Space Settlement FAQ's]

Fowarding Dennis May's response to Mike Combs

Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 13:32:04 -0600

I wrote (11/11):

>Although the Moon and Mars have low
>gravity, a sleeper car on a circular track can
>perform artificial gravity the same as a spinning
>platform, at a greatly reduced cost.

Mike Combs mikecombs@... wrote (11/12):

>Perhaps, but why compare this with orbital habitats? Do you plan to built
>10,000 person permanent settlements on sleeper cars on circular tracks?

At some point hundreds of people will be involved
in mining on the moon and asteroids before an
orbital habitat is constructed. For reasons of
efficiency and health these people should spend as
much time as practical under a 1 G environment.
Those constructing the orbital habitats can be shuttled
to a Moon base for 1 G time more efficiently than
traveling back to the Earth.

Those doing sedentary work in particular should have
offices in rail cars, sleep, and eat while under 1 G.
It is by far cheaper to keep someone traveling in a
circle than to degrade their health and ship people
back and forth to the Earth.

I would expect that circle tracks will be a permanent
companion feature of all factories and outposts on low
G bodies with human workers. Mars has high enough gravity
this will likely be unnecessary. The Moon and nearby bodies
may not have this feature for some time but as settlements
get larger they are certain to appear.

On another topic: I would expect nuclear rockets to play
a pivotal roll in the settling of space. Getting to Mars
is no more time consuming than traveling the oceans of
the Earth given nuclear rockets. Mars has water-ice
ready to be mass driven to wherever needed. The Moon
may have some cometary water at the poles in deep craters
but Mars is certain to have a great deal more. Jupiter's
moons have plenty of water. Nuclear rockets are
clearly the preferred method of human travel to reduce
time in space between protective habitats. Dragging a
protective habitat with you is an extremely inefficient
means of travel. Shipping and time related efficiencies
apply to space as well as they do the Earth. Those who
can deliver the goods quickly at a reduced price will
ensure the commercial success of space. If it makes
sense to have an SST for commercial travel it certainly
makes even more sense to have nuclear rockets in space
travel. Slow intra-solar system travel will greatly
hamper economic progress.

Dennis May