IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

23 Pages V  « < 21 22 23  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Mars Sample Return
mcaplinger
post Aug 14 2018, 12:17 AM
Post #331


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1721
Joined: 13-September 05
Member No.: 497



QUOTE (JRehling @ Aug 13 2018, 02:22 PM) *
This discussion in 2018 certainly highlights how wildly optimistic that was

If we had tried to do it, we'd have figured out how. It's these endless paper studies that go nowhere.


--------------------
Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stevesliva
post Aug 14 2018, 03:13 PM
Post #332


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1344
Joined: 14-October 05
From: Vermont
Member No.: 530



QUOTE (John Whitehead @ Aug 9 2018, 02:06 PM) *
Yes, there needs to be rocket engineering, not rocket science. But MAV funding is being spent on "rocket science" (propellant research), instead of engineering to improve the state of the art. There needs to be an engineering effort to make propulsion components less than half as heavy as typically used for satellites and spacecraft. Whether or not this counts as "new technology" is only semantics.


The first part is semantics, too.

Your point, to me, is that declaring the technology ready to snap into a typical "we're sending a spacecraft to mars" schedule is aiming to take 9 women and make a baby in a month.

It's a bit of a catch-22 where you can't get the money and staffing to solve the problem until you say with certainty that the problem is fully solvable with whatever time and money budgets allow. Things then slip right later but the project survives.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

23 Pages V  « < 21 22 23
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 16th August 2018 - 03:27 PM
RULES AND GUIDELINES
Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting.

IMAGE COPYRIGHT
Images posted on UnmannedSpaceflight.com may be copyrighted. Do not reproduce without permission. Read here for further information on space images and 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 a project of the Planetary Society and is funded by donations from visitors and members. Help keep this forum up and running by contributing here.