NASA NTRSDate not supplied
Many previous studies have examined sending crews to and from Mars. The most economical involved a ‘conjunction’ class whereby the crew spends around 500 days on Mars surface waiting for a ‘cheap’ return. The total mission time results in a mission duration around 3 years. Given the current demonstrated crew maximum of a 1 year stint on ISS, it is interesting to look at reducing that time to only two years, thus reducing risk and minimizing time in the Martian System. In order to meet such a short mission an ‘opposition’ class Mars mission (which includes a Venus flyby) was chosen. The energy required to perform such a mission in only two years (for the 2036 opportunity at least) is about three times that of the 3 year conjunction mission. The rocket equation clearly shows that this mission would then require several times the propellant of the three-year mission unless the Isp of the propulsion system can be increased. Electric propulsion can provide the 3-10x improvement in Isp but even with a nuclear reactor power levels could approach 10 MWe. As an alternative, a smaller reactor (1.5 MWe class) joined together with a chemical stage was found to allow for using each propulsion system to its best advantage: low thrust in interplanetary space and chemical in the gravity wells of Earth and Mars. Indeed, the use of high Isp, low thrust during the interplanetary leg of the journey’s reduced the required capture/departure ∆Vs by 5-10X. Lowering the NEP power also allowed fitting the power system into a single SLS launch – which limited the radiator area to ~ 2500m^2. For the first look a reactor using fuels created by the SP-100 program with a limit of ~1200K was assumed. Starting in the ‘Lunar Gateway’ also allowed for use of commercial tankers to fuel the vehicle in a relative benign place. A top level summary of the mission design, concept of operations, as well as a conceptual point design of the vehicle is described.
Nuclear Electric Propulsion↗