Robert Zubrin: how to go to Mars right now
11–20 of 24 posts
Re: Robert Zubrin: how to go to Mars right now
#12I think the most interesting aspect of the Mars Direct-style plans is that they can potentially be one-way. The largest expense with a trip to Mars in terms of technology and resources is getting back out of the Martian gravity well and back to Earth. If you go far enough into the Mars Direct-style approach, there's no particular reason why you need to be in any hurry to come back and you can think about sending crews in the dozens rather than single digits.
I'm not sure I can see NASA doing a one-way mission, but I'll be first in line if SpaceX or whoever tries it.
Re: Robert Zubrin: how to go to Mars right now
#13I just watched Apollo 13 last night and I have to say, I'm sad i wasn't alive during the space race - the very concept thrills me. But it appears that while we have the technology to get to Mars today, we lack the impetus - something that the article addresses, but not wholly. We went to the moon to beat the Soviets. It would be more likely that we would persue a manned Mars program if we had someone to beat. As it s…
We went to the moon to beat the Soviets. That's half the truth. The rest of the truth is: We went to the Moon out of sheer terror . In fact, the Moon trip itself was a side effect. The space race took the form of a race to the moon because "the race to the Moon" was a much more joyful marketing slogan than "the race to design and build the next generation of ICBMs that will enable cities and towns like yours to be de…
I'm fascinated by comments like this one, which relate a historical narrative explaining what motivated some event. How do I tell if it's true? What would it mean for it to be false? If it's true (which it is, presumably,) could you tell another story that was just as true, but completely different? There's nothing controversial about the idea that the space program was motivated by the desire to test military technology (indeed, everyone assumed this was the purpose of North Korea's recent "satellite launch" or whatever.) And yet the story being told here is much "bigger" than that fact.
(If you have trouble seeing what I mean, here's an example: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=624495 . People see the same facts and write completely different stories.)
Re: Robert Zubrin: how to go to Mars right now
#14Interesting plan, but massively glosses over some very hard things. Land 40 tons using a parachute???? And of course galactic radiation that is going to be bad for the crew (how bad is a subject of debate that I already had, so am not going to repeat).
One of the cornerstones of the Mars Direct approach is that it takes advantage of the solar system's orbital mechanics such that the actual trip is relatively short in comparison with the duration humans have spent in space so far. I think you probably have a point about 40 tons aerobraking in the atmosphere and then popping a parachute, but I wouldn't expect either to be a deal breaker.
The NASA Design Reference mission is essentially a modified version of Mars Direct, so I would expect reading up on this would provide solutions to these problems, or at least it will go into more detail than this brief article.
Re: Robert Zubrin: how to go to Mars right now
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
We went to the moon to beat the Soviets. That's half the truth. The rest of the truth is: We went to the Moon out of sheer terror . In fact, the Moon trip itself was a side effect. The space race took the form of a race to the moon because "the race to the Moon" was a much more joyful marketing slogan than "the race to design and build the next generation of ICBMs that will enable cities and towns like yours to be de…
I'm fascinated by comments like this one, which relate a historical narrative explaining what motivated some event. How do I tell if it's true? What would it mean for it to be false? If it's true (which it is, presumably,) could you tell another story that was just as true, but completely different? There's nothing controversial about the idea that the space program was motivated by the desire to test military techno…
This is something I recently ran into in another thread, and I didn't get into it there because it seemed too meta and unproductive, but this seems like a good opportunity.
When we talk about history we are not talking about a binary system, we're talking about experiences related through perspectives. There is rarely an absolute truth to history, and the longer back we go the less certain our understanding tends to be. The situation is even worse when we start talking about motivations.
In this case, the motivations of the space program weren't simply military, or rather, they were military to the military, but if you read about or speak to the people involved, you're not necessarily going to hear that. For some of the people, the moon race was genuinely about exploration and wonder, for others it was exploration used as cover for ICBM research, etc. It is very easy to conflate the motivations of the individual with the motivations of the institutions they are associated with, and this frequently ends up cheapening one or the other.
Re: Robert Zubrin: how to go to Mars right now
#16I don't think it's ever been the technology that's prevented us going to Mars - its the cost and the will of the people. A 25% bigger budget for NASA is still bigger, and considering right now even the ISS looks to be in trouble, you would need someone or something very special to get the public behind more space missions.
Hmm.
NASA: 17.6 Billion. TARP Bailout: 700 Billion.
Your tax dollars at work...
I'd love to see what a company like SpaceX could do if they had a yearly grant (qualified by demonstrable successes) of 25% NASA's budget.
Re: Robert Zubrin: how to go to Mars right now
#17We need a permanent presence in space, not a series of one off jaunts. Mars is too far and our technology too limited to colonize. It would just be a flag plant. However the moon is within our reach.
Spending resources on Mars now will only delay our permanent presence in space.
Manned missions to the Moon to set up a colony. Robotics for the rest of the solar system. It's the only way.
Re: Robert Zubrin: how to go to Mars right now
#18I think that Moon is much important milestone than mars in the shorterm. The main reason is that Moonh is the huge resource of Helium-3, which should be a main energy resource of the next centuries. Who dominate the moon will also dominate the energy of the future. This is the main reason, why Chine, USA and Russia take a look more at the Moon than Mars.
Re: Robert Zubrin: how to go to Mars right now
#19I don't think it's ever been the technology that's prevented us going to Mars - its the cost and the will of the people. A 25% bigger budget for NASA is still bigger, and considering right now even the ISS looks to be in trouble, you would need someone or something very special to get the public behind more space missions.
Hmm. NASA: 17.6 Billion. TARP Bailout: 700 Billion. Your tax dollars at work... I'd love to see what a company like SpaceX could do if they had a yearly grant (qualified by demonstrable successes) of 25% NASA's budget.
Nice comparison. Sad though.
Re: Robert Zubrin: how to go to Mars right now
#20We need a permanent presence in space, not a series of one off jaunts. Mars is too far and our technology too limited to colonize. It would just be a flag plant. However the moon is within our reach. Spending resources on Mars now will only delay our permanent presence in space. Manned missions to the Moon to set up a colony. Robotics for the rest of the solar system. It's the only way.
I don't understand this at all. Your first sentence is bold yet your second is hesitant. Make up your mind, my friend! :-)