means more robust, aerodynamic hulls, heat shields, complex navigation and control systems, all kinds of mass that has to be shipped out to the Belt even though you're not going to need it until you get back home.
Sure, its technically possible, but we're talking costs here. It will all come out of profits. Every kg of propellant you need to come home and brake when you get home has to be carried with you on the way out, and that means even more propellant to boost it, and still more propellant to boost THAT. And there's no aero braking in the belt, so you'll need still more propellant to stop you when you get there.
The propellant masses quickly become untenable for reaction motors. We need radically different propulsion technology here. Probably nuclear fusion of some sort...And naturally ocurring water or methane ices in the Belt for reaction mass.
Space/Science » in reply to "Belt to the inner solar system is just as energy-expensive–you have to slow down when you get home."
True, but aero braking
The whole thread (22 posts)
- Mars; here we come.
- A long way to go but I'm glad it's his mission
- Apollo cost $100G in today's dollars.
- Colonization ain't gonna happen.
- It's not impossible, just unprofitable.
- So what's wrong with constant resupply from a home base?
- The tensions facing this Earth and species won't allow those expenditures.
- You need a reason to go there.
- Good point.
- So what's wrong with constant resupply from a home base?
- It's not impossible, just unprofitable.
- Colonization ain't gonna happen.
- Apollo cost $100G in today's dollars.
- A long way to go but I'm glad it's his mission