Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]

Royals Rendezvous Statement
Royals Rendezvous has moved to a new location, please go to royalsrendezvous.co.uk to continue the discussion.

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
China to go to Mars?
Topic Started: 19 Apr 2016, 10:33 PM (398 Views)
daib0
Member Avatar
Inter-Forum Gamemaster!
BBC News


China’s plans for the Moon, Mars and beyond

Later this week China will announce more details about a mission to Mars. Until now, the country has been secretive about its military-led space programme. But in an exclusive interview with the BBC, Wu Weiren, the head designer of its lunar and Mars missions, reveals China's future plans for exploration.


Rumours are that they are putting 2020 as an optimistic target for Mars ... IS IT POSSIBLE? CAN IT BE DONE YET?!


Royals Rendezvous - a specialist and friendly Reading FC fan forum
Cello man... VIDEO https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEVmGOEMJLE&t=12s Please share !
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Owlish52
Member Avatar
RR Foreign Legion - Across the Pond - View from Texas
Getting to Mars, no huge problem (the condition one arrives in could be an issue). Getting folks back is a whole 'nother question... With the unanswered questions about such a trip (degradation of muscles while in zero-G, radiation exposure and damage, shielding, return fuel and provisions, many more), 2020 seems absurdly soon. NASA has a proposed 2030 schedule, that I severely doubt will be met.

Mars gravity is only 38% that of Earth, but more than twice the Moon's gravity (~17% of Earth's), so a lift-off from Mars would take a bit over twice the energy a Moon lift-off required. Depending on the speed of return (assuming a return; the Mars One private project is a one-way trip, for example), more fuel will be required for a Mars de-orbit and return, then a Earth capture and re-entry. Provisions for both legs of the trip add much more weight that the Moon trips had to carry. The MarsOne Webpage proposed unmanned trips starting in 2020 and manned (one-way) trips in 2026. Their plan is interesting, and not too far-fetched on quick examination.
"It could have been worse with Hillary..." - Owlish52
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Owlish52
Member Avatar
RR Foreign Legion - Across the Pond - View from Texas
The BBC article is an interview (which I just gave a listen) and refers to a Chinese orbiter and rover on Mars by 2020, which seems very possible. It does not involve human travel, at least at this time. Since the US has done those things, and India has put a functional Mars orbiter in place (unlike North Korea's non-functional Earth 'satellite'), I see no reason China could not complete those goals by 2020. Chinese launch systems are currently a bit behind the US, Japan and Russia, who each have an operational 20,000 kg to Low Earth Orbit launcher in service, while the Chinese currently top out at 12,000 kg, with a 25,000 kg system (the CZ-5, or Long March 5) scheduled for an initial flight this year. That launcher could handle a Mars mission of the type described in the BBC interview.

I do agree with the Chinese official in the interview and wish that China was working in conjunction with the rest of the world, but I also understand the US reluctance to work with a military-controlled space operation. People may talk about the US military-industrial complex, but at least the industrial side does not contain active-duty military personnel; the Chinese military-industrial complex is comprised of active-duty military personnel! Russia at least offers the illusion of a separation between their space program and their military (which is in many cases all the US actually provides as well - tell NASA and you've told the U. S. Air Force!).
"It could have been worse with Hillary..." - Owlish52
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
daib0
Member Avatar
Inter-Forum Gamemaster!
thanks Owlish, very informative!!
Royals Rendezvous - a specialist and friendly Reading FC fan forum
Cello man... VIDEO https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEVmGOEMJLE&t=12s Please share !
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
daib0
Member Avatar
Inter-Forum Gamemaster!
on BHS

"Daib0, I think your engineer (chap) rather underlays the effect of having to reach twice the speed for escape velocity as required on the moon. Every extra bit of speed requires more fuel. More fuel requires more fuel to combat the weight of more fuel which requires more fuel to counter the weight of the more fuel for the more fuel... and on and on. One way is easy. Return is incredibly difficult.

As for those saying why, if we want to persist as a race the only option is for us to become a spacefaring race of colonisers."



Next comment on there:

"One way ticket. You have to have massive nuts or be seriously p**sed off with the wife."



:D


Royals Rendezvous - a specialist and friendly Reading FC fan forum
Cello man... VIDEO https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEVmGOEMJLE&t=12s Please share !
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Darlington
Member Avatar

Listen I am thick I know that but reading Owlish's bit I just thought....If Mars is only 38% that of earth and we can fly a rocket out of Earth's gravity then surely you can fly one back and break out of Mars gravity. The issue appears to be fuel so fly to Mars and then send a one way rocket with the fuel for the first rocket to get back. Is that too simple??
Edited by Darlington, 21 Apr 2016, 03:59 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cribsie
Member Avatar

Very interesting stuff. It does seem to be a tad ambitious seeing as China has never even put a man on the moon. By the way, did anyone see this? A brilliant film about the Soviet space programme, and the kind of thing BBC Four does so well. http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04lcxms/cosmonauts-how-russia-won-the-space-race
My Reading FC History Site The Biscuitmen
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Owlish52
Member Avatar
RR Foreign Legion - Across the Pond - View from Texas
Darlington
21 Apr 2016, 03:59 PM
Listen I am thick I know that but reading Owlish's bit I just thought....If Mars is only 38% that of earth and we can fly a rocket out of Earth's gravity then surely you can fly one back and break out of Mars gravity. The issue appears to be fuel so fly to Mars and then send a one way rocket with the fuel for the first rocket to get back. Is that too simple??
Fuel is one issue, and provisions for the return trip is another. One option certainly could be to send off two missions - one manned with fuel for the full trip from Earth to Mars and for half the return, plus provisions for the trip out and half the time to be spent on Mars plus some reserve and the second unmanned, but with the same amount of provisions and fuel. The idea would be the second mission is a resupply run only, so the manned ship would only haul the fuel for the outbound run and a percentage of the fuel for the return (since Mars' orbit is outside that of the Earth, the trip out will be 'uphill', against the Sun's pull and require more fuel that the 'downhill' return trip [this does depend on the specific orbit used for the return; a faster return could take as much or even more fuel - one of the many variables in such a journey]). When the second mission arrives at Mars, fuel from the first mission could be transferred to the second ship, and that ship used for the return portion.

Again, this is one way it could be addressed; some schemes are based on making the return fuel on Mars, which may be a good option. The problem is that the fuel and provisions for the return are 'dead weight' on the trip out, requiring still more fuel to lift them out of Earth orbit and boost them to Mars. While two ships seems extravagant, it may be cheaper and easier than one larger vessel to haul all the fuel and supplies. It could also allow both the manned parts of the trip to be optimized, while the trip out on the unmanned vessel could be slower, as the travel risks to personnel would be nil during the unmanned transit. The risk to the personnel is not well defined (radiation, low-G effects, lack of exercise) and may be either less than we fear or more severe - studies on the Kelly twins (one spent almost a year in the International Space Station) should provide some good data for the low-G effects.

The radiation risk is harder to quantify, mostly because solar radiation can be greatly increased by solar flares - storms on the Sun that are unpredictable. These can increase solar radiation by a factor of as much as 48 times. The Earth is largely protected against these flares, but a mission to Mars (or even the Moon) could be impacted seriously by a large flare, and the degree of protection needed or possible is not clear.

Lots of options, and lots of questions we just don't have good answers to yet.
"It could have been worse with Hillary..." - Owlish52
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
daib0
Member Avatar
Inter-Forum Gamemaster!
Owlish said: " (since Mars' orbit is outside that of the Earth, the trip out will be 'uphill', against the Sun's pull and require more fuel that the 'downhill' return trip "

never realized that!!

Could you put your last post on BHS, where I have also left you another Mars question!!!


Royals Rendezvous - a specialist and friendly Reading FC fan forum
Cello man... VIDEO https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEVmGOEMJLE&t=12s Please share !
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · News & Current/Past Events · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Royals Rendezvous - 2013-16