If humans get to Mars, what might they do? [We could be there within six years]

Reuters ^ | 1-20-04 | Reuters

[ambrose]

If humans get to Mars, what might they do?

Tuesday, January 20, 2004

By Deborah Zabarenko, Reuters

WASHINGTON - If humans ever get to Mars, what might they do there? Would they use spare weapons-grade plutonium to heat up the red planet to a more Earth-like temperature, as one fanciful-sounding plan suggested?

Probably not, according to Humboldt Mandell, a former chief of NASA's Mars programs. But he said a favored Mars exploration plan could be considerably quicker than the White House proposal for a Moon base to be used as a stepping stone for a human mission to our next-door planetary neighbor.

Some NASA officials wondered privately before Wednesday's announcement why they had been left out of discussions about the presidential program.

Still, Mandell, a 40-year NASA veteran who left a year ago to become a research fellow at the University of Texas Center for Space Research, said the U.S. space agency has the technical know-how to accomplish the moon and Mars missions, though not necessarily as the White House envisions.

For a start, Mandell said in a telephone interview that while a permanent Moon base was possible, it would double the cost of any human mission to Mars.

"I have no objection to building a Moon base, but if you're going to go to Mars, the cheapest way to do it is to base it on the Earth and then make Mars the second safest place in the solar system for humans, and then send the humans to Mars," Mandell said.

He said there would be "logistical nightmares" lurking in the plan to transport equipment and humans to the Moon and then launch a mission to Mars from there.

"With one-third of the NASA budget, in six or seven years you could be at Mars," Mandell said. "It doesn't compute with me to try to drag it out."

18 Months on Mars

A faster method - ranging in price from $20 billion to $100 billion as opposed to an earlier NASA estimate of about $400 billion - would be to build a beachhead on Mars before humans arrive, he said.

"The right way to do this job is to build a little village there before you ever send humans," Mandell said. "You'd put Winnebago-size payloads there and they would connect to each other robotically." These payloads would include living quarters, hospital, and kitchen: "All the things that you need to sustain a crew of six or seven people for a year and a half," he said.

This would include a plant to produce water from the ice that might be available beneath the martian surface. The water would be for human use during the mission, and could then be split into hydrogen and oxygen to fuel the trip back to Earth, according to Mandell.

This scenario estimates a six- or seven-month travel time from Earth to Mars, an 18-month stay, and another six or seven months for the voyage home.

The space shuttle fleet, grounded since the fatal Columbia accident on Feb. 1, 2003, would have only a small role in this plan, carrying crew members to the Mars craft as it moved in Earth orbit, Mandell said. The Mars vessel would go from Earth orbit to Mars.

Mandell acknowledged that research has been done on various Mars exploration ideas over the decades, including plans to tap any oases on Mars, to use any resources on the planet as propulsion systems, and to use spare weapons-grade plutonium to heat up the planet - where the average temperature is a minus 81 degrees F - to a more human-friendly temperature.

This last idea is known as terraforming, and Mandell rejected it out of hand.

"I'm one of those people that's conscientiously against terraforming," he said. "It may be technically possible. But to think about taking the most deadly element that's known to humanity, like plutonium, and mucking up Mars with it, to me that borders on the immoral."

[ambrose]

ping

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Sort of putting the cart before the horse, I'd say. First we go back to the Moon to identify and use lunar resources. After we gain experience in living and working off-planet and understand how to use the Moon for fuel and life support, we can move on to Mars.

[thesummerwind]

The ACLU will open up an abortion clinic and a gay rights workshop right away.

[Atlantic Friend]

It reminds me of the Mars trilogy : Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars, by someone named Robinson, if I recall correctly. A little heavy on scientific facts, but fascinating when it came to terraforming the red planet.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

The Bush idea is to build an Earth-Moon system that will give us exploration freedom.

Mandell's sermon and moon paranoia, is in line with the Sagan/Mars agenda. It's a religion.

[Diogenesis]

Yup. NASA [and the FBI] should be reorganized with Americans.

[ambrose]

There are those who say we should bypass the Moon and go straight to Mars. I suppose it makes sense to conquer the Moon before Mars.

However, I still don't understand why we can't send some colonists over to Mars now. Let's get the ball rolling.

[Diogenesis]

THIS JUST IN:

Yes. A brave Democrat has just appeared, all dressed in "Mars-red"
and he declares himself ready to be sent to Mars.

[RLK]

If humans get to Mars, what might they do? [We could be there within six years]

------------------------

Answer: Pray to God somebody is able to get them back out of there.

[ambrose]

Why would we want them to come back? We should send them there for good, in order to colonize.

It is our destiny.

[Simmy2.5]

The Mars without moon guys are primarily Robert Zubrin's group. His plan, Mars direct, seems scientifically sound. If anyone is willing to try it of course. http://www.marssociety.com Now, they are in support of Bush's current plan since, hey, at least it is a start.

Though I admit, even I would prefer the timeline moved up. But that can all be done as the plan becomes more concrete. And unlike Zubrin, I believe that going back to the moon should be done at least before going to Mars (if for no reason then to do more research into living in space, and litterally, another world).

I also like the idea of sending colonist to Mars now (all we need is the rockets, landers, whatever). But, one step at a time.

[RLK]

Why would we want them to come back? We should send them there for good, in order to colonize. It is our destiny.

---------------------------

Destiny? To colonize a frigid gravel pit?

[ambrose]

Mars is a beautiful planet... would you want aliens to judge the Earth's beauty based on a probe dropped in the Saharan desert?

As for frigid, it isn't too bad during the day near the equator... and wear a lot of clothes at night.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

However, I still don't understand why we can't send some colonists over to Mars now. Let's get the ball rolling.

Because Congress would never fund a purely scientific mission. Science is extremely important but "searching for life" just won't cut it. Scientists believe life is out there (so how would that be a discovery?), so instead of going off on a whim and a prayer, they've been charged with building the roadway to travel into the cosmos. O'Keefe quickly realized the reason NASA was drifting was that it had no mission. He barn stormed with Bush and their experts to find a suitable goal to revitalize NASA, push technology, gain experience and utilize resources - and all just 3 days away. With Bush's initiate, the country will benefit and we'll be able to service our comsats (military and commercial) with the rocket fuel we will produce on the Moon. It's a solid proposal that will give concrete results.

[Truth29]

We need one of the robotic probes to dig up a hibernating Shadow vessel. That would get the ball rolling.

[RLK]

Maybe Mars could open its borders with Mexico.

[11B3]

His proposal was far too timid. 18 months and we should have crews on the moon. One hell of a nice place for a high energy laser, since it faces the Earth at all times.

[11B3]

I'll say one thing for the current administration: It sure is nice not to see displays of idiocy like that anymore. Now if the president would drop the occasional idiocy in proposals (like immigration), life would be better.

Is it just me, or does Tipper look more like Monica wearing a wig in this photo?

[IrishCatholic]

This is the smart thing to do and about time too. By putting a permanent presence on the moon we ensure our future Mars success by colonizing something that isn't 18 months away. With Prometheus and other engines that can be used safely from the moon, Mars wont be 18 months away. Let's not get ahead of ourselves.
To go to Mars directly is a stunt. The university professors that advocated robotics for research under the better-faster-cheaper really meant projects they could control and keep the science dollars for themselves. If everyone got into space they would lose control of the financial pie. If we went to Mars directly and came back it might be another thirty years before we did it again. When we did, we would have to ask permission from the Chinese to land on their planet. THEY are going into space to stay. It is a new space race. I just hope the liberals who hate us and the conservatives that hate the government don't bury this effort.