Could a route among the asteroids be built to reach Jupiter's moons once the technology to reach and set up a...
$begingroup$
Once the technology is ready to reach and set up a base in Mars (perhaps 10 years if SpaceX expectations come true) could it be possible to build a route among the asteroids to reach Jupiter's moons?
The problem of the time of the travel would be more or less the same if you would have bases in the following places, and if you start the travel when the planets/asteroids are closer,
- Earth - Mars 0,52 AU
- Mars - Vesta 0,63 AU
- Vesta - Sylvia 0,64 AU
- Sylvia - 588 Achilles 0,67 AU
- 588 Achiles - Jupiter 0,57 AU
But how about the problems of setting permanent bases in those asteroids, even when some are large ones of almost of the size of a dwarf planet, would it be feasible? Setting up a base in Mars it has to be easier. I suppose they plan to obtain water from Mars, may be they would find a way to obtain Oxigen from the CO2 in the atmosphere, also I suppose Mars is warmer than those asteroids and have more protection (even though a tiny not enough protection) from radiation than atmosphereless asteroids, and how about energy supply, if the way they plan to obtain energy in Mars is somehow related with the sun (solar energy), that has to be harder when you are far away.
Could a route among the asteroids be built to reach Jupiter's moons once the technology to reach and set up a base in Mars is ready?
science-based mars asteroids jupiter
$endgroup$
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Once the technology is ready to reach and set up a base in Mars (perhaps 10 years if SpaceX expectations come true) could it be possible to build a route among the asteroids to reach Jupiter's moons?
The problem of the time of the travel would be more or less the same if you would have bases in the following places, and if you start the travel when the planets/asteroids are closer,
- Earth - Mars 0,52 AU
- Mars - Vesta 0,63 AU
- Vesta - Sylvia 0,64 AU
- Sylvia - 588 Achilles 0,67 AU
- 588 Achiles - Jupiter 0,57 AU
But how about the problems of setting permanent bases in those asteroids, even when some are large ones of almost of the size of a dwarf planet, would it be feasible? Setting up a base in Mars it has to be easier. I suppose they plan to obtain water from Mars, may be they would find a way to obtain Oxigen from the CO2 in the atmosphere, also I suppose Mars is warmer than those asteroids and have more protection (even though a tiny not enough protection) from radiation than atmosphereless asteroids, and how about energy supply, if the way they plan to obtain energy in Mars is somehow related with the sun (solar energy), that has to be harder when you are far away.
Could a route among the asteroids be built to reach Jupiter's moons once the technology to reach and set up a base in Mars is ready?
science-based mars asteroids jupiter
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Yes, but the question is "why?"
$endgroup$
– Alexander
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Because the moons of Jupiter might have very interesting things to explore including the possibility of life in Jupiter's moon Europa, and they might have more resources to set up bases there than larger asteroids, and we wouldnt have to wait for the development of faster spacecrafts to reach there and so on. But I believe there are a lot of things to analize.
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
no, what I mean is what would the asteroid bases would buy us if we want to explore Jupiter moons?
$endgroup$
– Alexander
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
That a permanent base might be more adapted for living than a spacecraft so you need to make a stop, resupplying if you can obtain anything from them
$endgroup$
– Pablo
5 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
"if you can obtain anything from them". And my point is that making this stop is not worth it. But maybe I should just write a full answer.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
5 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Once the technology is ready to reach and set up a base in Mars (perhaps 10 years if SpaceX expectations come true) could it be possible to build a route among the asteroids to reach Jupiter's moons?
The problem of the time of the travel would be more or less the same if you would have bases in the following places, and if you start the travel when the planets/asteroids are closer,
- Earth - Mars 0,52 AU
- Mars - Vesta 0,63 AU
- Vesta - Sylvia 0,64 AU
- Sylvia - 588 Achilles 0,67 AU
- 588 Achiles - Jupiter 0,57 AU
But how about the problems of setting permanent bases in those asteroids, even when some are large ones of almost of the size of a dwarf planet, would it be feasible? Setting up a base in Mars it has to be easier. I suppose they plan to obtain water from Mars, may be they would find a way to obtain Oxigen from the CO2 in the atmosphere, also I suppose Mars is warmer than those asteroids and have more protection (even though a tiny not enough protection) from radiation than atmosphereless asteroids, and how about energy supply, if the way they plan to obtain energy in Mars is somehow related with the sun (solar energy), that has to be harder when you are far away.
Could a route among the asteroids be built to reach Jupiter's moons once the technology to reach and set up a base in Mars is ready?
science-based mars asteroids jupiter
$endgroup$
Once the technology is ready to reach and set up a base in Mars (perhaps 10 years if SpaceX expectations come true) could it be possible to build a route among the asteroids to reach Jupiter's moons?
The problem of the time of the travel would be more or less the same if you would have bases in the following places, and if you start the travel when the planets/asteroids are closer,
- Earth - Mars 0,52 AU
- Mars - Vesta 0,63 AU
- Vesta - Sylvia 0,64 AU
- Sylvia - 588 Achilles 0,67 AU
- 588 Achiles - Jupiter 0,57 AU
But how about the problems of setting permanent bases in those asteroids, even when some are large ones of almost of the size of a dwarf planet, would it be feasible? Setting up a base in Mars it has to be easier. I suppose they plan to obtain water from Mars, may be they would find a way to obtain Oxigen from the CO2 in the atmosphere, also I suppose Mars is warmer than those asteroids and have more protection (even though a tiny not enough protection) from radiation than atmosphereless asteroids, and how about energy supply, if the way they plan to obtain energy in Mars is somehow related with the sun (solar energy), that has to be harder when you are far away.
Could a route among the asteroids be built to reach Jupiter's moons once the technology to reach and set up a base in Mars is ready?
science-based mars asteroids jupiter
science-based mars asteroids jupiter
asked 7 hours ago
PabloPablo
215312
215312
1
$begingroup$
Yes, but the question is "why?"
$endgroup$
– Alexander
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Because the moons of Jupiter might have very interesting things to explore including the possibility of life in Jupiter's moon Europa, and they might have more resources to set up bases there than larger asteroids, and we wouldnt have to wait for the development of faster spacecrafts to reach there and so on. But I believe there are a lot of things to analize.
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
no, what I mean is what would the asteroid bases would buy us if we want to explore Jupiter moons?
$endgroup$
– Alexander
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
That a permanent base might be more adapted for living than a spacecraft so you need to make a stop, resupplying if you can obtain anything from them
$endgroup$
– Pablo
5 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
"if you can obtain anything from them". And my point is that making this stop is not worth it. But maybe I should just write a full answer.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
5 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
1
$begingroup$
Yes, but the question is "why?"
$endgroup$
– Alexander
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Because the moons of Jupiter might have very interesting things to explore including the possibility of life in Jupiter's moon Europa, and they might have more resources to set up bases there than larger asteroids, and we wouldnt have to wait for the development of faster spacecrafts to reach there and so on. But I believe there are a lot of things to analize.
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
no, what I mean is what would the asteroid bases would buy us if we want to explore Jupiter moons?
$endgroup$
– Alexander
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
That a permanent base might be more adapted for living than a spacecraft so you need to make a stop, resupplying if you can obtain anything from them
$endgroup$
– Pablo
5 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
"if you can obtain anything from them". And my point is that making this stop is not worth it. But maybe I should just write a full answer.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
5 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
Yes, but the question is "why?"
$endgroup$
– Alexander
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Yes, but the question is "why?"
$endgroup$
– Alexander
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Because the moons of Jupiter might have very interesting things to explore including the possibility of life in Jupiter's moon Europa, and they might have more resources to set up bases there than larger asteroids, and we wouldnt have to wait for the development of faster spacecrafts to reach there and so on. But I believe there are a lot of things to analize.
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Because the moons of Jupiter might have very interesting things to explore including the possibility of life in Jupiter's moon Europa, and they might have more resources to set up bases there than larger asteroids, and we wouldnt have to wait for the development of faster spacecrafts to reach there and so on. But I believe there are a lot of things to analize.
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
no, what I mean is what would the asteroid bases would buy us if we want to explore Jupiter moons?
$endgroup$
– Alexander
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
no, what I mean is what would the asteroid bases would buy us if we want to explore Jupiter moons?
$endgroup$
– Alexander
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
That a permanent base might be more adapted for living than a spacecraft so you need to make a stop, resupplying if you can obtain anything from them
$endgroup$
– Pablo
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
That a permanent base might be more adapted for living than a spacecraft so you need to make a stop, resupplying if you can obtain anything from them
$endgroup$
– Pablo
5 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
"if you can obtain anything from them". And my point is that making this stop is not worth it. But maybe I should just write a full answer.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
"if you can obtain anything from them". And my point is that making this stop is not worth it. But maybe I should just write a full answer.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
5 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
According to SpaceX, the answer is yes. The SpaceX program is banking on the idea that people can derive rocket fuel from the elements on Mars almost as easily as we can engineer it here on Earth, and water/food/oxygen could be readily processed in bulk, even if it's not as easy when you don't have a livable atmosphere.
If this proves to be true, then Mars would become a much better base of operation for solar exploration and habitation than Earth because the lower gravity would allow us to launch large payloads into space VS Earth which is so big that it is near the limit of how large a planet can be an still reach space with chemical fuel.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
That is fascinating. Do you have a citation for your statement that "Earth which is so big that it is near the limit of how large a planet can be an still reach space with chemical fuel."? I'd love to read more.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
6 hours ago
4
$begingroup$
nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/expeditions/expedition30/…
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
There is also a lot of fun stuff on the SpaceX website itself.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
I wonder of the feasibility of bases in those asteroids , if anything they expect to use in Mars to obtain energy, oxigen, food, radiation protection, etc. could be used in those asteroids. How about water? Would they have to be resupplied from the Mars base? Are there some rich in water asteroids near those ones?
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
I don't recall the exact period, but it would be expected that optimal resupply windows would only be available about once every 2 years give or take the exact asteroid/moon in question. Most likely any such colonies could not have permanent populations due to low gravity anyway, but would rather be tours of duty where you send out a small number of engineers to maintain mostly automated operations. I don't know what value there is in planetary moons, but it is believed that some asteroids are good sources of rare and precious metals that may make such operations worth while.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
5 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You are clearly aware of the fact that a route would not be constant - everything orbits with different periods, and although the asteroids have orbits that are 'close' to one another, they still cover a huge range. Perturbations make life even more complicated. Jupiter and Mars have wildly different orbital periods from one another, of course.
The presents a difficulty with setting up staging posts in the asteroids. Even if you always head from Mars to Jupiter around conjunction (the optimal launch window does not precisely coincide with conjunction), the asteroids that will be "on the way" will vary. So you would need a lot of such posts scattered around the belt, and you'd have to be careful in selecting larger bodies such that they wouldn't sometimes cluster all together.
It would also be expensive to build and equip these points, and keep them supplied. Even if they were unmanned, the whole point of them would be to hold supplies for such journeys. What is there to be gained from such expense? Is there any advantage to shipping supplies out there to be picked up by people en route? If you shipped them in unmanned shipments, they could be shipped more cheaply, but then it would be a challenge to get them into a depot at the staging post.
However, even if supply caches are desired, they don't have to be in the asteroids themselves. We don't need to build a route through the asteroid belt - it's nowhere near as hard to navigate as sci-fi shows like to depict. The distance between them averages as 2.5 times the distance between Earth and the Moon. If we need supply caches put part way along the journey by unmanned flights, we may as well just have containers that fly themselves out there and then do a burn to put themselves in a stable solar orbit, or grapple on to an asteroid if you prefer, to be picked up later. Permanent or semi-permanent installations would simply be unnecessary.
New contributor
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I'm aware that the route wont be constant. But I wonder if that still could be a good idea , if the bases could be re-supplied in time for things they can't obtain in the asteroids like they will in Mars and if they could get independency of some supplies. Could they be energy independent? I dont know how they plan to obtain energy in Mars . Could they obtain oxygen easily in the asteroids from compound the asteroids are made of?
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
There's another issue: energy usage. In order to rendezvous with these bases you'd need to burn fuel to decelerate and rendezvous with the base, and then burn fuel again in order to accelerate to move on. Each base would add to this. And since that adds into your transit time, it adds to the necessary supplies required for the trip. So, in other words, it would be more fuel, time, and supply efficient to make the straight run from Mars to Jupiter than stopping along the way.
$endgroup$
– Keith Morrison
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Agreed, you wouldn't bother with intermediate stopps in the asteroid belt. It's so sparsely populated and the orbits are so perturbed that you'd pick the fastest orbit from Mars to Jupiter.
$endgroup$
– pojo-guy
2 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You could, but not a permanent set of bases. Instead, you would need to have some form of mobile, anchorable bases that hopped from asteroid to asteroid as the asteroid they were anchored to fell farther and farther behind the optimal location for a Mars-Asteroid X orbit.
Each of the intermediate stages would need to move on independent schedules, since the outermost asteroids take longer than the innermost ones. The orbital period of asteroids in the asteroid belt runs from three to six years, give or take a bit. Mars has an orbital period of about 1.88 years, so Mars would orbit the Sun 3+ times before the outermost asteroids orbited the Sun once.
Unless the bases moved on the basis of an ion drive (spewing out asteroid atoms as propellant), solar sails, or some equally low energy, low thrust option, it is unlikely that anything even semi-permanent could be set up to make the flight in hops. It could be possible for limited, exploratory missions to the moons of Jupiter, but except for being the first man to walk on 10 or 20 moons, why?
Well, I can actually think of one possible reason why. The closer you are to the planet, the faster you can control a Jupiter probe. With delays of a second or two (assuming you can safely get that close), you could actually hope to control and direct a flying probe (with the assistance of a lot of AI flight tech) and direct it to interesting features. Except for this possibility (and the possibility of moon probes directed similarly), sending humans out there without a specific target that actually needs human adaptability / flexibility seems a bit foolhardy.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "579"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f139512%2fcould-a-route-among-the-asteroids-be-built-to-reach-jupiters-moons-once-the-tec%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
According to SpaceX, the answer is yes. The SpaceX program is banking on the idea that people can derive rocket fuel from the elements on Mars almost as easily as we can engineer it here on Earth, and water/food/oxygen could be readily processed in bulk, even if it's not as easy when you don't have a livable atmosphere.
If this proves to be true, then Mars would become a much better base of operation for solar exploration and habitation than Earth because the lower gravity would allow us to launch large payloads into space VS Earth which is so big that it is near the limit of how large a planet can be an still reach space with chemical fuel.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
That is fascinating. Do you have a citation for your statement that "Earth which is so big that it is near the limit of how large a planet can be an still reach space with chemical fuel."? I'd love to read more.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
6 hours ago
4
$begingroup$
nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/expeditions/expedition30/…
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
There is also a lot of fun stuff on the SpaceX website itself.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
I wonder of the feasibility of bases in those asteroids , if anything they expect to use in Mars to obtain energy, oxigen, food, radiation protection, etc. could be used in those asteroids. How about water? Would they have to be resupplied from the Mars base? Are there some rich in water asteroids near those ones?
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
I don't recall the exact period, but it would be expected that optimal resupply windows would only be available about once every 2 years give or take the exact asteroid/moon in question. Most likely any such colonies could not have permanent populations due to low gravity anyway, but would rather be tours of duty where you send out a small number of engineers to maintain mostly automated operations. I don't know what value there is in planetary moons, but it is believed that some asteroids are good sources of rare and precious metals that may make such operations worth while.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
5 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
According to SpaceX, the answer is yes. The SpaceX program is banking on the idea that people can derive rocket fuel from the elements on Mars almost as easily as we can engineer it here on Earth, and water/food/oxygen could be readily processed in bulk, even if it's not as easy when you don't have a livable atmosphere.
If this proves to be true, then Mars would become a much better base of operation for solar exploration and habitation than Earth because the lower gravity would allow us to launch large payloads into space VS Earth which is so big that it is near the limit of how large a planet can be an still reach space with chemical fuel.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
That is fascinating. Do you have a citation for your statement that "Earth which is so big that it is near the limit of how large a planet can be an still reach space with chemical fuel."? I'd love to read more.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
6 hours ago
4
$begingroup$
nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/expeditions/expedition30/…
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
There is also a lot of fun stuff on the SpaceX website itself.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
I wonder of the feasibility of bases in those asteroids , if anything they expect to use in Mars to obtain energy, oxigen, food, radiation protection, etc. could be used in those asteroids. How about water? Would they have to be resupplied from the Mars base? Are there some rich in water asteroids near those ones?
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
I don't recall the exact period, but it would be expected that optimal resupply windows would only be available about once every 2 years give or take the exact asteroid/moon in question. Most likely any such colonies could not have permanent populations due to low gravity anyway, but would rather be tours of duty where you send out a small number of engineers to maintain mostly automated operations. I don't know what value there is in planetary moons, but it is believed that some asteroids are good sources of rare and precious metals that may make such operations worth while.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
5 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
According to SpaceX, the answer is yes. The SpaceX program is banking on the idea that people can derive rocket fuel from the elements on Mars almost as easily as we can engineer it here on Earth, and water/food/oxygen could be readily processed in bulk, even if it's not as easy when you don't have a livable atmosphere.
If this proves to be true, then Mars would become a much better base of operation for solar exploration and habitation than Earth because the lower gravity would allow us to launch large payloads into space VS Earth which is so big that it is near the limit of how large a planet can be an still reach space with chemical fuel.
$endgroup$
According to SpaceX, the answer is yes. The SpaceX program is banking on the idea that people can derive rocket fuel from the elements on Mars almost as easily as we can engineer it here on Earth, and water/food/oxygen could be readily processed in bulk, even if it's not as easy when you don't have a livable atmosphere.
If this proves to be true, then Mars would become a much better base of operation for solar exploration and habitation than Earth because the lower gravity would allow us to launch large payloads into space VS Earth which is so big that it is near the limit of how large a planet can be an still reach space with chemical fuel.
answered 6 hours ago
NosajimikiNosajimiki
1,820115
1,820115
$begingroup$
That is fascinating. Do you have a citation for your statement that "Earth which is so big that it is near the limit of how large a planet can be an still reach space with chemical fuel."? I'd love to read more.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
6 hours ago
4
$begingroup$
nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/expeditions/expedition30/…
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
There is also a lot of fun stuff on the SpaceX website itself.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
I wonder of the feasibility of bases in those asteroids , if anything they expect to use in Mars to obtain energy, oxigen, food, radiation protection, etc. could be used in those asteroids. How about water? Would they have to be resupplied from the Mars base? Are there some rich in water asteroids near those ones?
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
I don't recall the exact period, but it would be expected that optimal resupply windows would only be available about once every 2 years give or take the exact asteroid/moon in question. Most likely any such colonies could not have permanent populations due to low gravity anyway, but would rather be tours of duty where you send out a small number of engineers to maintain mostly automated operations. I don't know what value there is in planetary moons, but it is believed that some asteroids are good sources of rare and precious metals that may make such operations worth while.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
5 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
That is fascinating. Do you have a citation for your statement that "Earth which is so big that it is near the limit of how large a planet can be an still reach space with chemical fuel."? I'd love to read more.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
6 hours ago
4
$begingroup$
nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/expeditions/expedition30/…
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
There is also a lot of fun stuff on the SpaceX website itself.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
I wonder of the feasibility of bases in those asteroids , if anything they expect to use in Mars to obtain energy, oxigen, food, radiation protection, etc. could be used in those asteroids. How about water? Would they have to be resupplied from the Mars base? Are there some rich in water asteroids near those ones?
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
I don't recall the exact period, but it would be expected that optimal resupply windows would only be available about once every 2 years give or take the exact asteroid/moon in question. Most likely any such colonies could not have permanent populations due to low gravity anyway, but would rather be tours of duty where you send out a small number of engineers to maintain mostly automated operations. I don't know what value there is in planetary moons, but it is believed that some asteroids are good sources of rare and precious metals that may make such operations worth while.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
That is fascinating. Do you have a citation for your statement that "Earth which is so big that it is near the limit of how large a planet can be an still reach space with chemical fuel."? I'd love to read more.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
That is fascinating. Do you have a citation for your statement that "Earth which is so big that it is near the limit of how large a planet can be an still reach space with chemical fuel."? I'd love to read more.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
6 hours ago
4
4
$begingroup$
nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/expeditions/expedition30/…
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/expeditions/expedition30/…
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
There is also a lot of fun stuff on the SpaceX website itself.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
There is also a lot of fun stuff on the SpaceX website itself.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
I wonder of the feasibility of bases in those asteroids , if anything they expect to use in Mars to obtain energy, oxigen, food, radiation protection, etc. could be used in those asteroids. How about water? Would they have to be resupplied from the Mars base? Are there some rich in water asteroids near those ones?
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
I wonder of the feasibility of bases in those asteroids , if anything they expect to use in Mars to obtain energy, oxigen, food, radiation protection, etc. could be used in those asteroids. How about water? Would they have to be resupplied from the Mars base? Are there some rich in water asteroids near those ones?
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
I don't recall the exact period, but it would be expected that optimal resupply windows would only be available about once every 2 years give or take the exact asteroid/moon in question. Most likely any such colonies could not have permanent populations due to low gravity anyway, but would rather be tours of duty where you send out a small number of engineers to maintain mostly automated operations. I don't know what value there is in planetary moons, but it is believed that some asteroids are good sources of rare and precious metals that may make such operations worth while.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
I don't recall the exact period, but it would be expected that optimal resupply windows would only be available about once every 2 years give or take the exact asteroid/moon in question. Most likely any such colonies could not have permanent populations due to low gravity anyway, but would rather be tours of duty where you send out a small number of engineers to maintain mostly automated operations. I don't know what value there is in planetary moons, but it is believed that some asteroids are good sources of rare and precious metals that may make such operations worth while.
$endgroup$
– Nosajimiki
5 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You are clearly aware of the fact that a route would not be constant - everything orbits with different periods, and although the asteroids have orbits that are 'close' to one another, they still cover a huge range. Perturbations make life even more complicated. Jupiter and Mars have wildly different orbital periods from one another, of course.
The presents a difficulty with setting up staging posts in the asteroids. Even if you always head from Mars to Jupiter around conjunction (the optimal launch window does not precisely coincide with conjunction), the asteroids that will be "on the way" will vary. So you would need a lot of such posts scattered around the belt, and you'd have to be careful in selecting larger bodies such that they wouldn't sometimes cluster all together.
It would also be expensive to build and equip these points, and keep them supplied. Even if they were unmanned, the whole point of them would be to hold supplies for such journeys. What is there to be gained from such expense? Is there any advantage to shipping supplies out there to be picked up by people en route? If you shipped them in unmanned shipments, they could be shipped more cheaply, but then it would be a challenge to get them into a depot at the staging post.
However, even if supply caches are desired, they don't have to be in the asteroids themselves. We don't need to build a route through the asteroid belt - it's nowhere near as hard to navigate as sci-fi shows like to depict. The distance between them averages as 2.5 times the distance between Earth and the Moon. If we need supply caches put part way along the journey by unmanned flights, we may as well just have containers that fly themselves out there and then do a burn to put themselves in a stable solar orbit, or grapple on to an asteroid if you prefer, to be picked up later. Permanent or semi-permanent installations would simply be unnecessary.
New contributor
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I'm aware that the route wont be constant. But I wonder if that still could be a good idea , if the bases could be re-supplied in time for things they can't obtain in the asteroids like they will in Mars and if they could get independency of some supplies. Could they be energy independent? I dont know how they plan to obtain energy in Mars . Could they obtain oxygen easily in the asteroids from compound the asteroids are made of?
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
There's another issue: energy usage. In order to rendezvous with these bases you'd need to burn fuel to decelerate and rendezvous with the base, and then burn fuel again in order to accelerate to move on. Each base would add to this. And since that adds into your transit time, it adds to the necessary supplies required for the trip. So, in other words, it would be more fuel, time, and supply efficient to make the straight run from Mars to Jupiter than stopping along the way.
$endgroup$
– Keith Morrison
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Agreed, you wouldn't bother with intermediate stopps in the asteroid belt. It's so sparsely populated and the orbits are so perturbed that you'd pick the fastest orbit from Mars to Jupiter.
$endgroup$
– pojo-guy
2 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You are clearly aware of the fact that a route would not be constant - everything orbits with different periods, and although the asteroids have orbits that are 'close' to one another, they still cover a huge range. Perturbations make life even more complicated. Jupiter and Mars have wildly different orbital periods from one another, of course.
The presents a difficulty with setting up staging posts in the asteroids. Even if you always head from Mars to Jupiter around conjunction (the optimal launch window does not precisely coincide with conjunction), the asteroids that will be "on the way" will vary. So you would need a lot of such posts scattered around the belt, and you'd have to be careful in selecting larger bodies such that they wouldn't sometimes cluster all together.
It would also be expensive to build and equip these points, and keep them supplied. Even if they were unmanned, the whole point of them would be to hold supplies for such journeys. What is there to be gained from such expense? Is there any advantage to shipping supplies out there to be picked up by people en route? If you shipped them in unmanned shipments, they could be shipped more cheaply, but then it would be a challenge to get them into a depot at the staging post.
However, even if supply caches are desired, they don't have to be in the asteroids themselves. We don't need to build a route through the asteroid belt - it's nowhere near as hard to navigate as sci-fi shows like to depict. The distance between them averages as 2.5 times the distance between Earth and the Moon. If we need supply caches put part way along the journey by unmanned flights, we may as well just have containers that fly themselves out there and then do a burn to put themselves in a stable solar orbit, or grapple on to an asteroid if you prefer, to be picked up later. Permanent or semi-permanent installations would simply be unnecessary.
New contributor
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I'm aware that the route wont be constant. But I wonder if that still could be a good idea , if the bases could be re-supplied in time for things they can't obtain in the asteroids like they will in Mars and if they could get independency of some supplies. Could they be energy independent? I dont know how they plan to obtain energy in Mars . Could they obtain oxygen easily in the asteroids from compound the asteroids are made of?
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
There's another issue: energy usage. In order to rendezvous with these bases you'd need to burn fuel to decelerate and rendezvous with the base, and then burn fuel again in order to accelerate to move on. Each base would add to this. And since that adds into your transit time, it adds to the necessary supplies required for the trip. So, in other words, it would be more fuel, time, and supply efficient to make the straight run from Mars to Jupiter than stopping along the way.
$endgroup$
– Keith Morrison
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Agreed, you wouldn't bother with intermediate stopps in the asteroid belt. It's so sparsely populated and the orbits are so perturbed that you'd pick the fastest orbit from Mars to Jupiter.
$endgroup$
– pojo-guy
2 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You are clearly aware of the fact that a route would not be constant - everything orbits with different periods, and although the asteroids have orbits that are 'close' to one another, they still cover a huge range. Perturbations make life even more complicated. Jupiter and Mars have wildly different orbital periods from one another, of course.
The presents a difficulty with setting up staging posts in the asteroids. Even if you always head from Mars to Jupiter around conjunction (the optimal launch window does not precisely coincide with conjunction), the asteroids that will be "on the way" will vary. So you would need a lot of such posts scattered around the belt, and you'd have to be careful in selecting larger bodies such that they wouldn't sometimes cluster all together.
It would also be expensive to build and equip these points, and keep them supplied. Even if they were unmanned, the whole point of them would be to hold supplies for such journeys. What is there to be gained from such expense? Is there any advantage to shipping supplies out there to be picked up by people en route? If you shipped them in unmanned shipments, they could be shipped more cheaply, but then it would be a challenge to get them into a depot at the staging post.
However, even if supply caches are desired, they don't have to be in the asteroids themselves. We don't need to build a route through the asteroid belt - it's nowhere near as hard to navigate as sci-fi shows like to depict. The distance between them averages as 2.5 times the distance between Earth and the Moon. If we need supply caches put part way along the journey by unmanned flights, we may as well just have containers that fly themselves out there and then do a burn to put themselves in a stable solar orbit, or grapple on to an asteroid if you prefer, to be picked up later. Permanent or semi-permanent installations would simply be unnecessary.
New contributor
$endgroup$
You are clearly aware of the fact that a route would not be constant - everything orbits with different periods, and although the asteroids have orbits that are 'close' to one another, they still cover a huge range. Perturbations make life even more complicated. Jupiter and Mars have wildly different orbital periods from one another, of course.
The presents a difficulty with setting up staging posts in the asteroids. Even if you always head from Mars to Jupiter around conjunction (the optimal launch window does not precisely coincide with conjunction), the asteroids that will be "on the way" will vary. So you would need a lot of such posts scattered around the belt, and you'd have to be careful in selecting larger bodies such that they wouldn't sometimes cluster all together.
It would also be expensive to build and equip these points, and keep them supplied. Even if they were unmanned, the whole point of them would be to hold supplies for such journeys. What is there to be gained from such expense? Is there any advantage to shipping supplies out there to be picked up by people en route? If you shipped them in unmanned shipments, they could be shipped more cheaply, but then it would be a challenge to get them into a depot at the staging post.
However, even if supply caches are desired, they don't have to be in the asteroids themselves. We don't need to build a route through the asteroid belt - it's nowhere near as hard to navigate as sci-fi shows like to depict. The distance between them averages as 2.5 times the distance between Earth and the Moon. If we need supply caches put part way along the journey by unmanned flights, we may as well just have containers that fly themselves out there and then do a burn to put themselves in a stable solar orbit, or grapple on to an asteroid if you prefer, to be picked up later. Permanent or semi-permanent installations would simply be unnecessary.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 6 hours ago
SamBCSamBC
1613
1613
New contributor
New contributor
$begingroup$
I'm aware that the route wont be constant. But I wonder if that still could be a good idea , if the bases could be re-supplied in time for things they can't obtain in the asteroids like they will in Mars and if they could get independency of some supplies. Could they be energy independent? I dont know how they plan to obtain energy in Mars . Could they obtain oxygen easily in the asteroids from compound the asteroids are made of?
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
There's another issue: energy usage. In order to rendezvous with these bases you'd need to burn fuel to decelerate and rendezvous with the base, and then burn fuel again in order to accelerate to move on. Each base would add to this. And since that adds into your transit time, it adds to the necessary supplies required for the trip. So, in other words, it would be more fuel, time, and supply efficient to make the straight run from Mars to Jupiter than stopping along the way.
$endgroup$
– Keith Morrison
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Agreed, you wouldn't bother with intermediate stopps in the asteroid belt. It's so sparsely populated and the orbits are so perturbed that you'd pick the fastest orbit from Mars to Jupiter.
$endgroup$
– pojo-guy
2 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'm aware that the route wont be constant. But I wonder if that still could be a good idea , if the bases could be re-supplied in time for things they can't obtain in the asteroids like they will in Mars and if they could get independency of some supplies. Could they be energy independent? I dont know how they plan to obtain energy in Mars . Could they obtain oxygen easily in the asteroids from compound the asteroids are made of?
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
There's another issue: energy usage. In order to rendezvous with these bases you'd need to burn fuel to decelerate and rendezvous with the base, and then burn fuel again in order to accelerate to move on. Each base would add to this. And since that adds into your transit time, it adds to the necessary supplies required for the trip. So, in other words, it would be more fuel, time, and supply efficient to make the straight run from Mars to Jupiter than stopping along the way.
$endgroup$
– Keith Morrison
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Agreed, you wouldn't bother with intermediate stopps in the asteroid belt. It's so sparsely populated and the orbits are so perturbed that you'd pick the fastest orbit from Mars to Jupiter.
$endgroup$
– pojo-guy
2 mins ago
$begingroup$
I'm aware that the route wont be constant. But I wonder if that still could be a good idea , if the bases could be re-supplied in time for things they can't obtain in the asteroids like they will in Mars and if they could get independency of some supplies. Could they be energy independent? I dont know how they plan to obtain energy in Mars . Could they obtain oxygen easily in the asteroids from compound the asteroids are made of?
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
I'm aware that the route wont be constant. But I wonder if that still could be a good idea , if the bases could be re-supplied in time for things they can't obtain in the asteroids like they will in Mars and if they could get independency of some supplies. Could they be energy independent? I dont know how they plan to obtain energy in Mars . Could they obtain oxygen easily in the asteroids from compound the asteroids are made of?
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
There's another issue: energy usage. In order to rendezvous with these bases you'd need to burn fuel to decelerate and rendezvous with the base, and then burn fuel again in order to accelerate to move on. Each base would add to this. And since that adds into your transit time, it adds to the necessary supplies required for the trip. So, in other words, it would be more fuel, time, and supply efficient to make the straight run from Mars to Jupiter than stopping along the way.
$endgroup$
– Keith Morrison
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
There's another issue: energy usage. In order to rendezvous with these bases you'd need to burn fuel to decelerate and rendezvous with the base, and then burn fuel again in order to accelerate to move on. Each base would add to this. And since that adds into your transit time, it adds to the necessary supplies required for the trip. So, in other words, it would be more fuel, time, and supply efficient to make the straight run from Mars to Jupiter than stopping along the way.
$endgroup$
– Keith Morrison
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Agreed, you wouldn't bother with intermediate stopps in the asteroid belt. It's so sparsely populated and the orbits are so perturbed that you'd pick the fastest orbit from Mars to Jupiter.
$endgroup$
– pojo-guy
2 mins ago
$begingroup$
Agreed, you wouldn't bother with intermediate stopps in the asteroid belt. It's so sparsely populated and the orbits are so perturbed that you'd pick the fastest orbit from Mars to Jupiter.
$endgroup$
– pojo-guy
2 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You could, but not a permanent set of bases. Instead, you would need to have some form of mobile, anchorable bases that hopped from asteroid to asteroid as the asteroid they were anchored to fell farther and farther behind the optimal location for a Mars-Asteroid X orbit.
Each of the intermediate stages would need to move on independent schedules, since the outermost asteroids take longer than the innermost ones. The orbital period of asteroids in the asteroid belt runs from three to six years, give or take a bit. Mars has an orbital period of about 1.88 years, so Mars would orbit the Sun 3+ times before the outermost asteroids orbited the Sun once.
Unless the bases moved on the basis of an ion drive (spewing out asteroid atoms as propellant), solar sails, or some equally low energy, low thrust option, it is unlikely that anything even semi-permanent could be set up to make the flight in hops. It could be possible for limited, exploratory missions to the moons of Jupiter, but except for being the first man to walk on 10 or 20 moons, why?
Well, I can actually think of one possible reason why. The closer you are to the planet, the faster you can control a Jupiter probe. With delays of a second or two (assuming you can safely get that close), you could actually hope to control and direct a flying probe (with the assistance of a lot of AI flight tech) and direct it to interesting features. Except for this possibility (and the possibility of moon probes directed similarly), sending humans out there without a specific target that actually needs human adaptability / flexibility seems a bit foolhardy.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You could, but not a permanent set of bases. Instead, you would need to have some form of mobile, anchorable bases that hopped from asteroid to asteroid as the asteroid they were anchored to fell farther and farther behind the optimal location for a Mars-Asteroid X orbit.
Each of the intermediate stages would need to move on independent schedules, since the outermost asteroids take longer than the innermost ones. The orbital period of asteroids in the asteroid belt runs from three to six years, give or take a bit. Mars has an orbital period of about 1.88 years, so Mars would orbit the Sun 3+ times before the outermost asteroids orbited the Sun once.
Unless the bases moved on the basis of an ion drive (spewing out asteroid atoms as propellant), solar sails, or some equally low energy, low thrust option, it is unlikely that anything even semi-permanent could be set up to make the flight in hops. It could be possible for limited, exploratory missions to the moons of Jupiter, but except for being the first man to walk on 10 or 20 moons, why?
Well, I can actually think of one possible reason why. The closer you are to the planet, the faster you can control a Jupiter probe. With delays of a second or two (assuming you can safely get that close), you could actually hope to control and direct a flying probe (with the assistance of a lot of AI flight tech) and direct it to interesting features. Except for this possibility (and the possibility of moon probes directed similarly), sending humans out there without a specific target that actually needs human adaptability / flexibility seems a bit foolhardy.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You could, but not a permanent set of bases. Instead, you would need to have some form of mobile, anchorable bases that hopped from asteroid to asteroid as the asteroid they were anchored to fell farther and farther behind the optimal location for a Mars-Asteroid X orbit.
Each of the intermediate stages would need to move on independent schedules, since the outermost asteroids take longer than the innermost ones. The orbital period of asteroids in the asteroid belt runs from three to six years, give or take a bit. Mars has an orbital period of about 1.88 years, so Mars would orbit the Sun 3+ times before the outermost asteroids orbited the Sun once.
Unless the bases moved on the basis of an ion drive (spewing out asteroid atoms as propellant), solar sails, or some equally low energy, low thrust option, it is unlikely that anything even semi-permanent could be set up to make the flight in hops. It could be possible for limited, exploratory missions to the moons of Jupiter, but except for being the first man to walk on 10 or 20 moons, why?
Well, I can actually think of one possible reason why. The closer you are to the planet, the faster you can control a Jupiter probe. With delays of a second or two (assuming you can safely get that close), you could actually hope to control and direct a flying probe (with the assistance of a lot of AI flight tech) and direct it to interesting features. Except for this possibility (and the possibility of moon probes directed similarly), sending humans out there without a specific target that actually needs human adaptability / flexibility seems a bit foolhardy.
$endgroup$
You could, but not a permanent set of bases. Instead, you would need to have some form of mobile, anchorable bases that hopped from asteroid to asteroid as the asteroid they were anchored to fell farther and farther behind the optimal location for a Mars-Asteroid X orbit.
Each of the intermediate stages would need to move on independent schedules, since the outermost asteroids take longer than the innermost ones. The orbital period of asteroids in the asteroid belt runs from three to six years, give or take a bit. Mars has an orbital period of about 1.88 years, so Mars would orbit the Sun 3+ times before the outermost asteroids orbited the Sun once.
Unless the bases moved on the basis of an ion drive (spewing out asteroid atoms as propellant), solar sails, or some equally low energy, low thrust option, it is unlikely that anything even semi-permanent could be set up to make the flight in hops. It could be possible for limited, exploratory missions to the moons of Jupiter, but except for being the first man to walk on 10 or 20 moons, why?
Well, I can actually think of one possible reason why. The closer you are to the planet, the faster you can control a Jupiter probe. With delays of a second or two (assuming you can safely get that close), you could actually hope to control and direct a flying probe (with the assistance of a lot of AI flight tech) and direct it to interesting features. Except for this possibility (and the possibility of moon probes directed similarly), sending humans out there without a specific target that actually needs human adaptability / flexibility seems a bit foolhardy.
answered 6 hours ago
Laughing VergilLaughing Vergil
47114
47114
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f139512%2fcould-a-route-among-the-asteroids-be-built-to-reach-jupiters-moons-once-the-tec%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
Yes, but the question is "why?"
$endgroup$
– Alexander
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Because the moons of Jupiter might have very interesting things to explore including the possibility of life in Jupiter's moon Europa, and they might have more resources to set up bases there than larger asteroids, and we wouldnt have to wait for the development of faster spacecrafts to reach there and so on. But I believe there are a lot of things to analize.
$endgroup$
– Pablo
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
no, what I mean is what would the asteroid bases would buy us if we want to explore Jupiter moons?
$endgroup$
– Alexander
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
That a permanent base might be more adapted for living than a spacecraft so you need to make a stop, resupplying if you can obtain anything from them
$endgroup$
– Pablo
5 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
"if you can obtain anything from them". And my point is that making this stop is not worth it. But maybe I should just write a full answer.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
5 hours ago