Re: Joint Russian/Chinese manned flyby mission to Mars

Einar <einarbb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

:On Oct 7, 2:15 am, Fred J. McCall <fmcc...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
:> Einar <eina...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
:>
:> :On Oct 6, 10:29 pm, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)":<mooregr_deletet...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
:> :> "Einar" <eina...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
:>
:> :>
:> :>news:1191673205.556865.295880@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
:> :>
:> :> > On Oct 5, 11:21 pm, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)":> > <mooregr_deletet...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
:>
:> :> >> "Einar" <eina...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
:> :>
:> :> >>news:1191615890.058300.305340@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
:> :>
:> :> > Nasa did a fly around the Moon, if I remember correctly pryor to the
:> :> > Moon landing mission.
:> :>
:> :> You don't remember correctly. NASA did two orbital missions of the Moon
:> :> prior to landing, Apollo 8 and Apollo 10.
:> :>
:> :> The whole point here is that a flyby doesn't give you all that long of a
:> :> time to do much in terms of "local" remote control.
:> :>
:> :> > There is an additional thing that a flyaround mission to Mars could
:> :> > do. They could "TEST LAND" the planned Mars mission lander, remotelly
:> :> > naturally. That would be necessary precurso to an actual landing.
:> :>
:> :> No, they might, if they timed it accurately, but keep in mind during the
:> :> entire time of this 'test land' they are either accelerating towards Mars or
:> :> moving away, so you have to possibly adjust your timing as the speed of
:> :> light delays change.
:> :>
:> :
:> :They might join orbit, instead of making it a flyby. But that is only
:> :an alternative option.
:> :
:>
:> Why go that far and then not land people? You're already paid all the
:> costs and run the bulk of the risks. Either you think your lander
:> will work (in which case it might as well have people in it) or you
:> don't (in which case you might as well not bother).
:>
:> :
:> :>
:> :> And as for this being necessary, hardly. In fact you've replaced the actual
:> :> scenario (landing a manned vehicle on Mars) with a made-up one (remote
:> :>
:> :
:> :You need to mind that to land on Mars is both at the same time, more
:> :difficult than landing on Earth and than landing on the Moon. A manned
:> :landing has never been done on that solar system body, but plenty of
:> :times on Earth and number of times on the Moon.
:> :
:>
:> A manned landing had never been done on the Moon until the first time
:> we did one, either. Hell, a manned landing had never been done on
:> EARTH up to a certain point in history.
:>
:> Note that we felt no need to run an unmanned 'test' of either of those
:> prior to actually doing them.
:>
:> :
:> :It would be mad not to test the technologies necessary for a
:> :successful landing on Mars, with some sort of a real test.
:> :
:>
:> Hogwash.
:>
:> :
:> :At this time, the task is though impossible, i.e to land humans on
:> :Mars.
:> :
:>
:> By you, perhaps. Others of us don't find the case for impossibility
:> nearly as convincing as you do.
:
:Now, what gives. Isn´t it true that Mars has more mass than the Moon?
:That means that orbital speed will be higher, which means that your
:entry speeds will be correspondingly greater than for the Moon. In
:addition, isn´t the athmosphere of Mars 1/10th as thick as that of
:Earth? That means that it has correspondingly less capability to
:absorb the energy, to be read slow down, a capbsule or a lander or a
:shuttle, which is trying to land on the surface. That means that the
:said craft, whichever type, will still be supersonic, somewhere in the
:range between Mac2 and Mac5, when it has gotten into a quite a low
:altitude.
:
:Like the article does say, then those steering the craft have 90
:second to get rid of that velocity and come to a gentle landing.
:
:You appear to think this a pease of a cake...stupit.
:

There's someone "stupit" here, all right, but it's apparently you.

It doesn't matter how fast you're going how low. What matters is how
fast you're going when you hit the ground.

What the article says is wrong. Look at some real numbers. PEAK
force during a Mars landing is only around 1.5g.

Why 90 seconds? That's what's in current landing profiles and it's in
there because that's adequate time.

Stupit!

:
:>
:> :
:> :>
:> :> >
:> :> > Ellse the risk would be quite mad.
:> :> >
:> :> > Someone said that the people might be stranded on Mars.
:> :> >
:> :>
:> :> Maybe. Look at Case for Mars. There's far worse places to be stranded than
:> :> Mars.
:> :>
:> :> Provided with enough power, you have access to enough resources. (Besides,
:> :> landing resources is pretty easy in the big picture, the delta-v ain't all
:> :> that bad compared to any other options).
:> :>
:> :
:>
:> I'm pretty sure Einar doesn't intend to let reality intrude upon his
:> 'logic', Greg.
:
:That´s your problem. You appear to think the impossible easy, without
:ever having said anything towards explaning how it is easy.
:

That's your problem. You appear to think the merely difficult
impossible, without ever having said anything toward explaning how it
is impossible.

:
:Have you mentioned a single counter argument to the article I have
:posted? NO.
:

Have I mentioned a single counter argument to the article you have
posted? YES. Have you bothered to read and understand? NO.

:
:>
:> :
:> :>
:> :> >
:> :> > A far more
:> :> > likelly failure outcome is that they become a crater on Mars. The
:> :> > landing is the critical point of the endevour, at least the first of
:> :> > the critical points.
:> :>
:> :
:> :Now, for the short term the Moon looks attractive. After all we have
:> :the technology to land there today, and it is closer to Earth to boot,
:> :and to top that going there is a lot cheaper; yet operational lessons
:> :learned there are applicaple everywhere ellse, when operating on
:> :airless bodies.
:> :
:>
:> There aren't that many interesting airless bodies of similar size
:> where those lessons would apply.
:>
:
:There are thousand of airless bodies dotted around the Solar System,
:for which the lessons learned will be completelly applicaple. They don
:´t need to be of similar size.
:

Of course they do! You have made a big deal out of Mars being a
different size then the Moon yourself! Why, unless it's EXACTLY the
same size as the Moon, that means we've never landed on that kind of
body before! It must be IMPOSSIBLE!!!

Stupit.

:
:The sizerange does range from the
:planet Mercury over to airless rocks of the asteroyd belt.
:

You can't treat all those the same. The small ones display little or
no gravity capture behaviour when compared to the Moon and Mercury has
an atmosphere, albeit VERY thin.

Why, those differences make landing on those bodies IMPOSSIBLE!!!!

Stupit.


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Joint Russian/Chinese manned flyby mission to Mars
    ... :>> Moon landing mission. ... :> prior to landing, ... :>> There is an additional thing that a flyaround mission to Mars could ... Why go that far and then not land people? ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: What if the Chinese built a small nuclear pulse vehicle?
    ... completed in four years - with landings on the moon, mars, orbiting ... asteroids, landing on the Galilean moons of Jupiter, and the major ... maintain manned outposts throughout the solar system, ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Space Travel by Humans is Possible
    ... If Mars ... :would be like the Moon, i.e. airless, that solution would work. ... :Mars has got athmosphere, but rather too thin, landing like on the ... enough that we can land like on Earth, ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Argh! General frustration and steam-letting
    ... Sea Wasp wrote: ... listening to the first manned Mars landing and waiting for the ... From your summary it seemed to me that you were saying the first landing on Mars turned out to have werewolves on it. ... I took it that a human landing on the Moon eliminated the moon's magical power to turn men into wolves and humans landing on Mars would eliminate the War God's power to make men on earth fight. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.composition)
  • Re: for BMJ and all other parochial lot re moon landing
    ... I am not interested in forcing my opinion down anybody's throat. ... subject and in reading your posts and composing my posts. ... with nobody else being present on the moon? ... landing -but haven't dismissed the landing as a fake. ...
    (sci.research.careers)