posted
Why a manned mission to Mars? Why not return to the Moon instead? It's got the stuff we need, and we would learn more about living long periods away from the Earth within a safe distance from her. The logistics are cheaper. More bang for our buck.
So, what's so special about a manned mission to Mars anyway?
Posts: 2506 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Are there any scientific benefits to be gained? Wouldn't we gain new, different, insights by pushing the envelope?
Posts: 2506 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I read a book called "The Case for Mars" that was great and I think is the impetus behind this trend inside NASA. Mars has a lot of resources that we can use to help in a colonization effort. A Mars colony could be self-sustaining in a far shorter time than one on the moon. I want to see permanent moon bases established, for astronomy, for mining in support of other space efforts (since the cost of getting material to space from the moon is so much less than it is from Earth), and for research and .... well... also just for fun. But it will always be expensive to maintain. I can't see a colony on the Moon becoming truly self sufficient for a century or more.
Mars, however, has things in abundance that can be converted into the things a new colony will need. The book made an analogy with the successful and failed arctic expeditions. Those that were successful used local resources. I was convinced, when I read that book, that the first colony in the solar system off earth would likely be on Mars.
I really want one at a LaGrange point, too, though. An inside out colony world spun up for gravity. That one will have the comfort factor of being close to Earth. I just think that one will come later.
[ November 29, 2003, 11:50 AM: Message edited by: ana kata ]
Posts: 968 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The L-points will rule the Earth/Moon system. Whether for transfer or communication, they are ideal locations for stations.
What about the atmosphere of Mars? It might be a good resource in itself, but isn't orbital transfer going to be more difficult going through all that gas? Mars has twice as much gravity. Mars is sometimes half-way around the sun from us.
People on the visible side of the Moon will always be in contact with Earth. There is no weather on the Moon (other than solar flares). I can think of plenty of reasons why it would be easier on Luna.
Posts: 2506 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Case For Mars homepage may contain a lot more information on this. I'm going by memory from having read the book last year. The atmosphere contains a lot of stuff we need to live.
In order to live on a base anywhere in the solar system without constant resupply you need a renewable source of oxygen and water, and then you have to grow food. So essentially you have to terraform at least some area around you. Whether it be a large garden or vast croplands. I believe that Mars is so very much easier to terraform because of the resources that are there, that it beats out the Moon by a long ways in cost and sustainability.
Do read that book, The Case for Mars. They have the whole thing planned out, how it would work. I am not remembering enough of the technical details to do it justice. It certainly convinced me.
Posts: 968 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mars has twice as much gravity? I don't think so... It's smaller than Earth, isn't it?
The main problem I have with it is that it's 1AU away at its closest point. Even if we have a direct line of sight and are at minimum distance, it's going to take some 10 minutes for a message to get to Mars.
One of the handy things about Mars, though, is that it has a large electromagnetic field. It'll filter out a lot of the nastier radiation that a lunar colony might be exposed to.
Now all we need are some Orion-style bulk freighters to haul around raw materials and such.
Posts: 903 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey Anne Kate - I know Robert Zubrin, he was my next-door neighbr growing up. his book is great, isn't it? And totally feasible. I went to a lecture he gave on it, and his program would already be happening if they had the funding. That's always the catch, eh?
Posts: 8504 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
his book is great, isn't it? And totally feasible. I went to a lecture he gave on it, and his program would already be happening if they had the funding. That's always the catch, eh?
