|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
 Posted - 05/28/2002 : 11:24:36 [Permalink]
|
Maybe I'm looking for Mars in all the wrong places; but, why is this news coming from the BBC?
NASA website and the JPL Mars Odyssey spacecraft site are strangely quiet about this.
-------
My business is to teach my aspirations to conform themselves to fact, not to try and make facts harmonize with my aspirations. ---Thomas Henry Huxley, 1860 |
 |
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2002 : 13:24:22 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Maybe I'm looking for Mars in all the wrong places; but, why is this news coming from the BBC?
NASA website and the JPL Mars Odyssey spacecraft site are strangely quiet about this.
Apparently this is "leaked" information. NASA is going to (possibly) hold a press conference declaring a stated goal of a manned mission to Mars within the next 20 years, and they are going to announce this discovery alongside it.
------------
Truth above pride and ego; truth above all |
|
|
|
Physiofly
Skeptic Friend
USA
90 Posts |
Posted - 05/28/2002 : 19:44:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Apparently this is "leaked" information. NASA is going to (possibly) hold a press conference declaring a stated goal of a manned mission to Mars within the next 20 years, and they are going to announce this discovery alongside it.
While I'm all for going to Mars, I think it would be politically and fiscally unwise to announce such a plan given NASA's current budget problems. Scientific American has an article on this:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/explorations/2002/052702nasa/
"Men are so simple and so much inclined to obey immediate needs that a
deceiver will never lack victims for his deceptions." - Niccolo Machiavelli
|
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2002 : 09:16:07 [Permalink]
|
Even with budgetary constraints, we need to get out of LEO and into space.
I recall the largest problem with the water on Mars was that it was frozen in the surface which made it difficult for them to figure out just how much water is there.
Before we start nitpicking about NASA and the press, remember that a large portion of the American public (I can't remember where I found the poll) believe the shuttle can go to the moon. It's not just media sensationalism, it'll be the common person getting bored with the 9 month trip to Mars and the delay in transmission. Which will be, of course edited to fit in the time allotted, and become fodder for more conspirawhackies.
Anyway, a manned Mars mission might be enough to encourage a general public interest in support funding for NASA and our space programs in general.
(20 years huh? Caity's gonna be very very happy. She was 5 when she announced she was going to Mars.)
---
...no one has ever found a 4.5 billion year old stone artifact (at the right geological stratum) with the words "Made by God."
No Sense of Obligation by Matt Young |
|
|
|
Wiley
Skeptic Friend
68 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2002 : 15:13:09 [Permalink]
|
An unmanned (round trip) mission is much more likely. It would obviously be safer but also much cheaper and could still accomplish all scientific objectives. I would love to see a manned mission, but I doubt I will. Regardless an unmanned round trip mission must come first, and I hope this discovery provides the impetus for it.
As for the American public... The moon landing got an 80 share. That means 20% of the American public thought there was something better on TV.
|
|
|
|
Physiofly
Skeptic Friend
USA
90 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2002 : 21:50:08 [Permalink]
|
As an aerospace physiologist I'd love to tackle the challenge of sending a human to Mars, unfortunately I agree with Wiley, we just don't have the technology to do it cheaply and safely yet. I'd be curious to know if anyone has ever calculated how much extra tonnage is required to provide living space and life support for one astronaut per year.
Trish hit the nail on the head - we need to work on getting out of LEO. To do that we need to tackle the one truly big problem of coming up with a cheaper and more efficient method of launching payload into orbit. While it's not as glamorous as rockets to Mars, it's more important in the long run.
I bet there's a sizable chunk of the population that doesn't even know we went to the moon (excluding moon hoax conspiracy nuts).
IMHO, we should dump the ISS and step our way to Mars by cutting our teeth establishing a Moon base first in a joint effort with Russia, China, ESA, et al.
"Men are so simple and so much inclined to obey immediate needs that a
deceiver will never lack victims for his deceptions." - Niccolo Machiavelli
|
|
|
|
gezzam
SFN Regular
Australia
751 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2002 : 22:44:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
An unmanned (round trip) mission is much more likely. It would obviously be safer but also much cheaper and could still accomplish all scientific objectives. I would love to see a manned mission, but I doubt I will. Regardless an unmanned round trip mission must come first, and I hope this discovery provides the impetus for it.
I think that once we have an goal, the human race will overcome most obsticles to achieve what has to be done. The moon landing proved that I think with the desire to win the space race. Not saying that the discovery of water on Mars is enough for that.
However if there was money to be made from it....
"Damn you people. Go back to your shanties." --- Shooter McGavin |
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2002 : 05:36:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
As an aerospace physiologist I'd love to tackle the challenge of sending a human to Mars, unfortunately I agree with Wiley, we just don't have the technology to do it cheaply and safely yet. I'd be curious to know if anyone has ever calculated how much extra tonnage is required to provide living space and life support for one astronaut per year.
I haven't finished this yet, but it's very encouraging, and optimistic, and sounds (to a layman like me) like a very workable idea:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0684835509/qid=1022848485/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-3738547-9486317
[especially now that we've confirmed that there are tremendous amounts of hydrogen just below the surface. We can send an unmanned lander that can start producing the fuel using the hydrogen in the soil for a manned mission's return trip from Mars months before we actually send any humans.]
------------
Truth above pride and ego; truth above all
Edited by - tokyodreamer on 05/31/2002 05:37:45 |
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2002 : 05:41:33 [Permalink]
|
quote:
IMHO, we should dump the ISS and step our way to Mars by cutting our teeth establishing a Moon base first in a joint effort with Russia, China, ESA, et al.
Hear, hear! The ISS is a huge waste of time and resources relative to any benefits it has so far provided. And as far as I know, one of the biggest criticisms is that there aren't any big benefits claimed to be forthcoming from it.
They should at least make it a millionaire tourist spot. I hear there is no better sleep than sleep in zero G. 
------------
Truth above pride and ego; truth above all |
|
|
|
Wiley
Skeptic Friend
68 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2002 : 09:56:24 [Permalink]
|
Bob Parks does not think to highly of Zubrin and his efforts.
http://www.aps.org/WN/WN98/wn082198.html
More of Parks' criticisms of Zubrin can be found in his book, Voodoo Science.
I do agree with Trish and Physiofly that first step in the manned exploration of the solar system is getting out of LEO. We currently do not have an economical way of getting out of LEO. Hell, we don't even have an economical way getting to LEO. (I can say a lot of wonderful things about the Space Shuttle, but economical is not one of them.)
[completely ancillary comment]
Oooh! This post bumped me up to Skeptic Friend. I think I'll go get a cookie.
[/completely ancillary comment]
Edited by - Wiley on 05/31/2002 09:58:12 |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2002 : 10:44:44 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Hell, we don't even have an economical way getting to LEO.
I've read that if there was gold orbiting the Earth that it wouldn't be economical to send the shuttle to get it.
What ever became of the X-Prize that was so in the news a couple of years ago?
-------
My business is to teach my aspirations to conform themselves to fact, not to try and make facts harmonize with my aspirations. ---Thomas Henry Huxley, 1860 |
|
|
|
Wiley
Skeptic Friend
68 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2002 : 10:59:10 [Permalink]
|
quote:
quote:
Hell, we don't even have an economical way getting to LEO.
I've read that if there was gold orbiting the Earth that it wouldn't be economical to send the shuttle to get it.
I remember reading somewhere that it would have been more economical just to keep using the Saturn V. (Ah, good ol' German engineering.  )
|
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
