Russian scientists have announced plans to build a nuclear power station on Mars. They say that all the necessary technical drawings have now been completed, and - after a few minor niggles have been ironed out - all will be ready for the construction work to begin. The power plant should be up and running by 2030. But experts are already asking questions about the feasibility of the project. The first extra-terrestrial nuclear power station will serve the permanent research camp which, Russian scientists believe, could be set up on Mars within the next 30 years. Deputy chief engineer of Red Star - a state scientific company closely affiliated with Russia's Nuclear Energy Ministry - says the station will be constructed in the mountainous areas of Mars, possibly in one of the canyons. It will produce enough power for future Russian missions to the planet to be fully self-contained and will not need more than six engineers to maintain.

Scientists say that the station is now almost ready to be built - all they have to do is to find a way to protect staff and environment from radiation. The only stumbling block is how to deliver ready-made building blocks to a construction site 300 million kilometres (186.4 million miles) away from Earth. The plan is that the heavier equipment will be delivered to Mars by an automatic lander - like the European Beagle which is now making its way to the Red Planet.

View: Full Article | Source: BBC News

This took me quite by surprise, I had no idea Russia were planning anything as ambitious as this, nor that they had the funds to research such an undertaking.

The estimated date of completion may not be for another 27 years, but this would be a project of monumental scale, and I'm not convinced that even by then, it will be possible to have a manned Nuclear power plant operating on Mars by 2030.

Let's face it, at the moment we consider ourselves lucky if an unmanned probe gets there in one piece.

i think it could be done today if we had the motivation. its just a matter of risk. back in the old days, risk was a part of spaceflight; but now we consider risk an obstacle. if we are too afraid to try ambitious things like this, will they ever be accomplished? at least the Russians still have balls between their legs, gotta give em that much credit. i wish them luck.

Bizarro, it couldn't be done today if the whole world worked together doing it, and that is a fact. Although the risk factor is an obstacle, funding is by far the biggest obstacle. The station itself, the delivery system, the propulsion system of the delivery system, the costs of maintaining it and research and developement are all hampered by funding.
I agree with SaRuMaN and starlyte. This project is too ambitious and the time table too optimistic. Russia is a broke and backward nation barely capable of feeding itself. If this happens at all, it surely will not be a Russian adventure, but a joint adventure involving various other nations.

you are all too pessimistic. never underestimate a budding capitalist economy in search of a boost. could you imagine the goldmine that a Mars colony would provide? the Russians are looking to capitalize on our failures by becoming the space leader. a Mars colony would assure that. nothing is impossible. you could say improbable, but its definitely possible right now. with our space program on the rocks, the Russians could easily prove theirs to be worthy of investment.

sometimes i think people let money sink into their thinking. money is just some arbitrary measure of effort, not of the ACTUAL effort involved. money is not something that prevents something from happening if it is necessary to do. if we found out that the world was going to be hit by a giant asteroid next year, i guarantee you that we would make this happen and then some. we have the ability, we just don't have the desire. we're too busy triffling with life here on Earth and the petty games we play everyday.

i also believe we could launch a rocket next week to the ISS if we had to in a pinch. all the NASA people are just fishing for funds when they say they cannot. its just politics at play. they want more fat paychecks.

Bizarro,
Lets break down your last post a bit, shall we?

im sorry, i will only agree to disagree. i see things in a totally different light from you two. call me crazy, but i believe in human ingenuity. there is more than one way to skin a cat. with even modest funding a space program could do these things, its just a matter of putting a few good minds to work at the method.

i should add that a manned mission would not have problems with getting to Mars. the problem with the probes is that we send a machine to do a man's job. a pilot could easily realize the mistake in calculations and correct them without risking the mission. this is precisely why we should send a manned expedition.

Some days it just feels more like home .......

I for one, think we should get our space program back up and running. As long as we learn from our mistakes, a base on Mars is worth the risk. It's all a matter of getting the right minds together with the proper funding. Getting to the moon cost lives, we still did that. Risk just goes with the territory, we explore, it's part of our collective psyche. Another space race would be a huge boost to all countries involved, let's beat the Russians to it.

BTW, getting into orbit on a shoddy Russian rocket is full of risk.

@Kismit.

Starlyte, i don't know if there are any microbes on Mars. if there were, that would be a great discovery. also, there are abundant rocks from Mars on Earth from space. wouldn't any microbes that were on Mars at that time be here already?

the main problem is radiation. there needs to be more research into building a spacecraft that can protect the crew from intense radiation. a different propulsion method would be great as well. i think a nuclear powered spacecraft would work, especially one with a powerful engine. it could be reused.

I was under the impression that it's currently next to impossible to get humans to Mars, because with liquid chemical fuel as the only available fuel source, the sheer weight of the fuel that would be needed to get there would make the whole trip completely inpractical.

It's not going to be possible to get people to Mars at all until we have improved upon our propulsion capabilities somewhat. An Ion-drive powered by a nuclear power source might just do the trick, but until that has been achieved, it is more or less a technological impossibility for humans to reach Mars at this point in time.

we can always do a trajectory shot to limit the amount of fuel we would need. i agree that a different form of propulsion would be helpful, but its still possible without it.

How would the craft slow down once it got to Mars, how do you relaunch it back into space from the surface, and how do you return to earth afterwards ?

Also, how do you feed the astronauts and how do you protect them from the sun's radiation on the journey there and back ?

There are a lot more factors to consider aswell, and these are just the most obvious ones. I think you'd be hard pushed to reach Mars with today's technology, the risks involved would make it suicidal.

Even if it were possible to get to Mars, without a more effective means of propulsion, the amount of time you'd spend in space would expose you to so much radiation that you'd never survive long enough to make it back alive.

how would it slow down? rockets for just that purpose.

how would it return? in-situ resource utilization http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/mars/...s/marssurf.html

how do you feed the astronauts and protect them from the sun's radiation? you grow food on the spaceship and recycle water. there are theoretic 'safe rooms' being developed where astronauts could stay during powerful cosmic radiation storms. i believe with some money put into researching this issue it could be overcome.

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/mars/.../mars_crew.html

an interesting page about manned missions to Mars.

i don't believe that is true, Nancy. you can blame NASA for the deaths of those astronauts but i believe it was bound to happen eventually. its not perfectly safe and the people who fly on the shuttle know that when they sign up. we will get right back on the horse again and something else will happen in the future too. you cannot stop exploring because of accidents. that's what caused this, an accident. we will learn from it just like we learned from the O-ring failure and we will move on.

those links just answer a few of the questions about how its possible. we have the technology, we just dont have the will.

Bizarro, although those links you provided are interesting, as Nancy said, they aren't anything new. Also, those links only reinforce everyone elses position that we simply don't have the means to make this mission now if the whole world worked together doing it. Those links confirm that.
You have completely disregarded everything said by Nancy, SaRuMaN and myself regarding this, and seem to be blinded by your own belief in the impossible, despite all the information that we've placed before you.
Not only is your position incorrect, but your arguments only expose your inability to see the facts as they really are.

no, i see your 'facts', Homer, i just think they are based on flawed thinking. i have far more faith in humanity than you do. i believe money is not ever going to be a reason that humanity stops reaching for the stars. we have an inherent need to explore. when we decide to finally accept that fact of our nature, money will not stop us. we will do whatever is necessary. while that is not the case today, it could very well be tomorrow for all you know. when speaking of the future, no one can speak in 'facts'. is your middle name Nostradamus?

if it were suddenly necessary to go to Mars in 5 years, i believe we would be there- i have no doubt of that. right now, its not a necessity. that doesn't mean its impossible. improbable sure, but definitely not out of our technological grasp. if it were a national priority, we could even start today. ALONE.

that's like NASA saying we can't fly up and get the astronauts from the ISS. do you really believe that? of course we can go get them. we know exactly what is required and if it came down to it we could modify or even build a rocket to do it. we are just trying to get the Russians to pay for it for awhile and using the Columbia accident as an excuse. did we suddenly forget the technology necessary to fly a rocket or even one of the grounded shuttles? they can still fly, we are choosing to keep them on the ground. if we had to, i think we would risk flying one to get them. don't you? after all, they have proven reliable enough to only have 2 accidents in many flights. that is acceptable risk when lives are on the line.

I maintain that a LOT of vodka went into that announcement.
I mean, let's all be honest here. The Russians. Not saying anything bad about them, but they don't have near the technology to pull this off.

Why don't the Russians start off with something light, like a nuke plant in Siberia? Then they could build one in Africa, and then in Antarctica, and then orbiting the earth, and then on the Moon... Baby steps. You can't pick up a guitar and play like Jimi, you know.

Must comment....

These two words is often used on threads on this site:

"Impossible" and "fact" when it should be "I/they think" or "seems"

Thats a fact

I choose to have absolutely no opinion about anything on this thread, but Kaj just made me laugh.

Cheers mate

umm, the Russians put the first man in space, and also have landed a probe on Venus which transmitted data and images. the surface temperature of Venus is 457 degrees Celsius. not to mention the intense pressure. i think that is technology that we have yet to figure out as our Venus probes have not been nearly as successful. most of them crashed into the surface, the other only managed to transmit for a short time before being crushed.

i could go step by step through the Soviet space program and show you areas where their expertise is astounding(as well as where they have colossal failures) but i think you can do that for yourself.

saying they don't have the technology is clearly a massive understatement.

Bizarro, it seems you're forgetting who you're dealing with. I have proved you wrong before, and others(including myself) have proved you wrong now. I said it before, and I will say it now: I have never lost a debate, and I never will. There isn't anybody anywhere on earth who has the ability to defeat me in a debate I chose to participate in.

You stated in your initial post:
"i think it could be done today if we had the motivation"
This was the only thing I was debating. There isn't an educated person on the planet who thinks we can make a trip to Mars today. This is a fact that can't be realistically argued with. It is not possible to send a manned mission to Mars today, and that was the only thing I was debating you on.

In a later post, you stated:
"if it were suddenly necessary to go to Mars in 5 years, i believe we would be there- i have no doubt of that.
I'm not disagreeing with that, but it has nothing to do with your argument.



Kaj stated:

Alright Nancy! You go girl

ok, Homer. your comment doesn't even warrant a response. i could nitpick and retaliate but you are undefeatable in a debate! at least your ego is

Nancy, i didn't say that we didn't map Venus from orbit. i only pointed out that the Russians had successfully sent a probe to the surface and transmitted images and data. show me where one of our probes survived on the surface of Venus and transmitted back images... you can't because we never accomplished this. maybe you should do a little reading of your own on the Pioneer mission to Venus. pay particular attention to the sentence that mentions only 1 of the 4 surface probes transmitted data and only for 1 hour in that case. the surface probes were failures to say the least.

this 'debate' (and i use that word loosely) has deteriorated to something ugly. maybe ive had a bad day or something but i don't feel the need to continue it anymore.

ive just had enough bashings today from people who i thought would be respectable. so far today ive been labelled: rude, insensitive, an 'uneducated' person, and been told i should move to another country to be happier. good night.