Humans on Mars
Discussion
Interesting goal for the new US Administration - putting a human on Mars (versus continued funding of Artemis - is how I've read it).
And then I came across this article https://www.msn.com/en-gb/health/other/nasa-astronauts-must-follow-strict-regime-when-leaving-earth-for-mars/ar-AA1xplvi?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=a24512c0e63843368f829d25fae42357&ei=83
It seems a big but hugely challenging ambition, when even going to the Moon proved extremely difficult - and with NASA's $5bn blackhole in infrastructure updates needed, where's the human pipeline coming from?
And then I came across this article https://www.msn.com/en-gb/health/other/nasa-astronauts-must-follow-strict-regime-when-leaving-earth-for-mars/ar-AA1xplvi?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=a24512c0e63843368f829d25fae42357&ei=83
It seems a big but hugely challenging ambition, when even going to the Moon proved extremely difficult - and with NASA's $5bn blackhole in infrastructure updates needed, where's the human pipeline coming from?
Aside from the "Woo, look what we did!" aspect, it's a totally pointless exercise.
There isn't enough gravity on Mars to sustain an atmosphere, even if we were in the position to "Terraform" a planet. There's nothing to protect the planet from solar radiation either, so why bother?
You could argue it would make a great waystation for travel further out into the cosmos but to what end? Until we manage to break the laws of physics regarding light-speed travel, or are prepared to sustain generational travel over hundreds of thousands of years, we're pretty much stuck in our Solar System.
The money being wasted on a Mars programme would be far better spent cleaning up this planet. Hell, it would be cheaper to fire our garbage into space* than pursue this folly.
There isn't enough gravity on Mars to sustain an atmosphere, even if we were in the position to "Terraform" a planet. There's nothing to protect the planet from solar radiation either, so why bother?
You could argue it would make a great waystation for travel further out into the cosmos but to what end? Until we manage to break the laws of physics regarding light-speed travel, or are prepared to sustain generational travel over hundreds of thousands of years, we're pretty much stuck in our Solar System.
The money being wasted on a Mars programme would be far better spent cleaning up this planet. Hell, it would be cheaper to fire our garbage into space* than pursue this folly.
- Probably not, but I love the thought.
Nexus Icon said:
Aside from the "Woo, look what we did!" aspect, it's a totally pointless exercise.
There isn't enough gravity on Mars to sustain an atmosphere, even if we were in the position to "Terraform" a planet. There's nothing to protect the planet from solar radiation either, so why bother?
You could argue it would make a great waystation for travel further out into the cosmos but to what end? Until we manage to break the laws of physics regarding light-speed travel, or are prepared to sustain generational travel over hundreds of thousands of years, we're pretty much stuck in our Solar System.
The money being wasted on a Mars programme would be far better spent cleaning up this planet. Hell, it would be cheaper to fire our garbage into space* than pursue this folly.
It's in our nature to explore. There isn't enough gravity on Mars to sustain an atmosphere, even if we were in the position to "Terraform" a planet. There's nothing to protect the planet from solar radiation either, so why bother?
You could argue it would make a great waystation for travel further out into the cosmos but to what end? Until we manage to break the laws of physics regarding light-speed travel, or are prepared to sustain generational travel over hundreds of thousands of years, we're pretty much stuck in our Solar System.
The money being wasted on a Mars programme would be far better spent cleaning up this planet. Hell, it would be cheaper to fire our garbage into space* than pursue this folly.
- Probably not, but I love the thought.
While sending humans to Mars may not provide immediate economic returns, the spin-off technologies and scientific advancements could have far-reaching benefits. Historically, space exploration has been an investment in knowledge and innovation that has improved life on Earth. If managed well, a Mars mission could follow the same pattern—driving progress in fields as diverse as healthcare, sustainability, and AI.
Nexus Icon said:
Aside from the "Woo, look what we did!" aspect, it's a totally pointless exercise.
There isn't enough gravity on Mars to sustain an atmosphere, even if we were in the position to "Terraform" a planet. There's nothing to protect the planet from solar radiation either, so why bother?
You could argue it would make a great waystation for travel further out into the cosmos but to what end? Until we manage to break the laws of physics regarding light-speed travel, or are prepared to sustain generational travel over hundreds of thousands of years, we're pretty much stuck in our Solar System.
The money being wasted on a Mars programme would be far better spent cleaning up this planet.
Balderdash. Was going to the moon a totally pointless exercise? Breaking the sound barrier? Going to the poles? Climbing Everest? Sailing round the world? Man can do 'pointless' things because he evolved beyond being a hunter/gatherer. And remember that money is not 'wasted', it provides employment for skilled workers and feeds their families (and a chunk of it goes back as tax).There isn't enough gravity on Mars to sustain an atmosphere, even if we were in the position to "Terraform" a planet. There's nothing to protect the planet from solar radiation either, so why bother?
You could argue it would make a great waystation for travel further out into the cosmos but to what end? Until we manage to break the laws of physics regarding light-speed travel, or are prepared to sustain generational travel over hundreds of thousands of years, we're pretty much stuck in our Solar System.
The money being wasted on a Mars programme would be far better spent cleaning up this planet.
You may say that going to Mars is a silly dream, but I would say that cleaning up the world, feeding all the starving Africans and eliminating world poverty is an even sillier dream and even less achievable. That really would be pissing into a black hole.
paddy1970 said:
While sending humans to Mars may not provide immediate economic returns, the spin-off technologies and scientific advancements could have far-reaching benefits. Historically, space exploration has been an investment in knowledge and innovation that has improved life on Earth. If managed well, a Mars mission could follow the same pattern—driving progress in fields as diverse as healthcare, sustainability, and AI.
Yes. Only yesterday on TV I saw an advert with a lady explaining how the mattress she was selling was developed using NASA technology.Roofless Toothless said:
paddy1970 said:
While sending humans to Mars may not provide immediate economic returns, the spin-off technologies and scientific advancements could have far-reaching benefits. Historically, space exploration has been an investment in knowledge and innovation that has improved life on Earth. If managed well, a Mars mission could follow the same pattern—driving progress in fields as diverse as healthcare, sustainability, and AI.
Yes. Only yesterday on TV I saw an advert with a lady explaining how the mattress she was selling was developed using NASA technology.Simpo Two said:
Balderdash. Was going to the moon a totally pointless exercise?
I don't think America was trillions of dollars in debt when they did this. Simpo Two said:
feeding all the starving Africans and eliminating world poverty is an even sillier dream and even less achievable.
There's plenty enough food and fresh water available to feed everyone quite comfortably. It's just a question of distribution, political will, and getting some people to have less so everyone can have enough. I think that's much easier to achieve than sending a man to Mars. But maybe not as easy to sell to us in the West. Roofless Toothless said:
paddy1970 said:
While sending humans to Mars may not provide immediate economic returns, the spin-off technologies and scientific advancements could have far-reaching benefits. Historically, space exploration has been an investment in knowledge and innovation that has improved life on Earth. If managed well, a Mars mission could follow the same pattern—driving progress in fields as diverse as healthcare, sustainability, and AI.
Yes. Only yesterday on TV I saw an advert with a lady explaining how the mattress she was selling was developed using NASA technology.It is pointless to send humans to Mars.
Skeptisk said:
Roofless Toothless said:
paddy1970 said:
While sending humans to Mars may not provide immediate economic returns, the spin-off technologies and scientific advancements could have far-reaching benefits. Historically, space exploration has been an investment in knowledge and innovation that has improved life on Earth. If managed well, a Mars mission could follow the same pattern—driving progress in fields as diverse as healthcare, sustainability, and AI.
Yes. Only yesterday on TV I saw an advert with a lady explaining how the mattress she was selling was developed using NASA technology.It is pointless to send humans to Mars.
turbobloke said:
“…and laser communications to stay in touch with earth and send more data quicker.”
My research uses the Human Exploration of Mars as a focus. “If we can treat people on Mars, we can treat people anywhere.”
October or Nov 2026 for the next Mars launch window.
That gives around 18 months for fully tested, human rated vessel with landing capabilities to be available to launch.
Six to nine months to reach the planet.
That's mid 2027 at the earliest.
Given SpaceX is currently just blowing up empty spaceships, I'd say that's a punchy target. For anyone other than Spacex - impossible.
Crew would have no way of returning if this launch window was used.
That gives around 18 months for fully tested, human rated vessel with landing capabilities to be available to launch.
Six to nine months to reach the planet.
That's mid 2027 at the earliest.
Given SpaceX is currently just blowing up empty spaceships, I'd say that's a punchy target. For anyone other than Spacex - impossible.
Crew would have no way of returning if this launch window was used.
LivLL said:
October or Nov 2026 for the next Mars launch window.
That gives around 18 months for fully tested, human rated vessel with landing capabilities to be available to launch.
Six to nine months to reach the planet.
That's mid 2027 at the earliest.
Given SpaceX is currently just blowing up empty spaceships, I'd say that's a punchy target. For anyone other than Spacex - impossible.
Crew would have no way of returning if this launch window was used.
NASA’s Design Reference Architecture 5.0 - Human Exploration of Mars - works around a 2037 launched, 3-year crewed mission.That gives around 18 months for fully tested, human rated vessel with landing capabilities to be available to launch.
Six to nine months to reach the planet.
That's mid 2027 at the earliest.
Given SpaceX is currently just blowing up empty spaceships, I'd say that's a punchy target. For anyone other than Spacex - impossible.
Crew would have no way of returning if this launch window was used.
This document, written in 2009, formed much of the basis of Andy Weir’s book The Martian.
If they want to do something put the money into creating faster space travel, base it on travelling to the nearest discovered "Goldilocks" planet with an Earth like temperature not a dead rock with no atmosphere.
Wolf 1061c is the closest yet discovered (so far) and it's 14 light years from Earth.
https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/news/240/the-nearest-p...
Wolf 1061c is the closest yet discovered (so far) and it's 14 light years from Earth.
https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/news/240/the-nearest-p...
V8LM said:
NASA’s Design Reference Architecture 5.0 - Human Exploration of Mars - works around a 2037 launched, 3-year crewed mission.
This document, written in 2009, formed much of the basis of Andy Weir’s book The Martian.
Current President wants it done during his term. Musk is promising an unmanned mission in the 2026 launch window. This document, written in 2009, formed much of the basis of Andy Weir’s book The Martian.
Simpo Two said:
I get Page not Found.
IIRC Reagan wanted to get a man on Mars back in the 1980s. The problem is that too many people say 'Why?' and then the Democrats get in and scrap it. Rinse and repeat.
Not likely to even get that far; the money is controlled by Congress and the republicans have a majority so thin you can see through it; Remember the historically huge throughput of groundbreaking legislation in the last two years? There wasn't, Congress barely passed anything at all because the speaker is a bellend who doesn't really believe in federal government and herding 218 cats to vote for the same thing is close to impossible. This hasn't got any easier because Trump's president.IIRC Reagan wanted to get a man on Mars back in the 1980s. The problem is that too many people say 'Why?' and then the Democrats get in and scrap it. Rinse and repeat.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff