Re: Is USA going to be embarrased by China getting to Mars first

On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 14:47:42 GMT, Earl Colby Pottinger
<earlcolby.pottinger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Cardman <do-not@xxxxxxxxxxx> :

On 8 Apr 2006 23:32:52 -0700, schumache1234@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

We have supposedly been there, so why not push our boundaries a bit
further and get on with the real job of landing some people on Mars.

To go to Mars requires a lot more hardware. It is better to build to a
level needed for the Moon first before extending this level to cover
Mars later on.

Cardman, please note the third word in his above sentence.

You mean that NASA once went to the Moon in a few tiny places, where
they did not go far, did not do very much, had a quick look around,
and then left.

It seems to me that a few boot prints in the regolith does not quite
equal a "been there and done that" to a suitable degree. This planet
sized moon, around the same size as North America, has a vastly larger
area left to explore.

Not to mention that NASA can practice their remote base, living off
the land, battling the dust, and tackling increased radiation within
the safety of a few days from Earth.

We could hope for a major mining and refining operation on the Moon,
as a start to building a Luna city, but then that is so not NASA...

This may note be a person who is worth a long discussion.

Since NASA, the President and Congress have already fixed their sights
on their Moon Base, then any alternate Mars plan at this time can rank
under a pointless discussion.

If you want to look beyond the Moon then you can also discuss
destinations like Europa, Ganymede, Titan and maybe even Enceladus if
that actually becomes more interesting. I suspect not...

Still, I have been thinking more recently about Ceres, when that is a
nice destination to set a human distance record in the nearer term.

Anyway, no Mars until around 2038 by my estimate. And if you can live
that long then you only need patience now.

Cardman
http://www.cardman.org
http://www.cardman.com
http://www.cardman.co.uk
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Hey Homer
    ... pretend the space race and the trips to the moon never happened. ... less than 10% of the estimated NASA cost ... a private company can do, the government can do at 5 times the cost? ... back to the moon or on to Mars and do it cheaper than the government. ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)
  • NASA, spaceflighters living in a dream world
    ... Moon or Mars? ... NASA plans to return astronauts to the moon by 2020, ... Independent panel is reviewing plans and looking at "potential ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Improved lunar landing architecture
    ... The one other close location in this solar system, ... For example, in the case of water alone, then on the Moon we do not ... On the other hand Mars has tons of water. ... >> will only become another NASA mini-disaster that will set back any ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Ice on Mars South Pole Is Deep and Wide
    ... they should be talking to us about our somewhat salty old moon that's ... life might have once upon a time existed on Mars, ... An Earth w/o magnetosphere, w/o moon is simply a much larger Mars. ... Even if we're talking 1% Earth wet, Mars is missing most of its salt. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Improved lunar landing architecture
    ... >> Overlooking the fact that it may not actually have water. ... A noticeable chunk out of NASA's two yearly trips to the Moon. ... No point in going to Mars ... works for NASA to one day land people on Mars. ...
    (sci.space.policy)