Water and Ice

When you think about it, Martian moons are NEOs
exactly half of the time. ;-)

Therefore I would think that it is best to put them
in with the NEOs. Also, they are near to Mars, which
is probably a positive thing; and the return delta-v
is much less than from the moon. In addition the
Mars moons may well possess water; more and more
accessibly than the moon appears to. Finally, they
are within range regularly, predictably and often.

Ravenart@... wrote:

> One of the things that dosen't make sense to me is why we have to colonize
> big planets first in the order out from earth's orbit. Must we settle Mars
> and other planets first?
>
> It seem to me that when we take into consideration that time, not energy, is
> the main factor in transportation, and that resources can be gained more
> easily from small mass objects than from larger mass objects like planets.
>
> It seems to me that progress would be better measured in going in going to:
> LEO
> NEOs
> Moon
> L4 and L5
> Marian Moons as transfer stations
> Asteroids
> Jupiter's moon Ganymede
>
> Those are, in my consideration the key points of future solar economy,
> especially L4, L5, asteroids and Ganymede. L4 and L5 are most stable points
> in near frontier, suitable for both home and industrial bases. Asteroids for
> the vast material riches that can be depended on as steady source of supplies
> for a long time. Ganymede while planet-sized is also one of the largest
> sources of ice that can be transported to anywhere in system, thanks to
> Jupiter's gravity as a booster to cargo's verocity. If we put our attention
> on those places after a foothold in LEO and NEOs, we can speed up the
> economic development because we would have sources that provide stablity for
> investment. The rest of the system would be easier to colonized once we have
> colonized those key points.
>
> Carl Mullin
>

--
- Ian Woollard (ian.woollard@...)

"Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding
technological civilization?"
- Gerard O'Neill