Article

2005-05-21 Home Front: Tech

Manned Mars Missions: 60 Years of proposals, always 20 years away.

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-05-21 13:26|| || Front Page|| [11141 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 New article from Mark Wad's amazing sEncyclopedia Astronautica, surveying the history of this most-common and elusive of spaceflight objectives.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-05-21 13:29|| 2005-05-21 13:29|| Front Page Top

#2 Some day someone will go. It may be the US, it may be an international venture. Hell it may even be the Indians or Chinese. But personally I think no manned Mars mission should be attempted until propulsion technology reached the point that the trip takes 60 days tops

Posted by Cheaderhead 2005-05-21 15:43|| 2005-05-21 15:43|| Front Page Top

#3 Why? I mean, the human record for being in space is somewhere around a year or so.

And making the trip faster would almost be more a matter of prepositioning supplies or using local resources.

Posted by Phil Fraering 2005-05-21 17:13|| http://newsfromthefridge.typepad.com]">[http://newsfromthefridge.typepad.com] 2005-05-21 17:13|| Front Page Top

#4 One would of course want to use local resources for fueling, life support etc. But if the travel times are much lower than with any chemical system then one can launch pretty much when ever one is ready. No more relying on Hollaman transfer orbits or elaborate flyby paths that get to Mars by using the gravity fields of Venus and or Earth

Posted by Cheaderhead 2005-05-21 19:21|| 2005-05-21 19:21|| Front Page Top

#5 Even with better propulsive methods one is pretty much going to be a prisoner of some form of scheduling. If you have more delta-V one would want to use it to make the crossing shorter rather than put up with a longer crossing at an arbitrary time.

Posted by Phil Fraering 2005-05-21 19:28|| http://newsfromthefridge.typepad.com]">[http://newsfromthefridge.typepad.com] 2005-05-21 19:28|| Front Page Top

#6 "60 years of proposals, always 20 years away"
Sounds a lot like fusion, doesn't it? Except fusion is 50 years and $14 billion (at Princeton) and it's still 20 years away.

Posted by Tom 2005-05-21 20:33|| 2005-05-21 20:33|| Front Page Top

#7 Sending construction robots to Mars first is the way to go. Four to five electrically-powered robots with a small nuclear power plant to recharge them and provide habitat power, on a *one-way* mission. Their main mission is to mine a deep cave in a mountain, reinforce it with rods, line it with pressure sealant and use the shell of their craft as the door and extended door frame. Then they mine deeper into the mountain, not just in length, but mining down to create a large water cistern. Next, they start mining and harvesting water for the cistern, and maybe processing oxygen and hydrogen for lightweight pressurized bladders. Then they can continue to improve their position more and more. Dig more tunnels that are not connected to the main system. They could even build a spaceship runway. Other projects include setting up strong communications with Earth, a weather station, taking core samples, setting up an outdoor shelter tent for equipment to be left outside, and monitoring radiation levels and habitat atmospheric pressure.
By doing this, they save thousands of man-hours doing grundge work, while the food/water/air/radiation clock is running. Instead, knowing what the robots have done, and more importantly, what needs to be done, allows the humans to have a far more specialized cargo, and to pack a lot of extras instead of just basic stuff. Best of all, the robots' work is never done. When the humans arrive, they can more directly use the robots, and the robots stay and continue to work when the humans leave. Imagine the savings if the astronauts knew they had tested and pure water and oxygen, and a large shelter, waiting for them.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-05-21 21:45|| 2005-05-21 21:45|| Front Page Top

#8 Wouldn't it be a whole lot less inexpensive and risky to just invite the Martians to visit us here on Earth, first?

Posted by NA$A 2005-05-21 22:16|| 2005-05-21 22:16|| Front Page Top

#9 Not as long as Slim Whitman lives...

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-05-21 22:33|| 2005-05-21 22:33|| Front Page Top

#10 Good reference, Frank.
My second wife (God rest her soul) got me Mars Attacks for Christmas right after it came out on video. I laughed so hard she was seriously afraid I would choke or have a heart attack. It was an absolute classic of satire and visual comedy, from the stupid hippy declaring "They come in peace!" just before he provokes the Martians by releasing a white dove, to the demented old lady laughing at the immolation of Congress.
One sour note was that Carl Sagan, brilliantly lampooned by the Pierce Brosnan character, died just before the film's release. This cast a pall over an otherwise brilliant and hilarious performance by Brosnan.
I think the brain-dead media bitch with a Chihuahua's tranplanted head was perhaps the funniest and most cogent visual.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-05-21 23:19|| 2005-05-21 23:19|| Front Page Top

23:52 .com
23:31 BH
23:27 Angavimp Flailing4010
23:19 Atomic Conspiracy
23:15 Hee Hee
23:11 Fred
23:01 BH
22:59 BH
22:59 Jackal
22:58 Jackal
22:56 Bomb-a-rama
22:49 Charles
22:48 Frank G
22:45 Frank G
22:44 Barbara Skolaut
22:44 Charles
22:43 Jackal
22:33 Frank G
22:33 Frank G
22:27 Super Hose
22:20 Angavimp Flailing4010
22:16 NA$A
22:12 Mrs. Davis
22:09 Frank G