Every time I hear about people wanting to have a manned trip to Mars, I have to roll my eyes. It seems that we are just nowhere near what is needed to actually perform one, namely a long term space habitat probably needing spin gravity, minimal leakage, and propulsion, especially assuming that such things would need to be tested and the actual Mars shot would be far down the mission scale (comparable how Apollo 11 was the one that made it to the surface of the moon). Talk of a one way trip sound even sillie
To expand on this for general conversation. Looking at orbital physics, it seems that a Mars mission will take about two years. 7-9 months to get to Mars, a stay of several months then another 7-9 months back at the optimal times in the Earth-Mars orbits. Leaving at other times or attempting quicker transit speeds greatly increases the distances or fuel needed as to be prohibitive. Therefore, we'll need a long term space habitat for the astronauts. How many we'll need is a questions but I would guess that three might not have all the needed skills for such a long mission. Adding more will increase the weight needed in terms of space ship, food, fuel, atmosphere, water, etc.
So, we'll need a long term space habitat for a questionable number of people. It will need to be shielded from cosmic rays and other radiation. It will be able to maintain an atmosphere for the astronauts for the entire time. As I've been told by many naval friends, all ships leak. Space ships are no different and there are loses of gas to space. The ISS has to be sent shipments of atmosphere regularly like food from what I've read. health concerns as well as other reasons, it'll probably need spin gravity. Those other reasons might include the need for things like a machine shop so they can fix anything that breaks or goes wrong. It's either that or learn how to make zero G machining equipment. They'll probably already need to know how to weld in zero G, some of which has been learned on the ISS and previous missions, but I be there is still more to learn to improve the equipment and techniques. Solar power better be able to power the mission at Mars because I doubt we have enough plutonium for such a large mission for the usual nuclear power plant, and probably not the tested tech for another type using uranium.
Anyway, once we know what tech we need, it will need to be developed and tested. I could see several tests that would take a long time. First, more testing at the ISS or other space stations to develop the needed tech to build a prototype of a long term space habitiat. Then building such a space habitat in orbit around earth farther out with people living there for long periods to see how it works and to test the tech. Another version for movement that could be tested by revisiting the moon on a long trip around it with landing mission. Studying the moon for months. Finally, something going to Mars which would be resupply mission, equipment, emergency return plans, ect. to test actually getting to Mars and the conditions there. Followed by the actual mission to Mars with a crew. Failure to learn all we think we need to learn could result in even more missions and testing.
Check out Dr. Robert Zubrin's Mars Direct reference mission for a low cost, sustainable manned Mars program that doesn't require any technological breakthroughs.
The moon is a planet just like the Earth, only it is even deader.
Manned Trip to Mars (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Manned Trip to Mars (Score:2)
To expand on this for general conversation. Looking at orbital physics, it seems that a Mars mission will take about two years. 7-9 months to get to Mars, a stay of several months then another 7-9 months back at the optimal times in the Earth-Mars orbits. Leaving at other times or attempting quicker transit speeds greatly increases the distances or fuel needed as to be prohibitive. Therefore, we'll need a long term space habitat for the astronauts. How many we'll need is a questions but I would guess that three might not have all the needed skills for such a long mission. Adding more will increase the weight needed in terms of space ship, food, fuel, atmosphere, water, etc.
So, we'll need a long term space habitat for a questionable number of people. It will need to be shielded from cosmic rays and other radiation. It will be able to maintain an atmosphere for the astronauts for the entire time. As I've been told by many naval friends, all ships leak. Space ships are no different and there are loses of gas to space. The ISS has to be sent shipments of atmosphere regularly like food from what I've read. health concerns as well as other reasons, it'll probably need spin gravity. Those other reasons might include the need for things like a machine shop so they can fix anything that breaks or goes wrong. It's either that or learn how to make zero G machining equipment. They'll probably already need to know how to weld in zero G, some of which has been learned on the ISS and previous missions, but I be there is still more to learn to improve the equipment and techniques. Solar power better be able to power the mission at Mars because I doubt we have enough plutonium for such a large mission for the usual nuclear power plant, and probably not the tested tech for another type using uranium.
Anyway, once we know what tech we need, it will need to be developed and tested. I could see several tests that would take a long time. First, more testing at the ISS or other space stations to develop the needed tech to build a prototype of a long term space habitiat. Then building such a space habitat in orbit around earth farther out with people living there for long periods to see how it works and to test the tech. Another version for movement that could be tested by revisiting the moon on a long trip around it with landing mission. Studying the moon for months. Finally, something going to Mars which would be resupply mission, equipment, emergency return plans, ect. to test actually getting to Mars and the conditions there. Followed by the actual mission to Mars with a crew. Failure to learn all we think we need to learn could result in even more missions and testing.
Re: Manned Trip to Mars (Score:1)
Check out Dr. Robert Zubrin's Mars Direct reference mission for a low cost, sustainable manned Mars program that doesn't require any technological breakthroughs.