why haven't there been any manned missions to mars yet?

Question

what r u waiting for u goons and shouldn't the govern't be puttin' more money for research in order to prevent the earth from being destroyred by killer asteroids

Answer 1

This isn't another rhetorical question is it? They haven't sent men to Mars yet because they are short of funds. They are building up to it though, check out the NASA website.

Answer 2

The space agencies are trying the best but most of the funds are going to war and charities, ESA are wishing but NASA are going to do so soon.
Other space agencies are looking at it, this maybe another race to space, the race to Mars.
The purpose to go to Mars is to see the planet, investigate and see through for a human eye, not because there is life or no life.
There will be no killer asteroid yet, but if so the mission coming up,we will have to build colonies on Mars and The Moon if The Moon survives an asteroid impact to the Earth too.

Corrections to your question, I'm educated more than you.

Why have there not been any manned missions to Maars yet?
What are you waiting for you goons, should not the government be putting more money in research. In order to prevent the Earth from being destroyed by killer asteroids.

Meteors though if to collide.
Meteories are small meteors.
It maybe an asteroid or comet to follow the path of a meteor.

Also the fact it takes a long time to get to Mars and back and the matter of landing and surviving.

Note: Always go into slang in speech marks or stars.

Answer 3

If some scientific papers are to be believed, life originated on Mars before making the huge transplanetary leap to Earth where it blossomed.

We haven't been back to Mars because it was a boring place back then and the neighbourhood hasn't got better since - It's much better to view from afar than visit up close not least because it would cost a fortune and 6 years travelling.
As for research into preventing destruction by asteroids - there really isn't much use - a meteor big enough to destoy life on Earth, travelling at orbital speeds will not be disuaded from its target by a thermonuclear bomb or two

Answer 4

Why climb out of one gravity well just to fall down into another?

From Wikipedia:
While most people think of space colonies on the Moon or Mars, others argue that the first colonies will be in orbit (see International Space Station). Several design groups at NASA and elsewhere have examined orbital colony feasibility. They have determined that there are ample quantities of all the necessary materials on the Moon and Near Earth Asteroids, that solar energy is readily available in very large quantities, and that no new scientific breakthroughs are necessary, although a great deal of engineering would be required.

Answer 5

As far as we see into space there is no Giant Meteor headed for Earth.

Also the government is doing something, ever heard of NASA DEEP IMPACT mission? We CAN hit a comet with a roket if we need to so we are well protected, no worries.

As far as Mars is concerned... well it's a very hard logistical task to go there (and if you ask me fairly useless). As technology improves we can travel faster but even today a mission to mars will take more than 18 months and not many austronauts will be willing to do that. Besides we don't know that much about humans in space for a long time yet... what is the long time consiquence of 0 G? We have reasearched some of that on the ISP (International SPace Station) and I would say it is a huge step in trying to go to Mars. Still there are many problems to be solved before we ever get there... Unlike the moon Mars has significant gravity, unlike the moon Mars is flat out hostile to life as we know it (moon is too, don't get me wrong, but extremes are more noticable on mars), unlike the moon Mars has a "bad" orbit for us to go there (since if you miss a launch date you won't be launching in the next few months as mars does not circle the earth) and so on...

Going to the moon was relatively easy, going to Mars is too, but it is a step harder. As a tax payer though, I REALLY don't want to pay for another round of who can flex the mussle and science is better served with unmanned vihicles, but that's an opinion.

Answer 6

Mars is home of another race of spirit beings (aliens) who are not that keen on having visitors from earth
Also there is much on Mars the ones in control at Nasa do not want you to see...like the 12 pyramids and past cities

Answer 7

I don't think killer asteroids are a huge national or mundial concerns. The fact is that scientists do not really nead to go mars to study it, and the goverment gets happy so that it not have to spent to much money. Technology losses but it is really the only thing that losses here.

Answer 8

Apparently Werner Von Braun who designed many of the launch vehicles for NASA drew up plans for a manned mission to Mars but these were turned down due to budget constraits.

Answer 9

At the speed rockets can currently travel, it would take three years to get to mars and three years back. The process may take some time while they look for places to land, plan ahead for what ways going to mars would benefit mankind and try and find a faster way to get there. We will be going to mars for sure, but not right away.

Answer 10

It cost sooooo much money that they haven't got. They are looking to get back to the moon soon (ish) few years yet tho, when they get to the moon, they'll look at how they can fly to mars from there. This isn't gonna be for years and years yet.
They can spot metorites just as well from earth so they don't need to go to mars to do that

Answer 11

The Irish are planning a manned mission to the sun. They will go at night