Red Dragon |
Red Dragon |
Aug 7 2011, 09:46 AM
Post
#1
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1729 Joined: 3-August 06 From: 43° 35' 53" N 1° 26' 35" E Member No.: 1004 |
'Red Dragon' Mission Mulled as Cheap Search for Mars Life
any opinion on this? would it really make sense adapting a manned spaceship to unmanned Mars landing? I am skeptical... if replying, please remember forum guideline 1.5 |
|
|
Aug 7 2011, 12:16 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 153 Joined: 4-May 11 From: Pardubice, CZ Member No.: 5979 |
Since payload capacity of Red Dragon to Mars surface would be couple of tons I see this concept quite suitable for MSR mission.
It could IMHO merge at least two separate missions: Sample Caching Rover and Sample Return Lander. Don't you think? |
|
|
Aug 7 2011, 03:37 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 3652 Joined: 1-October 05 From: Croatia Member No.: 523 |
Since payload capacity of Red Dragon to Mars surface would be couple of tons I see this concept quite suitable for MSR mission. Payload mass (i.e. launch vehicle performance) to Mars will be just one factor in MSR. A much bigger cost will be the actual spacecraft, as is usually the case. I don't see Red Dragon helping here. If a large mass is needed there, just using Falcon Heavy with a dedicated spacecraft would make more sense (coincidentally, MSR with one spacecraft was something Elon Musk suggested would be enabled by the Falcon Heavy). This concept of using Dragon to land something on Mars is interesting but it does have drawbacks. A big chunk of the landed mass would be Dragon itself and its (for unmanned landers) unnecessary pressurized structure. It also remains to be seen if a Dragon could actually perform a successful EDL in the first place. -------------------- |
|
|
Aug 8 2011, 01:24 AM
Post
#4
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14448 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
A big chunk of the landed mass would be Dragon itself and its (for unmanned landers) unnecessary pressurized structure. The point being, when the LV can lift so much weight - then you can get away with 'wasted' mass. The thing we have the least of, is money. If a system like this gets instrumentation onto the ground at <$ than, say, 'traditional' spacecraft design and LV's.... then it's a win. |
|
|
Aug 8 2011, 02:27 AM
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 321 Joined: 6-April 06 From: Cape Canaveral Member No.: 734 |
Full inline quote removed - ADMIN
No, the capsule is still a fixed size and it is a pressurized structure meant to contain personnel and loose cargo. It is ill suited to contain a rover or instrument suite such as Phoenix. All previous landers jettisoned their heat shield to expose the spacecraft, Dragon can't do this and if it could, it would expose a sealed vessel. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 1st November 2024 - 12:18 AM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |