AngelLestat

It seems that Nasa is following our votes.. http://www.popsci.com/nasa-makes-titan-and-enceladus-new-frontiers

You can have all kind of animals.. but we should know that animals are not 100% efficient machines.. so you will be able to feed more people if you use just vegan diets. Of course they can sacrifice some efficiency and eat once a while meat. First.. if we are talking of colonization.. at that point, beat gravity is just as common as refuel. (we are almost there with spacex alone, maybe just 10 years more for 2 reusable stages, you may have skylon too) So if you are trading rare metals (or products already manufactured), the cost of the fuel is nothing in comparison.. earth already waste many tons on fuels just to get few kgs of rare metals. About venus infinity.. things made from the atmosphere only needs 8.5kms to reach low venus orbit. And things from the surface; can be rised with ballons (submarines are more accurate) to the cloud level with almost no energy cost. So they have the same deltav. But that magnet was cleaning this orbit by billions of years. The asteroid belt orbit is pretty much virgin, the chances for collision are greater, no sure how much greater.. Many scientist said that mostly all asteroids close to earth were belt´ asteroids which orbit was disturbed. This mean every few millons of years, earth has enough time to get a collision with any close orbit asteroid, that is why there are so few in comparison with the asteroid belt. And if we look in the asteroid map, jupiter is the planet with the most clear space. So you only need to be worry on the new ones, that is why being in space is not safe enough, atmospheres are a great thing, they give pressure, radioactive shielding, resources and protection from meteorites. If you just trade the 5 or 10% of your most expensive resources then is not a bad place to be. Thanks. Venus has its disadvantages as well as Mars has its. Water is not so easy to get in big amounts, this rise the cost of fuel for rockets, then you need to counter close to 3m/s of meridional winds, maybe there is a passive position where this is reduced, but it force you to design (kinda) aerodynamic cities and waste a bit of power on that. About material structural penalty, you already have to make the city to resist at least 6m/s in propulsion (but with lower acceleration), on the other hand change of winds are not a real problem. About build things in the atmosphere.. may have its drawbacks, the same as build in vacuum and with dust. There is a way to navigate the city using kites. I am finishing a scientific paper and starting a patent (which does not have real practical use in earth by legal motives). Yeah that is the economic motive that a cloud city should chase. What if you cover Chester´s Mill dome with some superconductors to create a strong magnetic shield, not sure how much will be the energy requirement.

beamed energy to be used as thermal source does not qualify as electricity, of course rockets needs propellent, so I guess there is no way to go around that. Or maybe he was asking for the turbo pump.. In this case would be an electric turbo pump using beamed energy.

Yeah that, unconsciousness. Sometimes I mix my language with english. For me starts from the level zero and then goes up. I will call intelligent to a light that turns on when a photosensitive cell detects no light. And is not just me, people is used to call these things that way.. "The intelligent car", some animals do similar basic stuff, if they see a shadow over them, they move (in case is a predator), those are just few neuron interconnections, if we add more and more.. I guess it will reach the point when you are not able see who is more intelligent, you or "it". yeah is not. 2 days ago I have a similar dog "intelligent" experience with my neighbour´s dog. She told me that the other day in my park, the dog was looking for some animal, I knew about this but I never found it. Then she tells the dog.. "go.. help Ariel", without signs. The dog makes all the way until my house (go around the limits until reach my park door, it waits until I open. Then he enters but it doesn´t know what to do, so look the owner and she tells him.. search the "coipo", show it to Ariel.. And he does that. By the way.. the dog knows me.. but not much... But it may be realized between all possible things his owner may be asking.. the one with higher chances of being right.. was that. Because his NN was already trained and that was the result outcome under those inputs. That is how ANN works. And I guess a dog knows that an elephant should come with 4 legs.. if they have 3, they see that as a weakness to attack. Why it knows? because is a pattern.. that is an animal, and all animals are symmetric and most of them has 4 legs. That is something that a big ANN would not have difficult to figure out.

Well I could find some extra data about the biggest Venus issue.. how to get water. At altitudes below 30km up to 10km, in afternoon, is possible to find high (for venus) concentrations of water (without h2so4). Amounts that goes from 50 ppm to 100ppm, This is equal to 50 to 100 grams of water by m3 (15m3 for each liter). The good news is that "afternoon" in venus may last some months if you are anchored to land. Winds are just 10m/s at that height and you can even use some mountains to reduce the cable needs, not sure the best way to collect it, with a scoop or with a big surface a bit more colder to condensate the water. At 48km, we have the biggest h2so4 precipitation, this is just 10 to 20 ppm, but we don't need extra energy to collect it, only to separate water in case we don't want the acid. Mr. Rubisco, Is really annoying when you drop numbers without have a real idea or reference of what are you talking about I made the math, for a 5000 tons habitat, which might be 150m x 150m x 2 floors + 100 people (or more floors and less area, this saves insulation), we need between 0,5mw to 1,3mw. (no gigawatts). Now this cooling air machine may weight 2 or 4 tons, I will said 1 or 2 if we make it lighter. Plants can help in the cooling needs, If we have all our roof surface with plants (where habitat air can not flow with the plants and envelope air, but you can visit this section using doors. What happens is that plants receive light and water.. they evaporate that water carrying that heat to the top of the envelope, this cool down few degrees the plants layer and the human habitat below. If we use the special emissivity cover to radiate heat directly to space, then that is all we need for plants and us. A 40m x 12m kite at 48 kmh wind, can generate 8 mw.. So energy in venus is not a real problem. I am an evidence machine, is time that you provide once a while some evidence.. "as the 1gw air conditioner." Take a look to the amount of radiation that people receive in airplanes.. then reduce a bit the altitude and increase the time exposure by 50 years. Then try to convince all inhabitants they will not die from cancer. The higher cities are at 4000m in bolivia. You may have some towns at 5000m but without much stadistic data. At 5000m you have 2 times the shielding than at 7500m. Is easy to notice this just studying the atmosphere density curve and the area below: Maybe if instead 57km, you place it at 54,5 may have more sense. Helium and hydrogen lifting capacity is reduced. Air may increase.. not sure.. if is at higher temperature. You still can do that at 54km, you dont include the habitat inside the lifting envelope, but you deposite there all your waste heat from the machines and you apply special emissivity coefficients to the envelope (different top from bottom) to harvester heat. Is a good idea, but like different layers means different speeds, you may need to wait quick a lot to to have an interception window (the same as orbits). if you low the whole lading base for short amount of time (for all kind of isru bases or floating industries), then you might be wasting similar energy in changes of altitude for transport "goods" that the one you waste in cooling. But well, is pointless try to be so energy accurate now. Almost all problems have solution, the factor here is find the one that is most cost efficient. The envelope needs certain thick to support the structure, you can divide that thick in 2 or 3 layers..... I don't understand, now you want a city at 65km? Reduce the day/night cycle is welcome.. but not really necessary.. I will put this as last of requirements. About wind speed, I am not interested in wind speed at certain layer.. I am interested in wind gradient.. the difference of wind speed at different layers.. that is the energy you can harvester. At lower altitudes from 48 to 50, is when most of the speed change happen. heh, I was trying to said volcano Ah with electrodynamic tether, yeah I know that technique. but yeah, there is no magnetic field here, also.. we know very little about this.. how much damage might receive this skimming trying to trap super fast particles. As you can see, we already solve those issues you mention.. we need some chemist.. also other kind of ideas or math is welcome.

agree, but I guess we would be able to find life in any celestial object before we sent the first guy there.. Not sure with mars.. And then when we finally find it, there is something amazing about life.. we can kill it! XD Is all more fun after that.

>_< it wasn't there before XD See.. now it has 2 votes Yeah, but you will need to buy those rights to the venus corporation, and we don't sale to avoid competition in the solar system. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/93905-nasa-is-considering-a-manned-mission-to-venus-before-mars/&do=findComment&comment=1629108 But, even with the extra cost for that, it does not solve the radiative shielding issue. Maybe in enceladus would be possible use a thermal nuclear reactor, not to produce electricity.. just for thermal, then you increase the temperature until the point you separate oxygen from hydrogen, this will create a thin atmosphere around, and then you ignite a cigarette to create extra heat which.. will to create more atmosphere? :S Not sure.. but I guess it should be a way to find some twisted way to live in enceladus.

Sure, live in caverns in mars is a great idea.. the problem is how you made the cave? Those TBMs we use here are not light, they also require a lot of energy, even in the lower scale needed for mars. Mars soil is soft, this is good for energy, but as you said it needs extra material to support itself. By yeah, I guess that is the best way for mars. Visibility at 53km is around 5 to 10km giving by the visible power flux. By the way, I don't see any robot landing airplanes when the visibility is zero XD. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/129667-designing-a-venus-cloud-base/&do=findComment&comment=2358779 Big batteries mean more than 1 to 5 hours or charge.. It just need 10 to 20 min + autogyro (which it can be landed and directed without energy consumption), another method will be with a parafoil with a propeller behind. If something go wrong.. there are 2 options.. Descent until touch venus surface and wait until a "submarine" resque (capsules have a lot of insulation and resist enough pressure), or you may have a special ballon inflattion eject (just for the astronauts) where they can float at 53km. In their suits even if they leave the capsule at 40km altitude, they will be fine until they rise. The asteroid belt is big, venus is closer. Venus has extra launch windows to a certain asteroid (I will said 1 year for venus and around 5 years for mars), if you need to send a spare to certain station, what do you do? Venus has also the shortest flying time from the minimum energy trajectory.. but it paids a bit more of deltav... What is the rush? I already show with math that a 5000 tons habitat using air as lifting gas will take 44 days to mix 1/4 of its air with a 3m diameter orifice in the envelope. The envelope will be a sphere of 150m radius (just to make the math easier) Yeah is an issue, but from the beginning all the things that you bring from earth needs to be the most lighter possible.. the same for mars xd. And once you are enough advance in venus, each time you increase the surface envelope by a 30%, it means you can double your payload, so each time you have more lift by less cost. And one of the lifting gases is almost free in Venus.. Nitrogen. Envelope radius and habitat mass: 150m--> 5000T 500m-->183000T Heh, why it matters if is in the gravity well or not? You have plans to visit the outer planets with the asteroid colony? Or visit other stars? Because if you want to go the other direction (earth) you need to spent similar or more deltav than from venus. About the size of the asteroids.. we can only detect asteroids of 1km or bigger. This does not mean that there are not all the other sizes from a small stone to 900m floating around.. That for certain gives you higher chance of being hit than in orbit around the earth, where planets was cleaning the area by 4000 millones of years. I have it into account. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/129667-designing-a-venus-cloud-base/&do=findComment&comment=2357790 You may find the source of that info some post below. Yeah, you should act fast in after the first encounter. For small asteroids may be not so hard. Also your first asteroids you choose, will be those who contain the higher % of heavy elements you can find, so you don't lose time and money with the waste.. Is like if in the ten century here on earth, we would be bothering to remove 1km3 of land to find few diamons or gold, when in that time you find those in the surface. Yeah, I dont know what details or theory development behind the design the mod creator had into account. too bad that is not for KSP, it would be fun try that landing.. Heh, I like it. it has its flaws, but I guess for the long term step, mars advocates should think out of the box to compete with venus advantages. This mean different ways to achieve long habitable areas without huge cost. What I like of this idea is that the structure is self supported by the pressure difference. Someone knows an estimative chance to be hit it by a rock in mars at that area? The inside atmosphere should be as low as possible, 0.3 bar will reduce a lot the forces on the dome. Radioactive shielding would not work.. An atmosphere provide 1200g/cm2 meanwhile the spacestation provide 10g/cm2, and mars atmosphere 20g/cm2. Not sure how crazy is magnetic shielding..

all those places seems great for visit, but I don't imagine a self sustaining colony in any of those places. I can imagine a robotic refueling station in case we still use chemical rockets by that time... By the way.. you've forgotten Enceladus, the most water active moon.

You need to keep some aerodynamic, there are times depending your latitude location that you need to counter the meridional winds (toward the poles), if you are not aerodynamic, it will cost you a lot of energy to move. Not sure.. but all big airships use rigid structure. Even the new goodyear blimp, is no longer a blimp.

I don't like that base design, I just find exactly what magnemoe was asking (when I was looking something else), so I wanna see his reaction On the design, I like more a rigid structure as K2 said, a ellipsoid shape to keep aerodynamic and structure strengh will do the work.. because you want to move that city or outpost to different latitudes once a while. In a quick read I did not understand how to calculate the scale height, I will see tomorrow if I have time.. it also work to calculate radioactive shielding. (long distance between asteroids) I know, that is one of the reasons why the asteroid belt is the worst location to find the next right asteroid. About safety... No planet is in that area, that is why jupiter clean all the objects and the same with inner planets. And I am not saying that you will be hit for a big asteroid.. just a small one will do enough damage. And is just a game of chances.. which is higher there than close to other planets. The distance is 2,2 to 3,2 AU, this mean 282w/m2 vs 133w/m2 (one side), this has no comparison with venus that you get 400w/m2 (all sides, no need for tracking) inside the clouds and +600w/m2 a little above... No to mention 2600w/m2 in venus orbit. Venus is closer that any other planet to the asteroid belt, and it has higher orbital velocity, so the travel time is lower. You can pick one, use its own ice as propellent and then capture the asteroid using the thick atmosphere of venus.. then is all yours. Earth can not do aerocapture of asteroids.. it will be too risky.

Ok, I did not realize before the mass of lifting gases remains similar. I give you a point for that. But I still I don't see the point for all drawbacks you get just to fight a minimum problem (cooling). Let's compare these two altitudes, 52,5 vs 57 km: 1-Radioactive shielding: 1,3kg/m3 vs 0,7 kg/m3, then you need to multiply that by the scale height, in resume you lost half or more. 2-Pressure: 0,9 bar vs 0,37 bar. --> this equals to 7700m, not sure what physical problems might bring in case we use the right oxygen mixture,but nobody test it for longer periods of time. 3-Normal breathing air mixture vs oxygen rich mixture. --> this increase the cost of the lifting gas, because nitrogen is much cheaper to get than oxygen, and a lot of process require oxygen from day 1. It also increase the risk of fire. 4 -Returning and flying vehicles: You force all vehicles to fly at that height as minimum, returning vehicles from space would have problems to slow down, more time and energy to recover or rescue things floating at 50km, reach the surface could be possible with two different vehicles with variable buoyancy, but not if one of them needs to reach 57km. 5- At 57 km it needs higher UV protection, bad for materials. 6-More complex envelope design due gases expansions between day and night or changes of temperature. This nasa paper explain in more detail this and other drawbacks. 7-Envelope cost may be a bit higher, the surface increase but is more due manufacture complications working at big scales.. 8-You can not collect much h2so4 at that height.. Positive things: passive cooling, extra solar energy and more visibility. (take care with direct sun exposure) Now lets see how needed was this.. How much energy we waste with active cooling? Let's begin with the havoc mission, why you think they choose 50km? Because they have a huge rocket they need to lift, and they can not double the envelope surface because increase the cost and the complexity of all the maneuvers. They know that the only thing they need to counter is the thermal flux passing through the insulation with active cooling.. In this case you have modules, you just cool the modules, if you have a whole habitat inside the envelope, then lets imagine your habitat (bottom of an ellipsoid) at 30 degrees, the rest of your envelope (heat keeps up) 45 degree, outside 46 degree, because the % of air in your habitable zone is nothing compared with the rest of the envelope, so the average temperature inside the envelope will be close to 1 degree lower. That is the difference you need to cool down. And no get confuse with my old thermal passive stratification idea, this is different. And about the weight of insulation and cooling? Insulators are the most lightest elements made, you have even an aerogel that can be manufacture in base to co2. You have big quantities of argon in the atmosphere, you can use that as thermal insulator going in the middle of a double layer envelope. Or use different emissivity techniques, as the one that I show you which radiates heat directly to space. And the extra energy you get from sun, you can harvest more energy from wind, is more reliable, does not need storage and reach Mw or Gw of power is cheap. But.. It can be useful for different base uses and isru.. It might be process that will get efficiency benefits from passive cooling and low pressures. There are also other process that get benefic with high pressures and heat, like electrolysis. Another way but also increase the complexity of the envelope, is with working fluids (evaporation and condensation using the thermal gradient of venus), then the city may oscillate between 49 and 56 km, you can cool things when you are at 56 and then insulate when you go down, this way you extract energy from the atmosphere.. But it may be more efficient just extract energy from a normal way and us active cooling. Or with a good insulated pipe scoop floating high enough suck.ng cool air to cool the city. Yeah, I was also thinking in some of those crazy ideas, but they don't worth it. The most important I guess is know where we can get water and what would be the energy cost. One for sure is from the sulphuric acid, and our best second hope will be in the ground crust, as a water reservoir trapped. Vulcans are the main source of water on venus, and some asteroids. I saw that there is 12ppm of helium in venus atmosphere (much higher than earth), So if we use oxygen, nitrogen and helium in our breathing air with a single envelope, we can save hydrogen and envelope surface. Better leave the hydrogen to produce methane and different things we would need to manufacture and self sustain..

Look what I found.. no ksp.. orbiter. http://www.orbiter-forum.com/showthread.php?t=3495 Can you elaborate? Why it will consume more deltav? You can launch from 55km to lower the atmosphere, the gravity there is 8,7ms2 instead 9,8 like earth. The circumference of venus is a bit small, that also reduce a bit the deltav, the only drawback it is the rotation speed at cloud level vs earth.. cloud level at 55km 90 to 100 m/s, earth at cape canaveral is 400 m/s. Someone can make an accurate deltav requirement? We already have an idea which does not need any new tech in the cloud topic to solve the surface mining (in case is needed). We can even mine the top of a mountain 10km height with even less requirements. It will fun to divide us in two designing groups and find an answer once for all to this venus vs mars question. You may help mars or both if you like. But try to be organize. So we can compare a rought cost and energy requirements and the amount of things needed to be exported from earth.. and the whole deltav cost. Until now only sargenrho made some advancements in the mars quest. The only way to figure out what problems we might find is thinking step by step. Someone accept the challenge? Or the mars points and arguments only can reach this step? You made your point with the magnetic accelerator, it is truly an advantage, about venus, you can build "weave" a fleet of solar sails in orbit with few kg of material that would also transport things between earth and venus without propellant. We still need to solve the propellent needed to ascend stuff from the clouds.. or just include that in the extra cost that venus has.. Yeah, we still need to know the exact deltav requirement from cloud base, but how small it is vs falcon9 is a positive hint. If they are filled with gases why it matter how big they are? also that blimp carries a rocket, the density of an habitat will be lower. PD: About an asteroid colony. Being close to the sun means more energy, that is 100% related to your manufacture and mining cost. Plus the cost of the habitat vs mars or venus. The asteroid belt is the most dangerous place to have an hábitat. But well you can made a thread as the venus cloud design, and find what are the real requirements, then we can compare all.

Hi Sargerho, I dont have time for a full review.. also I will like you get some help from other mars advocates.. We (in the other thread) are trying to make a similar plan, we still need more time. It will be fun to see what group have the best plan. One thing: take into account that nuclear power or fussion or similar stuff, they all require cooling to measure its efficiency. Here on earth we use huge cooling towers evaporating water that is lost and we have an atmosphere to help in the heat transfer.. In mars you can not waste water, is almost as difficult like get ride of heat in space, maybe worst if your radiators transfer heat to the soil or between them (depending the angle). Any radioactive pollution will be dangerous than earth, because the atmosphere is 205 times less massive than earth (this means 205 times less radioactive diluted). THe other ideas looks nice. What is ITT and WTC? The amount of acid in the air is almost none.. micro doplets that are not enough to harm you (in short exposures) because they just can react with the same amount of skin (also micro). You get rid of the suit, you hang it on the rack and you go dinner, it will evaporate. In mars you really need special procedure to get ride of the dust which might do a lot of harm. Heh, why you need to launch your rocket from inside the city or airship? In that case in mars you will launch the rocket from the top of the habitats? XD If you sent people only, this is how big is your rocket:

To speak clearly, there are not perfect layers that are not permeable to hydrogen (unless a single layer of perfect graphene), but if the material you are using is enough to just lost 1% of hydrogen in 1 month then I said is enough. That % is reduced by volume, because volume increase faster than surface. There is another option to harvester materials from land without floating ballons to cool the vehicles.. you can use the highest mountain in venus.. "Maxwell montes 11km", at that height you have almost 100c less than in the surface. Is good idea start with modules from earth. We would need a vasimr tug carrying things between earth and venus after some time, then solar sails can be added to the mix too. I did the math some time ago, 400mx400m sails made in orbit with a density of 1gm2 to 5gm2 (does not matter much) are able to transport in cargo of 5 tons in 5 to 7 months (no manned), the cargo will detach from the solar sails for aerocapture or reentry. Then catch another load and go back to earth doing the same thing. A fleet of those should be cheaper and they can work at any moment without waiting for launch windows. mmm, but the drag you get from harvest that co2, is not worst than lift that co2 from cloud city to there? Hi there.. still not sure what advantage you see into such high altitude.. And I cant understand your math.. I just saw some numbers.. let me see if I understand. Some facts: at 50km the venus air density is 1,6kgm3, breathing air will lift 0,5 kg and hydrogen 1,6 kg aprox, but at 57 km, venus air density is 0,72kgm3, at this height air lift 0,26kg by m3 and the hydrogen 0,76 kg by m3.. So for the same volume you have less than half of the payload. 50km is very hot, but 52,5km is fine. You dont need to heat all the envelope, just your living area, some machines from the city or outpost, might be outside so the heat does not enter. If your living area has good insulation, then the amount of cooling needed is negligible compared to your other needs. I show how get energy in venus is not a problem. At that height you lose a lot of radioactive shielding, you need uv protection and your breathable air should be mostly oxygen, that is expensive than nitrogen.. (nitrogen comes truly free in venus, you dont need to make chemical reactions and is the second more abundant gas.). With this and other insulation and emissivity techniques, you will be able to have a 3 or 4 degrees lower than the surrounding in passive way http://www.gizmag.com/building-heat-mirror-photonic-radiative-cooling/34958/

there are ways to shutdown the conscience (pressing in certain part of the brain), or to measure what responses comes from inconscience. Scientist find that all responses are generated by inconscience and then the brain makes the illusion to make you think you choose that answer in a conscious way. They achieve that, knowing before the test subject, what it would be his/her answer some short time before he becomes conscious of his/her answer. I think that inconscience is just the answer that a complex ANN trained in patterns gives you. Then you might have the conscience as the driver that "guide" in some way your choices.. but we don't know what is conscience yet, or if is just a manifestation of inconscience. Or maybe someone knows.. About intelligence, you are using a difficult way to define intelligence, I guess we already have discuss about this, there is a video of michio kaku in which define what is intelligence in a very practical way. Because the time when you cross a line between human vs other animals, or human and chimps and dolphins vs all animals.. it does not have sense.. It makes you believe that there is a physical difference that it triggers or not.. and the main difference may be just incremental. I guess nobody can answer that yet.. our best choice still is try to divide all problems in very small problems until reach the most basic principles, and then start from there. Because in its complexity, brain see it from a distance is indecipherable, the same that try to know how a complex ANN reach its answer.. it can not be followed. That is the barrier.. know if conscience is one thing that works with a different mechanism or not. Or if just arise from complexity. maybe.. but also the elephant has a bigger body, so it has more cells or terminal nerves to control. Also, sometimes an animal might look dumb, but it may be using the brain in a different way that us. Elephants had a great memory, they may be have also quite a lot of genetic memory, but is hard to prove it from our perspective. My only concern is not about if they are bad or good.. my concern is with unmeasured progress. Not sure how that can be a good thing.. we can not even enjoy certain discovery or use it, because in a very short time it will be another that will make pointless the first one. Not sure how an IA can defend us and it self from that destiny.

Why they cannot get permission for landing that it will happen long time after? They get FAA permission some days after the last time..

the adobe title was misleading.. not sure about that material with sulfur.. so I can not said much. It might work.

Ok lets find out.. can you make a list of things you will need to make this mars habitat including travel and landing from the things you need? just a rough estimation. What you will need to make a partially sustainable habitat? Then we (venus advocates) can make our estimates on a cloud habitat and compare. I guess that is the only way to have a real idea what seems better. In fact if I see that there is a point where I can suggest an efficient approach to mars I will do. What you mean? I did not understand the example.. About a runaway, is possible, but it does not match with the design that a venus hábitat should follow.. which is being aerodynamic and stable (like a spheroid, where its payload is in the bottom). Why not a parafoil with an electric propeller? With an alternative method or extra parafoil in case something happen. 1-A capsule by design has very good thermal insulation, so even if your systems fail.. If you have at least 4m2 of parachute you will touch land very soft, then using all the energy to stay cool until a special submarine rescue you, the chances are not good, but is a possibility than mars people does not have.. You can just use 1 propulsion to land on mars, and you dont cant miss the land level. Also if you walk on mars and you fall hitting your helmet with a rock.. you are death. 2-You don't require of machines to stay floating in venus either. A ship floating in the sea is in danger because does not touch the sea floor? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sorry, I mistake in this post on hydrogen vs breathing air as lifting gas: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/129619-venus-vs-mars-colonization/&do=findComment&comment=2358035 I made the correction.

Yeah, it should be easy to solve, 460c, 90bar and no sulphuric acid.. the first is beaten in all kind of restaurant ovens, normal materials can resist 1000, to 2000 to 4000 c, the second was beaten in 1960 when the manned submarine trieste reach 11000 meters of deep, which equals to 1100 bar. High temperature electronics was designed, they can work without problem under 350c. And if your rover heats up, it can inflate a ballon to reach 10 km until it cools down. Helium diffuse faster than hydrogen, because Hydrogen is a diatomic molecule. By the way there are hydrogen proof layers, unless we use party balloons. Not sure about one single vehicle able to travel between so different density and temperatures, like the ones found between surface and clouds. Maybe something from 52 to 30km, then other vehicle for 30 to surface. Maybe a hot air ballon would be able to make the whole trip, but it would not be able to lift much, if the air is already at 400 degrees, it does not become much lighter heating to 600 degress.

Some data we should have into account: Winds: Altitude colour code: Blue=62-70 km, purple=58-64 km, Red=44-48 km. Chemestry: Anual Energy Budget: Pressure, temperature and density: Surface map: Extras: Havoc mission pdf with extra info on venus. Gravity at 52km: 8,7 m/s2 Venus circumference: 38025 km https://www.dropbox.com/s/y5gu06h0u7n7v66/HAVOC-Final-Outbrief-General-pdf.pdf?dl=0 Any other interesting fact or data about Venus, can be added here.

Yeah I know them, but one of many ways to train an ANN is with genetics algorithms like its shown in this video: About deep learning mechanism being unable to answer that.. As I said, I imagine that is because the ANN model used just focus in one or at least two aspect from these: (images, or semantic, or language, or arithmetic, sounds, etc) . In deepmind they study many of these different training methods. And I saw incredible demos showing the power of understanding. But If you make the same ANN with many inputs from a microphone, a camera, and internet with another ann to understand arithmetic and language semantics. It would be able to learn that an elephant always come with 4 legs unless it is an injured elephant. Because is just how information is related.. until certain training the ANN should be able to make that connection.

I am agree but let's clear something.. is not for the Thick atmosphere.. is for the h2so4 in the clouds that reflect most of the light, and those are measure in 100ppm or less.. We can have an atmosphere like earth with high amount of h2so4 and it will reflect a lot. One of the global warming solutions is spray the atmosphere with h2so4, you need just a small amount (that will not do any harm we guess) to just stop the global warming. But we don't know what consequences that might have.. is not advisable to experiment with our atmosphere. http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/511016/a-cheap-and-easy-plan-to-stop-global-warming/

I said a tech we mastered in 1910, 1783 was the beginnings, nothing mastered there, just experiments. About what lifting gas we should choose, that is a good question.. but is not Breathing Air because it does not have economic sense.. Me previous example with a sphere envelope of 150m radius, was able to lift 5000 tons with air and 17000 tons with hydrogen at 52,5km. You may said, oxygen is much more cheap than hydrogen in venus.. yeah.. but.. to fill those 14100000 m3 , you only need 1175kg of hydrogen.. Is that a lot? lets see how much methane we can do with that: 1kg of hydrogen + electricity can produce 12 kg of methane --> 14100 kg of methane --> 30000 liters of methane.. Where you go with that? A 747 consume 200000 liters of kerosene and the falcon9 400000 liters if I remember... With hydrogen your envelope is 282857m2 and with air 636428 m2, so an envelope with air cost 3 times more. The only pro for air, that a leak would be 5 times slower. Ok I have a huge mistake there with . and , differences between reading systems. That volume would require 1775 tons of hydrogen, which in fact is 1000 tons due the pressure at 52,5 km. We can produce 12000 tons of methane with that, which is 24.000.000 liters of methane, that is enough for many launches. So yeah, breathing air as lifting gas sounds good for big hábitats. An airship is like a ship.. if you have a boat.. it will sink with anything you do, but a big one, is not so easy. Those WW2 hellium airships was like a boat (for airship scale). A rigid airship with no flammable envelope and hydrogen, (500m long airship) it will support higher missiles and damage than the biggest naval ship around. Is all about volume.. the math said so.. About today airships.. you choose a really bad moment for comment.. you did not hear? all airships are making a comeback.. Russia.. China build new airships that are being tested right now.. Aeroscraft - Lockheed Martin - Airlander are all airships companies that already start production for their new models, Airlander is ready and will be test it next month. All the advantages that provide, is something that all people in the world is waiting.. also europe with their new plans to include them in their logistics. We are going back to the caverns like 30000 years ago? What about the land.. the sky... sorry. but I prefer my 5 star room with balcony in my flying hotel. By the way.. a mars habitat is way more expensive than one in Venus.. we can made the math if you want. I imagine that for prove you are waiting to someone do it for real in venus.. but you not need any proof for mars? What kind of argument is that? 1- there are a lot of good light materials in market that block hydrogen by many years, graphene oxide is in development and will work better and be cheaper. 2- not sure what is the issue with this.. you think that is not possible to track the position of a vehicle without gps? Or that is not possible to have a propeller to move in the atmosphere. 3- if an airplane can hold the shuttle.. why not an airship that is a lot more stable and does not need constant speed to fly.

Ok. designing a cloud base seems fun, but maybe we should be more organized. not sure how.. I will sent to Rakaydos some info to add to the OP, that will help everyone to save some time in data search. If the zubrin co2 air breathing rocket would be work in mars, then in venus should be work as wonder. Here in earth we have just 21% oxygen in the air, in venus we have 97% of co2, so if that can be used, I want to know, how do you made that magnesium fuel in venus? ------------------------------------------- I take some time to work on the energy aspect so you can connect your chemical machines to do your stuff. These are the best methods that I figure out: In the moment we know our objectives and base requirements. I will be able to combine a design based in the first 2 ideas to solve the energy aspect and calculate its mass. What about a floating platform that can control its buoyancy compressing hydrogen. If we use methane rockets which volume is big. Then an empty rocket stage would float vertical (engine down) at certain altitude once it falls to venus. This guy calculate that: http://selenianboondocks.com/2013/11/venusian-rocket-floaties/ Now, you can add to these stages extra inflatable balloons that would not add much weight to increase the flotation altitude to 25 km, which you only need achieve 15kg/m3 and resist 266 celsius, then you can pick up the stage with this platform from below, then the second stage and for last you rise it to 52km for assembly, refuel and launch. No sure your thoughts.