Thursday, May 1, 2025
Contact    |    RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon  
Unexplained Mysteries Support Us
You are viewing: Home > News > Space & Astronomy > News story
Welcome Guest ( Login or Register )  
All ▾
Search Submit

Space & Astronomy

NASA doesn't have the funds to land on Mars

By T.K. Randall
July 14, 2017 · Comment icon 24 comments

Who is going to be first to land humans on Mars ? Image Credit: NASA/Pat Rawlings
The space agency has admitted that it cannot currently afford to land humans on the surface of Mars.
Despite making a great deal of progress with its Orion spacecraft and Space Launch System, NASA has revealed that its plans to send humans to Mars by the early 2030s may already be in jeopardy.

The problem is that there is insufficient funding available to develop the vehicles that will be needed to land astronauts on the planet's surface and to then bring them safely back home again.

While it may eventually be possible to see NASA astronauts going in to orbit around Mars, actually landing on the surface is never going to happen unless this particular hurdle can be overcome.
"I can't put a date on humans on Mars, and the reason really is... at the budget levels we described, this roughly two percent increase, we don't have the surface systems available for Mars," said the space agency's chief of human spaceflight William Gerstenmaier.

"And that entry, descent, and landing is a huge challenge for us for Mars."

The news suggests that private space firms such as SpaceX and Blue Origin might actually be in with a chance of placing a human on Mars before NASA does.

Elon Musk's timetable in particular currently aims to achieve this by as early as 2025.

Source: Independent | Comments (24)




Other news and articles
Our latest videos Visit us on YouTube
Recent comments on this story
Comment icon #15 Posted by danielost 8 years ago
you forget obama cut funding to orion and nasa had to cut other programs to keep orion.  
Comment icon #16 Posted by Noteverythingisaconspiracy 8 years ago
The past is not really the point of this thread. Secondly the House and Senate was republican during much of Obamas time in office and as I just said they decide NASA's budget. Even if he wanted to Obama couldn't have done much without money from congress could he ? I'm not really trying to be partisan here, as non-americans I have no part in that fight, I am just stating the facts as they are. You are familiar with how politics work in your own country.................. aren't you ?
Comment icon #17 Posted by taniwha 8 years ago
What an absurd belief to have.  You know this how? 
Comment icon #18 Posted by Captain Risky 8 years ago
I think differently. Colonising Mars and keeping people there full time makes sense if its used for mining and a spaceport for further exploration. If there is money involved then the cost of maintaining an artificial environment and convincing people to live in such becomes feasible. I wouldn't wanna live there but I'm sure others would. 
Comment icon #19 Posted by Waspie_Dwarf 8 years ago
Firstly that is by no means certain. The evidence is somewhat contradictory as to whether life could naturally survive on Mars. Secondly there is a huge difference between a planet being unable to support life naturally and being able to support life with the aid of technology. Mars has the three main essentials to support plant life, sunlight, water and carbon dioxide, Pressurised green houses can be built, soil chemistry can be changed. If plants can be grown on Mars then human habitation is possible. Whilst it is possible that Mars IS a dead world, it is not logical to think that it must re... [More]
Comment icon #20 Posted by Waspie_Dwarf 8 years ago
Wow, accusing other people of absurd beliefs, that's the kettle calling the pot black. Have you ever actually read the crap you post? If my beliefs are absurd then I am in good company. Here are some quotes from people that you may think are absurd, but all are experts and some are considered geniuses:                   Learning and thinking.
Comment icon #21 Posted by The Silver Thong 8 years ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcdDb-cbadw
Comment icon #22 Posted by Noteverythingisaconspiracy 8 years ago
Link doesn't work. Edit: Strangely it does work when I quote it. 
Comment icon #23 Posted by danielost 8 years ago
the past is important if your going to blame a president  blame the correct one. not his first term when he cut the funding.  he had house and senate.  which is why obamacare passed.  
Comment icon #24 Posted by Noteverythingisaconspiracy 8 years ago
If you go back you will find that I wasn't blaming the president, I was merely commenting of UFOwatcher who seemed to believe that NASA is responsible for deciding what to do with their funding. They aren't. Is there anything factually wrong in what I wrote here ?


Please Login or Register to post a comment.


Our new book is out now!
Book cover

The Unexplained Mysteries
Book of Weird News

 AVAILABLE NOW 

Take a walk on the weird side with this compilation of some of the weirdest stories ever to grace the pages of a newspaper.

Click here to learn more

We need your help!
Patreon logo

Support us on Patreon

 BONUS CONTENT 

For less than the cost of a cup of coffee, you can gain access to a wide range of exclusive perks including our popular 'Lost Ghost Stories' series.

Click here to learn more

Recent news and articles