An interesting article from Lexington section of "The Economist" magazine. http://www.economist.com/news/unite...moon-landings-holds-lessons-today-america-and
Space race? America is no longer in the "space race." Obama shut it down and is using the money to buy votes from the "poor." However, there is still a token effort -- American astronauts who want to go into space can hitch a ride on a Russian rocket to Russia's international space station.
Hey, they're right. I don't support the Mars mission. I don't know why we are even entertaining the notion of putting people on Mars in a mission that's "doomed to fail in its current form."
Thanks. All joking aside, while I fully supported manned spaceflight and the tech space exploration brings us, a manned mission to Mars would be extremely expensive. Better to do it as an international venture.
Actually I think the Mars Mission idea should be dropped for now. At our current technological level, it's prohibitively expensive. I think at this point it's better to concentrate on the Asteroid mission. That's a good test bed for technology that would be needed to go to Mars and we actually need to knowledge derived from it to protect ourselves. Mars isn't going to land on our heads, but asteroids are more than likely too.
Agreed. Step-by-step working up to it. Asteroid missions, a lunar colony, maybe an L-5 station supplied and sent building materials using rail launchers from the Moon.
Well that's the thing. The last Mars Mission plan I saw didn't have supplies already sent to Mars orbit. It seems common sense to me that the mass requirements should be cut down to only carry supplies for a one way trip, but already have sent supplies in unmanned ships to last for the duration of the mission and the trip. Even the planning for the mission isn't "there" yet.
Agreed. The Apollo moon missions were one-shot landings. Part "Space Race", part research. Any Mars mission should be purely about the research with an eye toward establishing a colony. This means doing exactly what you just said; having the tech and the foresight to stage supplies either in Mars orbit or on the surface for use by explorers and colonists.
Is the 'space race' still going on? I thought that we thought that we won that race already. I mean like in Moon landing almost half a century ago. ( if there was an actual Moon landing a half century ago, not that I doubt it, but the door's open)
If you don't doubt it, why bring it up? As it is, even if NASA tried to fool the public like the Hollywood movie Capricorn One, they can't have fooled the Soviets, the Brits and every other large body of scientists on the planet for very long.
I bring many things up that are controversial or have more than on strong opinion regarding their veracity. I've been arguing with the naysayers for decades. But they're still out there saying nay. Obviously the Russians tracked the event and if we were trying to fool the world, they certainly wouldn't have let us get away with it. Still. like with most everything, the door is still open. I have no actual proof of almost anything.
The conspiracy theorists will never change their minds since, IMO, they are mentally unable to do so. Well, without treatment that is. Agreed about the Russians (Soviets at the time).
I don't support the Mars mission, but I actually like the idea of the Asteroid mission. Seek out an asteroid and park it by the Moon. Then maybe check it out. I prefer missions where human involvement is temporary, occurs near Earth, and involves the possibility of coming back home to Earth at the end of it. I don't know if we should even consider a Mars mission before there is a two way ticket, and we know how to re-launch spacecraft, and have a supply chain in place.
You know it's only a matter of time before we have another impact event, right? Not just a strike, but an extinction level of impact event. According to history, we're due. Of course, that covers the next few thousand years so I wouldn't lose any sleep over it, but it is a fact worthy enough of considering establishing human colonies off the planet.
I didn't think about that. That might be necessary in the long run. Well, in any event, I still want to see a way for any off-world colonies to support themselves if they end up on their own as the last outpost for human-kind.
I would rather we figure out a way to deflect asteroids rather than make arks to ride them out. That's why I think an asteroid mission is worthwhile.
Fine. A good idea. You should work on eliminating Super Volcanoes and all diseases too since both of those could wipe us out. Spreading the human race to other planets is an insurance policy insuring species survival just as a fish breeder spreads all of his fish into separate tanks as a hedge against disease or accident.
We're not even close to making self sufficient habitats. I was arguing originally that a trip to Mars isn't really doable with current technology much less colonizing the galaxy.
We're close. What we can't due is make it a "sure thing". If I was planning on immigrating to Mars, I'd want my chances of survival to be as close to 100% as possible. Just because we can't take those risks now due to a lack of tech doesn't mean we shouldn't be researching the tech. Asteroid missions and establishing a colony on the Moon would be stepping stones in that direction.
