BFR delivery to Deep space gateway & Mars Base camp?

[Cloakedwand72]

Would the BFR be able to deliver crew & cargo too & from the Deep space gateway & the Mars Base Camp?

[Scotius]

According to all sources, yes.  

[Ultimate Steve]

Yes. Why you'd want to do that is beyond me, though, a single BFS would have many times more habitable volume than the currently proposed Deep Space Gateway and is expected to become more operational before Mars Base Camp, not to mention potentially many times less expensive than MBC.

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

Those are the latest set of NASA Mars mission plans in a long string of canceled mars plans stretching all the way back to Das Marsprojekt. See: Constellation, SEI/90-day report, Mars Design Reference Mission 1 though 5, NASA Ride report, Journey to Mars and many others.

In the extremely unlikely event of either of these flying before they are cancelled, then yes. BFR can land on and return from the moon or mars carrying significant cargo with orbital refueling, so travelling to a Lunar or Martian space station would be easily within its capabilities. 

I'm sorry to sound pessimistic about NASA's mars mission plans, since I really do hope they work, and I wish NASA the best of luck. However I suspect that the politics are not stable enough to withstand the long-term concentrated effort necessary to allow these projects to succeed, and I suspect that the worst designed parts of these missions (why do you need a lunar space station to go to mars?) are the result of politics.

[Bill Phil]

Sure. 

12 minutes ago, Mad Rocket Scientist said:

Those are the latest set of NASA Mars mission plans in a long string of canceled mars plans stretching all the way back to Das Marsprojekt. See: Constellation, SEI/90-day report, Mars Design Reference Mission 1 though 5, NASA Ride report, Journey to Mars and many others.

In the extremely unlikely event of either of these flying before they are cancelled, then yes. BFR can land on and return from the moon or mars carrying significant cargo with orbital refueling, so travelling to a Lunar or Martian space station would be easily within its capabilities. 

I'm sorry to sound pessimistic about NASA's mars mission plans, since I really do hope they work, and I wish NASA the best of luck. However I suspect that the politics are not stable enough to withstand the long-term concentrated effort necessary to allow these projects to succeed, and I suspect that the worst designed parts of these missions (why do you need a lunar space station to go to mars?) are the result of politics.

There's not many issues with the missions working. NASA is a highly competent agency. They just won't likely happen given... well... Congress' enormous control over their budget.

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

Just now, Bill Phil said:

Sure. 

There's not many issues with the missions working. NASA is a highly competent agency. They just won't likely happen given... well... Congress' enormous control over their budget.

Exactly, the previous plans weren't cancelled because they failed. In fact, I personally think there hasn't been an entire unfeasible NASA Mars plan since they were designing winged landers.  

[kerbiloid]

Iirc NASA's MDRA 5 and BFS plans presume 6-8 months in zero-G without centrifuge (even medical one), then active work on surface (MDRA includes drilling) for next year (if they successfully crawl out).
And ISRU refueling to return.

ESA's CDF Study presumes a medical centrifuge during the flight, but just a short (up to month) trip to the surface without drilling.

Nautilus is rather futuristic, and with no details.

Marpost was shown once and then disappeared. Even small picture scans are blurry.

This makes to think that BFR maybe could if it would.

[YNM]

Given the colossal nature of BFR, why don't just send it straight to Mars ? Everyone knows that an express is faster than a local...

Edited August 16, 2018 by YNM