Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Mars Landing

  1. Within 10 years

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. 10-20 years

    4 vote(s)
    40.0%
  3. 20+ years

    6 vote(s)
    60.0%
  4. Never

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. Apr 5, 2003 #1
    How long do you think it will be before we land the first manned spacecraft on mars?

    How close are we to being able to do this at present?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 5, 2003 #2
    In many many years. If we do not consider the technical problems of sending persons, it is also a money question, since the ship should come back (otherwise volunteers will be difficult to find!). Maybe in 50 years.
     
  4. Apr 5, 2003 #3
    That's a tough question to answer.

    As Rutwig stated, volunteers would be hard to find (even if the spaceshuttle comes back). It's the first mission and there are a lot of unknowns involved (and as much as I like a good adventure, after watching Mission to Mars, I wouldn't volunteer for it:smile:).
     
  5. Apr 6, 2003 #4
    lol, i would have thought volunteers would be a plenty! i sure know i would volunteer, evern if i didnt make it back, id be the first person on mars, and no one in history, and in all the future of the species could take that away from me :)

    in fact, i volunteer now, please :D
     
  6. Apr 6, 2003 #5

    drag

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Greetings !
    You and me so far, doesn't seem that hard...:wink:

    Seriously though, the idea of a one way
    manned mission is completely ridiculous.
    What kind of an example would that be in
    if men/women were sent on a historic mission of
    exploration which ends with certain death ?!

    I'd say 20+ years, there is no strong enough
    motive, like the cold-war in the past, to
    invest in the vast technological development
    and material investment required for such
    a mission. Aspecialy since when we do go there
    ourselves we'll want it to be more than just
    a few steps on the surface.

    Live long and prosper.
     
  7. Apr 6, 2003 #6

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Sign me up too...

    I voted 20+ years. I think it is technologically possible right now, but it would be hugely expensive. Remember Jim Lovell from Apollo 13 "Its not a miracle...we just decided to go." So it is with Mars. But I don't expect we will be making that decision any time soon.
     
  8. Apr 7, 2003 #7
    women!!!! ???? :D:D

    i tihnk we do have the technology now too, i mean technically, what do we need more than moon mission? once in space the inertia will keep the **** going to mars! however, once on marks you have gravity to contend with, so unlike the moon you cant just "float off" back to earth! i suppose that would be a problem! maybe youll need a bit more food :D
     
  9. Apr 8, 2003 #8
    I don't know about everyone else, but I would volunteer in a heart beat.
     
  10. Apr 8, 2003 #9
    Count me in for that mission even if it is one way :smile:. The mission could be closer than 20 years though. It depends on certain developements but the way human technology is progressing it would be technically feasable and within acceptable safety limits. Personally I think we should establish a presence on the moon first. Mainly because it's easier to get to - easy to use a launch platform for more exploration and should give us a lot of experience of living in space. Of course there are certain issues which need to be tackled first e.g. muscle problems, radiation, production of vital supplies etc. However I'm fairly certain that this will happen in the next 10-20 years. Also with the production of the first space elevator (scheduled within 10-30 years) these things will be a bit easier should become a lot easier. Exciting times I think.
     
  11. Apr 8, 2003 #10
    I think after the recent space diaster I feel we need to look long and hard at our space program. I feel maybe 25 years before we land succssesfully ( i apoligise for the spelling.)
     
  12. Apr 8, 2003 #11
    Of course. Hormones play a role you know :wink:

    Actually, suppose the spaceship veered off course and landed on some surpringly hospitable planet. Who else is gonna populate the planet?
     
  13. Apr 8, 2003 #12

    drag

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Greetings !
    What ?!
    Show me a single space-elevator design which
    is in any way technologicly and economicly
    feasible even within the next half a century !
    Who else ?! :wink:
    Dr. Smith - who caused it, the robot and maybe
    half a dozen monsters...

    Live long and prosper.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?