Given that even these simplified scenarios seem too difficult for people to bother evaluating on their own, there is no reason for me to rack my brain to figure out all the details of more complex scenarios. The absolute values will vary quite a bit based on mission architecture. These values are not intended to show actual mission values, but to illustrate the point that seems so hard for many to grasp about the immense value of in-situ resource use.

Once again the LM could have been much more massive if the whole mission was oneway. I used one-way from LEO because that is the simplest option promoted in the rock bottom approach of Mars Direct. One-way from LEO is also a reasonable scenario for building bases on the Moon. I do not however claim either is the best option.

I do claim and these numbers support it is stupid to go to the Moon to refuel for Mars. Many aerospace experts have supported that stance not just Zubrin including the only real aerospace engineer here. Many of the people who support Moon first avoid mentioning this. You for one will not admit it, and I'm not sure whether it's because you don't believe it or simply don't want to give any quarter to the Mars first folks.

Regards,
Mark