3D images (at different angles) of the face: Here
Images using Topological Data: Here
More Topological Imaging from NASA data: Here
-The Hajman-
Posted on 07/05/2002 8:39:21 PM PDT by Will_Zurmacht
Russia Proposes Sending Team to Mars Fri Jul 5, 3:58 PM ET By MARA D. BELLABY, Associated Press Writer
MOSCOW (AP) - Russian space officials proposed an ambitious project on Friday to send a six-person team to Mars by the year 2015, a trip that would mark a milestone in space travel and international space cooperation.
Russia's space program hopes to work closely with the American agency NASA ( news - web sites) and the European Space Agency to build two spaceships capable of transporting the crew to Mars, supporting them on the planet for up to two months and safely bringing them home, said Nikolai Anfimov, head of the Central Research Institute of Machine-Building.
The roughly 440-day trip is expected to cost about $20 billion, with Russia suggesting it would contribute 30 percent.
"It must be an international project," said Vitaly Semyonov, head of the Mars project at the M.V. Keldysha Space Research Center. "No one country could cope alone with this task."
Russian space officials said they are receiving encouraging signs of interest from NASA and European counterparts.
But NASA spokeswoman Delores Beasley said Friday that the Russians have not submitted any formal plan and that the agency would not comment on the proposed trip before then. Because of demands from Congress to scale back costs, human travel to Mars has not been on NASA's radar recently.
"We are still very far away," conceded Alain Fournier-Sicre, head of the European Space Agency's permanent mission in Russia. "But this kind of program is a long-term initiative for every space agency in the world," he said, adding that he held a meeting with Russian space officials this week to discuss the project.
Landing humans on Mars has long been a dream of Russian space scientists. But even in the heyday of the Soviet space program, when Moscow reported success after success, its attempts to reach the Red Planet were marked by failure. Soviet scientists began whispering about a "Mars curse."
The Soviet Union kicked off Mars exploration in 1960 by launching two unmanned spacecraft four days apart, but both failed even to make it as far as Earth's orbit. One resulted in an engine explosion that scattered debris and contamination over the Baikonur launch pad in one of the worst accidents in Soviet space history.
That was followed by repeated attempts and often repeated disappointment. The bad luck for Russia continued on Nov. 16, 1996, when the Russians launched an ambitious $300 million spacecraft, Mars 96, which they hoped would prove to the world that despite their economic struggles after the Soviet breakup, they could still run a first-rate space program. Mars 96 suffered an engine failure just after launch and crashed into the Pacific Ocean.
Anfimov said that despite the setbacks, "we never stopped planning and seeking opportunities to reach our next goal: Mars."
NASA's Mars program, plagued by its own series of setbacks, got back on track earlier this year when the unmanned Mars Odyssey spacecraft entered orbit around the planet and began mapping the mineral and chemical makeup of the surface.
Anatoly Grigoryev, director of the Institute of Medical-Biological Problems, which works with all of Russia's cosmonauts, said Russia's plan calls for a cargo and a manned ship, which would consist of a commander, a second pilot, a flight engineer, a doctor and two researchers. Three members of the team would descend to Mars, while the other three would remain onboard the ship in orbit.
Grigoryev said the trip could answer many of the remaining questions about Earth's mysterious neighbor.
"Is there life on Mars? If there is, what kind of life?" Grigoryev said, barely able to suppress his excitement. "This would be historic."
"Did Columbus wait for steamships before he voyaged to America?" No, but it didn't cost him twenty billion dollars to go, either.
Well, that's the only way it can be done. Russia can't afford the entire cost, the USA cannot do it for any amount of money. Too much affirmative action, let's face it.
Ummmmm........If it's all the same to you, I'd rather not have a 20 km diameter chunk of mineral put into low Earth orbit by the same guys that sometimes forget whether they are supposed to programm the thruster's computer with metric measurements or English measurements.
It makes me a little nervous.
You worked at NASA and don't understand what overcoming the challenges of a man mission to Mars would mean? Wow. First, the man mission to the moon was a complete waste too. But, look what huddles were crossed in the in the attempt. Understanding of the mechanics of spacewalks (took five attempts and almost killed the first walker), long-term space records (we actually thought that exposure over two weeks would kill), docking procedures (it was impossible to dock two spacecraft), creation of effective spacesuits, vast improvements in rocket design, geez the list goes on and on. The useless moonwalk project was a unbelieveable boon to spaceflight. Heck, it even gave us Tang, actually the crossover technologies gained from the useless man mission was worth the cost tenfold.
What pencil neck geeks fail to understand is America's need for a bold project to unite us! Not everything as in life is black and white, balance sheets. The nation was united behind the moon project and what is missing in America now is a sense of national purpose. Technological advancements will come: Life support, health maintenance, propulsion, aerobraking, radiation protection and plantary transportation. Plus, ideas and technologies not even in conception now.
So, basically I think you and Larry are wrong!
Another article:
MOSCOW (AFP) Jul 05, 2002
Russian space experts invited their US and European colleagues Friday in launching a manned flight to Mars by 2014.
The conquest of the Red Planet "should be an international project" similar to the International Space Station, Vitaly Semyonov of the Keldysh Space Research Institute in Moscow, responsible for its space exploration programme, told reporters.
"Russia has excellent engines for lifting space systems and a high degree of experience in space medicine," Semyonov said, highlighting the record for the longest space flight, 437 days, held by Russian cosmonaut Valery Polyakov aboard the Mir space station.
Nikolai Anfimov, of the Russian space agency Rosaviacosmos, said Russia was currently building a new Angara heavy launcher with a 28.5-tonne lifting capacity which would be suitable for the project.
A manned flight to Mars would cost around 20 billion dollars, and Russia's share could be around 30 percent, Semyonov said, adding that the expedition could be launched in 2014 or 2015. It would require two space launches, the first involving a supply vessel with the launch of the manned spaceship to follow.
The crew would comprise six astronauts, three of whom would remain in a near-Mars orbit while three others embarked on the Martian surface for a stay of between 30 and 60 days.
A Marswalker vehicle, similar to its predecessor the Moonwalker used during the historic 1969 walk on the moon, would be used by the astronauts as a cross-country vehicle on which they could explore the planet's surface, the official said.
Igor Mitrofanov, also of the Space Research Institute, said the recent discovery that the planet's surface concealed large quantities of water had strengthened their belief in the viability of the project, because "water is a vital ingredient for a human flight to Mars."
Mars Odyssey, launched in April 2001, was the first step in the new US programme of planetary exploration, set up after the failure of the unmanned modules Mars Climate Orbiter and Mars Polar Lander which crashed on the planet's surface in 1999.
Russia is planning to launch a module of its own to Mars and its satellite Phobos by 2005, Anfimov said, though he admitted that current funding was insufficient and would need to be increased next year.
Anatoly Grigoriev of the Institute of Medical and Biological Problems, which specialises in space-related health issues, said that although the first manned expedition to Mars was unlikely to meet with bug-eyed monsters, the prospect of encountering some form of life could no longer be ruled out.
The latest data showing that there was water on the planet meant that life was possible at least for minuscule organisms," he said.
There was already evidence that micro-organisms, hundreds of times smaller than those on Earth, existed in cracks of the Martian surface, he said.
Dan Golden used similar arguments in his passionate appeal. The Spinoff benefit number he quoted was seven to one though.
Don't misunderstand me. I am VERY much in favor of space exploration. I never said that the lunar missions were a waste. There was a substantial spinoff benefit from that activity. A manned mission to Mars wouldn't require much in the way of new technology though. Now we are in a situation where the terrestrial Hi-tech sector is at least a decade more advanced than any hardware that gets to be flight qualified. Hi tech is doing very well without a big government funded. low tech, quest for the Holy Grail.
Another benefit of the lunar landings was their awesomeness. We put men on the MOON!! To my perception the lunar landings will always be more meaningfull than a Mars landing could ever be. Maybe our first interstellar journey might surpass it but I seriously doubt it.
You said we need something that everyone could get behind to unite us. Don't you think that colonizing space is a worthy undertaking? I am sure that building autonomous space tugs and mining ships and factory ships would present technological hurdles that would provide myiad spinoff benefit. It would be very cool too.
It's entrepreneurs who drive almost all beneficial societal change. On our way to the asteroid belt we could learn everything we wanted too about Mars. The problem with a Mars mission is that it has to be a government project. No sensible businessman would ever invest in it.
Admittedly, not everything of value can be measured on a balance sheet, but most scientific progress has been brought about as a direct result of some "for profit" activity. If the US government has 30 to 100 billion dollars laying around that it wants to spend on science with a hope that some spinoff benefit will ensue I can suggest a lot of things way more significant than a manned mission to Mars.
*True artificial intelligence and machine sentience
*Recombinant DNA built viruses that kill cancer cells or reverse the aging process
*Low cost space access technology. (Skyhooks)
*Really Really cheap energy production technology.
A crash program for any of these projects would require more money than the typical coporation would put at risk so government involvement would be ok for a while. Any one of these endeavors, if successful would make it much more likely that you would eventually see the science on Mars that you want.
I'll say it again. Mars is a dead end. It doesn't lead anywhere. Unless of course, you really believe that those structures on Mars are proof of extraterrestrial life, that I'm sure, trumps everything else including common sense...
Pencil neck geek? Ad hominem?
And I say again, that is obvious from the images, your own little state of denial notwithstanding. Moreover, it's no longer just the images of the one region. The Hydaspis Chaos images, the "Inca City" images, and a number of other things in other areas all tell the same story.
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.