House Committee Chairman Encourages NASA To Send Crew Flyby Mars in 2021

[Nibb31]

You wouldn't see much, because a flyby would fly over the dark side of the planet. You'd see a sunset, 30 minutes of darkness, a sunrise, and you'd be on your way for another 10 months of travel... Not much point.

[NASAFanboy]

You wouldn't see much, because a flyby would fly over the dark side of the planet. You'd see a sunset, 30 minutes of darkness, a sunrise, and you'd be on your way for another 10 months of travel... Not much point.

You would still see Mars, and that is what matters.

And Venus too.

[Kryten]

You would still see Mars, and that is what matters.

And Venus too.

I don't remember 'getting one guy to be able to look at Mars out of a window for a few minutes' being added to the NASA act.

[NASAFanboy]

I don't remember 'getting one guy to be able to look at Mars out of a window for a few minutes' being added to the NASA act.

There is a reason this was proposed at a hearing and not being worked on since 2010.

[xenomorph555]

The US cannot or should not do this, they would go into economic collapse with their massive military, space and other stuffs budgets. Not to mention $19 trillion debt.

[sal_vager]

It'd be cool to keep US politics out of this thread, somehow :/

[Albert VDS]

Well thats rather hard if look at the thread title.

[montyben101]

I sort of find it amazing knowing that i will be alive (hopefully) to see people explore the gas giants, if not the inner solar system

[Northstar1989]

I agree Northstar it's a he'll of an opportunity. But... Can we get a space craft assembled by then? Correct me on this, but the alignment is in 2021. It's a two year journey so does that mean the launch window is in 2019?

I don't know if five years... Or even seven years is enough time to assemble a reliable craft to do the job. Because I tell ya right now if we throw together some sketchy space machine and something goes wrong.. it's curtains for the future of space exploration for a good while.

That being said.. it's not worth it imo. I understand the rarity of the alignment, but.. so what? Future Mars missions won't rely on Venus being in the right place so I say let's take our time and do it right.

We can do it intelligently and reliably if we start NOW- it's just going to take some serious funding...

Honestly, the best thing would be for NASA to cooperate HEAVILY for financial and technological/engineering support with the ESA on this, and portray it to the public/politicians as a triumph of Western innovative spirit and intellectual freedom over the oppressive forces of Communism (China) or corrupt "democracies" really run by totalitarian leaders (Russia).

Regards,

Northstar

[Northstar1989]

The US cannot or should not do this, they would go into economic collapse with their massive military, space and other stuffs budgets. Not to mention $19 trillion debt.

Actually, the United States' national debt is MUCH smaller compared to its GDP and population in comparison to, say, Italy or France. And a lot of space program funding actually ends up feeding back into the economy- as the profit margins and salaries are very high in the defense and space sectors (which also creates room to cut out a lot of fat if politicians can make up their mind to try and bring down costs...)

And who do you think owns most of that debt? It's the Chinese, actually- which comes seriously in handy for preventing future wars and encouraging good relations between the US and China (China knows if they ever ended up at war with us, they would never see a cent of that money...)

Regards,

Northstar

Edited May 16, 2014 by Northstar1989

[Nibb31]

I sort of find it amazing knowing that i will be alive (hopefully) to see people explore the gas giants, if not the inner solar system

I wonder what makes you so optimistic?

If you're lucky, you might get to see a manned Mars mission (although there are some 90 year old NASA retirees who have been waiting all their life to see it), but I doubt that a manned expedition to Saturn or Jupiter will happen in any of our lifetimes.

[Nibb31]

Honestly, the best thing would be for NASA to cooperate HEAVILY for financial and technological/engineering support with the ESA on this, and portray it to the public/politicians as a triumph of Western innovative spirit and intellectual freedom over the oppressive forces of Communism (China) or corrupt "democracies" really run by totalitarian leaders (Russia).

I wonder what puts you or your country on a moral high ground compared to different and much older cultures.

The important thing isn't who accomplishes something. It's what Humanity accomplishes. Those countries are just as representative of Humanity as yours.

[Brethern]

Am I the only one thinking that this is too big of a step? It's been what? almost 50 years since we sent man to the moon, the most we did since then is have a few orbital stations.

If anything they should be working on improving the reliability of anything that would send a man to mars. And no what we have now doesn't have a good enough safety record to attempt it.

[Northstar1989]

I wonder what puts you or your country on a moral high ground compared to different and much older cultures.

It's a matter of different government types, and different ideologies. Older doesn't mean better, and there is no question that the Communist Chinese government is oppressive, totalitarian, and antithetical to freedom and democracy around the world. In fact, half the reason China is doing as well as it is is not because of their government (which is actually newer than the US government- the current Chinese government has its roots in the 1940's), but because of their long history, large territory, and huge population- all of which stem from history *BEFORE* the current government took power.

It makes perfect sense to frame this as a battle of ideologies in order to touch off another space race and win popular support for further human progress in space exploration...

The important thing isn't who accomplishes something. It's what Humanity accomplishes. Those countries are just as representative of Humanity as yours.

It's true that the ultimate measurement of success is what humanity accomplishes- but competition in the form of a space race is one of the best ways to encourage further progress and accomplishment for all parties.

And one other measure of the success of humanity is the triumph of freedom and democracy vs. oppression and totalitarianism. Trust me, I'm just as concerned about the increasingly anti-democratic tendencies of American politics as I am about the totalitarian Communist regime of China. If China is moving towards a Big Brother style dystopia, America seems to be moving towards a cyberpunk Corpocracy dystopia, where the rich control everything (and are above the law) and the poor have no say in how their own government is run...

Regards,

Northstar

[Northstar1989]

Am I the only one thinking that this is too big of a step? It's been what? almost 50 years since we sent man to the moon, the most we did since then is have a few orbital stations.

If anything they should be working on improving the reliability of anything that would send a man to mars. And no what we have now doesn't have a good enough safety record to attempt it.

NASA's problem is precisely that it is *too cautious* now. Exploration has been, and always will be, dangerous. People need to accept that, and not make too big a deal of it if a few astronauts are lost in the process (thousands more people die every day in Africa, after all). The risks they undergo for the greater good is precisely what makes astronauts heroes worth looking up to.

Of the Nina, the Pinta, and the Santa Maria, for instance, only two made it back to Europe... (I bet you didn't know THAT) As a wise man once said, "You can't discover new continents without losing sight of the shore".

Regards,

Northstar

[Northstar1989]

If you're lucky, you might get to see a manned Mars mission (although there are some 90 year old NASA retirees who have been waiting all their life to see it).

Agreed. And I want to ACTUALLY SEE THAT MISSION (and I bet those retirees do too). So that's why we need to take this first bold step, and "bravely go where no man has gone before".

Planetary Sciences are never going to inspire children to enter into careers in math and science (and, at least in the US, not nearly enough young people do that anymore). Manned missions are.

Regards,

Northstar

P.S. The current NASA space program has become the laughing-stock of the world, even here in America. For instance, the popular television show "The Big Bang Theory" openly mocks the space program with their treatment of one of the main characters going to the ISS, and at another time the characters stealing a spare camera for the Mars Rover to film their friend, like extra-planetary rovers are just some joke to use the spare parts from to pull practical jokes and spy on people...

Edited May 16, 2014 by Northstar1989

[NASAFanboy]

I wonder what makes you so optimistic?

I wonder what makes you so pessmistic.

The conditions are right for a new burst in space exploration, this time instead of the Moon, we go interplanetary. More and more billionaires are investing themselves into the space industry, the government is proposing new technologies such as asteroid mining and solar farms (Despite the fact some are not practical, any space infrastructure is good space infrastructure so if they really want to do it, I support them 100%), and the Chinese and Iranians (Both arch enemies of one of the greatest spacefaring powers of the world) are gearing up their own space programs. Perhaps you may call these ideals unreasonable and propose cheaper and less exciting "logical" alternatives.

We stopped exploring space with humans due to the big boondoggle known as the space shuttle and the lack of competition and a hostile Congress. As you can see, Congress is once again warming up to the idea of space exploration, the Chinese are prodding us in the back, and we've handed LEO to private companies to invest in spacecraft that can launch lunar sorties, to Lagrange point stations, and Mars missions (Multiple launches). Space exploration will see a rate of progress in this century not unlike the space race.

But humans are not all completely forms of logic, and we, especially the leadership, likes to show the other side who's nether region is bigger.

Edited May 16, 2014 by NASAFanboy

[Seret]

We stopped exploring space due to the big boondoggle known as the space shuttle

Er, no we didn't. Not even a little bit. If anything the pace has accelerated as our capabilities have increased. We don't need to send humans to explore the solar system, we're doing a grand job without them.

[NASAFanboy]

Er, no we didn't. Not even a little bit. If anything the pace has accelerated as our capabilities have increased. We don't need to send humans to explore the solar system, we're doing a grand job without them.

Space exploration isn't just science.

It's about building a sustainable interplanetary civilization for not only us, but our children and their kin.

[Seret]

Space exploration isn't just science.

It's about building a sustainable interplanetary civilization for not only us, but our children and their kin.

That's colonisation, which isn't on the cards. Exploration is about acquiring new knowledge, sounds a bit sciency to me.

Science output is the goal of exploration missions, it's how their performance is measured. You personally may have different goals and expectations, but if they're not aligned with those running the space programmes you're probably just setting yourself up for disappointment.

Edited May 16, 2014 by Seret

[NASAFanboy]

That's colonisation, which isn't on the cards. Exploration is about acquiring new knowledge, sounds a bit sciency to me.

Science output is the goal of exploration missions, it's how their performance is measured. You personally may have different goals and expectations, but if they're not aligned with those running the space programmes you're probably just setting yourself up for disappointment.

Every manned mission is a precursor to a research base.

Every research base is the first step to colonization.

Many of those in Congress want NASA to establish a base on Mars. The Constellation Program called for it, and so did the NASA Authorization Act of 2013. NASA's Mars Reference Mission 5.0 is still in effect as of 2013, and that too calls for a future Mars research outpost. Bigelow and NASA are both looking at a probable lunar outpost. I can assure you that a research base is well on the cards, and a research bases are colonies if you stretch it.

Robotic exploration now should be focused on the Outer Planets and finishing up a Mars Sample Return, and humans should be sent to fill the gaps in between. Robotic exploration doesn't excite the imaginations of the public. It doesn't give a nation a factor of national pride. That's why Congress is hesitant to fund it.

[shynung]

Every research base is the first step to colonization.

I highly doubt that this is the case. We have research bases in Antarctica Continent, but there is no effort to build any colony there whatsoever, as far as I knew. Living conditions both on the Moon and Mars are significantly worse than that, so I find the concept of having manned research bases there very unlikely.

Edited May 16, 2014 by shynung

[Kryten]

Every manned mission is a precursor to a research base.

Hence the US having had a moonbase since the late 70's. Oh, wait.

[NASAFanboy]

Hence the US having had a moonbase since the late 70's. Oh, wait.

Hence, the Soviets dropping out of the space race and us investing into a big boondoggle.

Oh, wait.

@Shyung.

No one cares about Antartica! It's a piece of ice!

That doesn't excite the public mind at all

Edited May 16, 2014 by NASAFanboy

[Whirligig Girl]

I think that a mission to Mars should be saved for a landing. Something that there's a point to do. With a flyby you just take some pictures and go back, and you'd be cooped up in a cabin for 20 months.