One-way trip to Mars?

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

docm

Guest
So asks Dr. Larry Krauss in the NY Times..... (author of The Physics Of Star Trek)

A One-Way Ticket to Mars

NOW that the hype surrounding the 40th anniversary of the Moon landings has come and gone, we are faced with the grim reality that if we want to send humans back to the Moon the investment is likely to run in excess of $150 billion. The cost to get to Mars could easily be two to four times that, if it is possible at all.
>
There is, however, a way to surmount this problem while reducing the cost and technical requirements, but it demands that we ask this vexing question: Why are we so interested in bringing the Mars astronauts home again?
>
To boldly go where no one has gone before does not require coming home again.
 
C

crazyeddie

Guest
"The largest stumbling block to a consideration of one-way missions is probably political. NASA and Congress are unlikely to do something that could be perceived as signing the death warrants of astronauts."

Which is so true that it makes the whole point of the article rather moot.
 
A

abq_farside

Guest
And I am sure that there would be numerous individuals that would be more than willing to sign up for a one-way trip.

Talk about your death panels :)
 
D

dragon04

Guest
I understand what the guy is trying to say, and in principle, I don't even disagree. At our current technological level, a "there and Back Again" Mars mission (done by Governmental Agencies) would probably be cost prohibitive especially considering that our current Administration and Congress will nearly double an already ridiculously high Debt.

That said, I submit that any Government-funded (IOW Taxpayer cost) "one-way" Mars mission is a bigger waste of money than a program that perfects the art of interplanetary travel at our current technological level. I don't see the logic in spending vast amounts of money on an entire infrastructure that's to ba a one-shot deal unless it's done to try to save Humanity from imminent extinction.
 
B

baulten

Guest
I dunno, I kinda agree with the article to be honest. Eventually we will have the technology to get to Mars and back easily and effectively, but right now, the only realistic choice would be one way trip. As long as they didn't force anyone to do it, there's nothing morally wrong with it.

It'll never happen though.
 
C

crazyeddie

Guest
baulten":37fxh23h said:
I dunno, I kinda agree with the article to be honest. Eventually we will have the technology to get to Mars and back easily and effectively, but right now, the only realistic choice would be one way trip. As long as they didn't force anyone to do it, there's nothing morally wrong with it.

It'll never happen though.
It would make for great reality TV, though, wouldn't it? I wouldn't put it past the entertainment industry to finance it someday..... :shock:
 
B

baulten

Guest
crazyeddie":2qdkj2l6 said:
It would make for great reality TV, though, wouldn't it? I wouldn't put it past the entertainment industry to finance it someday..... :shock:
Hahaha, now THAT would be one I would actually watch! :lol:

In all seriousness, there's a HUGE difference between a group of 4-6 scientists (and eventually more as more missions were sent) signing their life away for the sake of spending the last 5-10 years doing research on Mars and a group of younger people going to win a million dollars on a reality show. I can tell you, if I was 60 some years old, I would have no issue agreeing to spend my last years on a small Mars colony.
 
M

MasterComposter

Guest
I might be willing to spend my last years on Mars.

Maybe we can solve the Medicare and Social Security crisis by sending all of our old people on a one-way trip to Mars. Granny, your check is now being sent to a PO Box on Mars. Would you like to go pick it up? You can visit your doctor while you are there!
 
D

docm

Guest
Ahhh....but the real question would be if they would have access to CineMax After Dark, aka SkineMax? That could make the isolation worth while, especially with a mixed crew ;)
 
J

jim48

Guest
Sounds good to me. Afterall, Alice Kramden made a one-way trip to the moon, so why not let Obama go to Mars?
 
C

cosmictraveler

Guest
Robots are the best way to explore other planets and celestial objects for a hell of allot less money than sending humans beyond the moon. The more robots are developed , the better they will become in doing research for humans anywhere we send them. They work 24/7 so no need to stop exploring with them except if they are solar powered. I'd think RPU's are a better way to go and they last many years longer than solar powered robots.

The robots one day soon will be so advanced they will have an AI program running them for them to make any corrections or find things that we want them to look for. I just feel that unless the speed and safety of human powered ships isn't improved then humans will not have much of a chance out there, alone, in space especially if something goes wrong. There have been over 30 missions to Mars but only 13 of them actually made it there and did what they were to do. That's not a good record to send humans anywhere is it???
 
D

docm

Guest
That failed mission count is a bit deceiving since most occurred in the early days of spaceflight and the number of launches is now closer to 40. Almost half were launch failures or things like shrouds failing to detach and mostly Russian.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY