: Sea Wasp
: My claim is that the two are relatively equally
: reachable. More supplies does translate to more COST, but not more
: technical difficulty.

A longer coast phase *does* translate to more technical difficulty.

: My other claim is that there's much more worthwhile to use/get ON Mars
: than there is on the Moon, such that it's not really worthwhile to GO
: to the Moon if your actual intent is to end up on Mars. I.e., the
: Moon is NOT a stepping-stone to Mars, it's a side trip with no real
: use.

Building infrastructure on the moon (and other near-earth locations)
is worthwhile if your goal is to make regular trips to mars. If you
aren't going to make regular trips, I don't see the "use/get" thing.

Yes, yes, I realize that you contest that infrastrucre on the moon is
worthwhile, because of the 2x(2.5km/s) delta-v required to reach it,
among other issues. But for a sizeable extra-atmosphere presense, it beats
the alternatives, naict.


Wayne Throop http://sheol.org/throopw