flights to mars from the moon?

Question

Who was ridiculed last week for suggesting that the Moon could be used as a staging base for manned space flights to Mars, when it was pointed out that this would be like using the end of your back garden as a staging base for a trip to Australia?

Answer 1

I've asked about the possibility of a moon base on here before:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=An63oTunQSufy0gL0BbWDknsy6IX?qid=20060817103534AAANcRL

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AntrondYJ0ZauQEPU_umbknsy6IX?qid=20060817133553AA3BzRy

Answer 2

I have been ridiculed on that point a number of times.

My argument is very simple,,, if you can't even spend the night in your back yard it is FOOLISH to plan a trip to Australia.

The Moon is close, everything you need to make the year-long trek to Mars would make a very comfortable little Moon base. Shelter, food, water, waste disposal, radiation protection. All of these things need to be MASTERED before we attempt a trip to Mars. Imagine if our astronauts came down with ecoli poisoning from a lack of sanitation half-way to Mars. The mission would be over and the astronauts would likely die.

The moon can be a staging point,, a launch pad with 1/6th the gravity of Earth and no atmosphere.

After all,, when you take your "Australia" trip you load your car in your front yard don't you?

Answer 3

Once they master solar radiation protection, and a base capable of keeping humans alive for years, and I'm sure they have already you have to assume the governments technology is more advanced then what we think. Then the moon wont be the only place they'll occupy.

The moon is just the new space launch pad, its Mars thats the jump off point into the solar system.

Answer 4

The largest investment of energy in sending a vehicle from earth to space is the departure from the gravity of earth.
The idea behind the moon base is based on the assumption that a viable lunar base is feasible, without constant need for supplies from earth, and that, under the surface of the moon, it would be possible to sustain a scientific and industrial colony that could build and send space vehicles to the long voyages to nearby planets, with minimal energy requirements for takeoff.

Answer 5

I don't know. Bush put forward the whole new Moon/Mars idea I think. I read an interesting article in Discover magazine recently about the effects of cosmic ray radiation on a long-term voyage to Mars, and how Mars has no magnetic field to protect us from them like Earth.

Answer 6

you're somewhat good. in spite of everything, why worry sending human beings someplace as quickly as we are able to deliver robots and in simple terms take a seat in our chairs and watch it from a distance. No distinctive than text fabric messaging relatively of truthfully assembly with human beings. and because further and further human beings won't be able to look to spell, according to probability we're not smart sufficient from now directly to be waiting to deliver human beings to the moon or Mars. yet your argument that "wouldent or no longer it relatively is a logical option to in easy terms use robots for all area exploration and not wory approximately human beings dieing in explotions and stuff" (sigh) would not make experience. As of 2006, in easy terms 19 people who have died in area injuries - it relatively is fewer than die in motor vehicle injuries on one weekend. And "they'd even have robots build the stuff on mars or moon and after that if thay prefer they'd deliver them there after each thing is outfitted" - why worry construction something on Mars or the moon if human beings are not going to bypass there?

Answer 7

Since I live in Australia, this would be a good analogy.

Answer 8

You can always hope that it was the originator of the ridiculous analogy, but I doubt it.

Answer 9

I dont know who it was but its a good idea

Answer 10

Can't remember.Try looking for it on http://bbcnews.com