New Mars Forums

Would it not still be a good idea to break it up into stages a la Mars Direct. You could send the hab, and return vehicle on slower trajectories before hnd, and once they are set up and ensuring a place to stay and way to get home, send the crew.

Would this make it more expensive?

Could you make it clearer what components you are taking along, and what each of their functions are?

Cheers

Nick

Ok, hows about this for an adaptation of the game - a way of keeping it competitive.

How about you have competing teams flying parallel missions to mars, competing to do various tasks or complete goals first.

I dont think they could actually each design and build their own spacecraft, (you guys would have to model each of their rockets and habs), but maybe theyd have to oversee the construction of each of their rockets or habs, and mistakes would lead to problems later on. (that would definately add to tension at launch and landing)

They would have to design and man their own mission-controls, deciding what equipment to have, how many people contributing and to what positions (as well as staff rotas), their layouts and command structure would then more reflect what they wanted to do and would directly impact the mission by being more or less efficient.

Im not sure about the transit time to get to mars, but there would still be things to do en-route - especially for mission control.

When they land on mars they have tasks to perform (least of which is staying alive) and missions to perform.

Most importantly, the teams can interact and see how the other is progressing (in a kind of peak over the fence kind of way), and when they reach mars the teams, if they are there at the same time, will be able to interact with each other, maybe help each other, maybe sabotage other teams. One team might help out anothers mission control if theirs fails or has communication problems etc.

If it looks good enough as well, you might even be able to splice the whole thing together and make short films of their eforts.

This version is obviously a little less 'realistic' but would maintain the basic mission structure it would just give the players more control and responsibility over their fates. And obviously give everything a potentially needed competitive edge.

I can see teams registering a week before game start, then 10 teams all racing to build their rockets and fly them to mars over a couple of months. total mission time would of course be important.

I seriously think this is a great concept.

All the technical information is there for you to base the game on. Its not going to be based on science fiction, so you can litterally incorporate every detail properly, which will be a big buzz for those of us who will notice it. And for those players when they come out, and think that maybe mars exploration might be quite cool, there is all this information on the web that is proving that we can actually do, in real life, what they just did in the game!

I wouldnt say it is wasted at all!

Just because this particular group advocates a short mission time doesnt mean that the anti-matter propulsion technology they show isnt a god send!

They probably only give such a short mission time in order to highlight the extremely short transit time made possible by the technology.

The truth is that such a short transit time (6 weeks) would solve all of NASAs problems with getting to mars - the only real technological problem we have is dealing with the trip there and back. Radiation and the health impact of zero-gravity would both be all but eliminated by eliminating much of the potentially hazardous time actually spent in space!

Bottom line - its a great technology that will very likely revolutionise space transportation when it is eventually realised.

I see youve gone for a starting bid of $500. Very sneaky 

Im sorry, my bad. Its cwegner.

I have no usefull skills to offer you in programming, but i think its an excellent idea, and would be more than enthusiastic to help beta-test. A lot of mods were made using the original HL engine, many of which proved to be enourmously popular. You could definately be onto a winning idea here, one that could bring the bug for mars exploration to the masses!

Keep me (and us) updated and f you need any help just let me know!

maybe i spoke to soon........

Mars Trip Not on Political Radar - Wired News

Although, reading between the lines from what the spokesman says, is it that theyre not interested in going to mars right now, or that theyre not being told to be interested in going to mars right now (as in i-would-if-i-could-but-the-boss-hasnt-given-the-go-ahead-yet-but-might-do-soon-hint-hint)

hmmmmm

The CAIB report suggesting NASA needs a 'compelling mission requiring human pressence in space', public interest in mars is at its highest in over a decade due to the combination of its close approach and the 4 missions currently en-route and due to arrive at the beginning of next year, more societies and groups than ever before pushing for increased human exploration, X-prize to be won in the first half of next year (fingers crossed), i swear if america doesnt make a commitment now or in the near future to put people on mars, they never will!

We really are building up to something over the next year, (SpaceX are launching falcon at the end of the year too) commercial spaceflight and public interest in space are both about to take off, the goverment must reallise this, and hopefully they will respond with positive action.

The dark side of the moon only provides a bonus for radio telescopes.

Its called the 'dark side' because we never see it, rater than because light never falls on it. A lunar observatory could quite happily sit near trhe 'rim' in view of earth for transmitting data and but still having lots of sky to look at that isnt actually obstructed by the ever-present earth.

The bonus of sighting a telescope on the moon or another lareg body is that you dont need gyroscopes for it to work out what direction it is pointing in or keep it pointing in the right direction - gyroscopes simply dont last long enough and fail after a couple of years.

yeah, thats the one i've been checking. But the site hasn't been updated in months!

Just wondering if anyone had heard anything about it being cancelled or delayed!

lol

There wont be that many people on mars by MY 50 (assuming MY 0 is first landing), therell still probably be only one real colony, with a spattering of small outposts.

But hey, im no party pooper, i get the idea.

What about skiing/snowboarding events on artificially created  carbon-dioxide powder snow. No chance of it melting at least! Of course you ll need some pretty tough and flexible pressure suits, but it will be MY 50!

Im not sure how feasible the track events might be?!?!?!

All the field events!

hmmm
Ill have a better think about it then get back.

This is the basis of quantum theory. Basically it has been found through various exeriments that light displays both wave-like properties and particle like properties, this at one time sparked a heated debate over which it was, particle or wave, until quantum theory came along and said both and neither, in other words wave-particle duality.

I could go into detail, but its been a couple of years and i would probably mess up a detail somewhere and confuse you. Itll be in any university level chemistry book you can find.

Suffice to say that light displays some properties of waves and some properties of particles, for instance it has momentum, but not mass. Such is the quantum world.