Sign in to follow this  
metalAZZman

Manned mission to mars

Recommended Posts

A Mars mission is perfectly possible in the next 10-25 years using only current technologies. Chemical propulsion and limited to no on-orbit construction are the only way to go for now. It can be done in very few launches if we live off the land. We can make methane/oxygen fuel from the Martian atmosphere, we can make oxygen and perhaps even water if we land in the right spot. And while robots may be a more viable method of doing science on a per-mission basis, wouldn't it be better to have geologists living on site? We can't wait for advanced propulsion and giant shipyards. If NASA really had the dedication we could do it right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sometimes, you have to recognize a lost cause. There is no point in fighting an uphill battle when there are no benefits to gain in the end.

Some things in life are impossible. Some are hard, but feasible. Others are hard, and not worth the effort.

Einstein said we could never harness nuclear power.

Once we thought that we could never break the sound barrier, it was thought to be an unbreakable wall.

We would never set foot on the Moon.

Cellphones would never catch on.

There are tons of things which seemed impossible, but we actually made it possible because we dared to dream.

Think about that next time you are flying in a metal birds, watch stories through a window or see things as bright as day when it's actually at night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A Mars mission is perfectly possible in the next 10-25 years using only current technologies. Chemical propulsion and limited to no on-orbit construction are the only way to go for now. It can be done in very few launches if we live off the land. We can make methane/oxygen fuel from the Martian atmosphere, we can make oxygen and perhaps even water if we land in the right spot. And while robots may be a more viable method of doing science on a per-mission basis, wouldn't it be better to have geologists living on site? We can't wait for advanced propulsion and giant shipyards. If NASA really had the dedication we could do it right now.

Making methane/oxygen fuel from the Martian atmosphere is not "current technology". It hasn't even been conceptualized into an experimental model. It has a TRL (Technology Readiness Level) of 1 at best, whereas it needs to be at least 7 or 8 for human lives to rely on it.

And it's not a matter of dedication, it's a matter of budget. NASA barely has the resources to build Orion and a SLS right now, but not enough money to develop any mission-specific hardware.

There are tons of things which seemed impossible, but we actually made it possible because we dared to dream.

Think about that next time you are flying in a metal birds, watch stories through a window or see things as bright as day when it's actually at night.

That's a classical fallacy. There are also many more things which seemed impossible and still are, and most likely always will be.

Edited by Nibb31

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's a classical fallacy. There are also many more things which seemed impossible and still are, and most likely always will be.

By all means, explain why it's a fallacy. Saying it just is doesn't make it so.

All we know that thing which seem impossible are impossible now. We can guess that they will always be impossible.

But we cannot know for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By all means, explain why it's a fallacy. Saying it just is doesn't make it so.

All we know that thing which seem impossible are impossible now. We can guess that they will always be impossible.

But we cannot know for sure.

It's an appeal to history. That people are wrong about a colony on mars being impossible doesn't follow logically from people being wrong about e.g. supersonic flight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do realize that the comment you posted works the other way around?

My point is; You can think you know the boundaries of what is possible or you can look for the boundaries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People used to think that they could turn lead into gold, build a ladder to the Moon, or make perpetual motion devices. It turns out those things are still not possible, and probably never will be. You can dream all you want about pink unicorns and time travel, it doesn't mean that it just takes a dreamer to make impossible things possible.

For all those dreamers who had succeeded despite naysayers, a whole lot more perished for not listening to naysayers.

You are saying that the claim "People said we couldn't ever fly, but now we can" implies that "people said that we couldn't do FTL travel, therefore we should be able to". That is the fallacy. In other words, if some ideas were proven wrong in the past doesn't mean that all ideas will be proven wrong in the future.

We have a much better grip on science than we did in the Middle Ages when myths like those were created. Physics and causality are pretty constant and we have a good enough grasp on most things to figure out what is impossible, what is impractical, and what is highly improbable with pretty good certainty levels. I'm not saying we know everything, but I can quite confidently rule out things like my cat building an antigravity device or you flying to Mars tomorrow morning.

Similarly, developing the technology and infrastructure to fly to Mars in 10 or 15 years is going to be impractical, expensive and therefore improbable to a rather high degree of certainty. Beyond that timeframe, nobody knows really, so it's a bit pointless to speculate on what might or might not be possible in 30 or 50 years depending on what technological breakthroughs, social movements or economical events might or might not happen.

Edited by Nibb31

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying that we can do everything which seems impossible, I'm saying we can't know for sure if we don't try.

Turning a different element into gold has already been done. It just takes too much energy to make a tiny amount of gold, so it's not worth it.

I can agree on the perpetual motion machine and building a ladder to the Moon, or actually physics agrees. But making a pink unicorn is theoretically possible if we can change a horse's DNA.

We are proof that time traveling is real, we do it all the time. We even have some people from the past(astronauts) amongst us. If they stay up in space for 6 months then they are .007 seconds younger then if they stayed on earth.

Beyond that, nobody knows really, so it's a bit pointless to speculate on what might or might not be possible in 30 or 50 years depending on what technological breakthroughs, social movements or economical events might or might not happen.

And that is more or less my point. Things which we deem impossible now, might be possible "tomorrow" or not possible at all.

Oh and I'm not saying that we should try to get your cat to build an anti-gravity device, I doubt it would stay focused on the project and instead play with the fluxcompasitor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A Mars mission is perfectly possible in the next 10-25 years using only current technologies. Chemical propulsion and limited to no on-orbit construction are the only way to go for now. It can be done in very few launches if we live off the land. We can make methane/oxygen fuel from the Martian atmosphere, we can make oxygen and perhaps even water if we land in the right spot. And while robots may be a more viable method of doing science on a per-mission basis, wouldn't it be better to have geologists living on site? We can't wait for advanced propulsion and giant shipyards. If NASA really had the dedication we could do it right now.

Fun fact! If a Mars mission was launched when the post before yours was made, it would have been about halfway, if not more, to Mars!

What I'm trying to say, necro.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Results from RAD on the surface of mars are in. Estimated doses for a long term mars mission is just over 1 sievert.

http://www.space.com/23875-mars-radiation-life-manned-mission.html

Given that mars blocks half of the radiation, this means that the martian atmosphere blocks roughly 30% of the rest. With reasonable radiation protection it should be possible to reduce this a bit more.

The water in the martian soil could perhaps be extracted placed in the roof of the hab. Maybe they could bring a bunch of sandbags and a shovel, fill those up with martian soil and put them on top of the roof for even more protection =P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this