Is rocket reuseability a good thing for mars?
No.11944771 ViewReplyOriginalReport
Quoted By: >>11944867 >>11945805
This was originally the subject of a troll thread but I decided to repost it and give this question serious consideration.
There are two reasons for questioning the idea of reusability for specifically interplanetary Earth-to-Mars transports (this is not about LEO reusable launch vehicles):
1). Extended period of time without being serviced in a controlled environment
2). the lack of habitats for colonists on Mars
A Mars-to-Earth transport will spend almost three years between being serviced in a proper maintenance facility. Barring the low tech pressure-fed rockets, rockets have thousands of moving parts that are subjected to temperature and pressure extremes (pumping cryogenic fuel at pressures higher than the pressure of the already high-pressure environment of the combustion chamber). In order to ensure safety and mission success, these engines must be serviced and inspected in the proper facilities. Space-X & any potential competitors inspect and service, not only the complex engines, but also avionics, electrical systems, structure, etc. Doing similar maintenance actions in interplanetary space in a EVA suit is impossible, and it's even worse on the surface of Mars where dust contamination is a major concern. Any launch from the surface of Mars carries with it a serious risk greater than taking off from the surface of Earth. This segues to the second point.
Why would anyone want to send their spacecraft back to Earth when it can double as a hab module. Once a spacecraft lands on Mars, its habitat module can serve as a beachhead for the first colonists. Not only can the habitat module serve as living quarters for the first Martian colonists, but also the empty fuel tanks as well depending on the choice of fuel. Assuming non-toxic fuels like LOX-LH,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wet_workshop
a spent tank can double as a habitat module in of itself giving additional living space for colonists.
There are two reasons for questioning the idea of reusability for specifically interplanetary Earth-to-Mars transports (this is not about LEO reusable launch vehicles):
1). Extended period of time without being serviced in a controlled environment
2). the lack of habitats for colonists on Mars
A Mars-to-Earth transport will spend almost three years between being serviced in a proper maintenance facility. Barring the low tech pressure-fed rockets, rockets have thousands of moving parts that are subjected to temperature and pressure extremes (pumping cryogenic fuel at pressures higher than the pressure of the already high-pressure environment of the combustion chamber). In order to ensure safety and mission success, these engines must be serviced and inspected in the proper facilities. Space-X & any potential competitors inspect and service, not only the complex engines, but also avionics, electrical systems, structure, etc. Doing similar maintenance actions in interplanetary space in a EVA suit is impossible, and it's even worse on the surface of Mars where dust contamination is a major concern. Any launch from the surface of Mars carries with it a serious risk greater than taking off from the surface of Earth. This segues to the second point.
Why would anyone want to send their spacecraft back to Earth when it can double as a hab module. Once a spacecraft lands on Mars, its habitat module can serve as a beachhead for the first colonists. Not only can the habitat module serve as living quarters for the first Martian colonists, but also the empty fuel tanks as well depending on the choice of fuel. Assuming non-toxic fuels like LOX-LH,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wet_workshop
a spent tank can double as a habitat module in of itself giving additional living space for colonists.
