![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Just idle speculation on a winter afternoon here but there have been several
scientific papers lately that suggest some interesting possibilities for flight on Mars. If, as many suspect, there was once large amounts of standing water on Mars, the atmospheric pressure to maintain that water must have been in the 600 - 1000mb range. Recent data from the Mars Reconosance Orbiter suggests that the current rate of atmosphere loss doesn't support the near total loss of that atmosphere since so it may still be there somewhere - possibly frozen and covered by dust. Other papers suggesting ways to "teraform" mars hold that a small amount of CFC gasses (posibly carried by as few as 10 rockets) could trigger enough greenhouse effect to release that frozen atmosphere should it prove to be there. CFC's are thousands of times more powerful as greehouse gases than CO2. There is a lot of oxygen on Mars but it's mostly bound up with iron as rust (That's why Mars is red) However enough of it may be loosely bound to minerals that 200mb or so of it would be released if warmed. So, still speculating, at 38% Earth gravity and with an Earth-like1000mb atmosphere, what would flight be like on Mars? Well, it might be possible for humans to routinely fly under their own power. It would take only a third as much wing area for the same wing loading. Interesting stuff... Bill Daniels "Ron Wanttaja" wrote in message ... On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 14:21:41 +0000, Scott wrote: DABEAR wrote: It would seem to me that if there were enough atmosphere on Mars to support Ultralights, an astronaut could cover greater ground in exploration, especially considering the STOL capability of such an aircraft. VTOL is nice, but an engine failure could cause a mission abort. A dual engine failure could maroon astronauts. In regards to the rovers, if the vehicle breaks down, it's a long way to walk back to base camp on very little oxygen. Good idea, but they don't have any VORs there yet. ![]() Yeah, but on the plus side, there's no FAA there, either. :-) A couple of problems. First, Mars' gravity is about 38% of Earth's, but its atmospheric density is less than 1% of ours. You'll end up needing a very large wing to carry an astronaut, especially when you consider that our intrepid Mars explorer has to wear a pressure suit and carry sufficient air for his sojourn. Plus the fact that the air is so thin the vehicle's engine probably won't be able to use it to oxidize the fuel, so the vehicle must carry both fuel and oxidizer. The whole problem isn't THAT much different from the "Lunar Buggy" discussion we had about two years back. Here's one of my write-ups on that: http://tinyurl.com/2kwjhe Ron Wanttaja |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Australian Ultralights | Kevin Berlyn | Home Built | 0 | March 15th 05 12:09 PM |
Best engine for ultralights | Josip | General Aviation | 5 | August 27th 04 06:02 PM |
one medical away from Ultralights | Gilan | Owning | 7 | May 22nd 04 12:54 AM |
one medical away from Ultralights | Gilan | Piloting | 7 | May 22nd 04 12:54 AM |
Ultralights photo | Mirco Landini | Home Built | 4 | September 17th 03 06:08 AM |