro Gear Loose" Sampere - - While it is nice that someone remembers Redstone Arsenal, Huntsville, Alabama where Dr. Von Braun developed the Saturn V booster, I do not believe any satellites were ever launched from there. The static testing shook the ground but nothing ever (intentionally) left the surface. Those were the days!

Mars drama takes new turns

BJ - Ilion, NY — Tue, 29 May 2007 20:00:34 GMT

The black holes are most fascinating! What possibly could lurk within? Are they geographically positioned such that timing and the orbiter's position might allow more illumination down the hole from our sun? I REALLY want to know!

Mars drama takes new turns

Patrick — Tue, 29 May 2007 20:48:43 GMT

Tom

"Personally I would like to see my tax dollars feed and help someone. "

Well then rest easy son, because the tax dollars we've spent on space have done exactly that. GPS and more accurate weather forcasting using satelites have allowed farmers to drastically increase crop yields, feeding more people using less land. The same sats have also improved storm warning systems across the globe, saving lives.

The money we spent on space has also lead to cell phones, personal computers (like the one you used to rant about how your money is wasted) and advanced imaging technology used in medicine, again saving lives.

So try educating yourself next time before solidly placing your foot in your trachea.

Mars drama takes new turns

Joe G. — Tue, 29 May 2007 21:23:56 GMT

Tom,

To respond to your comment, NASA's funding eats up a fraction of 1% of the national budget. Cutting congressional pork would contribute more towards feeding the hungry, and congressional pork contributes significantly less to advancement of our technology and our general knowledge of the universe.

If the United States continues its current anti-intellectual mood and cedes space, we also cede our future to nations like the Peoples' Republic of China. In such a situation with a dominant China, as the world's biggest debtor nation, when the debts come due here in the ole' God-fearing U S of A we'll no longer be wearing cutesy little bracelets that say WWJD, What Would Jesus Do, they'll read WWBD, What Would Beijing Do?

It's your future too.

Mars drama takes new turns

Lyndon, Dallas — Tue, 29 May 2007 21:49:20 GMT

With respect to Vern in Connecticut, NASA tested all the technologies and techniques used in the Lunar landings in Earth orbit during the Gemini and early Apollo missions. If something like a docking radar didn’t work, you wanted to know about that in Earth orbit, not on the dark side of the moon. Likewise the advantage of testing Martian habitats on the moon first is that if anything goes wrong you have a 3 day trip home and are not 9 months away from rescue.

A permanent outpost on the moon fulfills the promise of Apollo and gives us the testing grounds we need if we plan to go further into the solar system.

Mars drama takes new turns

BadFrog, North Oalkland County Michigan — Tue, 29 May 2007 21:59:44 GMT

NASA and such, spend millions of dollars to study uninhabitable planets ! Where is the common sense to spend money on the research of a habitual planet that is "dying" and trying to save it from an infestation of Humans .....Earth. OK, so the argument goes, that "we must explore outer space"..then we should develop propulsion systems and long term earthlike habitat space vehicles that can reach yonder solar systems witch might have "earth like habitat" planets. Then we can begin the migration of humans from earth to other planets that Humans can adapt to.

Mars drama takes new turns

Mac — Tue, 29 May 2007 23:07:05 GMT

All your base are belong to us.

Actually it's truly amazing that a Mars landing could possibly be achieved in my father's lifetime. I would say that the goal is to get to Mars but only if they can get back. With that said, I don't think the first ones there could survive. There's just too much that calculations won't take into consideration, however it doesn't negate the need and the resolve to conquer this goal. Whoever fulfills the crew roster for such a mission has my deepest support and respect. We must make this a reality and soon.

Mars drama takes new turns

Jim, Brisbane Australia — Wed, 30 May 2007 00:55:18 GMT

We need to improve efficiency in both administration and launching mass. The shuttle is the rolls royce of space vehicles, when a mack truck is needed. We need heavy lift capability lost since the saturn 5

Mars drama takes new turns

Joshua Zev Levin, Ph.D. — Wed, 30 May 2007 01:14:44 GMT

A few points --

1) Apologies to Steve Smyth for not crediting him for the term "MagLev Launch". I have been using the broader term "Space MagLev" for a while.

2) Thanks to "H. C. PETLEY", "Lyndon, Dallas" and others for pointing out the vital role the moon can play is preparing for a Mars Mission. Let's get bases on the moon so that we can, at last, have a permanent presence in space. Then, let's use the moon to its full potential for manufacturing, mining, scientific research, astronomical observation, and, of course, using MagLev to launch vehicles to Mars and beyond, as described in my last missive, above.

3) Finally, I thought about the extra-high speed that can be achieved from the moon to launch space vehicles, and how to deal with on a manned Mars mission. Note that we do not have to implement the full 6000-mile-long circumferential MagLev Launch system to go to Mars, just a few hundred miles would do.

After being launched by a MagLev Launch Accelerator on the moon, the Mars Vehicle will still need rockets to manage Mars-orbit injection, the landing sequence, and the return trip home. With the advantages of MagLev Launch, these rockets can be much bigger than otherwise, providing a faster way to get home after the mission. It is, after all, very desirable not to keep our brave astronauts in space longer than we have to.

Also, after the fuel is expended, the dead weight of the rockets could be propelled away from the manned ship using an electric inductive-rail system, providing more thrust. Perhaps some of the rockets could be parked in Mars orbit, similar to the Apollo Command Module, while manned exploration goes on below. This is all speculation, but such speculation can be fun, right?

Mars drama takes new turns

Joe G. — Wed, 30 May 2007 04:00:20 GMT

Doctor Levin,

How do you propose keeping the high-G acceleration of an electromagnetic rail-launch system from turning any potential astronauuts to jelly? 17,000 miles per hour for escape velocity, achieved in a few seconds of acceleration, is not very kind on living payloads.

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?
url=/iel5/20/26497/01179826.pdf?arnumber=1179826

It's a great idea, but until we learn how to ruggedize humans to sustain 1,000+ G accelerations, I'd probably book the human crew a slower flight on a chemical rocket.

If you're talking about launching components, that's another story. Some of the more sturdy components we can heft into orbit using a rail gun. En route to Mars the interplanetary stage might even "catch" em-launched payloads and use the kinetic energy transfer as a speed boost.

As you point out, a rail gun firing projectiles from the space craft could be used to accelerate the craft towards Mars. Unfortunately such a system could also be viewed as a very dangerous space-based kinetic weapon. The politics of getting such a system deployed could be as tricky as trying to get a 1960's-proposed Orion (nuclear weapon powered) space craft into orbit.

There are pros and cons to every approach.

For an energy-efficient pie-in-the-sky approach I personally favor a space elevator. Once the first one is woven making a copy is relatively trivial. A copy deployed by robots could easily be placed at Mars, and ascent and descent would become trivial.

A series of Aldrin Cyclers spaced six months apart could provide a slow but efficient transit system between the two worlds' elevator stations.

http://www.gaerospace.com/projects/
AstroTels/pdfs_docs/Astrotel_2003_ICES.pdf

Your mileage may vary. I just want to see humans on Mars in my lifetime. If we make it by 2035 or so, I might just live to see it. :)

Oh, and as an aside to all of the "save this planet first" people, I understand where you're coming from, but the environmental technologies necessary to keep a crew alive and fed in a self-contained environment for twenty-four months have tremendous potential to make our own world much more habitable and fruitful for our six-billion plus inhabitants. It's a bargain.

-Joe G.

Mars drama takes new turns

Des Emery, St, Thomas, ON,Canada — Wed, 30 May 2007 04:26:00 GMT

Astronauts train in water to 'simulate' weightlessness they will experience in space. Likewise, they train in the Arctic to 'simulate' living on Mars. because the Arctic environment can be programmed to see how well the Astronauts cope with living in extreme conditions in which they are crowded together, have no privacy, must wear a full gear-up to visit the potty, eat the same food over and over, endure isolation, etc., etc. And the applicants can't wait to get to Canada's arctic islands to take their turn.

Mars drama takes new turns

Roger A Crowe — Wed, 30 May 2007 04:57:59 GMT

Your article describing current status of the Spirt and Opportunity probes currently on Mars was most enlightening. As a current employee of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) I was most interested in the news about the Martian holes, the revival of the Opportunity Probe, and the spectacular picture of the Victoria Crater which clearly invites closer scrutiny.

Your article, however, failed to mention the critical role of JPL in the design, creation, testing, orbit insertion, landing and operation of the twin rovers and orbiter that are currently at Mars. Indeed, JPL is a world center of excellence in robotic design and orbit determination which ultimately led to those robust probes and safe Martian operations. Although Steven Squyres and his collegues at Cornell should be congratulated for their leadership and direction of the probes and orbiter, nothing would have been possible without the contributions of JPL engineers who worked on the Mars Excursion Rover landers and the Mars Reconaissance Orbiter Spacecraft.

Mars drama takes new turns

Alan Boyle — Wed, 30 May 2007 06:33:01 GMT

Roger, the fault is mine. Steve was very forthright in recognizing the contribution of the good folks of JPL, including Mark Adler, Rob Manning and other folks I myself am in debt to. Steve made very clear that without the people of JPL, there would be no mission. Not just at one juncture in the mission, but at multiple junctures. I will amend the item to recognize that, and I'm only sorry I didn't do it from the get-go.

Mars drama takes new turns

steve smyth lynn ma — Wed, 30 May 2007 13:08:47 GMT

Josh Levin...sorry...I didn't realize I could yell at people via email...go for it. The outburst stems from pre-planned full moon fever...once in a blue moon kinda stuff. http://smythspace.blogspot.com Ironically, the plan has always been to give it all away. I just want it to happen...for the Folks coming along...there's gonna be a lot of 'em. It would be great if it started happening now, but I come from the time when Space Exploration/Expansion was acknowledged by those in the Space Exploration/Expansion Biz as a 'not in our lifetime' deal...but, they went ahead...unselfishly. Check it out...you'll feel better...guaranteed! Might even make it happen...Yipes! Forge ahead...through these interesting times...Double Yipes! Steve Smyth

Mars drama takes new turns

Gert van Niekerk, Pretoria, Gauteng, South Africa — Wed, 30 May 2007 15:28:50 GMT

Woohoo first the Moon now it's Mars. Believe me I realy like everything about space and I truely think that this is going to be very interesting, can't wait to see what happens... Keep up the good work.

Mars drama takes new turns

Richard campbell,Nassau,np,Bahamas. — Wed, 30 May 2007 15:58:18 GMT

the information learn so far from these two rovers is so important.that we can and one day soon will be working and living on mars.the only problem is who as the guts to get it started.before we go there tho we need to send a few more explorer ,just to me sure we can live and work there.bigger and better explorer could give us more view and information about mars and all it many wonders.

Mars drama takes new turns

Alan Sheets, Loveland CO — Wed, 30 May 2007 15:59:07 GMT

Dr. zev Levin -- I like the idea of a magnetic rail launcher, but fear that it will only be truly useful on the Moon. On Earth, atmospheric friction will be a problem.

Joe G. -- Actually, you can keep G forces quite low by making the launch track long. You don't have to get to orbital velocity in 100 feet, or even 100 miles. Some plans I've seen for a lunar-based launcher have the track going all the way around the equator, which would launch incredible amounts of mass at sub-1G accelerations. And there would be plenty of sunlight and radiation to power the thing (although finding enough magnetic and dimagnetic materials on the Moon might be a problem).

BadFrog -- the reason we spend "millions" exploring outer space is because it isn't nearly as much fun, politically, as spending the same amount of money exploring the Earth from space. GOES weather and LandSat Earth resource satellites are failing left and right, and there is no impetus to replace them. If you don't like that, complain to your congressman.

Mars drama takes new turns

William Wise, West Hartford, Connecticut — Wed, 30 May 2007 16:32:29 GMT

Hi! I'm an ((AVID))--and I mean U T T E R A L L Y AVID--PRO NASA SPACE SCIENCE (AND) SPACE EXPLORATION ENTHUSIAST!!! I'm an Amateur Astronomer, and I litterally A D O R E SPACE SCIENCE (of ALL KINDS)!!--and ALL MISIONS!!!--(especially the UNmanned missions, that do bring back a FAR, FAR, GREATER SHARE of SCIENTIFIC RETURN, than,say, the Space Shuttle/and/or International Space station Programs do (COMBINED)!!! And I just want to say that I'M "SO THRILLED" that (both) "Spirit" and "Opportunity" are (still!!)!! bring back extremely GREAT DATA (OVER) three YEARS after they both plummetted to the Martian surface!!!!--I'm "tickelled silly" with UTTER JOY!! And I Litterally "CAN'T WAIT" for the NEXT NASA MARS (LANDER)--named the "PHOENIX MARS POLAR LANDER", that is scheduled to be launched (this) August 3rd--and arrive at MARS next year (2008) in MAY!! I certainly HOPE that that mission can last LONGER (ALSO!!)!!--than its three-month projected life-time (for its nominal mission)!!! Thank You for reading this!

Mars drama takes new turns

Ralphy Abreu Lawrence Ma — Wed, 30 May 2007 16:42:14 GMT

I am looking at the picture of the rocks and I do not know if this is an ilusion but it looks to me like a face of some kind of creature and further up looks like somebody is doing something can you check that?

Mars drama takes new turns

Joshua Zev Levin, Ph.D. — Wed, 30 May 2007 18:14:53 GMT

In response to Joe G. A very long MagLev rail could provide very high speeds with human-compatible acceleration. There is a long stretch of relatively flat land in northern Mexico extending from near Durango, eastward to the Sierra Madre Oriental range. This provides a "hockey stick" profile of gently rising land, followed by a rapidly rising mountain. A launch rail 300 miles long should be more than sufficient to provide fantastic speeds at minimal Gs. I see ground-based MagLev and the Space Elevator as two competing launch methods. Both offer great advantages over the way we do things today. Both have advantages and problems, and both should be fully explored.

Mars drama takes new turns

Joe G. — Wed, 30 May 2007 19:56:49 GMT

Thanks Doctor Levin and Alan for your helpful clarifications. A lunar equatorial launch system: with a ring that long an astonishing velocity could be reached simply by adding energy to the vehicle with each circuit. Eventually a limit would be reached, but potential speed could far exceed anything we could achieve using chemical means.

A receiving station on the other end could recapture a significant portion of the energy by carefully snaring the incoming vessel and braking it electromagnetically. Capture/launch stations on Phobos, Europa, and Rhea (Titan's atmosphere is too thick) could open up the rest of the solar system to us.

The only downfall I see besides potential supply sources of raw materials would be the infrastructure required to sustain such an enormous amount of extraterrestrial construction. As for what we could do here on Earth, as they say the sky is indeed the limit. :)

Hmmm, something new to dream about. :)

Thank you!
-Joe G.

Mars drama takes new turns

Phil, Houston, Texas — Wed, 30 May 2007 20:53:13 GMT

The most in-space science for the buck? Robots. Always has been, always will be. Why? They can be built to work in space. We can't. Sending people into space is dangerous, wasteful and stupid.

Mars drama takes new turns

Joshua Zev Levin, Ph.D. — Wed, 30 May 2007 21:22:17 GMT

Should a circumferential MagLev Launcher on the moon be equatorial, polar, or somewhere in between?

With an equatorial launcher, you can only send things to near the moon's equatorial plane, unless you use additional thrusters or gravity-assist.

With a polar ring, you can take advantage of the moon's 27.3-day sidereal rotation to aim the payload anywhere. You may have to wait a couple of weeks, though.

Mars drama takes new turns

Alan Sheets, Loveland CO — Wed, 30 May 2007 21:41:16 GMT

Dr. Levin -- regarding your question about placement... I would think that a near equatorial placement would be best to take advantage of the rotational velocity boost from the Moon's rotation. That'll also get you almost anywhere in the solar system that is interesting, and you'll get a few more grams of payload for the same energy cost.

Maybe you'll want to offset the placement by a few degrees, so if you need to get your out of the plane of the solar system you can aim at one of Earth's poles and do a gravity slingshot.

Mars drama takes new turns

Joshua Zev Levin, Ph.D. — Wed, 30 May 2007 23:12:46 GMT

Correct me if I'm wrong. The equatorial boost for the earth is about 1000 miles per hour. The equatorial boost for the moon is about 10 miles per hour.

Mars drama takes new turns

Tammy, Portland, OR — Thu, 31 May 2007 03:07:52 GMT

It is amazing these rovers, which were originally built for short-term use, have become so useful to us even beyond their original expectations.

Mars drama takes new turns

JC, Fairbanks, AK — Thu, 31 May 2007 09:03:25 GMT

A 'space gun' on Earth has a major problem, whether magnetically 'levitated' or not: until you get some tens of km up in our atmosphere, speeds anything like those needed to reach orbit would result in turning your space ship into SLAG, and there's already enough of THAT in orbit. So most of such a device would have to be built several Everests high, just to launch into orbit. Forget about escape velocity. This idea would make much more sense for the Moon or Mars.

Mars drama takes new turns

Joshua Zev Levin, Ph.D. — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 03:13:51 GMT

Remember that the launcher does not have to accelerate the payload to escape velocity -- just fast enough so that a much smaller rocket is needed to finish the job.

Consider the Space Shuttle, the three-humped camel. During the early stages of flight, the Solid Rocket Boosters (SRBs) lift the External Fuel Tank (EFT), while the EFT fuels the rockets that lift the Orbiter. After the SRBs are jettisoned, the Orbiter rockets lift the EFT and the Orbiter. After the EFT is jettisoned, the Orbiter's internal fuel tanks finish the job. All this extra weight in fuel and solid rockets is needed to lift more fuel. It would be nicer if we only needed the fuel in the internal tanks.

The MagLev Launch system is more akin to White Knight that launched SpaceShipOne, except it can't quite get it up to 50,000 feet, but probably can make the payload go faster than White Knight. I'm not sure of WK's maximum speed, but I think it's subsonic. Anybody know for sure?

Mars drama takes new turns

Des Emery, St. Thomas, ON, Canada — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 03:22:27 GMT

The Equator is not a reasonably level roadway. A MagLev system that long would be prohibitively expensive to build and just as expensive to operate. A projectile on it would have to be constructed to withstand collision with a variety of wildlife and travel through many different weather regions. A much shorter MagLev track would be preferable and timing would be much easier.

Thomas Ashby - Mars had water once upon a time, and therefore it also had oxygen. Most of both left quite a while ago. The silicon exposed recently was tested and was reported as 'pure.' I guess that diatoms never had the 'opportunity' or the 'spirit' to develop during the comparatively short time that water sloshed around on Mars.

Mars drama takes new turns

Dean Bailey, Knoxville, TN, USA — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 07:54:03 GMT

I can't help but to forsee the first resturanut on the moon being a darn Mc Donalds, admitting this as I lower my head in shame...

Mars drama takes new turns

Thomas Ashby, Calgary — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 10:36:03 GMT

Des- I asked if Mars had an oxygen atmosphere. The presence of water doesn't necessarily mean it did. I believe diatomacious "shells" are pure silicon but I will have to look into that more closely. That was just something I through out.

This article about Mars' core http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18968673/ makes me wonder how they can possibly know anything about the real state of the presence of sulphur in the interior.

I hope one day they do real geophysical mapping of Mars. Set up a network of geophones around the planet then slam a high explosive (maybe even low yield nuclear) into the planet to make it "ring" like they have done on the moon.

Mars drama takes new turns

JC, Fairbanks, AK — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:44:03 GMT

Guys:

-While the evidence that Mars once had a lot more water is quite strong, free oxygen is a totally different matter. *Earth* itself would have none without plants! We could not even have lived on the atmosphere of ~ 1 billion years ago... Mars never had significant amounts of free oxygen.

-What SPIRIT found is *silica* (SiO2) NOT *silicon* folks! The 2 are TOTALLY different things....

-Diatom shells (like nearly all such shells) are composed of Calcium Carbonate, no Si involved. About zero carbonates have been found on Mars.

-Exactly how the Fe/Ni/S contents of planetary cores are constrained is, I'm afraid, something far beyond the scope of the e-article quoted...

-Only veery small explosives have been used on the Moon. The seismic detectors there sensed far more (1) moonquakes and (2) impacts. These produced FAR more useful data, as well...

-As for using a nuke to seismic-survey Mars, the problems I have with that are to numerous to mention. Besides, Mars gets hit with plenty of small meteoroids whose impacts can be used for this purpose.

Mars drama takes new turns

Thomas Ashby, Calgary — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 22:37:33 GMT

JC, Fairbanks,AK

Diatomacious shells not silica you say?? Nada Nada! You should read this about diatoms.

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

Also, the frequency with which Mars gets hit by large
meteorites isn't known. What you see now in terms of cratering happened eons ago. But it does get hit.

Mars drama takes new turns

JC, Fairbanks, AK — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 00:36:04 GMT

Yup, looks like you're right, diatoms are one of the few exceptions. However Si02 occurs much more commonly in several other, geologically produced forms, on Earth. SiO2 on Mars is not considered significant evidence of life.

What is meant by "large" has to be defined. If by "large" one means "large enough to register on a seismograph, then the Apollo Passive Seismic Experiments detected hundreds of impacts by meteoroids from cm to ~1m across (capable of forming impact craters ~1-20 m in diameter. PSE data gave us alot of info about the lunar interior...in addition, observation of impact flashes on the moon has become a hot new field, and many have been video-ed, some that should have formed craters over 100m across.

The impact rate on Mars is not at all zero and is in fact estimated at 2-3 times that on the moon. More than 20 impact craters up to nearly 200m in diameter (plenty big to have resulted in big seismic signals) have 'appeared' in just the 7 years of MGS imagery we have. Since these are just the ones that've been noticed, in imagery of a small fraction of mars' surface, this is only a small fraction of such impacts in this time frame. Impact rates calculated from this are roughly consistent with the quoted 2-3x estimate.

In point of fact a martian surface bare of craters *cannot* be even close to eons old, and may be only a few tens of ky old....

Mars drama takes new turns

Thomas Ashby, Calgary — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 04:38:08 GMT

Dude..I didn't bother to look into the geologic ages of cratering. But there are 3 distinct epochs on Mars. Go here

http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10715&page=28

and scroll down to Cratering Chronology...billions of years are mentioned. Which for lack of a better term I used "eons ago". It is linked to the time of massive cratering of the moon.

I also said the rate of impacting of large ones isn't known..I didn't say zero.

Mars drama takes new turns

JC, Fairbanks, AK — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 03:40:04 GMT

Thomas:

Yup, the Noachian, Hesperian, and Amazonian, based almost totally on 'crater counts' on different surfaces. Personally I would add a 4th, the 'modern' for the (many) areas that have zero detectable impacts.... Are you a scientist, Thom? If not, maybe you SHOULD be; thanks for the call on diatoms....I'd lost that in the mists of time....

ps. Sorry the TB Lightning swiped a Cup from your hometown Flames a couple years ago, guy. Maybe they shouldn't'a let go of Martin St.Louis....

Mars drama takes new turns

Thomas Ashby, Calgary — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 03:35:04 GMT

JC..I'm not a scientist and never will be. Was educated in it and I like this stuff. I think of myself in terms of a generalist.

Ya Calgary and all Canadian NHL SUCKS!!

Mars drama takes new turns

Matthew, Marietta, OH — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 12:47:25 GMT

Dr. Levin,
Regarding your "three-humped camel" analogy, note that the oribiter carries no fuel for its main engines; it is all contained in the ET. The OV OMS engines of the shuttle are nowhere near the capacity of a "third stage" system--they aren't even sufficient to raise the vehicle, with any major payload, out of a rather low orbit. Their primary purpose is for the correction of orbit or de-orbit.

While your general analogy is correct (strike up another for those who argue against big-launch, one-time shot spaceflight, since von Braun lost the last argument), the devil is in the details, and the people of this country already have a poor enough understanding of science and engineering.

By all means, I love your enthusiasm and desire to ask questions, but a little research goes a long way.

Thanks!