NASA wants to send humans to Mars in the 2030s − a crewed mission could unlock some of the red planet’s geologic mysteries

[Admin]

Scientists know quite a bit about the surface of Mars from robotic missions, but there are still many unexplored geologic features that could tell researchers more about the solar system’s formation.

NASA wants to send humans to Mars in the 2030s − a crewed mission could unlock some of the red planet’s geologic mysteries : Read more

 

[Unclear Engineer]

While I support the idea of sending humans to Mars for scientific exploration, I am questioning the idea that NASA's SLS is adequate for that task. Even for the Moon missions, the SLS is not even taking a lander - SpaceX (or Blue Origin) has been tasked with getting an orbit-to-surface-and-back taxi waiting in lunar orbit for the Orion capsule to arrive. So, how is the SLS going to get the NASA astronauts from Mars orbit to Mars surface and back? And, how is it going to supply enough consumables for the astronauts to be there for "up to 500 days"? It seems like NASA would need a lot of SLS launches using upper stages that have not yet been even conceptually designed. Will Congress provide the needed funding - this century?

I am thinking that SpaceX is a much more likely source for an actual crewed trip to Mars. But, NASA is probably going to need to pay for crew seats, and may need to pay for getting its astronauts a return vehicle, if SpaceX/Musk are still thinking one-way trips by then.

NASA does seem to be thinking about nuclear thermal propulsion for Earth-to-Mars orbit transfer spacecraft, so that needs to be developed, too. Unless somebody comes up with fusion powered thrusters by then.

Which reminds me, how about a status report on the Pulsar direct fusion drive engine? Their website says "Static tests are to begin in 2024 followed by an In Orbit Demonstration (IOD) of the technology in 2027." Is that still on-track for the tests this year? That could really change the equations for Mars exploration.

 

[billweberx]

No way in hell will NASA use the SLS to go to Mars. Starship is the only viable solution, once it's fully functional. Even then, there's no way to get back with the Starship until a lot of infrastructure is built on Mars. That could take decades of robotic missions.

 

[Ogre]

It seems like every decade some space agency somewhere is planning to send humans to Mars the following decade. Mark my words: there will be no humans on Mars in this century.

 

[Ken Fabian]

On Mars anything astronauts can do robots will do better. Go further, last longer. Cost less. Nothing blows out the difficulties and costs of missions in space than including astronauts.

 

[billslugg]

NASA's rationale for sending humans to Mars.

"3.1.1 Taking advantage of the unique attributes of humans in scientific exploration

It is important to consider the unique capabilities that humans bring to the process of exploring Mars. As a result, a common set of human traits emerged that apply to exploration relating to the MEPAG science disciplines, which include geology, geophysics, life, and climate. These characteristics include: speed and efficiency to optimize field work; agility and dexterity to go places that are difficult for robotic access and to exceed currently limited degrees of-freedom robotic manipulation capabilities; and, most importantly, the innate intelligence, ingenuity, and adaptability to evaluate in real time and improvise to overcome surprises while ensuring that the correct sampling strategy is in place to acquire the appropriate sample set. Real-time evaluation and adaptability especially would be a significant new tool that humans on Mars would bring to surface exploration. There are limitations to the autonomous operations that are possible with current robotic systems, with fundamental limitations to direct commanding from Earth being the time difference imposed by the 6- to 20-minute communications transit time and
the small number of daily uplink and downlink communications passes."

Boiling it down:
1) Humans excel at speed and efficiency in field work
2) Humans have the ability to go places robots can't
3) Humans are more dexterous than robots
4) Catch errors in real time
5) The 20 minute time delay

My belief is all of these problems will go away very soon with advances in robotics and AI. Adding humans increases cost a hundred fold. The justification is simply not there. Send in the machines until they can't tell us any more.

https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/373665main_nasa-sp-2009-566.pdf?emrc=6dfe40

 

[Rob77]

Costs aside - the big benefit in my opinion of sending humans is to get them prepared for interplanetary travel and the technologies that come with it. I think by continually sending robots we aren't pushing for human interaction and technology required to live sustainably on other planets, thus slowing progress in this area.
I know there are some (even in this community) that accuse Musk of dreaming too big (i.e. ego) - but I believe that is driving some of the success for SpaceX.
On a personal note - I wasn't alive for any of the moon landings so be nice to be alive to see humans set foot on Mars.

 

[Joexo]

Pretty sure they meant 2130s