Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SpaceX says 'reusable rocket' could help colonize Mars
breitbart ^ | Sep 29 03:13 PM US/Eastern

Posted on 09/29/2011 2:08:01 PM PDT by BenLurkin

The US company SpaceX is working on the first-ever reusable rocket to launch to space and back, with the goal of one day helping humans colonize Mars, founder Elon Musk said Thursday.

The vehicle would be a reusable version of the Falcon 9 rocket which SpaceX used to propel its Dragon space capsule to low Earth-orbit on a test mission last year. Its first cargo trip to the International Space Station is set for January.

Currently, a Falcon rocket costs between 50-60 million dollars to build and launch, with fuel and oxygen costs making up just 200,000 dollars. Then, it is lost forever as it burns up on re-entry into Earth's atmosphere.

The rocket would take off as normal, then separate into its upper and lower stages. The column-like lower portion would make its way back to Earth and hover back down to land upright, in the same position from which it took off.

No wings are needed to steer it back to launch pad, he said.

In the near term, the technology could be used to launch satellites and take cargo and crew to the ISS, which is presently serviced only by Russia since the US space shuttle fleet retired in July.

The effort to build a reusable rocket "is a parallel effort... it is not impacting our sending of cargo to the space station," Musk said.

In fact, it would be just about ready to go except for the fact that SpaceX and NASA agree it needs to have some sort of way for its occupants to eject in case something goes wrong.

So a project to build escape thrusters into the sidewalls of the spacecraft is expected to take two to three years, Musk said. After that, the Reusable Falcon 9 rocket may be ready.....

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...


TOPICS: Astronomy; Science; Travel
KEYWORDS: mars; spacex
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

1 posted on 09/29/2011 2:08:04 PM PDT by BenLurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis

An animation is at http://www.spacex.com/npc-luncheon-elon-musk.php.


2 posted on 09/29/2011 2:09:20 PM PDT by BenLurkin (This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

I still like John Glenn’s idea of using asteroids to haul freight to mars.

Park your freight on an earth crosser, then in a couple of years when the roid makes a close approach to mars, launch it from there.


3 posted on 09/29/2011 2:14:18 PM PDT by cripplecreek (A vote for Amnesty is a vote for a permanent Democrat majority. ..Choose well.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Can we send all the liberals to Mars?


4 posted on 09/29/2011 3:03:06 PM PDT by SVTCobra03 (You can never have enough friends, horsepower or ammunition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Just send all the liberals. No return necessary.


5 posted on 09/29/2011 3:05:32 PM PDT by Hardraade (I want gigaton warheads now!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Yeah. In 1000 years when private industry re-invents the nuclear engines that were developed back in the 1960’s, they’ll go to Mars. Costs too much.

But alternate energy companies can’t develop competitively priced products without government money.


6 posted on 09/29/2011 3:11:01 PM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

If SpaceX can pull this off it will be the first fundamental innovation in deployed rocket technology since the first Space Shuttle was launched in 1981. Unlike the horrifically expensive Shuttle, this approach could actually reduce the cost to low earth orbit by a very significant amount. Even if the system is not able to achieve Elon Musk’s goal of being man rated, it could still provide the cheapest way to loft inanimate payload to LEO. Perhaps total launch costs per pound of payload could be cut down to something like 1/5th of the current amount.


7 posted on 09/29/2011 3:16:55 PM PDT by Jeff F
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin; KevinDavis

Thanks BenLurkin.
Roadmap To Mars
by Buzz Aldrin with David Noland
December 2005
The key advantage of a permanently orbiting spacecraft, or Cycler, is that it must be accelerated only once. After its initial boost into a solar orbit swinging by both Mars and Earth, the Cycler coasts along through space on its own momentum, with only occasional nudges of thrust needed to stay on track. This dramatically reduces the total energy required for a Mars mission. Because conventional chemical rockets are so thirsty -- the mass of the Apollo 11 craft that carried us to the moon was more than 90 percent fuel on takeoff -- every pound saved pays a huge dividend in the form of less propellant and smaller, cheaper boosters.

Once established in orbit with the long-term human survival systems, radiation shield and artificial gravity mechanism necessary for a lengthy space journey, the Cycler swings by Earth and Mars on a predictable schedule. Astronauts piloting "taxi" spacecraft, such as NASA's planned Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), rendezvous and dock with the Cycler as it passes Earth, using only the propellant necessary to accelerate the smaller craft. As the Cycler swings by Mars, the taxi casts off and brakes into Mars orbit, like a commuter stepping off a train. The Cycler, meanwhile, speeds on beyond Mars and eventually loops back toward Earth, ready for another passenger pickup.

8 posted on 10/01/2011 12:18:57 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (It's never a bad time to FReep this link -- https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Jack Hydrazine; ELS; ToxicMich; Art in Idaho; TheOldLady; Oiao; nepppen; Vaquero; ...



9 posted on 10/01/2011 12:26:18 PM PDT by KevinDavis (What has Ron Paul done in Congress??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin; KevinDavis

I understand that a nuclear rocket could get a manned ship to Mars in a few weeks during cose approach. If that is true, I expect such a ship could be rather large and keep them safe for the 2 years it might take before coming home?

Or even just to get there do the science for a couple of months and come back, leaving the habitats and stuff for a future mission?


10 posted on 10/01/2011 1:05:09 PM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

So a ship like that would keep going back and forth between Earth and Mars carrying freight and crew?

That is a very interesting idea.


11 posted on 10/01/2011 1:07:30 PM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SVTCobra03; Hardraade

Silly! Liberals are from Venus!


12 posted on 10/01/2011 1:09:33 PM PDT by mrreaganaut (Harding/Coolidge '20!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
The rocket would take off as normal, then separate into its upper and lower stages. The column-like lower portion would make its way back to Earth and hover back down to land upright, in the same position from which it took off.

Seem like it carries a lot of fuel not used to get to orbit...lowering payload. Put some wings on it and glide it back for refurbishment.

13 posted on 10/01/2011 1:11:41 PM PDT by hattend (If I wanted you dead, you'd be dead. - Cameron Connor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL; All

That is what Robert Zubrin proposed.. Send a ship do some stuff on Mars and go back on a reentry vehicle..


14 posted on 10/01/2011 1:13:03 PM PDT by KevinDavis (What has Ron Paul done in Congress??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

This article breaks down the costs of the Falcon heavy:

http://blog.nss.org/?p=3080&cpage=1

It will cost 1/15th the price of a shuttle and 1/10th the cost of a Delta 4. This is a game changer.


15 posted on 10/01/2011 1:15:01 PM PDT by Brett66 (Where government advances, and it advances relentlessly , freedom is imperiled -Janice Rogers Brown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

That’s the general idea, I do wonder though how long the trip would take, and how many of these would be needed to make regular trips to and from truly practical.


16 posted on 10/01/2011 2:04:12 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (It's never a bad time to FReep this link -- https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis

Zubrin???...didnt I see him in “The Big Bang Theory”


17 posted on 10/01/2011 2:46:55 PM PDT by Vaquero ("an armed society is a polite society" Robert A. Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: hattend

Fuel is cheaper and lighter than wings with all the associated flight hardware and landing gear suitable for a rolling, high-speed landing. You only need a few seconds worth of fuel.


18 posted on 10/01/2011 2:55:24 PM PDT by hopespringseternal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv; KevinDavis

Zubrin is a little nutty but he does make some good points when he isn’t hiding out on a remote island playing Mars explorer. lol.


19 posted on 10/01/2011 3:43:30 PM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

The thing about the Mars to Earth and back ship is that it would never have to actually slow down or stop, right? (obviously it is slowing down if its coming closer to the sun or something? I dunno...)


20 posted on 10/01/2011 3:45:55 PM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson