It's a pipe dream and theoretically possible, but given that yes.
In the event we ever find a reason to stay on the moon then it'll probably be tried but I doubt it's ever be cost effective to build a station on the moon for that purpose.
Space stuff...
- Thread starter pete01
- Start date
In the event we ever find a reason to stay on the moon then it'll probably be tried but I doubt it's ever be cost effective to build a station on the moon for that purpose.
And heavy.
Very heavy in terms of energy needed to move it out of our gravitational pull and beyond.
With today's tech? Including fuel for the journey.
Mars - pipe dream.
I thought part of the justification for the current missions was partly that.
The ISS one weighs in around 2.5 tons, no idea if it can be done better this century.
There is very little that hasn't already been demonstrated that is needed for a Mars mission.
And for fuel you're missing the worst part, you need more fuel to launch everything back again.
It's technically possible, but impractically expensive. Even with the reusable super heavy lifting vehicles being developed it's tens of Billions or hundreds of Billions. Think Iran war cost.
Yeah but no one actually believes the current missions will happen as written.
NASA plans missions knowing they'll get canned 9 times out of 10. They're just trying to build a justification to advance the technology in more or less the right direction so when the current plans are dropped the next set can get a bit closer.
Like I already said : #36.
Keeping someone alive on mars : not likely.
Getting them back alive : forget it.
Even if you overcame the money issue, of which you'd need mountains of the stuff.
Keeping someone alive on mars isn't that much harder than doing it in space or the moon and we've been doing that for decades.
It's mostly a matter of scale and lack of any purpose.
We haven't been keeping anyone alive on the moon for anything more than a few days.
And the space stations are all protected by the earth's magnetosphere.
I'll stick with my views on this, until there's a significant change in circumstances.
What's a little cancer in exchange for landing on Mars?
People can survive a lot of radiation when given over a long period. We don't have good data on it because it's unethical to just inject plutonium into random people without their consent.
Last edited:
About 7000x that of the moon landings.
Pipe dream. And not just because of the money. Mars is just too far to transport a human.
They only beat the 50 year old record by 4,000 miles. In a spacecraft travelling at 25,000mph that was less than ten minutes worth of extra travel. Only thing better was the quality of the sound and vision in the capsule. Big deal!
Well im impressed anyway
Bet you 100 quid it happens before 2050.....
That's a sobering thought. 66 years.
