Posted on 05/23/2007 4:56:11 AM PDT by Condor 63
NASHVILLE - The first man to walk on the moon told an audience of nearly 3,000 Intergraph customers and employees Tuesday that although a mission to Mars would be difficult, it can be done.
Neil Armstrong, the commander of Apollo 11, spoke for nearly an hour on stage at the Gaylord Opryland Convention Center, reflecting on the space age that began 50 years ago.
(Excerpt) Read more at al.com ...
Congratulations to Armstrong.
It’s not often that you see a 77-year-old described as “doable” in the newspaper.
I don’t really think it’s doable under the present circumstances.
“He said helium 3 is needed to fuel fusion reactors for nuclear plants.”
Except that we don’t have any fusion reactors.
If I’m not mistaken, this is the first public appearance he’s made in decades.
ROFL!
I think it’s doable too, but have an idea that would, in my opinion, greatly increase the chances for a successful mission to Mars. Make it a one-way trip. That way, all the resources of the spacecraft would be geared towards getting there and setting up a colony, rather than storing fuel and supplies for a return trip to earth. I realize that some might have moral questions about such a mission, but I am sure there would be explorers willing to do this.
We will remain on this planet until the US withdraws from the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies of 1967
Elderly astronauts for early scouting missions.
Ha!!
He’s wrong. If it were pre-Nixon, i.e., pre-Affirmative Action, it would be difficult and expensive, but doable. Now it’s impossible in the public sector.
A trip to Mars would be a waste.
Would Americans want their first representative on another planet to be a death row criminal?
That would be my only objection...but the pool of volunteers may be limited otherwise.
China won't have any problem with it when they get there first. ;)
"One way trip" doesn't have to mean "one way forever" - the idea can be that once the base is up and running, future ships can ferry passengers back and forth and bring the builders home, if they so desire. It just raises the risk for the first crew, because they won't be able to get back on their own.
Jihad Astronauts?
But the real question is, why should it be done? What is there about Mars that would justify the immense cost of sending a few people to visit? I honestly cannot think of one.
The more rational and sustainable approach would be to ignore Mars altogether, and focus on building space infrastructure closer to home. Once that's in place, Mars will be a natural and relatively easy goal.
Otherwise, it's just another Apollo program, but with a duration that makes it far too long to be an "event". It would never survive the politics.
Maybe he’s “doable” to some of his 75 year old female fans. :-)
Wow. I thought Armstrong never made public appearances anymore?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.