Who will win the Mars race?

[mindlight]

Rocket Launch: NET November 2017 | SpaceX Falcon Heavy Inaugural Flight

This is the year the launch of the Falcon Heavy rocket ( planned payload to Mars- 16.8Tons) opens up the possibility of a man on Mars for the first time since the Apollo Space programme and the retirement of the Saturn 5.

The private initiatives of Elon Musk and Mars One are planning permanent Mars settlements by 2025 and 2032 respectively with a date to put a man on Mars as early as 2022 if the TLS ( payload 450 tons to Mars) development works out.

NASA (2030s maybe - 50 tons to mars max) and the FKA(2030 - 150 tons to low earth orbit) are planning return trips.

The Russian EnergiaV will not be available till 2028 and the SLS will not be available till 2029 in its full Mars transit version. The Chinese are developing the Long March 9( 37 tons to Mars) rocket with a target date of 2028. ESA do not really have any manned mission space programme worth talking about but maybe they will warm to the idea later?


Who do you think will win the race and why?

Would you consider moving to a Mars base?

What are the key ingredients for success and challenges to overcome for a Mars mission?

 

[JacksBratt]

Nobody..

You cannot go through the Van Allen belt of radioactive particles...
This is a huge and impossible obstacle and thoroughly halts all attempts...
The costs are too high, including human life.

 

[Radagast]

Rocket Launch: NET November 2017 | SpaceX Falcon Heavy Inaugural Flight

This is the year the launch of the Falcon Heavy rocket ( planned payload to Mars- 16.8Tons) opens up the possibility of a man on Mars for the first time since the Apollo Space programme and the retirement of the Saturn 5.

The private initiatives of Elon Musk and Mars One are planning permanent Mars settlements by 2025 and 2032 respectively

That's ridiculous. We couldn't even get a Moon settlement going by then.

 

[Radagast]

You cannot go through the Van Allen belt of radioactive particles...

Actually, we did in putting men on the moon.

 

[naveed]

Who will win the Mars race?

[bless and do not curse] Mars.

let's make planet Earth great again.

 

[mindlight]

Nobody..

You cannot go through the Van Allen belt of radioactive particles...
This is a huge and impossible obstacle and thoroughly halts all attempts...
The costs are too high, including human life.

I have added an extra option to accomodate your objection. Please vote not going to happen.

 

[mindlight]

That's ridiculous. We couldn't even get a Moon settlement going by then.

These are the plans with Musk, Mars One and the Russian space agencies all saying 2030 or before.

 

[mindlight]

[bless and do not curse] Mars.

let's make planet Earth great again.

There is a lot of money and some strong willed idealists arguing otherwise. Also the technology is reaching a trigger point where a Mars mission is feasible as the Falcon Heavy launch will hopefully demonstrate in November of this year

 

[Radagast]

There is a lot of money and some strong willed idealists arguing otherwise. Also the technology is reaching a trigger point where a Mars mission is feasible as the Falcon Heavy launch will hopefully demonstrate in November of this year

The Falcon Heavy launch demonstrates no such thing. We would need to also:

• design and test a Mars-going spaceship
• confirm that crew/passengers could live in a spaceship for a year or so without physical or mental harm
• design and test a Mars habitat
• confirm that colonists could live on Mars long-term without physical or mental harm (this includes developing and testing a food supply, and resolving problems of radiation exposure on Mars).

 

[JacksBratt]

Actually, we did in putting men on the moon.

Actually, look into it.....we didn't go there. Now they are saying we cannot even go to the moon. They are saying "we lost the technology". Really? You "lost the technology"? Seriously?

I truly believed that they went to the moon. Argued furiously with those that denied it.

So, I went on a mission to disprove their supposed reasons why it was fake....

Well, to be honest, there is no way they went to the moon. The logic, facts, physics and a myriad of other truthful issues show that it is totally inconceivable that they went to the moon. Especially with the technology of 1969.

Open your mind and toss out the cognitive dissonance....It is harder to prove to someone that they have been fooled than it is to fool them in the first place.....do some digging.... you will see the impossibility.

Now, it is becoming even more apparent with the obstacles they are facing in this whole pipe dream of a mars landing...that, some how, were not even an issue in 1969.

 

[Cearbhall]

Who do you think will win the race and why?

A monkey, probably.

 

[Halbhh]

Rocket Launch: NET November 2017 | SpaceX Falcon Heavy Inaugural Flight

This is the year the launch of the Falcon Heavy rocket ( planned payload to Mars- 16.8Tons) opens up the possibility of a man on Mars for the first time since the Apollo Space programme and the retirement of the Saturn 5.

The private initiatives of Elon Musk and Mars One are planning permanent Mars settlements by 2025 and 2032 respectively with a date to put a man on Mars as early as 2022 if the TLS ( payload 450 tons to Mars) development works out.

NASA (2030s maybe - 50 tons to mars max) and the FKA(2030 - 150 tons to low earth orbit) are planning return trips.

The Russian EnergiaV will not be available till 2028 and the SLS will not be available till 2029 in its full Mars transit version. The Chinese are developing the Long March 9( 37 tons to Mars) rocket with a target date of 2028. ESA do not really have any manned mission space programme worth talking about but maybe they will warm to the idea later?


Who do you think will win the race and why?

Would you consider moving to a Mars base?

What are the key ingredients for success and challenges to overcome for a Mars mission?

Radiation. Even a can do attitude and lot of knowledge won't cancel radiation, and with current technology it comes down to a very hard equation -- mass vs fuel. It's no joke.

Some pretty dramatic tech breakthroughs are needed, and.....notice a fact -- when your life is in a situation that tech means live or die, then anything that can cause even just a seemingly minor failure like in a field effect -- that seemingly minor glitch can mean extinction.

People don't know just how many different ways Earth and it's magnetic field protect us. It's all taken for granted. But a 3 week trip to the moon mars ain't.

Also, Mars ain't got much field. That's why it is desiccated.

How to Protect Astronauts from Space Radiation on Mars

 

[Goonie]

It'll be a one way trip. Given the distances involved, radiation and the inevitability of mishap anybody who signs up must be aware of this.

 

[naveed]

There is a lot of money and some strong willed idealists arguing otherwise.

only a complete idiot would spend trillion of dollars

to go to a planet that has been dead for millions of year.

when we already live on the best planet

in the solar system / universe.

love and cherish and look after planet Earth.

[bless and do not curse] Mars.

let's make planet Earth great again.

 

[Radagast]

Actually, look into it.....we didn't go there.

We did actually. I saw it on Australian television -- on a feed that came directly from one of our own radio-telescopes.

They are saying "we lost the technology". Really? You "lost the technology"? Seriously?

The US used the Saturn V rocket at the time, which was substantially more powerful than, say, the Falcon Heavy. And the LEM etc. would need to be redesigned using current tech. You couldn't get the parts for the old tech anymore.

Well, to be honest, there is no way they went to the moon.

Trust me. They did. All the arguments against are just nonsense.

 

[Radagast]

love and cherish and look after planet Earth.

Yes, we should.

 

[mindlight]

The Falcon Heavy launch demonstrates no such thing. We would need to also:

• design and test a Mars-going spaceship
• confirm that crew/passengers could live in a spaceship for a year or so without physical or mental harm
• design and test a Mars habitat
• confirm that colonists could live on Mars long-term without physical or mental harm (this includes developing and testing a food supply, and resolving problems of radiation exposure on Mars).

I agree that a lot of testing is needed. But we do have the experience of the Apollo missions and dozens of people have lived on the IIS including through solar storms for 6 months to a year in length. The power of Space Xs follow up rocket to the Falcon Heavy The ITS might mean a Mars trip of just over a month with a large payload rather than a year in space. But there are big research challenges to do with radiation, oxygen and water supply, greenhouses, power generation etc for the Mars base. If you can ferry 450 tons payload though a Mars colony could be well equipped to survive and thrive on Mars. I believe the Mars One plan is for an initial 2 way trip on a Falcon Heavy with 4 astronauts. This would answer the questions to a considerable extent of where research funding could be best allocated. What is great here is that Elon Musk and the people who support him have the funds to make this happen. It is a question of what do we need to make this happen not have we eliminated every potential risk before we do it.

 

[mindlight]

Radiation. Even a can do attitude and lot of knowledge won't cancel radiation, and with current technology it comes down to a very hard equation -- mass vs fuel. It's no joke.

Some pretty dramatic tech breakthroughs are needed, and.....notice a fact -- when your life is in a situation that tech means live or die, then anything that can cause even just a seemingly minor failure like in a field effect -- that seemingly minor glitch can mean extinction.

People don't know just how many different ways Earth and it's magnetic field protect us. It's all taken for granted. But a 3 week trip to the moon mars ain't.

Also, Mars ain't got much field. That's why it is desiccated.

How to Protect Astronauts from Space Radiation on Mars

Been there done that with Apollo and IIS. Always room for improvement. But there are risks in such a mission which is why a willingness to die to make this happen is a prerequisite. The exciting thing is we are now moving past the mollycoddled risk adverse days of public sector space programmes which crippled the manned space programme for much of the last half century. Now its men of vision and funds who are driving this.

 

[mindlight]

only a complete idiot would spend trillion of dollars

to go to a planet that has been dead for millions of year.

when we already live on the best planet

in the solar system / universe.

love and cherish and look after planet Earth.

[bless and do not curse] Mars.

let's make planet Earth great again.

Our beautiful planet is vulnerable to asteroids and super volcanoes not to mention nuclear war. Being a multiplanet species in that context and carrying the best of earth with us to new worlds makes a lot of sense in that context

 

[Paulos23]

I have no idea. We have the capacity to send tonnage there, surviving is still being worked out.