| Forum Index > General Forum |
Keep Nation bragging and the political debate out. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
On August 06 2012 15:23 SafeAsCheese wrote: What is the major complication that prevents humans from landing on mars right now? Is it the return trip? The temperature? The Engineering aspects, Computers, mapping, vehicles and so forth. | ||
imallinson
United Kingdom3482 Posts
On August 06 2012 15:23 SafeAsCheese wrote: What is the major complication that prevents humans from landing on mars right now? Is it the return trip? The temperature? One of the hardest things is actually keeping the people from completely wasting away on the two 9 month trips. A lack of gravity really messes up you musculature. | ||
|
MusicalPulse
United States162 Posts
On August 06 2012 15:24 Medrea wrote: Return trip. Its not the moon, you need a whole set of thrusters again to leave the atmosphere. Also it would take 9 months to get there, you would need food/water for that long, and the way back. Considering that length of time, how long would they stay on Mars? | ||
|
Snorkels
United States1015 Posts
 gg JPL/NASA. | ||
|
Medrea
10003 Posts
Take from that what you may. Some countries might have people with the gumption to accept a one way mission. | ||
|
Random_Guy09
Canada1010 Posts
On August 06 2012 15:23 SafeAsCheese wrote: What is the major complication that prevents humans from landing on mars right now? Is it the return trip? The temperature? Pretty much everything. But if they can find water it just increases the chance of it happening | ||
|
Medrea
10003 Posts
MONEY. | ||
|
acker
United States2958 Posts
On August 06 2012 15:23 SafeAsCheese wrote: What is the major complication that prevents humans from landing on mars right now? The major complication is politics. If we really, really wanted to land someone on Mars, I bet we could do it in less than fifteen years. It would take about two trillion dollars, though. Unless someone finds a way to wage a war on Mars, nobody is going to spend that much money to put someone there. If you're talking about the major barriers given current NASA budget, I'd say it's the six month journey to get there, plus radiation. | ||
|
BuddhaMonk
781 Posts
On August 06 2012 15:23 SafeAsCheese wrote: What is the major complication that prevents humans from landing on mars right now? Is it the return trip? The temperature? There are two main problems at the moment. The first is that the length of time it would take would mean that the amount radiation the astronauts would be exposed to would be quite high and could cause them health problems when they get back (cancer). Likewise the length of time they would be in space would mean they would lose bone density and again this would cause them problems (osteoporosis). The second is that it costs a ton of money. It could have already happened if there was an unlimited budget. | ||
|
VY Canis Majoris
Sweden32 Posts
"America has to stay in front of the space frontier..." | ||
|
MusicalPulse
United States162 Posts
On August 06 2012 15:26 VY Canis Majoris wrote: He just had to say it: "America has to stay in front of the space frontier..." Freakin... | ||
|
rezoacken
Canada2719 Posts
Anyway, before this gets out of hand, I think my issue was as clear as it could be and I don't want to fuel more debates from people who just want to argue everything without basic understanding of the issues. Quitting and slamming the door is always classy. | ||
|
Left4Cookies
Denmark803 Posts
| ||
|
Random_Guy09
Canada1010 Posts
On August 06 2012 15:24 Medrea wrote: Return trip. Its not the moon, you need a whole set of thrusters again to leave the atmosphere. Even though Mars doesnt really have a thick atmosphere. It's why they had to use that parachute and why they had to calculate now much the thin atmosphere would really slow down the capsule. | ||
|
Jetaap
France4814 Posts
On August 06 2012 15:25 Random_Guy09 wrote: Pretty much everything. But if they can find water it just increases the chance of it happening One of the big problem would be also to protect the crew from solar radiation. | ||
|
SafeAsCheese
United States4924 Posts
On August 06 2012 15:25 Medrea wrote: For current technology sending people to the surface of mars is a one way trip. Take from that what you may. Some countries might have people with the gumption to accept a one way mission. There are probably plenty of scientists that would accept that type of mission, ones that are already sick or even some healthy. They would be the first human to ever be on another planet, far far outstripping the fame that people like Armstrong got. Their name would go down in history for hundreds, maybe thousands of years. It's an ethical question to be sure. | ||
|
holdthephone
United States523 Posts
and yeah i'd imagine there'd be plenty of volunteers for the one way trip to mars. shit would be nuts. | ||
|
YoucriedWolf
Sweden1456 Posts
Just kidding i always keep mine next to the table. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
BuddhaMonk
781 Posts
On August 06 2012 15:25 Medrea wrote: For current technology sending people to the surface of mars is a one way trip. Take from that what you may. Some countries might have people with the gumption to accept a one way mission. Not true, with enough money it's absolutely possible to do a return trip. | ||
| ||
|
|
Shopify Rebellion Sundays
Spirit vs Mixu
Clem vs TBD
RSL Revival
Serral vs Rogue
BlizzCon
IdrA vs MC
Afreeca Starleague
Light vs JyJ
Soulkey vs hero
WardiTV Weekly
Monday Night Weeklies
Afreeca Starleague
Snow vs Shinee
Shine vs EffOrt
GSL
PiGosaur Cup
The PondCast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
