Manned Mission to Mars

[SpikedRocker]

With the up-coming Mars lander about to land http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/space/05/23/mars.lander/index.html

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/phoenix/news/phoenix-20080522.html

Alot of discussion is around the space and aeronautical people whether a manned mission to Mars is even worth it. With 55% of all Mars missions being sucessful there is a good chance something will go wrong. I feel right now that manned missions to Mars are not needed now. We need to get back to the moon and get labs put up so we can possibly improve the success rate to Mars. Most people beleive either of those missions are not worth it because people are on Earth cannot extract resources from them. So what are your thoughts?

[VirDeBello]

More research needs to be put in for labs on the moon and alternate ways of propulsion other then the current ways. Hopefully we will not be going to this manned mission the ol' fashioned way. We have the ideas and theories of new ways to get to Mars but we just need to test them out.

[Red]

long overdue

[VirDeBello]

Oh yeah....maybe I don't know but are they creating or have created some new ways of getting to mars like technological or something?

[Itch]

Watched a pretty interesting mini-series about this on the Science channel (yes I'm a nerd) It was called "Mars Rising" Talks alot about the issues of communication, technology, cosmic radiation, personal interactions, muscle atrophy, etc.

 

Here's a link if you're interested... http://science.discovery.com/convergence/mars-rising/about.html

[SpikedRocker]

Oh yeah....maybe I don't know but are they creating or have created some new ways of getting to mars like technological or something?

Yes. Ion engines are one of the newest forms. They have one on the probe heading to pluto and its 'flying' in terms of predessors like Huygens-Cassini and Voyagers. From Earth it will reach Pluto in 13 years. I think for Voyager 1 it took nearly 20. Ion propulsion is awesome but it takes a huge amount of fuel to send a payload needed for a manned mission, it would almost need a nuclear reactor to make it feesable now.

Watched a pretty interesting mini-series about this on the Science channel (yes I'm a nerd) It was called "Mars Rising" Talks alot about the issues of communication, technology, cosmic radiation, personal interactions, muscle atrophy, etc.

I love that channel and that series. Pretty much if you wanted to learn about missions to Mars, that is the show to watch. I think one idea proposed on that show was instead of landing on Mars is to land on one of its moons, Deamos and Phobos. Reasoning being the dust storms, huge radiation and temperature extremes. Basically when it would be the safest a lander would be sent down to the planet and then sent back up to the safety of the moon.

Alot of interesting therorys are out there and the one used in the book/movie 2001: A Space Odessey is still one of the leading ones, using nuclear engine and have a centrifugal capsule for artificial gravity. Its still to difficult to work those details out.

[Madness]

I think its gonna BLOW UP !!!...! FFS no im kidding i really wanna see what Mars Looks like:blush:This is for SpikedRocker the (science Nerd)

[SpikedRocker]

I think its gonna BLOW UP !!!...! FFS no im kidding i really wanna see what Mars Looks like:blush:This is for SpikedRocker the (science Nerd)

 

Yes yes..and I am also looking forward for better quality images from the planet. Better than what I can get on my telescope from here!

[VirDeBello]

http://world-unexplained-mysteries.com/2007/06/spacecraft-of-future.html

 

Here is the website for the new ways of propulsion I was talking aboot. Similar to the one I used for my research paper before...

[SpikedRocker]

http://world-unexplained-mysteries.com/2007/06/spacecraft-of-future.html

 

 

I remember some of these. Solar sails was a pretty good idea but just like normal wind its kinda unreliable for travel. Anti-matter engines...in therory it would be a great source of power, but we have to find anti-matter and contain it longer than a a few billionths of a nano-second. And my all-time fail favorite idea, the space elevator. I would be a good idea because it cuts the cost of escaping Earths gravity which comprises 85% of fuel consumption for the space shuttle. But you won't find material strong enough to make it and there are very little in fail-safe measures, so if it breaks either the load plumets to Earth like a meteor or is lost out in space with no control and possibly take out a satelite or two. We need some new ideas in general for this stuff and I don't have any:001_tongue:.

On another note, for those that might be interested, Science Channel is airing the live broadcast of the landing sunday night starting at 7:00 PM EST. Lander is expected to land at 7:53 and will take 7-12 minutes for us on Earth to know if it survived. So if you want to know if it survived but not all the backstory on it...tune in at 8.