NASA Waiting for A Mandate: Manned Mission to Mars

[Total Refected Power]

NASA outlined its Mars policy and human exploration of Mars is not a priority. Ten-year goal: a soil sample returned to earth by 2011. .

The policy makers said that they need a mandate from the public or the President to set human exploration as a priority.

While a lot of technology needs to be developed for a successful mission, I think it seems to be no less doable in the year 2000, as it was in 1960 for JFK to set a man on the moon goal.

It would cost a lot, but would be an amazing feat.

 

[OS]

the current american public are not risk takers. They generally don't want to see money used on such a risky project. Plus, there is no "big bad guy" country out there with even the remotest threat of matching the US technologically, so there really isn't the drive for the public to be competitive.

I on the other hand fully agree that we should send a manned mission to mars. Technology developed in such a mission could easily power the next economic boom, just as research done in the 60s power the economic boom today.

 

[IBhacknU]

I'm for this sort of thing, but trying to convince the public... that's another story.

 

[thebestMAX]

What?

Have a useful purpose for our tax dollars?

Never.

Big Business could only stand to profit from this and we could never have that, could we?

Above is known as sarcasm for those of you who dont get it.

 

[bigvince]

i agree that the public is not in the state of mind for such a thing to occur but the irony lies in the fact that an event of that magnitude is EXACTLY what not only the US needs but what the world needs. for too long we have not had anything in this country to rally behind (short of slick willys exploits and that doesnt count) nothing to instill national pride. in the sixties people were all for space exploration because the times reflected those feelings to expand and change our world. now-adays nobody cares nobody does and we are genneraly lacking in motivation. this needs to be corrected and what better way to do i them by sending a man to mars I mean it Mars! ...even as i type it im astounded by the shear scope of such an undertaking.


so who do i write to get this done?

 

[Total Refected Power]

I believe it is time for some unbridled optimism in the US. Technology is advancing at an amazing rate and we have cogent theories to fight disease. We need to augment our "space truck" philosphy with an ambitiuous plan such as human exploration of Mars. What are we waiting for? When will it ever be the "right" time? It is time for some strong, bold leadership. I don't think we can even imagine the technological and cultural benefits to such an undertaking. I hope I live long enough to see it.

bigvince: EXACTLY

 

[THELAIR]

big vince! well said... forward that to the speech writers for whoever the next president will be.

summs it up pretty honestly.


However i think in about 50 years we will see 2 things happen

1) first hte emergence of France as a space "power", they allready have quite hte lil program going now with their Areielle (sp?) rockets.

2) China in 75 years from now could seriously pose an ability to get on Mars. I think the shock that a non white person being on mars first would be incentive enough for hte americans to nail that one down before the chineese do. Now i understand thats quite the 'non political correct" thing to say, but its the honest truth, just as much as the chance of a black man back in the 60's being hte first to walk on the moon. Would never of happened.

Anyways, getting a man or person on Mars is a feat but i could see a lesser country like france, china, even india, building a colony on the moon first, being a safer/cheaper option than to go all the way over to mars.

in 50-75 years we may need that colony on whatever planet we decided, because in less than 20 years earths population will be at 10billion people. In 75 years from now? Who knows. Very scarry thought.

A hundred years ago, the year 2000 was meet with great imagination and excitement. The next 100 years will be met with suffering, poverty and overwhelming drudgery for 75% of the population.

EDIT
just read the US census bureau's projected timeline for when we will hit 10billion, they say it will take 50 years from now, i say it will happen in half that time. Remember not so long ago when Koffi Anan, the UN leader numbered the 6th billion child when he was in Sarajevo? Well According ot the census bureau, we will hit 6.1 billion people November 1st. We have added another 100million bodies to the earth since new years. 100 million more people that want what we want, fresh water, a home and all the wordly possesions they can get their hands on.

 

[thebestMAX]

<<. I hope I live long enough to see it.>>

Exactly what I said at my high school graduation in 1959. Im not as optimistic now.

 

[bigvince]

MAX,


i can see your point but optimisim is key and that would lie in the youth of this country. give them somthing to be proud of, give them somthing that focuses there energies, and watch how the guns fall from there hands, watch how so called teen angst turns into futuristic optimisim. I'm telling you ...were like this close, we just need that extra push that a project like putting a man on mars would provide...

 

[thebestMAX]

Anywhere where I didnt say the same thing? Im all for it before we cant do it because of lack of resources (put anything you want in place of that last word). We are on the same track.

 

[bigvince]

i don't quite understand what you trying to say but ....OK!

 

[JellyBaby]

In today's political climate, you'll not likely see a manned mission to mars. The Rs and Ds are too concerned about spending money on programs that will get them (re)elected. There's no money leftover for insiprational programs like this.

You would need competition from another country to force the politicians to fund a human mars mission. Or the private sector might give it a whirl if they knew they'd eventually profit from it.

When I was younger I always thought it odd the russias had a space station in orbit but we didn't. But luckily I had some national &quot;pride&quot; from our ongoing shuttle program.

btw, if you want to see this happen in your lifetime, don't vote for those pesky democrats (Gore said he'd all but eliminate nasa). Ugh.

 

[bigvince]

i wouldnt vote for a dummycrat if you held me upsidedown by my toe and started to tickle me with a feather.

 

[Tominator]

You all are forgetting the BIG problem....NO WATER! Unless a source IN SPACE is found there will be no manned Mars Mission.

BTW, in my opinion if the money the US Government has spent on space exploration had been given to 'Big Business,' we would be vacationing on the Moon!

NASA has become so Political and mismanaged as to make it laughable for serious exploration.

 

[Total Refected Power]

Tominator:

I am not an expert but the PLANETARY SOCIETY has worked out of lot of these problems. Could have a &quot;resource&quot; ship sent ahead of time, etc. It is really just a lack of will.

 

[Unsickle]

I have been interested in Mars for several years and I am a published technical author (Nanorobots for Mars EVA Repair, SAE 2000). Here is what I have to say.

Moon colony: Forget it. There is nothing on the moon, and the moon isn't remotely similar to Mars. Sure you'll gain hab experience, but that can be done in the extreme climates on this planet as well. Mars Society is doing just that right now.

Water: Water is not a problem. The systems that are developed for water reclamation are highly robust and efficient. Plus, water can be produced in situ via chemical processes with hydrogen and a nuclear reactor. We will need to send hydrogen there, a la Zubrin (though he is a crack head).

Something to watch out for in the future: Nanotechnology. Think Von-Neumann, assemblers, diamondoids, nanotubes, etc. We are just now on the threshold of nanotechnology. Give it a few decades.

 

[JellyBaby]

Unsickle,

How does nanotechnology matter in terms of the human mission to mars? Or did you just toss that in as an aside?

 

[Dameon]

NASA has crashed probes on the surface... they can't even get a dang probe to land in one piece, much less a cartload of people. I was the biggest space geek ever when I was young. Went to Space Academy and everything.. my mom still has my blue jumpsuit from the whole thing. but honestly, it doesn't seem justifiable in the expense right now.

 

[UG]

Tominator;

There are hundreds of cubic miles of water frozen at the south pole of Mars, year round. A lesser volume of frozen water can be seasonally found at the north pole.

There is significant, directly measureable evidence for sub-surface, frozen water in non-polar latitudes.

Water will not be an initial problem for Mars exploration.

Unsickle;

An abundance of He3 is known to exist in the lunar regolith: it's very useful for powering clean, electricity generating fusion reactors here on Earth.

Daemeon;

Just because you can't do it doesn't mean NASA can't. You're full of BS. You probably had to re-take kindergarten; several times.

 

[piku]

WHY DON'T WE JUST FCKING GO TO THE MOON INSTEAD??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/


damn i get so pissed whenever they talk about Mars. who the hell cares? lets deal with the moon first, THEN move on to Mars. Hell, if we acctually gave a damn we could be LIVING on the moon by now. but noooooo, lets just forget about it and deal with some red thing that is so far away we can barely get a ship there, let alone keep in contact with it for more than a week.




hehe sorry bout that

 

[Total Refected Power]

Piku:

Going back to the moon is largely useless and actually would divert resources from the correct mission: Mars.

 

[JellyBaby]

piku,

From what I understand the moon doesn't have much worth researching but I'm sure we'll be back someday. I tell ya at the rate earth is moving on space issues, I'm beginning to wonder if we'll even finish the international space station by the time I croak.

 

[The Wildcard]

What piku was probably trying to say is that if we ever want to colonize and to live in space, the moon would SEEM to be a much better choice than MArs since it's much closer and plus we already know so much about it.

REgarding the main topic, that sorta sucks that Nasa moving so slow with Mars.

 

[SJ]

First off, one of the reasons why some missions have failed is, lack of funding. They have a very limited budget. That same limited budget is the same reason why they are so slow on missions to mars.

 

[piku]

what the wildcard said.

What does mars have that the moon doesn't?

nothing but an extra billion miles to the trip.

I mean its not like there is breatheable air or something on mars. their both just rocks in space.

oh wait, mars has a face. my bad. unfortunatly it just looks like a mountain from the ground.