Red Dragon Options

[Paolo]

'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

[djellison]

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.

You're thinking 'how would dragon deliver Phoenix'. That's not the goal here. It's a change in philosophy.

The actual question is - what science could you do with a Dragon on the surface.

One scientist, at least, clearly thinks there is plenty that can be done.

I can see massive potential for Dragon as depicted in that video - and even more with comparatively simple modifications to the vehicle structure.

[Jim from NSF.com]

You're thinking 'how would dragon deliver Phoenix'.

No, I was thinking how Dragon could deliver Phoenix's instruments.
Scientists will compromise everything for a free ride.
There are no simple mods to the structure. Look at the recovered Dragon, the only place for instruments is in the interior. They would have extend through the two hatches.

Any other mods and it is not a Dragon anymore.

[djellison]

No, I was thinking how Dragon could deliver Phoenix's instruments.

Again - still the wrong mind set.

[Jim from NSF.com]

Again - still the wrong mind set.

Huh? So the "right mind set" is not to deliver instruments and just land a Dragon capsule.

Ok, I will go back to lurking and let the spacecraft "experts" state their "qualified" opinions based on their experience this field.

[djellison]

Huh? So the "right mind set" is not to deliver instruments and just land a Dragon capsule.

Very very obviously, that is NOT the point I was making. You really are very very determined to start an argument rather than have a discussion, aren't you.

Ok, I will go back to lurking

Please do.

[Jim from NSF.com]

Very very obviously, that is NOT the point I was making. You really are very very determined to start an argument rather than have a discussion, aren't you.

Then state your point because you haven't revealed andI know my mind set and it is not wrong.

The Dragon is a poor design to deliver any but people and goods. Same thing would apply to the Orion capsule or CST-100. They are structurally wrong for other tasks. They are designed to contain their payloads.

Driving rovers out the hatch is ludicrous, the hatch is small and high off the surface.

[djellison]

Driving rovers out the hatch is ludicrous, the hatch is small and high off the surface.

And yet again, Jim, you argue against something I've not proposed. I didn't propose delivering PHX's instruments. I didn't propose driving a rover out of the door. Yet you decided to have an argument with me about such things.

I have made my point - and made it clearly. The issue is not how to deliver payloads previously sent to Mars with Dragon. It's what payloads could you send to Mars with Dragon. You continue to ignore that simple statement and start arguments over things I've not said or even inferred.

ADMIN MODE:
Consider this a public administrator warning Jim - stop trying to start arguments with people. This has been an ongoing problem with you over the years. Your attitude continues to be mutually exclusive with that of constructive discussion. Your behavior is confrontational and rude, and this is not just my opinion, but that of many of the admin team and other UMSF members as well.

Might I suggest you do as promised and go back to lurking. Further posting in this manor, and we'll simply suspend your account.

Again.

[Jim from NSF.com]

And yet again, Jim, you argue against something I've not proposed. I didn't propose delivering PHX's instruments. I didn't propose driving a rover out of the door. Yet you decided to have an argument with me about such things.

I have made my point - and made it clearly. The issue is not how to deliver payloads previously sent to Mars with Dragon. It's what payloads could you send to Mars with Dragon. You continue to ignore that simple statement and start arguments over things I've not said or even inferred.

I am going to blow my wad on this. I am not talking about previous instruments but any type of one. Dragon is a bad platform. The ideas since your post demonstrate that it is. Most are non viable.

Ideas modifying the structure are non starters. It isn't a dragon the. Opening hatches, non starter again, the avionics are not designed for vacuum.

There is out of the box thinking and then there is off the reservation which most of the ideas are.