Phobos by 2033, Martian Surface by 2039?

[Still Waters]

Humanity's path to Mars may go through the Red Planet's tiny moon Phobos.

An incremental, multiple-mission approach that envisions getting astronauts to Phobos by 2033, then down to the Martian surface by 2039 could make manned Mars exploration technologically and economically feasible, said Firouz Naderi, head of the Solar System Exploration Directorate at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California.

http://www.space.com...hobos-moon.html

[pallidin]

How interesting... I never thought of that approach.

I read the article, and maybe it was addressed either in it or within the conference, but I have a question:

How do they intend to pull-off putting a required massive launch complex(including launch pad, massive rocket, etc...) on Mars to get back to it's moon's staging area?

And what's this about "cutting costs because of low funding"?

Uh... a manned mission to Mar's is the last idea where you want to "cut-costs"

If anything it should be an "over-cost" approach just for safety and redundancy. If that's not feasible, THEN DON'T DO IT UNTIL IT IS.

Just keep sending robotic missions if cost is such a big issue. Please don't risk the lives of astronauts due solely to "budget concerns"

[thedemon]

Great. If i each my greens and carrots, maybe i'll still be around to watch it all happen.

Edited May 10, 2015 by xxxdemonxxx

[Atuke]

Is there a specific timeline involved with this? Why such a random date? 2039. Why not 2027? Or 2032? It's all just kind of BS in my ear at this point. 45 years ago men were hitting golf balls on the moon, and landed there with computers and analog techno equivelent to a Nintendo DS. Where are the Hotels on Mars? I'm getting pretty sick of the space program.

[BeastieRunner]

Great. If i each my greens and carrots, maybe i'll still be around to watch it all happen.

My son and daughters will be in college/graduating college by then.

Eat your greens man!

[paperdyer]

This concept isn't too much different than launching Mars missions from OUR Moon. I wonder what happened to that concept?

[Infernal Gnu]

I love those two little cute moons of Mars. It pains me greatly to hear that Phobos gets closer to Mars by one meter per century and in 50 million years will be destroyed.

I want it to be boosted to a higher orbit ASAP.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

Uh... a manned mission to Mar's is the last idea where you want to "cut-costs"

There is a VAST difference between doing a low cost mission and cutting corners. A low cost mission does NOT mean that safety has to be compromised.

If anything it should be an "over-cost" approach just for safety and redundancy. If that's not feasible, THEN DON'T DO IT UNTIL IT IS.

The days of NASA having a huge budget are long gone. If they do things your way and wait until those days return then they will NEVER get to Mars.

Just keep sending robotic missions if cost is such a big issue. Please don't risk the lives of astronauts due solely to "budget concerns"

Once again you do not get that something can be done more cheaply without compromising safety. Take a look at NASA's Commercial Crew Program. Two new spacecraft which will enable the USA to launch crew members to the ISS from US soil. The Crew Dragon and the CST-100 were both developed far more cheaply than the shuttle. Both will be considerably cheaper to operate than the shuttle and both are far safer than the shuttle.

Let's compare that to Apollo. Apollo was the most expensive project NASA ever took. It was conceived and built when NASA had it's largest budget. It killed three astronauts before it even left the ground and very nearly killed another three during Apollo 13.

If NASA is to explore Mars it must not be risk averse. Whilst taking every possible precaution to ensure crew safety it must also be prepared to accept that space exploration is dangerous. Crew members may be lost. NASA and the astronauts will accept that risk goes with the territory, the public need to understand that too.