Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Waspie_Dwarf

Should we send humans to Mars?

60 posts in this topic

I suppose the issue is two-fold.

First, drop fuel, food, water, re-launch and other supplies on Mars by somewhat current methods. Very expensive of course.

Then, establish "way-stations", perhaps 2 - 4 between Earth and Mars(with one or 2 as an emergency redundency), which contain necessary supplies for both the transit to and from Earth as well as emergency supplies regarding technology and life support. Again, very, very expensive.

Must be in the multi-trillions of dollars. But, could be done.

Way-stations will be a difficult one because of the relation of the orbits of the Earth, Mars and the way-stations themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, we should, eventually. Run it like the Apollo program.

If we want to colonize, without it being a oneway trip, we should start with the Moon. Colonize at, or near, the Moon's poles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends if the Curiosity exploration program finds mineable ore... urgh, sorry I mean it depends if the Curiosity scientific program finds life. I know which is more likely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see money wisking by the Monitors as we speak ! THats the Human way afterall ! Cha-Ching ! :clap:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe we can start by sending humans to Washington - it would be a first.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose the issue is two-fold.

First, drop fuel, food, water, re-launch and other supplies on Mars by somewhat current methods. Very expensive of course.

Food yes, but why take water to a planet which has frozen water already there? Why take fuel when you can manufacture it there? There is a vast overestimation in your costs reduced right there.

Then, establish "way-stations", perhaps 2 - 4 between Earth and Mars(with one or 2 as an emergency redundency), which contain necessary supplies for both the transit to and from Earth as well as emergency supplies regarding technology and life support. Again, very, very expensive.

Sorry, as 27vet has pointed out, it doesn't work like that. Way stations are a non-starter.

Must be in the multi-trillions of dollars. But, could be done.

And you arrived at this figure how exactly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Billions,Trillions ,Gazillions ! WHo`s counting ! We cant even fund NASA correctly ! Lets just get off the cant do attitude`s and Get on to the Can Do ! :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the type of thing that would stimulate the economy and create jobs, which is always a good reason to support the space program, plus it will result in new technology being developed--or revealed.

There are also dangers of bringing back unknown microorganisms back to earth that would would not be able to deal with. These things seem able to survive in any environment, but yet again that's the type of danger we are going to be facing sooner or later in space travel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We either get moving on space exploration regardless of the cost/risk or we stand around on this planet and wait to go extinct.

There really are no two ways about it.

We are doomed on this planet and our only chance to survive as a species is to inhabit another world.

(doomed = Asteroid, Supervolcano, overpopulation, etc...)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are also dangers of bringing back unknown microorganisms back to earth that would would not be able to deal with. These things seem able to survive in any environment, but yet again that's the type of danger we are going to be facing sooner or later in space travel.

You mean like this?

alien_from_movie.png

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect that we already have sent men to Mars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect that we already have sent men to Mars.

Uh, no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just read A Princess of Mars and The Martian Chronicles. I'm thinking no. LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean like this?

alien_from_movie.png

At least tis a Start ! It would give us something really to join together and Fight ! Not ourselfs ! Well Its Us or Them right?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think time and money would be much better spent going to the moon and setting up a permanent base there first and use it to develop, test, and hone the technology needed to establish one on Mars, perhaps even use said Moon base to launch Mars missions rather than Earth.

Edited by Socio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think time and money would be much better spent going to the moon and setting up a permanent base there first and use it to develop, test, and hone the technology needed to establish one on Mars, perhaps even use said Moon base to launch Mars missions rather than Earth.

No doubt this will be the plan of attack on the missions ! We will build Moon bases first ! ITs only logical !

As soon as we can finger out how to make He-3 then we will have to build He-3 engines and ships that wont waist fuel from the Moon to Mars !

Edited by DONTEATUS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moon base frist then mars...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now if we could figure out how to get back to the moon.

I guess we could just wait until China or India get there and build their cities first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if funding went to building a Lunar Colony of some sort, then the Politicians will reject any concurrent funding to do the same with Mars with the lessons learned.

You would also have to re-supply any lunar colony with water regularly, in the first few decades at least, because I dont think the "Frost" inside craters will suffice. I also think it will have to be a Multi - National venture with ESA, NASA, Russian, and Indian or Chinese Space Agencies involved due to the enormous costs for developing what will need to be ground-breaking technologies in terms of life support. NASA is developing the SLS with an initial lift capacity of 70 tonnes (Waspie - does that include its own propellant weight??), ESA has the Ariane and Jules Verne re-supply vehicle - between them there will be a huge capacity to get into orbit and beyond depending on configuration.

Sufficient supplies to set up a station on Mars would be available by sending Jules Verne (s) on ahead configured with payloads dropped onto the Red planet to sustain human habitation. This is Rocket Science, but a capability that will mature in just a few years - without the need for exotic drive engines that could be decades away.

How to return from Mars? Well i dont think it was any accident that NASA used a retro rocket to lift Curiosity's lander back up into the Martian atmosphere (Proof of Concept).

So where do we go? My wish would be Mars - geologically far more interesting than the Moon. Is there life there (living or extinct) - doesn't make the slightest bit of difference, going to a planet rich in every mineral needed to survive and thrive, then the Moon is just playing second fiddle.... IMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You would also have to re-supply any lunar colony with water regularly, in the first few decades at least, because I dont think the "Frost" inside craters will suffice.

It's not "frost" it is a significant amount of frozen water which could almost certainly supply a human base for many decades. The down side is that this ice can only be found inside craters near the lunar poles.

Sufficient supplies to set up a station on Mars would be available by sending Jules Verne (s) on ahead configured with payloads dropped onto the Red planet to sustain human habitation.

Jules Vernes? Do you mean ATVs?

Well i dont think it was any accident that NASA used a retro rocket to lift Curiosity's lander back up into the Martian atmosphere (Proof of Concept).

That is NOT what it did, it simply hovered, lowered the rover on to the surface and then crashed. There was no lifting anything back into the atmosphere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not "frost" it is a significant amount of frozen water which could almost certainly supply a human base for many decades. The down side is that this ice can only be found inside craters near the lunar poles.

Jules Vernes? Do you mean ATVs?

That is NOT what it did, it simply hovered, lowered the rover on to the surface and then crashed. There was no lifting anything back into the atmosphere.

You really do not like it when people have contra - ideas to yours do you??

So tell me - what is the calculated M3 of recoverable ice - water available on the moon?

If you have never heard of the Jules Verne resupply vehicle then I am truly disappointed... nuff said on that point, unless being obsequious is also part of your reply

"It simply hovered and crashed"!! Sorry, that is really too ridiculous to even reply to because crashing would have meant crashing onto Opportunity. It lifted, as it was designed to do....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You really do not like it when people have contra - ideas to yours do you??

You really don't like making factually correct posts do you? I have no problems with different view points, I do have a problem when people make up their own facts.

So tell me - what is the calculated M3 of recoverable ice - water available on the moon?

Using data from a NASA radar that flew aboard India's Chandrayaan-1 spacecraft, scientists have detected ice deposits near the moon's north pole. NASA's Mini-SAR instrument, a lightweight, synthetic aperture radar, found more than 40 small craters with water ice. The craters range in size from 1 to 9 miles (2 to15 km) in diameter. Although the total amount of ice depends on its thickness in each crater, it's estimated there could be at least 1.3 trillion pounds (600 million metric tons) of water ice.

Source: NASA

If you have never heard of the Jules Verne resupply vehicle then I am truly disappointed... nuff said on that point, unless being obsequious is also part of your reply

Given the factual inaccuracies in your post so far I am not at all surprised that you don't know that Jules Verne is not the name of the vehicle type itself but only that of the first Automated Transfer Vehicle. I was attempting to clarify if it was indeed the ATV you meant (incidentally the second was called Johannes Kepler, the third is called Edoardo Amaldi the fourth will be called Albert Einstein and the fifth and final ATV will be called Georges Lemaître).

"It simply hovered and crashed"!! Sorry, that is really too ridiculous to even reply to because crashing would have meant crashing onto Opportunity. It lifted, as it was designed to do....

Again what is it with you and facts? Opportunity was not lowered this way, Curiosity was, you got that right the first time. I should remind you that your claim actually was:

Well i dont think it was any accident that NASA used a retro rocket to lift Curiosity's lander back up into the Martian atmosphere (Proof of Concept).

I repeat it did not do what you claimed. It did not lift Curiosity back up into the atmosphere.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would probably be sensible to establish a base on the Moon first,which could open up all kinds of new technology for future space travel, and of course lifting off from the moon would use much less fuel, than on earth. If all the Space Agencies got together maybe something will happen,instead of everyone trying to out compete with each other.

Edited by spud the mackem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes ! just Do it ! :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would probably be sensible to establish a base on the Moon first,which could open up all kinds of new technology for future space travel, and of course lifting off from the moon would use much less fuel, than on earth. If all the Space Agencies got together maybe something will happen,instead of everyone trying to out compete with each other.

There are good arguments for both the Moon then Mars and the straight to Mars scenarios. Whilst I may have disagreed with keithisco on the details, his argument that resources for supporting astronauts on Mars are in greater abundance than on the Moon is a valid one. However getting to Mars is much more costly. The economic case for the ease of resupplying astronauts on the Moon vs astronauts on Mars being at least partly self sufficient is a complex one and I don't know the answer.

However there is one factor that shouldn't be ignored, the human factor. We know that long exposure to zero g has medical consequences for astronauts, and even a one way trip to Mars is liable to expose astronauts to 6 to 9 months of zero g. What we don't know is what effects long exposure to reduce g has on the human body. Does the the calcium loss from bones still occur in a 1/6 or 1/3 g environment?

There is also the issue of medical emergencies or equipment failures. An astronaut taken ill on the Moon can be returned home in a few days. Any medical emergency on Mars would have to be dealt with in situ. As with the ISS any failed equipment can be replaces when the next resupply mission is launched. On Mars it could be months or years before replacements reach the base.

I'm a great believer in not running before you can walk, which is why I personally favour the Moon then Mars approach. I believe that lessons learnt on a Moon base can be transferred to a future Mars base and make it more likely to succeed.

My biggest fear is that which ever approach we take it won't be the scientists and engineers that decide, it will be the politicians.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.