[X] My Assistant

[Guest_exobioquest_*]

Hi, new here.

I'm wondering if any news has come down about finalizing what MSL will run on?

Will it be 2 Boeing's MMRTG (at ~100 watts?) or Lockheed Martin’s SRG (again ~100watts?), have they decided yet? Willl MSL use the RPS to trickle charge a battery or will MSL run on the RPS only? God I hope solar is not a option is anyone pushing for it?

[mike]

Gasoline production is a front so the military can fuel their killing machines.

[Guest_exobioquest_*]

mcaplinger,

Its unlikely the mass of the SRG will be more then the MMRTG, the mass estimates are ranged now so it is possible the MMRTG will weigh less, but so far SRG usually has a range average a few kg below the MMRTG.

Also your not considering all the extra weight of the radiators needed for the cruise staged to keep the MMRTG cool.

Pu238 last cost ~$1400 per gram, so for the purchasing of the fuel alone (not counting the making of the GPHS) the MMRTG's fuel will cost 5.6 million while the SRG's will cost 1.4 million. Can anyone find out how much a GPHS cost to make? So just fuel cost the SRG is 4.2 million cheaper, not much but when the mission goes over budget every dollar less overbudget it goes the less likely the mission will get bumped up.

mchan,

those nuts and their logic its scares me so, how likely you think they will make a effective stink?

[mcaplinger]

Its unlikely the mass of the SRG will be more then the MMRTG, the mass estimates are ranged now so it is possible the MMRTG will weigh less, but so far SRG usually has a range average a few kg below the MMRTG.

Also your not considering all the extra weight of the radiators needed for the cruise staged to keep the MMRTG cool.

You make a fair point about the radiators, though even MPF and MER had radiator systems.

I can't assess the mass estimates of the RTG systems themselves without detailed technical descriptions.

However, from http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/scitech/display.cfm?ST_ID=705

"Initially, the MMRTG could have an advantage from a mass perspective, as current NASA/DOE guidelines recommend that early missions using SRGs carry at least one redundant SRG unit until its reliability has been verified [11]. This means that early missions using SRGs would need to carry a minimum of two SRG units. Thus, for early missions (where a redundant SRG would be required), the MMRTG (at <45 kg [10]) would be the lighter option for spacecraft requiring one or two RPS units."

And according to the NASA FY06 budget request ( http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/107489main_FY06_1_sae.pdf ), page 2-22 "MSL - Department of Energy for Multi Mission Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators" and page 2-14 "Radioisotope Power System (RPS): Deleted Small RPS or second generation Sterling (SRG), and RPS Power Conversion Technology (RPCT)." I think it's clear from that that MSL is planning to use the MMRTG.