I was thinking about Mars as a manned destination, and my feelings are that
if you are goin to go there, you don't really want a set foot and return
mission. There are several reasons for this. Firstly at the current state of
the art on what happens to the body in microgravity, you will have some
weeks on landing when the humans will have to just build up their muscles
etc in order to do any work, thus you would perhaps need to pan for the
minimum time which is about two years or so on the surface. So first you
would launch your habitat with automated food and resource provision on
board and a spares store. You would need to get both on the surface and
working. Then you launch your humans. The risk here is of problems that
might be unfixable occurring on you habitat while humans in transit or on
the manned craft. You cannot resupply at these distances, so most problems
need to be fixable or the systems so robust they can cope with failures on a
massive scale.
The other problem of course is that you need to make some decision on
return. Do you provide a method or in effect send families to stay there.
I suspect in our current cultural state, we have to have the return, even
if crew rotation is proposed. thus at some point one needs to have the fuel
there to get a fair sized payload into orbit and way from mars. Not an easy
task.
Its a lot of work, and a lot of hardware and a lot of money.
Brian
--
Brian Gaff -
bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
"JF Mezei" <
jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote in message
news:4ed3042e$0$4786$c3e8da3$1069...@news.astraweb.com...