New Mars Forums

Unless you focus the beam extremely well the diameter of your laser tube would be considerably larger by the time it reaches space. You would also need a power supply suitable for driving the beam for prolonged periods of time. As to the inner portion of the light tube, would molecules not just pass through the walls, its only light after all.
Graeme

You'd need a massive solar array to produce the required energy. We are talking a *LOT* of energy here.

Looks like they are just working of current amount of energy used to date to project an estimated life span, they did say the estimate would depend on the Martian environment. But hey, even a couple of days over the estimated lifespan would have been a bonus, so if they only get half of the extra days we should count ourselves lucky for the extra data that will provide.

There looks to be a couple of areas worth a closer look however, towards the far side perhaps. Plus we can only see a part of the crater in this image, there could be other areas worthy of a closer look when we see the full interior.

It just goes to show how much we don't know for sure about the planet if both the Beagle team and NASA underestimated the density of the atmosphere - and all the more reason for getting more probes up there to tell us what its like before sending a manned mission.
I've looked at the image from the article, and looked, and looked, but there is nothing that stands out as being the obvious remains of Beagle2, it would be good to see the image the mention early in the article about a separate object near to Beagle2.
Lets hope they get a closer look at the 'string of pearls' soon, or we might not see anything at all after March this year accoring to Colin Pillinger in this [http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994752]New Scientist Article.

I think the first task would be to decide what you want the vehicle for, what you will be doing in it, how far you want it to go per day, will it be required for a multitude of tasks or just moving a couple of people from A to B etc. Then you have to decide what form of propulsion you'll be using, and only then should you consider the way of getting the propulsion to the surface to move the craft/vehicle.
I'd consider the first manned transportation crafts to be a multi-tasking vehicle that carries both people and supplies/equipment, and could double as an 'overnighter' for longer explorations away from the base. And in keeping with the K.I.S.S. principal power it with a known reliable source, and use large mesh wheels to cope with the rugged terrain.
Now if someone could design a craft capable of flying in the Martian atmosphere/gravity with the characteristics of a Harrier Jet that would certainly overcome the rough terrain, and it would give the occupants a good range to travel each day - though I'm not sure how jump jet technology would work up there (thinking out loud so to speak  )
Graeme

This is a low res starting image (yes I've been playing) of a very in-the-future rover for Mars exploration...

So what else would you like to see on a un-manned future rover, give me your suggestions and I'll do a final high-res version of it.

It must be difficult though when they're designing these rovers, loads of scientist sitting round shouting... I want... I want... I want...
If you asked each scientist from the Spirit/Opportunity team to design their ideal rover they probably come up with a brilliant rover for their own needs - but not for others. I suppose they have to compromise somewhere, and at least we've got some decent results from them.

I'd think by the time they made all the adjustments it would be easier to build something to a custom design rather than modify an existing chassis. The advantage of building from scratch would be using lightweight metals, designing the chassis to cope with the stresses involved with travelling across the martian landscape (and the stresses involved with the two power units they suggest).
I'm all for saving money, but then it has to be balanced well with usability, reliability, and safety.
Its good however that people are thinking about new ideas - I always like seeing new ideas, at least it shows people are not letting their grey matter stagnate.

That was basically my point, often in the past people thought they were doing what was right, only to be proved wrong at a later date. I think we should consider our actions before doing anything that could destroy *any* life on the planet. And that would rule out terraforming for a long long time.

Morden for its time, I think the Viking lander was a vital part in the exploration of Mars, it gave us a building block for future exploration that we are seeing now.

Any scientist can only be as good or accurate as the data they're working from. So i'd think none of them would be embarrassed by any data that comes to light from modern probes that contradicts their theories.
I hope that they will start looking for biological evidence whether current or in fossil form - whatever - as long as they keep looking and sending back data that I can sit a gaze at for a while.
Not much of a canoe person myself, that type of water transport has never appealed since I watched Deliverence.