President Bush is expected to announce new goals for Nasa. One of them is a return to the Moon and another is a mission to Mars. What do you think about this? Should we spend the money to accomplish this? Is this just another pipe dream?
Human Mission to Mars?
- Thread starter Makalakumu
- Start date
I think a return to the moon is long overdue. The manned trip to Mars is a bit of a reach, though. I think a station on the lunar surface would be a good idea and maybe even cheaper than the space station once it's up and running. At the rate that we are using the supplies that Earth has to offer we will soon have to look to other heavenly bodies for metals, minerals, and maybe even fuel sources. A manned mission back to the moon could be the first step in putting a permanently manned station there and that would, in turn, be a stepping off point for further exploration/exploitation of the solar system.
michaeledward
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,063
- Reaction score
- 82
I'm looking forward to the Bush Administration Tax Cut that is going to be required to pay for the moonbase & mars mission.
Mike
Mike
OP
- Thread Starter
- #4
Don't worry, Mike, we'll find a reason to invade. Martian wmd or somesuch.
Yeah its the run up a defecit and screw over your children tax plan. Mars wouldn't be worth it, but if we pay for it the way our government pays for everything else these days, we won't even feel it.
Sean
Unfortunately, there is no singular incentive to entice the majority of U.S. citizens to be willing to foot the bill for a manned Mars mission.
Bear in mind that I was a former astronomy student and though I no longer pursue that as a profession, it is a field that I am deeply interested in...particularly the manned exploration of space.
We went to the moon to gain the ultimate 'high ground' over the U.S.S.R. Yes, there was a lot we learned there, and sending men rather than probes proved fruitful in many respects, but as soon as Armstrong took that first step, we beat the Soviets. Everything after that was gravy. We got their first, the U.S. public got bored with it, the program got axed with Apollo 17.
Sending men to the moon again would be even more costly than it was in the 60's and 70's. There are no more Saturn V's left to ferry men up to the moon. The few that remained after the cancellation of Apollo are museum relics. Everything would have to be started from scratch. The STS system is unsuitable for anything but low earth orbit. Besides, there is no way a shuttle is going to land on the moon, much less take off again.
One could argue then that we simply move forward and plan for going directly to Mars. Though many have formulated some viable plans, like Dr. Robert Zubrin with his 'Mars Direct' proposal, it would still be incredibly costly and require the creation of some new technology. Again, it would be difficult to convince the American populace to pick up that check.
The obstacles of a manned Mars mission are considerable. At best, it would take around 6 months...one way. En route, the crew would be at risk of radiation exposure whenever the sun decided to puke on them. We already know that living in a microgravity environment for a long period of time causes the body to weaken considerably. The crew risks further radiation exposure while on Mars, since the Martian atmosphere and EM field are not sufficient enough to protect them from solar outbursts.
I think I'll stop now, because entire books have been written on the difficulties of a manned Mars mission, and I could not do them justice here. I would love to see a manned Mars mission...hell, I'd love to be on one. Unfortunately, I don't think the current social, political, and economical climate are conducive to such a venture.
Cthulhu
Bear in mind that I was a former astronomy student and though I no longer pursue that as a profession, it is a field that I am deeply interested in...particularly the manned exploration of space.
We went to the moon to gain the ultimate 'high ground' over the U.S.S.R. Yes, there was a lot we learned there, and sending men rather than probes proved fruitful in many respects, but as soon as Armstrong took that first step, we beat the Soviets. Everything after that was gravy. We got their first, the U.S. public got bored with it, the program got axed with Apollo 17.
Sending men to the moon again would be even more costly than it was in the 60's and 70's. There are no more Saturn V's left to ferry men up to the moon. The few that remained after the cancellation of Apollo are museum relics. Everything would have to be started from scratch. The STS system is unsuitable for anything but low earth orbit. Besides, there is no way a shuttle is going to land on the moon, much less take off again.
One could argue then that we simply move forward and plan for going directly to Mars. Though many have formulated some viable plans, like Dr. Robert Zubrin with his 'Mars Direct' proposal, it would still be incredibly costly and require the creation of some new technology. Again, it would be difficult to convince the American populace to pick up that check.
The obstacles of a manned Mars mission are considerable. At best, it would take around 6 months...one way. En route, the crew would be at risk of radiation exposure whenever the sun decided to puke on them. We already know that living in a microgravity environment for a long period of time causes the body to weaken considerably. The crew risks further radiation exposure while on Mars, since the Martian atmosphere and EM field are not sufficient enough to protect them from solar outbursts.
I think I'll stop now, because entire books have been written on the difficulties of a manned Mars mission, and I could not do them justice here. I would love to see a manned Mars mission...hell, I'd love to be on one. Unfortunately, I don't think the current social, political, and economical climate are conducive to such a venture.
Cthulhu
michaeledward
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,063
- Reaction score
- 82
Well Said ... and I agree. Even more so than the trip to Baghdad in November, this smacks of politics. Or, perhaps, even more deviously, a way to kill off NASA.
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=913
Today the Elected Leader of the Free World, Georgii Walkerovich Bushmanov announce the return of the Glorious American People to the moon within the next few years in preparation of begining diplomatic relations with our neighbors on Mars.
This return will be paid for by the retirement of our nobel space fleet. While our next generation starships are developed, the Beacon of Democracy will share the opportunity with loyal allies in Europe and Russia to accompany our Brave Astronauts in their quest to visit the people of the downtroden Mars.
No word yet on if UN weapons inspectors will go with them to look for Saddams W.M.D.
Funding for the program will be provided by a yard sale, a couple of bake sales, an e-bay auction and possibly even a bazzar. No word yet on if ad space will be available on the new ships.
Today the Elected Leader of the Free World, Georgii Walkerovich Bushmanov announce the return of the Glorious American People to the moon within the next few years in preparation of begining diplomatic relations with our neighbors on Mars.
This return will be paid for by the retirement of our nobel space fleet. While our next generation starships are developed, the Beacon of Democracy will share the opportunity with loyal allies in Europe and Russia to accompany our Brave Astronauts in their quest to visit the people of the downtroden Mars.
No word yet on if UN weapons inspectors will go with them to look for Saddams W.M.D.
Funding for the program will be provided by a yard sale, a couple of bake sales, an e-bay auction and possibly even a bazzar. No word yet on if ad space will be available on the new ships.
Bester
<font color=blue><B>Grand UberSoke, Sith-jutsu Ryu
The truth is its a good plan. The question as always is, will the government actually follow through with it, or will it leave it to wither on the vine like so many other brave new initiatives that have been announced, and then underfunded and forgotten as the administration continues to seek approval for its illegal war against Iraq?
OP
- Thread Starter
- #10
Juicy...How so?
Mod Note: Threads merged
========================
Seriously, a well thought out, well funded and well researched program to take us permanently to the stars would be excellent.
Sadly, the current administration has demonstrated little ability to follow through once it announces something that on the surface, is honorable.
- The education systems are under funded, and the states left hanging under the "No Child Left Behind" program.
- The enviroment is being raped under Bush Administration policies that have left the envormental protection agencies undermanned and under funded.
My opinion is that this announcement is yet another attempt by the illegal regime to deflect public attention from the recent news that the war against Iraq began being planned January 1, 2001.
I predict that like all other mandates put forth by our "Glorious Leader", it will be underfunded, and soon forgotten, lost in the pile of "attention deflection devices' this administration is becoming famous for.
As to the funding....this program to reach a successful stage is going to require billions, not millions of dollars in funding. Considering the last 20+ years of concern from both parties, I have very little faith in the success of this.
========================
Seriously, a well thought out, well funded and well researched program to take us permanently to the stars would be excellent.
Sadly, the current administration has demonstrated little ability to follow through once it announces something that on the surface, is honorable.
- The education systems are under funded, and the states left hanging under the "No Child Left Behind" program.
- The enviroment is being raped under Bush Administration policies that have left the envormental protection agencies undermanned and under funded.
My opinion is that this announcement is yet another attempt by the illegal regime to deflect public attention from the recent news that the war against Iraq began being planned January 1, 2001.
I predict that like all other mandates put forth by our "Glorious Leader", it will be underfunded, and soon forgotten, lost in the pile of "attention deflection devices' this administration is becoming famous for.
As to the funding....this program to reach a successful stage is going to require billions, not millions of dollars in funding. Considering the last 20+ years of concern from both parties, I have very little faith in the success of this.
michaeledward
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,063
- Reaction score
- 82
The Grover Norquist school of government. Cut taxes so far that programs must be eliminated. Stangle the baby in the carriage.
michaeledward
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,063
- Reaction score
- 82
R.I.P. Hubble Space Telescope.
From CNN.COM
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Hubble Space Telescope will be allowed to degrade and eventually become useless, as NASA changes focus to President Bush's plans to send humans to the moon, Mars and beyond, officials said Friday.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/01/16/hubble.telescope.ap/index.html
We gotta do it.
There's no need, but that isn't the point.
There's no need, but that isn't the point.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #15
I was recently judging a science fair and the topic that is on the kids minds is Mars. Humans going to Mars. When you ask them why that is so important most of the time they answer with, "We need someplace to go when the Earth dies."
Talk about a disposable society.
Upnorthkyosa
Talk about a disposable society.
Upnorthkyosa
The earth isn't gonna die. We may destroy the ecosystem to the point that humans can no longer live here but the earth itself will adapt and simply create another species to rule things.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #17
I agree, the earth isn't going to die. Humanity could go extinct, but that and the earth dying are not the same things. Its the message though...look at the meaning behind what these kids are saying...
I understand the message and see it as a (maybe rightful) fatalistic attitude. I believe mining stellar bodies would be a good idea for us. I also believe that a permanent settlement (yes, settlement) would make this a much easier endeavor.
hardheadjarhead
Senior Master
We could focus on two things with our R and D money:
1. Development of the "Space Plane" currently in research and the scramjet rockets to drive it to a theoretical mach 15.
2. Fusion reactors.
Right now Australia is working on the scramjet and Europe and Japan are working towards nuclear fusion reactors. The former would give us the means of springboarding to Mars and the latter would be one of the greatest scientific boons to mankind.
This whole Mars thing with Bush is simply a political move to get centrist votes away from the Democrats. I honestly believe his administration really couldn't give a darn about space exploration.
Our budget is in the red...bleeeeeeding red...and he wants to spend a trillion to get to a planet with very little on it. The administration has even gone so far as to say it was a "strategic" move to insure our interests in space are secure. Gee. There must be a line at the door with countries trying to get there first....
We have other things to focus on. Mars isn't going anywhere.
Regards,
Steve
1. Development of the "Space Plane" currently in research and the scramjet rockets to drive it to a theoretical mach 15.
2. Fusion reactors.
Right now Australia is working on the scramjet and Europe and Japan are working towards nuclear fusion reactors. The former would give us the means of springboarding to Mars and the latter would be one of the greatest scientific boons to mankind.
This whole Mars thing with Bush is simply a political move to get centrist votes away from the Democrats. I honestly believe his administration really couldn't give a darn about space exploration.
Our budget is in the red...bleeeeeeding red...and he wants to spend a trillion to get to a planet with very little on it. The administration has even gone so far as to say it was a "strategic" move to insure our interests in space are secure. Gee. There must be a line at the door with countries trying to get there first....
We have other things to focus on. Mars isn't going anywhere.
Regards,
Steve
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
On one hand, I am all in favor.
On the other, the budget deficit--once upon a time, the Republicans were opposed to deficit spending...
Funniest thing I've heard lately was Daniel Schor (a personal hero) saying, when asked on NPR about a permanent moon-base, "Well, I guess they're gonna need the room, once Guantanamo gets filled up...."
On the other, the budget deficit--once upon a time, the Republicans were opposed to deficit spending...
Funniest thing I've heard lately was Daniel Schor (a personal hero) saying, when asked on NPR about a permanent moon-base, "Well, I guess they're gonna need the room, once Guantanamo gets filled up...."
