advertisement


50 Years Since First Moon Landing.

Even with the technological advances of the last 50 years — not to mention the experience gained from NASA's many successful launches of probes into orbit about planets and landings on a planet and even the moon of planet! — I'm doubtful humans will set foot on Mars in my lifetime.

For one, the distance to Mars is orders of magnitude greater than to the moon. But even if that weren't the prime issue, how big of a rocket* would you need to get a person or two or three to Mars, land on the planet and have enough of a rocket left to come back to Earth, all the while storing enough oxygen and food and spinning people in a centrifuge to make the years-long trip in an otherwise zero G environment feasible.

Joe

* I did a back of an envelop calculation and came up with [ginormous number] ^3 metric tonnes.
 
Since the moon landings thanks to the space station(s) work we know much more of the deleterious effects on the body of weightlessness and cosmic rays.
 
Even with the technological advances of the last 50 years — not to mention the experience gained from NASA's many successful launches of probes into orbit about planets and landings on a planet and even the moon of planet! — I'm doubtful humans will set foot on Mars in my lifetime.
For one, the distance to Mars is orders of magnitude greater than to the moon. But even if that weren't the prime issue, how big of a rocket* would you need to get a person or two or three to Mars, land on the planet and have enough of a rocket left to come back to Earth, all the while storing enough oxygen and food and spinning people in a centrifuge to make the years-long trip in an otherwise zero G environment feasible.

Joe

* I did a back of an envelop calculation and came up with [ginormous number] ^3 metric tonnes.

I thought I'd read that they were looking for applicants OK with it being a one way trip?
 
Matt,

Yeah, a one-way trip would make it easier, but unless the Marsonauts were planning on starving after reaching Mars the rocket would have to bring a lot of equipment to make growing food on Mars feasible.

Joe
 
Interesting that it was suggested that he never got back into space because NASA would not want a national/global hero killed on any future missions.
Going to the moon exposed the crew to a big radiation dose. Maybe not a good idea to add to it
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joe

You could send several robotic missions to prep for a human landing.

Best people to send are old ones. They don’t need to breed, will die of old age before the radiation gets them and will be fine in low gravity.

The PFM demographic!

Stephen
 
For one, the distance to Mars is orders of magnitude greater than to the moon. But even if that weren't the prime issue, how big of a rocket* would you need to get a person or two or three to Mars, land on the planet and have enough of a rocket left to come back to Earth, all the while storing enough oxygen and food and spinning people in a centrifuge to make the years-long trip in an otherwise zero G environment feasible.

Joe

One of the points of looking for water on the Moon/Mars is that it can be used as a source of fuel. It enables us to send a robotic mission first to collect and 'crack' the water and generate Hydrogen and Oxygen. That could be done slowly using solar power, and build up the fuel + oxidiser for the return trips, etc. You then send a manned mission once this preparation has been done.

Fortunately Mars and the Moon have smaller gravitational wells than Earth. And they don't need to bring any kit back beyond that needed for a successful return.
 
i am very disappointed by the superstition and authoritarianism on display in this thread.

The billionaires will save us... Bezos and Musk are obvs planning a way to leave the planet for all of us to follow him after he has built us an offworld underground technology paradise with his tunnel boring company — making us a city we can drive about in Teslas buying Amazon Air.

We have moved from Brave New World and 1984 to Total Recall - or put it another way from Huxley via Orwell to really big Dick.
 
Since the moon landings thanks to the space station(s) work we know much more of the deleterious effects on the body of weightlessness and cosmic rays.
The radiation bit is unclear to me. I would have thought astronauts would have a hell of an exposure even with the shielding provided by their craft.
 
I’m more interested in the sciency part of these NASA missions so I’m cool with robots orbiting and landing on other worlds. Sending people isn’t worth the high risk and ginormous expense in my view.

Joe
 
I've got this and it's a great read!
Especially the bits about using a verb or noun with a number being easier to remember than a direct command line syntax.

519q-nX2b7L._SX258_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg
 
I’m more interested in the sciency part of these NASA missions so I’m cool with robots orbiting and landing on other worlds. Sending people isn’t worth the high risk and ginormous expense in my view.

Joe

Massive if true :<)
 
We should crowdfund a mission to send Donald, Nigel and Boris to Uranus as a proof-of-concept to see if it’s feasible.

If it doesn’t work, well, now we know. And if it does work, Uranus is plenty big enough for a few more assholes.

Joe
 
We should crowdfund a mission to send Donald, Nigel and Boris to Uranus as a proof-of-concept to see if it’s feasible.

If it doesn’t work, well, now we know. And if it does work, Uranus is plenty big enough for a few more assholes.

Joe

Uranus seems a particularly appropriate name for the choice of destination... Or should we then rename it Theiranuses?... :)
 
Matt,

Yeah, a one-way trip would make it easier, but unless the Marsonauts were planning on starving after reaching Mars the rocket would have to bring a lot of equipment to make growing food on Mars feasible.

Joe
Joe,

No deed to starve, it's really simple.

Mike

 
I watched the reconstruction on BBC last night which used original voice tapes and actors. Found it educational and dramatic.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0006p5f

Just finished watching this. Very good, but I’m sure I spotted a few rather obvious errors with the recreated/acted footage: a) the pen pictured several times was not a Fischer AG-7, b) when Aldrin was knocking the sample collecting tube into the surface of the moon there was a distinct ‘dink’ sound, and c) what certainly looked like a 1980s cassette Walkman was pictured floating in the capsule just after the ‘Day 7’ section started! Anyone else spot any wrongness?
 


advertisement


Back
Top