OFMM General Discussions

[fireballs619]

Voyager, if you meant the glider, then I could see it.

I'll do some research to see if it could fly in the atmosphere on mars. Reading in the 'Atmospheric Vehicles' thread, where it was mentioned, I found it was rocket powered, so that will help. It was designed for Mars, and I know that in-orbiter it can fly in atmo, but I'm not sure if that is realistic. Is the fact that it was designed for mars enough verification:idk: ?

Azure it is.

I'll update the wiki page. It feels great to finally have a selected vessel, even if it is just the SMEV!

 

[n72.75]

geostationary (whats if called over Mars?)

Areistationary?

Sounds right, we need an orbiter dictionary...

 

[River Crab]

but I'm not sure if that is realistic.

Hmm?
They actually built it. It's a real thing, not just an Orbiter addon.

 

[Columbia42]

As for an atmospheric vehicle for Mars exploration, I have an idea. What if we brought along a special cockpit thingy that we could attach to the skycrane and fly around over Mars but not land.
In more detail: After the skycrane has landed the crew on the surface in the Hab module/lander, it flies back up to the stack (or whatever we're calling it) and docks. There a cockpit is attached that can withstand mars atmospheric entry but is not made to land and has no thrusters or propellant. The skycrane with the cockpit attached then undocks from the stack and descends into the Martian atmosphere. The skycrane/cockpit contraption can then fly around Mars making low altitude observations. After this is done, the vehicle returns to Mars orbit* and docks with the stack. If we are feeling really ambitious, we could put some landing gear on the thing and have the skycrane land it. (This vehicle could pick up crew from the base and transport them around the planet).

*I don't think it would actually return to orbit, instead it would just do a suborbital hop and dock with the stack.

So what do you guys think?
BTW, I have no idea what I'm talking about, just thinking since we have these skycranes, why not use them?

 

[River Crab]

Areistationary?

Sounds right, we need an orbiter dictionary...

:shrug: I'd go with Mars-synchronous, if I wanted to be safe.

 

[Bj]

I'll update the wiki page. It feels great to finally have a selected vessel, even if it is just the SMEV!

Well the rest of the vessels haven't been built yet... :thumbup: when they do get built, the name of them can be decided by the builder, or if that builder wishes, by popular vote.

Areistationary?

Sounds right, we need an orbiter dictionary...

That's it

We do need a dictionary... anyone up to wiki it?

 

[River Crab]

...just thinking since we have these skycranes, why not use them?

That's one thing I can agree with, be it air-drop or cockpit thing. Although if you're not going to land, why not just beam video from the SC?

And the SC, I'll work extra-hard personifying her! :thumbup:

 

[Salun]

To much?

 

[Bj]

Too much?

:lol: A little...

 

[Izack]

To much?

To be honest, that thing scared the crap out of me.

 

[Salun]

:lol: A little...

A little? Bah Ill have to go with more offensive next time. >.<

 

[Izack]

A little? Bah Ill have to go with more offensive next time. >.<

What's that chap from, anyway?

 

[Salun]

To be honest, that thing scared the crap out of me.

Let it be a reminder to always hit shift-X when leaving a breathable area:suicide:

Its from the Movie Total Recall. Great film about A guy going to Mars. If you can watch it do so.

 

[fireballs619]

I would do the wiki, but unfortunately I don't have time. I'll edit it though.

It would still be geostationary, or rather geosynchronous, not arei-. Geo- means 'earth or land', but not Earth as a proper noun. Also, I don't think it would reference Ares, because the earth equivalent of that would be Terra, and we don't have a Terrastationary orbit . Enough of that rant, however.

 

[Bj]

I would do the wiki, but unfortunately I don't have time. I'll edit it though.

It would still be geostationary, or rather geosynchronous, not arei-. Geo- means 'earth or land', but not Earth as a proper noun. Also, I don't think it would reference Ares, because the earth equivalent of that would be Terra, and we don't have a Terrastationary orbit . Enough of that rant, however.

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Areostationary_orbit"]Areostationary_orbit[/ame]


[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Areostationary_orbit"] [/ame]

 

[fireballs619]

GAR! My crazy extrapolations were wrong?!!? This has never happened before!

 

[Bloodworth]

GAR! My crazy extrapolations were wrong?!!? This has never happened before!

Yasure, yabetcha...:thumbup:

 

[River Crab]

[imagethatiamnotquotingagain]
To much?

:blink: Do not want!

Going back on topic (I'm a hypocrite I know), have we decided to just do away with communication satellites or what? Personally I think we should leave a tiny comms sat in either geosynchronous orbit, or a very eccentric Molniya-type orbit (with periapsis on far side of Mars). In one Mars first colonization study, they proposed leaving it in a high Mars orbit, but I'm not sure why, and I forgot the name of the study.

---------- Post added at 22:47 ---------- Previous post was at 22:45 ----------

GAR! My crazy extrapolations were wrong?!!? This has never happened before!

You would have pulled it off and looked smart anywhere but this forum. :lol:

 

[Izack]

:blink: Do not want!

Going back on topic (I'm a hypocrite I know), have we decided to just do away with communication satellites or what? Personally I think we should leave a tiny comms sat in either geosynchronous orbit, or a very eccentric Molniya-type orbit (with periapsis on far side of Mars). In one Mars first colonization study, they proposed leaving it in a high Mars orbit, but I'm not sure why, and I forgot the name of the study.

What's the use of putting the satellite on the same line of sight to the base as the Earth?
A Molniya orbit or an areosyncronous one I agree with, but rather one that spends most of its orbit with a line of sight for both the base and Earth at the same time.
It's not like you can make radio transmissions any faster. The delay in communications is an insurmountable barrier.

 

[Bloodworth]

:blink: Do not want!

Going back on topic (I'm a hypocrite I know), have we decided to just do away with communication satellites or what? Personally I think we should leave a tiny comms sat in either geosynchronous orbit, or a very eccentric Molniya-type orbit (with periapsis on far side of Mars). In one Mars first colonization study, they proposed leaving it in a high Mars orbit, but I'm not sure why, and I forgot the name of the study.

---------- Post added at 22:47 ---------- Previous post was at 22:45 ----------


You would have pulled it off and looked smart anywhere but this forum. :lol:

A high Mars orbit would seem to be the best choice for a communications relay satellite. A higher altitude would seem to offer the best communications coverage and the shortest and least frequent communications blackout times between Mars and Earth.