/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10795228
with the right window it's as little as 6 months

>>10477709
>>10477786
The time it takes to get to/from Mars depends on where it is relative to Earth. Generally, unless you have absurd amounts of fuel, it takes roughly 6 months one way then another 18 months the other way, or you can take 6 months to Mars, stay for a year, then 6 months to go back.

>>10360088
you forgot the image

>>9815678
>a monthly supply rocket
That would be rather difficult to do because of the Hohmann transfer orbits. If you could add ion thrusters that were firing the whole flight you could make it faster (previous anon apparently thinks "normal" rockets are firing the whole trip or something) and at least have a better schedule. But the orbits are enough out of sync that they're only close every 2 years, and that makes regular supplies flights difficult.

And you can't make the resupply ships reusable if the whole problem is how long it takes to refuel the ship, at the very least you have to drop a one-way lander module so that the rest of the vehicle can return. At that point you might as well put big tanks of hydrogen in the supplies drops to speed up the fuel generation.

The more that people bring up the scale of what it takes to make enough fuel for the rocket, the more I see the Mars Direct idea (don't send humans until their return rocket is ready) is the way things need to go.

>>9679570
It would be a marginal improvement