New Mars Forums

clark

Member

Registered: 2001-09-20

Posts: 6,374

Re: Your nation's flag

Damn, are there some guys there that support a Mars direct mission or What ?

I support human exploration of Mars. I do not support Mars Direct.

I know that you are a big fan of the Moon, Clark. By the way, i think NASA expect a 7%/year increase of her budget. Is that small ?

It's about 5 percent a year for the next 5 years (more or less, more in the first few years, less in the last two years of the budget). This is extremly wondeful given that NASA's budget has been consistently slashed for the last decade, and has received funding below inflationary rates, thus reducing the actual amount of fund available to NASA when compared to other time periods. Now, to consider that the US is looking to cut just about every other program, NASA is very fortunate to receive this mandate, and this money.

dickbill

Member

Registered: 2002-09-28

Posts: 749

Re: Your nation's flag

Damn, are there some guys there that support a Mars direct mission or What ?

I support human exploration of Mars. I do not support Mars Direct.

Said word for word, I do not support "Mars Direct" the way it was described in 'the Case for Mars' of Zubrin, but I support the spirit of Mars direct.
I mean, many things have changes since the book was written, the most significant is that ice was discovered by THEMIS/Odyssey  2 feet underground. That means oxygen AND hydrogen available for the sabatier reactor and in situ production of CH4/O2. Zubrin would probably not anymore include the 7 tons of embarked hydrogen in a 'Case II' . Things change, we have to adapt. Here on this board, lots of other alternative are discussed, but they all belong to a Direct or Semidirect strategy. They all belong to a 20-50 billions $ first mission. The budget for Iraq deconstruction is 87 billions, so 50 billions is in your hands (mine too, I pay my taxes). Let's do it.
The Moon is dead, Mars was, is or will be alive.

I know that you are a big fan of the Moon, Clark. By the way, i think NASA expect a 7%/year increase of her budget. Is that small ?

It's about 5 percent a year for the next 5 years (more or less, more in the first few years, Now, to consider that the US is looking to cut just about every other program, NASA is very fortunate to receive this mandate, and this money.

Not all programs, the defense has a huge increase.

clark

Member

Registered: 2001-09-20

Posts: 6,374

Re: Your nation's flag

Said word for word, I do not support "Mars Direct" the way it was described in 'the Case for Mars' of Zubrin, but I support the spirit of Mars direct.

The 'Spirit' of Mars Direct is corrupt as well. I can think of no better way to slow human exploration of space to and beyond Mars then to approach Human exploration of Mars in a "flag-and-footprint" style mission.

Sure, the plan calls for additional missions, with the culmination in Human colonization of the Red planet. But it's silly to expect any government agency to foot the bill for something like that. Mars Direct may get people to Mars in the shortest amount of time, but it does nothing to keep us there.

When we go, we must be ready to stay.

I mean, many things have changes since the book was written, the most significant is that ice was discovered by THEMIS/Odyssey  2 feet underground. That means oxygen AND hydrogen available for the sabatier reactor and in situ production of CH4/O2. Zubrin would probably not anymore include the 7 tons of embarked hydrogen in a 'Case II' .

You're talking about a process that is little more than theory, and it is the centerpiece to Mars Direct. I'm sure it can work- I have confidence in the scientific and technical eltite, they can make something like it work. But we haven't really done all the research that needs to happen to make sure we are ready and can perform.

Guess what happens with Bush's space policy... we do the research neccessary to make Mars happen. What most here fail to see is that our Mars exploration program is getting an increase in funding. In 2009 we will be launching a rover that can work for an entire Martian year. We will be sending out sample return missions. We will be sending out in-stiu resource utilization experiments, to Mars.

This lays the groundwork for our latter manned missions to Mars. Development of nuclear propulsion means we can throw out most of the Mars Direct architecture and just do a fast burn trajectory.

Things change, we have to adapt.

Prove it. Come join me in the Luna mine pits.    :laugh:

. Here on this board, lots of other alternative are discussed, but they all belong to a Direct or Semidirect strategy. They all belong to a 20-50 billions $ first mission.

And therein lies all of the problems. Everyone is attached to the 'Direct' idea. Any plan that takes us further into space, that builds upon exsisting experience and infrastructure, is the one we all should support.

Remember, when we go, we should stay.

dickbill

Member

Registered: 2002-09-28

Posts: 749

Re: Your nation's flag

The 'Spirit' of Mars Direct is corrupt as well. I can think of no better way to slow human exploration of space to and beyond Mars then to approach Human exploration of Mars in a "flag-and-footprint" style mission.

Sure, the plan calls for additional missions, with the culmination in Human colonization of the Red planet.

I think you are completely true, MArs direct or semidirect are not settlement missions. They are first human missions to explore Mars, and they are cheap because they achieve a limited but very well define goal : landing 15-30 tons devices on Mars that sustain human presence for a while, including a return vehicle.
These missions were also cheap because they have been designed with todays technologies (well , Ares ~ Schuttle-C ). no additional programs, to land a man on MArs in the next 15 years, no latter.

Now, I think the timeframe is the biggest issue. Mars in 30 years or more ? well maybe never then.

Bill White

Member

Registered: 2001-09-09

Posts: 2,114

Re: Your nation's flag

clark, I agree with you on most of your post. But a few quibbles.

Sure, the plan calls for additional missions, with the culmination in Human colonization of the Red planet. But it's silly to expect any government agency to foot the bill for something like that. Mars Direct may get people to Mars in the shortest amount of time, but it does nothing to keep us there.

When we go, we must be ready to stay.

Agreed.

MarsDirect is rather like crossing the Pacific on a balsa-wood raft. Yet the Polynesians did exactly that, quite successfully.

Nuclear propulsion is a marvelous resource, however given proliferation dangers, nuclear propelled spacecraft will be kept under the close control of responsible Terran governments, who, as you and I agree, have little incentive to fund settlement. Even if we ignore the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, no Terran government will long control any Marsian settlement as practical matter. So why should they pay for it?

Nonetheless, follow on MarsDirect missions are reasonably affordable if some government funds the initial technology learning curve and if bought "off the shelf" follow on MarsDirect missions can be launched from most anywhere, once the technology is proven.

Nuclear propelled vessels will remain the monopoly of the United States government for the foreseeable future.

That said, I agree totally that the first MarsDirect must be linked to/with an identified interest group who intends immediate follow on missions.

:;):

Guess what happens with Bush's space policy... we do the research neccessary to make Mars happen.

Actually IMHO - - Daniel Goldin did spread around lots and lots of small grants that have born fruit for a MarsDirect style mission. Several weeks ago I posted a link to some research done for a few hundred thousand dollars on membrane technology that allows the separation of the Martian atmosphere which will greatly simplify the whole in situ process and use far less energy.   

I fear the Bush initiative might centralize research into one approved way of doing things, thereby slowing creative alternatives.

clark

Member

Registered: 2001-09-20

Posts: 6,374

Re: Your nation's flag

MarsDirect is rather like crossing the Pacific on a balsa-wood raft. Yet the Polynesians did exactly that, quite successfully.

To borrow your analogy, sending a couple of people, at great odds, into certain peril, well, seems outdated.  i don't mean this any kind of negative way, but we're talking about billions of dollars, a for-all-intents-and-purposes, dead rock, and perhaps some unknown commercial spin-offs. Mars Direct sells the 'rush'. But why the rush?

Nonetheless, follow on MarsDirect missions are reasonably affordable if some government funds the initial technology learning curve and if bought "off the shelf" follow on MarsDirect missions can be launched from most anywhere, once the technology is proven.

Follow on? For what? You just mentioned that governments have little incentive to fund colonization. Why build a base or send follow up missions? just book passage on USS Uncle Sam-
Argue against the experience of Apollo. Who else landed after we did? Fast approach, little gain. Mars Direct is the same thing.

I fear the Bush initiative might centralize research into one approved way of doing things, thereby slowing creative alternatives.

Perhaps, but I tend to see some of the opposite. I'm interested to see more details about the prize funding and funds for some of ther newer space launch companies. There's a lot of ideas out there, it's just a matter of getting the message heard.

dickbill

Member

Registered: 2002-09-28

Posts: 749

Re: Your nation's flag

To borrow your analogy, sending a couple of people, at great odds, into certain peril, well, seems outdated.  i don't mean this any kind of negative way, but we're talking about billions of dollars, a for-all-intents-and-purposes, dead rock, and perhaps some unknown commercial spin-offs. Mars Direct sells the 'rush'. But why the rush?

Clark, If Zubrin is our prophet and we are the apostles, it's not difficult to see that you are Juda. I don't understand, after all these beautiful marsan poems that you wrote to stimulate our will to explore Mars, how can you abandon our noble cause ?

Why the rush ? because we don't know how bright can be the future.
Right now we have pandemia, HIV, flux and we may have more deadly flux pandemia soon. And wars.
Right now we have global warming. We can expect catastrophic ecologic consequences of a magnitude never seen before, causing massive human migrations of unprecedented cost.  Our oceans are poluted, how intact are their buffering capabilities ? we don't know. We could have a global collapse of several ecosystem in chains, requesting all ressources possible just to survive.
All together, this suggest that we COULD, in the future spend much more money trying to fix these issues than we do it know.
SO, we are in on the Moon when this happen...forget Mars then, maybe next century, maybe ...
But if we are on Mars when this happen, who knows, some of the solutions for our problems might be there.
This is why I think we should not postpone further the Mars manned missions.

clark

Member

Registered: 2001-09-20

Posts: 6,374

Re: Your nation's flag

Clark, If Zubrin is our prophet and we are the apostles, it's not difficult to see that you are Juda.

Now that just made me smile dickbill!

30 pieces of silver, eh? It's a start.

I don't understand, after all these beautiful marsan poems that you wrote to stimulate our will to explore Mars, how can you abandon our noble cause ?

First, thank you for the compliment. I was under the impression that most of them fell on deaf ears, or blind eyes as the case may be.    Secondly, I haven't given up the 'cause'. My poems, the things I sometimes write, they are born from the same desire that we all share. People on Mars.

To give life to something that has yet to fully live. To push back the darkness of the unknown, and weave a new tapestry where none has exsisted before.

Yet Mars, for all it's allure and beauty, is but one small story to be, among a universe of stories to be. This is an issue I have grappled with for awhile now- Why only Mars?

Why only the Moon? Why only Neptune or Jupiter or an O'Neal colony? Why stop at any one place as the destination for our future?

It is my belief that Mars Direct will impede our progress, not acclerate it. Apollo, for all intents and purposes, was Moon-Direct. The result? Well, history, and our current outlook paint the picture pretty well. Getting people to Mars would be a beautiful achievement- a testimony to our arrogance, and our spirit as a species. Yet, like many others, I don't want to settle for just a few footprints and some words declaring human victory on a planet millions of miles away.

What I want is a world where those who choose to live in space, or destinations beyond Earth, have that choice. It's not about getting anywhere, or saving the species, or saving our own world. It's just about choice.

Why the rush ? because we don't know how bright can be the future.

How does rushing to Mars with 6 people brighten our future? Is rushing to Mars the only way to brighten our future or solve problems that loom on the horizon? Is it the best way?

SO, we are in on the Moon when this happen...forget Mars then, maybe next century, maybe ...

Maybe, but maybe sooner than you think. Sending people to Mars via Mars Direct dosen't give us, as in people, any more choices than they had before. It dosen't expand the opportunites of individuals. The Moon though, will.

I've listened for a long time to a lot of brilliant people on these boards going around and around in circles, looking for the path to get us to Mars. Invariably though, there are giant holes in every plan, either socially, economically, or scientifically.

The main breakdown is trying to figure out how to get people to Mars. Not just a few explorers, but people. As in thousands and millions. I want that too. The Mars Society states it as a goal. Yet Mars Direct dosen't help this goal. I should say, Mars direct dosen't help The goal.

The answer? As far as I have figured is a return to the Moon first, not second, or afterwards, or even in conjunction. The Moon first. With the moon we get economic justification for Mars, we get some social justification, and the science of the whole thing becomes more resolved and proven. It's no longer just paper proclamations of what might be possible. It's proof to those that doubt that we can live in space.

Bill White

Member

Registered: 2001-09-09

Posts: 2,114

Re: Your nation's flag

Corporations are enslaved by the need to show quarterly or at least annual profit/loss statements.

United States politicians (and the other democracies) are enslaved by the election cycles - - two years for Representatives, four years (maybe eight) for Presidents, and six years for Senators. Only those space visions having genuine bi-partisan support can survive this process.

I am beginning to believe that the biggets weakness of the Bush plan is an inability to be sustained come 2009. Especially if we all insist on calling it the "Bush plan" 

Okay, so if we rule out corporations from the role of "walking point" for settling space and we rule out democratic governments, what institutions remain with the longevity needed to undertake a multi-generational project?

What about the Vatican? 

clark

Member

Registered: 2001-09-20

Posts: 6,374

Re: Your nation's flag

Yes Bill, the Mayflower is an excellent idea. Isn't that a bit of salt in the wound though for those who want to cast aside religion as an impediment to a better future?

Religion being one of the best ways to get us there. :laugh:

Bill White

Member

Registered: 2001-09-09

Posts: 2,114

Re: Your nation's flag

Yes Bill, the Mayflower is an excellent idea. Isn't that a bit of salt in the wound though for those who want to cast aside religion as an impediment to a better future?

Religion being one of the best ways to get us there. :laugh:

"Religion is what the common people see as true, the wise people see as false, and the rulers see as useful"
--Seneca

= = =

Insofar as I aspire to be a wise commoner (ruler being rather a stretch) I am left in the oxymoronic position of believing that religion is both true and false. And I do see its uses.

clark

Member

Registered: 2001-09-20

Posts: 6,374

Re: Your nation's flag

Insofar as I aspire to be a wise commoner (ruler being rather a stretch) I am left in the oxymoronic position of believing that religion is both true and false. And I do see its uses.

"Above all things, I am a practical man, and if I must be wrong, then let me be spectacularly wrong."