Gerst is showing this chart at the NAC meeting today.
He’s saying he doesn’t have to make decisions about Phobos versus orbit versus surface until 2020.
[Update a couple minutes later]
Here are the solar electric options.
4 thoughts on “Mars ISRU”
Comments are closed.
Meh, I’m old enough to remember when Mars 2012/2013 was a discussion at NASA. There’s more than one reason a decision doesn’t have to be made until 2020.
Actually, there’s a case to be made that NASA should resume discussing a 2012/2013 Mars mission; it’s got every bit as much chance of happening as an SLS-based Mars mission.
/snark
On a more serous note, I see that they’re also about to change, again, the ARM (Asteroid Retrieval Mission) plan.
Minimum lander size driven by Crew Ascent Vehicle
That assumes the crew must return to Earth. Which makes no sense, even if you believe the purpose is science rather than settlement.
Of course, this matters only if you expect NASA to be the organization that opens the solar system.
Also seems to assume a LEM style configuration which makes little sense. 0.38g means SSTO gas and go is very possible.
…decisions … until 2020 to which you add lead times starting from 2020. If we knew we were serious about mars colonization we could send supplies now and every following launch window to the same site until going was a no brainer. Give that supply program funding so that only interest on investment is spent and it could continue forever even after colonists arrive.
If we can’t do LOX ISRU… give it up… we definitely have the wrong stuff.