Quantcast

NASA's plans to reach Mars by 2033.

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

DavidMcCann

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 15, 2016
Messages
2,656
Reaction score
166
I'm going to set all my goals like this.

I'm going to wash my car by 2019.

I'm going to reduce the time it takes to do my job by 33 seconds by 2027

I'm going to clean my gutters by 2033.
 

Winston

Lorenzo von Matterhorn
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
9,050
Reaction score
1,160
Dain bramage and brittle bones....

NASA Likely to Break Radiation Rules to Go to Mars

12 Apr 2017

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/space/nasa-mars-radiation-rule/

A somewhat heated discussion of one paper on the radiation subject in the comments below this article:

Debunking the invalid claims of a space radiation paper
May 11, 2015

https://www.thespacereview.com/article/2749/1

Radiation and Bone Loss: Deep Space Mission Concerns
July 18, 2006

https://www.space.com/2642-radiation-bone-loss-deep-space-mission-concerns.html

The new study shows that on longer flights, such as a 6-month trip to the Moon or 30-month trip to Mars, the bone lost as a result of microgravity will be compounded by more extensive bone loss as a result of radiation exposure. Up to now, NASA has focused on radiation's cancer-causing properties and effect on the central nervous and immune systems. The effect on bone health has been unexamined.

"Now we're concerned that radiation and reduced gravity are both going to contribute to bone loss," Bateman said.


It is estimated that severe bone density loss is possible on a Mars mission. ISS occupants lose 2% per month.

The only real fixes are artificial gravity and shielding en-route, both very heavy and driving up the cost of a mission even beyond the levels no one apparently wants to spend even at current guesstimated mission costs.

Spend a fraction of the money of manned missions on robotics and AI research, both technologies hugely useful here on Earth, and send robotic missions everywhere. If something promising is found like evidence of past or current life and robotics/AI still still aren't up to snuff, send humans.

Rather than worrying right now about Mars colonization for a guarantee of continued human survival in the solar system, spend more than lip service on planetary impact defense. That's much more doable right now and much cheaper than a Mars mission.

But, in the end, lobbyists will determine the policy based upon what Congress is willing to spend.
 

DavidMcCann

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 15, 2016
Messages
2,656
Reaction score
166
But, in the end, lobbyists will determine the policy based upon what Congress is willing to spend.
policy is useless when everyone dies. ;) We won't be colonizing mars, no matter how cool the PR is.
 

terryg

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
2,514
Reaction score
51
Location
Tucson, Az
Manned deep space missions are not feasible with todays technology. Perhaps in 50 years that will change. In the meantime, how about lander/rover missions to the moons of Jupiter and Saturn? That would be really interesting and certainly challenging.
 
Last edited:

Winston

Lorenzo von Matterhorn
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
9,050
Reaction score
1,160
policy is useless when everyone dies. ;) We won't be colonizing mars, no matter how cool the PR is.
Oh, I think we eventually will. But I don't think there's any Elon Musk rush to do so for the sake of human survival. Planetary defense will do for most impact hazards for now. Meanwhile, send robots, preferably with cameras, everywhere in the solar system. Much cheaper and more interesting for spectators on Earth.
 

Lowpuller

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2013
Messages
2,230
Reaction score
12
Why don't we colonize the moon to get the technology figured out? At least a rescue would be possible.
 
Top