"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
dakotatelephone...


Jorge R. Frank wrote:

The moon has one enormous advantage: three day return trajectory from
Earth.

That means you can learn long-duration planetary surface operations on
the moon without it killing you like on Mars.

You get a major leak in your spacesuit and either place will be just as
fatal inside of ten minutes.
You seem to be suggesting that the majority of the major health problems
encountered will be serious enough to demand evacuation to Earth, but not
serious enough to kill you inside of three days.
You also have solar storms to contend with on either world, so you had
better bring shovels to bury your habitat if you are intending to spend
much time there.
Then there's spacesuit design... on the Moon, assuming you only go
exploring for the two-week Lunar day, the big problem is not getting
cooked by the heat of the sunlight; if you want to go out at night also,
now you need a suit that has a major ability to keep you warm. That could
well be two entirely different suit designs.
On Mars you will need a suit to keep you warm, not cool you down, but at
least you can probably get away with a single suit design for day and
night.

While what you say is true, failures in spacecraft systems might be an area
where a three day return would keep you alive (e.g. Apollo 13) but a six
month plus return trip. The US is just now starting to learn how to do long
term life support aboard ISS. Given the Russian experience with their
equipment, there is reason to be leery of trusting such equipment on a Mars
mission.

The moon is like a weekend campout within an hour's walking distance of your
car while Mars is like hiking the Appalachian Trail over a period of months.
Note also that hiking the Appalachian Trail really wouldn't be possible
without frequent resupplies (buying supplies in towns or mail drops of
supplies).

Jeff
--
"Many things that were acceptable in 1958 are no longer acceptable today.
My own standards have changed too." -- Freeman Dyson