Slashdot Mirror
Buzz Aldrin's Roadmap to Mars
FleaPlus writes "Former astronaut (and MIT astronautics grad) Buzz Aldrin has an article in last months Popular Mechanics in which he describes a plan for manned Mars missions. Aldrin's plan proposes using a Cycler spacecraft permanently orbiting between Earth and Mars. This would have a shielded habitat and rotation-induced gravity, and would take just 5 months to reach Mars. Smaller vehicles would take astronauts to and from the Cycler. Aldrin claims the plan is less costly and more sustainable than NASA's current plans."
Buzz's plan may be cheaper than the NASA's current plan, but pass on his plan to NASA and the space industry and they'll inflate the price tag like he cannot believe.
Still, the Congress might buy it.
(sorry for a troll...)
Not only is he an MIT grad with a doctorate, he's got a moon crater named after him, and he has flown into space with Homer Simpson. With credentials like that I don't know how anyone could doubt his wisdom.
Has this guy lived or what?
He has a girlfriend at his age? Good for him!
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Before this feature, articles like this would simply never appear on the main page unless users configured their homepage to include all articles from the section (in this case "Science"). Now, these non-front-page articles get a small footprint at least.
I dug around a little and found the following abstract detailing an older version of Buzz Aldrin's work. Unfortunately, I can't seem to find a free link to the actual paper...
Evolutionary space transportation plan for Mars cycling concepts
Aldrin, Buzz; Byrnes, Dennis; Jones, Ron; Davis, Hubert
AIAA Space 2001 Conference and Exposition
A promising new human Mars exploration approach based on the use of an Earth-Mars Cycling Interplanetary Transportation System is described. In this approach, a cycling vehicle acts as a permanently emplaced transportation element that continuously cycles between the Earth and Mars using gravity assist with minimal course adjustment on each cycle eliminating the need to repeat the large and expensive injection propellant requirement of traditionally conceived Mars vehicles and missions. With the implementation of a two Cycler system, one Cycler would always be going to Mars while the other is returning to Earth. When in the vicinity of the Earth or Mars, the Cyclers release or are intercepted by smaller aerobraking "taxis" that ferry people and supplies to and from the surface. Alternatively, in the Semi-Cycler Concept, the Cycler vehicles themselves would use aerobraking and gravity assist to orbit about the Earth or Mars for a period before returning. In this way, unmanned cargo flights to Mars could use the minimum energy, long trip time trajectories while crewed flights could use the shorter flight time, longer stay time options. Both concepts are addressed in the paper, and the results of preliminary flight mechanics analyses are presented. In addition, a transportation plan is presented based upon a logical extension of existing space assets augmented by new vehicles providing a reusable transportation capability.
.... when do we get to blow zombies' heads off from Hell?
Soon, rite?
>:D
Seems like this guy came out up with his plans only after NASA released theirs. Story of his life, always second.
"I'm going to f***ing bury that guy, I have done it before, and I will do it again. I'm going to f***ing kill Google"
Without the ISS there would be no space tourism. You need to have a destination to sell before you get customers. A flight to Mars could be done with something like an extended apollo program, with similar non-reusable hardware, but you can't make money off that.
If money is not being made the US taxpayers will have to pay for the whole thing and I really can't see that happening in this day and age.
But wealthy people would pay for a cruise on the continous shuttle system Buzz is proposing. I think it is the right way to go.
And good on him for punching Bart Sibrel
http://michaelsmith.id.au
It only works if we find water on the moon and water on mars. Doesn't that mean this plan is science fiction? Or should billions be invested on a maybe?
that I always wanted to do:
:)
Fly into space.
Walk on the Moon.
Punch Bart Sibrel in the face.
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
This is a dangerous time for NASA. People are getting older there (as if they weren't before) But is the US education system producing enough people to fill the void and meet tomorrow's challenges? Will we make it to mars in less than 18 yrs as many are predicting or will the red planet be claimed by a rising red star?
Demented But Determined.
There seem to be a lot of 'extra' expenses that his plan depends upon.... like a permanent base on the moon, a permanent fuel depot and manufacturing plant on Mars (already in place) not to mention that he calls for two Cycler type ships not one... plus the multiple CEVs to actually realize the goal of sustainability. There's more but I'll let you read it yourself.
It's a nice plan but do I see a plan that's cheaper? Hell no, If the goal is to GET to Mars.
If the goal is to create an interplanetary transit system then sure, this is definitely the way to go.
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
I've always loved Buzz, he actually wrote about this stuff in his Sci-Fi book Encounter With Tiber. In it he also wrote about the "Big Can" method of building the space station, ie. build the Space Station out of the spent fuel tanks. I think he also had space stations at Lagrange points.
Who cares what school he's gone to?
I think it's rather relevant that he has an astronautics doctorate from MIT when the submission is about a plan for spacecraft which exploit interplanetary transport orbits.
I saw this referred to in the Encyclopedia Astronautica (no images). There's also a section that lists the "leading" proposed manned Mars missions.