The amount of money wasted in the Iraq War in 2006 and 2007 could have funded a human landing on Mars fully. The total bribes received by Russian officials could almost pay for two. It is such a shame that the world is wasting money on things that are detrimental to Humanity, rather than spending it on things that could save it, like space colonisation.
@rbolo29 I don't know about that. In order to generate a significant gravitational force, the ship would have to accelerate in a straight line. If it continuously accelerated then decelerated at 1g in a straight line, it would reach Mars in 2-5 days. Obviously this is beyond our capabilities. Artificial gravity would be much easier generated by spinning the spacecraft.
Yes, it's a great dream and I've love to see it but in reality we don't have the technology to guarantee a safe passage and return. We need much faster propulsion systems and such. Robert Zubrin is both a genius and a crack pot in one I think.
Which is why you create a robust long term exploration plan with prolongued colonization. Then you promote private venture and eneterprize for true colonization... the same process that took place in colonizing America, less all the tribal genocide... of course.
It is more important to have safe transportation and be able to remain on the planet for decades, not to stay in space for decades. Mars Direct gives the opportunity for lightweight and cheap with maximum surface time and a guaranteed return vehicle.
To build a multi-decade massive battlestar gallactica is definately not the first step... It would require great amounts of constant energy for simple propulsion - something that is not yet feasible.
There are already existing launch systems which can handle the non-human loads... heck, even humans could ride these high G rockets if not for NASA's tyrannical Human rating reqs.
As for next generation rockets, the Jupiter concept would have been best, but Ares V is going to be successful - NASA needs to cancel Ares I and restructure the priority of the Space Program.
Truly, we threw it all away with Saturn, and mis-used shuttle technology.
Not really. We learned how to walk 50 years ago. We are talking about learning how to put on running shoes FOR the marathon, instead of practicing in steel toe boots.
Which one makes more sense? a lighter, more efficient plan, or running 26 miles in steel toes?
Cosmic Radiation would not be a major issue so long as you adequately prepare with radiation shielding. Nothing is impossible. Simplest radiation shielding is a water barrier... water... no fancy new technology, just water.
The problem with "myths" about space travel is that those myths are as common as urban legends, such as the one where Mars will be bigger and brighter than the full moon... The general public are so greatly uneducated about it that they will believe anything they hear.
Not really... we have the technology, we have the ability... the only problem is in the funding... every other aspect of the technology has been in existence for decades... read Zubrin's "Case for Mars"... it will change your entire outlook. It will give you the facts! We can do it now, for less!
Private enterprises could accomplish this in a third the time and more than likely at a fifth the price it would take a government funded project. As far as i could see it would probably cause far less political upheaval which is one aspect i haven't heard anyone address yet. You know the politicians will be tripping over each other to get piece of the pie =(
NASA's budget is a mere tiny fraction ... less than 1% of the overall federal budget. Whatever amount of taxpayer money NASA consumes is practically insignificant.
As for what NASA does with it... NASA funds a lot of math & science related programs around America. It holds contests with prize money for people who come up with new ideas for improving technology in areas related to spacefaring technologies, among many other things.
I thin it would be wiser to start with the moon first, not only is it closer, it also has helium 3 (Russia and China are planning on holding joint missions sometime in the 20's). There is allot of practical promise in this
The Mars Society is brilliant!
Check them out and become a member!
smartwarlord 1 year ago
The amount of money wasted in the Iraq War in 2006 and 2007 could have funded a human landing on Mars fully. The total bribes received by Russian officials could almost pay for two. It is such a shame that the world is wasting money on things that are detrimental to Humanity, rather than spending it on things that could save it, like space colonisation.
EnceladusEmpire 1 year ago 3
The gravity on the ships could be generated through the constantly acceleration speeds and deacceleration speeds on the way to Mars.
rbolo29 2 years ago
@rbolo29 I don't know about that. In order to generate a significant gravitational force, the ship would have to accelerate in a straight line. If it continuously accelerated then decelerated at 1g in a straight line, it would reach Mars in 2-5 days. Obviously this is beyond our capabilities. Artificial gravity would be much easier generated by spinning the spacecraft.
Hypergalactica 1 year ago
Yes, it's a great dream and I've love to see it but in reality we don't have the technology to guarantee a safe passage and return. We need much faster propulsion systems and such. Robert Zubrin is both a genius and a crack pot in one I think.
rbolo29 2 years ago
@rbolo29
"Yes, it's a great dream and I've love to see it but in reality we don't have the technology to guarantee a safe passage and return."
Then maybe the solution is to make it a one-way trip. I suggest you check out "Mars to Stay" on Wikipedia.
jmxgen 1 year ago
Which is why you create a robust long term exploration plan with prolongued colonization. Then you promote private venture and eneterprize for true colonization... the same process that took place in colonizing America, less all the tribal genocide... of course.
Eisenmond 2 years ago
It is more important to have safe transportation and be able to remain on the planet for decades, not to stay in space for decades. Mars Direct gives the opportunity for lightweight and cheap with maximum surface time and a guaranteed return vehicle.
To build a multi-decade massive battlestar gallactica is definately not the first step... It would require great amounts of constant energy for simple propulsion - something that is not yet feasible.
Eisenmond 2 years ago
There are already existing launch systems which can handle the non-human loads... heck, even humans could ride these high G rockets if not for NASA's tyrannical Human rating reqs.
As for next generation rockets, the Jupiter concept would have been best, but Ares V is going to be successful - NASA needs to cancel Ares I and restructure the priority of the Space Program.
Truly, we threw it all away with Saturn, and mis-used shuttle technology.
We can still do it now, though...
Eisenmond 2 years ago
Zero G issues resolved by artificial gravity by way of tether and counterbalance.
Micrometeorites are a minor issue while not in a gravity well, but can be countered by modest lightweight composite material.
Radiation surges can be resolved by a "safe-room" inside the innermost portion of the ship, protected by water supply.
The trick is combining all the "needs" and still making it a lightweight and affordable mission.
Eisenmond 2 years ago
Not really. We learned how to walk 50 years ago. We are talking about learning how to put on running shoes FOR the marathon, instead of practicing in steel toe boots.
Which one makes more sense? a lighter, more efficient plan, or running 26 miles in steel toes?
Eisenmond 2 years ago
Cosmic Radiation would not be a major issue so long as you adequately prepare with radiation shielding. Nothing is impossible. Simplest radiation shielding is a water barrier... water... no fancy new technology, just water.
The problem with "myths" about space travel is that those myths are as common as urban legends, such as the one where Mars will be bigger and brighter than the full moon... The general public are so greatly uneducated about it that they will believe anything they hear.
Eisenmond 2 years ago 2
Not really... we have the technology, we have the ability... the only problem is in the funding... every other aspect of the technology has been in existence for decades... read Zubrin's "Case for Mars"... it will change your entire outlook. It will give you the facts! We can do it now, for less!
Eisenmond 2 years ago
Comment removed
RunFasterPussycat 2 years ago
Private enterprises could accomplish this in a third the time and more than likely at a fifth the price it would take a government funded project. As far as i could see it would probably cause far less political upheaval which is one aspect i haven't heard anyone address yet. You know the politicians will be tripping over each other to get piece of the pie =(
shiftychew 3 years ago 3
I totaly agree private enterprise is the only real hope right now.
kingsman565 3 years ago 2
Its kind of funny to think that NASA has only managed to only send humans some 380 pitiful miles away from the Earth; since 1972.
newmac 4 years ago 10
@newmac Yeah, what the heck have they been doing with taxpayer money since then?
RevDarkehorse 1 year ago
@RevDarkehorse
NASA's budget is a mere tiny fraction ... less than 1% of the overall federal budget. Whatever amount of taxpayer money NASA consumes is practically insignificant.
As for what NASA does with it... NASA funds a lot of math & science related programs around America. It holds contests with prize money for people who come up with new ideas for improving technology in areas related to spacefaring technologies, among many other things.
Among other things, NASA supports sci&tech progs
jmxgen 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@newmac @Eisenmond To be fair it's actualy more like 385000 Kilometers, or approx 240k miles. :P
googoo120 1 year ago
I thin it would be wiser to start with the moon first, not only is it closer, it also has helium 3 (Russia and China are planning on holding joint missions sometime in the 20's). There is allot of practical promise in this
SyndiCossack 4 years ago 3
The Moon is closer but has far less resources in which to establish a human presence. We should go to Mars first and then try to tackle the Moon.
BlutStein42 3 years ago 5
Let's set the bar high. We can do it.
Join the Mars Society.
junga02 4 years ago 7
Wow! The Mars Society has the right idea! Let's send Humans to Mars and inspire a whole new generation! The opportunities are endless!
Check them out and become a member!
Eisenmond 4 years ago 13
@Eisenmond To be fair it's actualy more like 385000 Kilometers, or approx 240k miles. :P
googoo120 1 year ago