Why a mission to mars?

Question

Why plan a manned mission to Mars, I mean they said they have landed on the moon, and allegedly had a look about, but years later they have discovered that there is frozen water on the moon, so if in our case, Water is the basis for all life on earth, then why not start with the moon, after all it is closer you can pretty much maintain communication all the time, would that not be a good place to try the experiment.

Al....

Answer 1

As much as i would love to see a manned mission to Mars some time before i pass on, the fact remains that a base of operations on the moon would be the next logical step, for one thing the 1/6th gravity of the moon would be perfect for a shipyard for building bigger and better spaceships, another benefit is that some of the metals used in the construction of new spaceships could come from the moon itself, sure we could send a ship to Mars right now but the ship would be small and cramped with very little in the was of creature comforts, ships built on the moon could be built bigger because of the lower gravity and could there for send more people to Mars at once.

Answer 2

It's not a question of either/or, but of when. You see, NASA has intentions for a moon base AND a manned mission to Mars. I suspect that some type of temporary moon base will be first on the agenda, because there are still huge problems to overcome for a Mars mission - not least the spiralling cost of such a venture.

In the very long term, a Mars mission Will become crucial to the survival of the human race. It is perhaps possible to terraform Mars, and change the actual composition of the (at present) thin and lethal atmosphere. The first step will be to plant hardy bacteria to release oxygen thereby starting an artificial global warming process. This in turn should melt Mars' tapped ice resources and create oceans, much like on Earth.

Answer 3

The big problem with the moon vs mars is this. Mars has 1. an atmosphere that over time could be adapted to a livable standard (there have been plans for seeding the martian atmosphere for years). This is just not possible with the moon. 2. Gravity on mars is closer to that of the earth.
In every way mars is a far more viable colonisation prospect.

Answer 4

As mars has an atmosphere and may have primitve life we run the risk of bringing back some dreadful organism which will run rampant on earth. Lets leave it alone.

Thought for the day: As the mars mission astronauts will be cooped up in a spacecraft for six months under hazardous conditions, are they very brave or just a little crazy?

Answer 5

because they found some sort of bubbles there that are similar to the ones that are here on earth that show that there has once been water on mars. If they find more evidence that life could have or could exsist there i heard on the news that nasa is going there to try to sart a whole generation there. there only problem would be oxygen which mars doesnt have but i has Co2 as its gas which is what trees need to survive here on earth so it might work out cuz we eexhale Co2 for trees some one just has to plant a tree on mars then oxygen maybe will be avialable

Answer 6

Mars isn't really such a good place for colonisation compared to space and may not even be any good at all for permanent settlement depending on how well humans do low gravity conditions (at present a complete unknown). It'd be a good science lab though and needs through exploration which will probably have to be manned.

But for living permanently, you'd be better off spending your money on big artificial space stations spinning to provide the gravity at Earth levels known to be healthy.

Answer 7

They are going to start with a manned base on the Moon before going on to Mars. Keep up will you!

Answer 8

Yes! you are right . Setting up a Moon base makes more sense.First! but that is to mundane for the politicians.Get the Moon sorted, then, go for the stars.

Even climbers of mountains need a base camp.

Answer 9

Yes it would make more sense to try out the technology closer to home, but Mars may be easier to market and raise interest in as it's never been done before.

Answer 10

Here is the answer I gave to a similar question yesterday.

Day length of Mars = 24 hours 38 minutes
Day length of Moon = 28 Earth days

Moon atmosphere pressure = zero
Mars atmosphere pressure = about 1/100th of that of Earth, a lot more than zero.

Martian temperatures range from about +17C to -170C. Moon surface temperatures have a range like +115C to -200C

Want to grow some beans and tomatoes? You can't do it on the Moon and get a worthwhile return. Plants cannot stand days so long. You cannot grow them under lights economically on the Moon because the low efficiency of photosynthesis means the energy balances are negative. If you tried to grow them "under glass" on the surface the greenhouse effect of the dome would cook them in minutes. They would also be irradiated by solar and cosmic radiation. All food would have to be sent from Earth.

Plants would probably tolerate the extra half hour of the Martian day length. Sunlight would be weaker but plants do grow in low light conditions on Earth and a bit of breeding and genetic engineering could fix this. Martian summer temperatures near the Equator reach about 17C, it is probably less than that outside my house right now here. A greenhouse could bring that temperature up to a pleasant 25C or so inside without much trouble at all.

The CO2 atmosphere of Mars can be added directly to the greenhouse for plant respiration. Martian atmospheric nitrogen would also be used. There is every indication of water on Mars in far greater quantities than the small amount which is speculated to be on the Moon.

The Martian atmosphere is mainly CO2 with some nitrogen. Using 19th century chemistry with simple, cheap catalysts it is possible to make quantities of methane, oxygen, carbon monoxide and even ethylene. Ethylene, methane and carbon monoxide could be used as propellants for Mars ground vehicles and to refuel rockets for launching stuff and people back to Earth. Oxygen would be used in these propellants mixed with atmospheric gas as a buffer, or straight as a rocket oxidant. A bit more chemistry might give gasoline or kerosene and even plastics. There are no easily exploitable resources for this on the Moon.

Hydrogen sent from Earth would be needed at the start to get things going but if water is found in good quantity then there is a source of hydrogen and oxygen. There is every reason to expect that other basic chemical resources such as nitrates, sulphates and chlorides will be available.

The Martian atmosphere has an ozone layer and would shield colonists from some UV, it also blocks some solar and some cosmic radiation. More protection would come from a metal roofed building with a layer of sandbags on top, or perhaps better, a building made from local materials -mud bricks, with an arched roof. The Romans knew how to build these. The complete lack of a Moon atmosphere means no shielding at all.

Thus it is possible for a Martian colony to grow at least some of their own food and produce their own fuels and oxygen while having some natural shielding from space radiation.

As for communication, people can live without telephones and the internet, strange to say. Want to contact relatives on Earth? Send them an e-mail. It might take several minutes to arrive, but they are probably asleep, down the pub, playing tennis or at work anyway. Repeater satellites in orbit round the Sun could maintain communications permanently. How long did it take for a letter to go from the USA to say Germany 100 years ago? People survived that quite nicely.

The Professor is 100% wrong. Martian microbes, if there are any, are adapted to Mars. They would not infect humans or animals because our immune systems would smash them up in minutes and in any case they are not adapted to us. Humans do not get reptile diseases nor vice versa and reptiles are biologically far closer to us than anything on Mars. In any case meteorites arriving from Mars, there are many, could have carried Martian life to Earth long ago. However the only casualty so far was an Egyptian dog killed in 1911 by a meteorite that was later found to come from Mars.

He is wrong about radiation too. Spacecraft can offer adequate shielding from solar radiation except in extreme circumstances and flight plans correctly drawn up do not place the crew closer to the Sun than Earth itself. It is possible to time missions when solar flares are unlikely.