In article m,
says...

On 13-04-09 01:09, David E. Powell wrote:
What a schmuck.


I have not watched the video yet.

However, considering that a trip to the moon as very little in common
with a trip to Mars, I would say that not going to the moon may in fact
make sense if the goal of eventually goingt o Mars remains.

The ISS is in fact more important for a trip to mars than going to the
moon as it would be a model (and testbed for technologies) for the
expedition ship to and from mars.

Having said this, I could see tests being made of a trip to slingshot
around the moon and return to earth to test aerobraking to insert a ship
into orbit, and/or test the martian lander.

But landing on moon would not bring much as the moon as no atmosphere
(can't test parachutes) and can't test aerobraking.

Can't even test spacesuits. Specifically, Apollo (and shuttle, and US-
ISS) spacesuits all use water (for cooling. This works because it is
essentially vented to vacuum where it freezes and sublimates. This
won't work well, or at all, on Mars due to the thin atmosphere.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_...lation_Garment

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer