You bring up some valid points.
But, supplies can be sent ahead of time to Mars and the space vehicles can be assembled in earth orbit negating the requirement of a single large rocket that must lift everything off the earth’s surface.
No they don't.
Not unless you involve that wonderful scientific organization, Los Zetas.
Finer scientists you will not fine.
“...supplies can be sent ahead of time to Mars and the space vehicles can be assembled in earth orbit negating the requirement of a single large rocket that must lift everything off the earth’s surface.”
True that. It’s brought up in that video I linked to that NASA already is working on a lifting body to get the pieces parts to an assembly plant/launch platform in LEO. From LEO, launch fuel to Mars falls dramatically, to about 7 lbs per lb of payload.
But now you’re talking three separate engineering processes and three separate complex systems: the parts shuttle, the orbiting launch platform and the launch vehicle. And complexity rises at the square of the change in the number of processes involved.
To: hopespringseternal
“Actually, one mongo direct ascent rocket would be a colossally stupid way to do it and you know it (or you are too ignorant to offer an opinion.)
First of all, the Mars transport would be assembled in earth orbit using multiple small launches. Second, the far more efficient way to do this to use some version of a nuclear electric rocket. Once you crank up the specific impulse enough the mass fraction is much friendlier.”
We knew from the start that the STS had a limited lifespan. The shuttle served for 30 years and has been retired for six, so where is its replacement? We still have to hire a ride from the Soviets whenever we need to refuel one of our spy satellites.
I’m just not ignorant enough to believe that what passes for NASA these days can accomplish all three of those missions in the span of the next eight years.
And be sure to wake me when you’re ready to test your nuclear electric rocket.