The first human mars mission?

As the reply posts to an earlier post stated there has been no metal
bent for a Mars mission, or even the crew short listed. Has there
been any preliminary designs on the lander craft, or how it's going to
get to Mars yet, or has the total work done on a Mars mission been
restricted to the work done by the Mars Society, with NASA
contributing nothing as yet except for some pretty animated movies,
and pretty pictures of martian astronouts on Mars?


Christopher
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
"Kites rise highest against
the wind - not with it."
Winston Churchill

In article ,
Christopher wrote:
...Has there
been any preliminary designs on the lander craft, or how it's going to
get to Mars yet...

*Lots* of designs. Lots of paper and viewgraphs. None of which have any
likely relation to anything that might happen.

NASA has *no plans* for a manned Mars expedition. None. It's completely
beyond their planning horizon. So there are no "preliminary designs":
that would imply a commitment, with specific plans to turn those
preliminary designs into definitive designs. There is no such commitment.

What NASA has, is design studies. A large pile of them; some of the ones
on the bottom of the pile are from the early 1960s. They might, or might
not, influence any real design that might someday be done.

or has the total work done on a Mars mission been
restricted to the work done by the Mars Society...

The Mars Society's work has been at the same level: design studies.
(Yes, they have built and experimented with mockups of some of the studied
designs. NASA has been known to do that too.)
--
MOST launched 1015 EDT 30 June, separated 1046, | Henry Spencer
first ground-station pass 1651, all nominal! |

NASA's first big study was in fact a manned Mars mission flyby one. EMPIRE
(Early Manned Planetary Interplanetary Roundtrip Expeditions) started in 1962.

The Mars Society has little money and is doing what we can do with it to move
the possiblity of manned missions to Mars beyond viewgraphs and studies.

--Chris Vancil

In article ,
HAESSIG Frédéric Pierre Tamatoa wrote:
NASA has *no plans* for a manned Mars expedition. None. It's completely
beyond their planning horizon.

ESA has one. Aurora. It calls for a manned mission in 2020 or 2030 ( I can't
remember which ). The problem is that only a very preliminary part has been
aproved.

Which means that no, ESA doesn't have one. No *plan* for manned Mars
expeditions has been approved by ESA. The approved part of Aurora is for
unmanned exploration, based on certain assumptions, including a vague hope
that a manned expedition might take place somewhere off beyond the
planning horizon.
--
MOST launched 1015 EDT 30 June, separated 1046, | Henry Spencer
first ground-station pass 1651, all nominal! |

"HAESSIG Fr?d?ric Pierre Tamatoa" wrote:

Henry Spencer a ?crit dans le message :
...
In article ,
Christopher wrote:
...Has there
been any preliminary designs on the lander craft, or how it's going to
get to Mars yet...

*Lots* of designs. Lots of paper and viewgraphs. None of which have any
likely relation to anything that might happen.

NASA has *no plans* for a manned Mars expedition. None. It's completely
beyond their planning horizon.

ESA has one. Aurora. It calls for a manned mission in 2020 or 2030 ( I can't
remember which ). The problem is that only a very preliminary part has been
aproved.


I think 2030 is slightly optimistic given existing data. But sure, you can
build a realistic if slow-winded process of getting there this way.

--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++

HAESSIG Frédéric Pierre Tamatoa wrote:

ESA has one. Aurora. It calls for a manned mission in 2020 or 2030 (
I can't remember which ). The problem is that only a very preliminary
part has been aproved.

ESAs Aurora program is a perfect example of how the manned exploration
of Mars should *not* be initiated. As Robert Zubrin shows in "The Case
for Mars", we have the necessary technology today - there is no need to
"develop new technologies"; this technology development process is not
the way to go to Mars - in fact, it is a great way of avoiding going to
Mars. We don't need "technology demonstrating missions".

- Just do it.

Personally, I don't see Aurora as the way to Mars - I see it as an
obstacle, blocking our way to Mars.

--
Steen Eiler Jørgensen
"No, I don't think I'll ever get over Macho Grande.
Those wounds run...pretty deep."

On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 17:14:47 GMT, (Henry Spencer)
wrote:

In article ,
Christopher wrote:
...Has there
been any preliminary designs on the lander craft, or how it's going to
get to Mars yet...

*Lots* of designs. Lots of paper and viewgraphs. None of which have any
likely relation to anything that might happen.

NASA has *no plans* for a manned Mars expedition. None. It's completely
beyond their planning horizon. So there are no "preliminary designs":
that would imply a commitment, with specific plans to turn those
preliminary designs into definitive designs. There is no such commitment.

What NASA has, is design studies. A large pile of them; some of the ones
on the bottom of the pile are from the early 1960s. They might, or might
not, influence any real design that might someday be done.

or has the total work done on a Mars mission been
restricted to the work done by the Mars Society...

The Mars Society's work has been at the same level: design studies.
(Yes, they have built and experimented with mockups of some of the studied
designs. NASA has been known to do that too.)

Thanks for that-and the other posters-looks like it'll be 2050 at
least before we go, and I'll probably be dead by then.


Christopher
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
"Kites rise highest against
the wind - not with it."
Winston Churchill

Christopher wrote:

Thanks for that-and the other posters-looks like it'll be 2050 at
least before we go, and I'll probably be dead by then.

Why 2050? One of the reasons, the manned missions to Mars have taken so
long to materialize, is that evolution in space travel has largely been
seen as "automatic". In the sixties, we thought we'd probably have lunar
bases around 1980 and manned Mars missions around 1995. Why did we think
that? In 1985, we thought we'd have manned missions to Mars by 2000.
What did we base that on? Now you say 2050, but based on what?

Nothing happens by itself. Nothing just comes into being. Someone has to
say "let's do it!" and then do it.

(This isn't meant as an advertisement, but seriously: support the Mars
Society. As I view it, it's our best chance to show the politicians that
we think something ought to be done.)

--
Steen Eiler Jørgensen
"No, I don't think I'll ever get over Macho Grande.
Those wounds run...pretty deep."

Steen Eiler J?rgensen wrote:
HAESSIG Fr?d?ric Pierre Tamatoa wrote:

ESA has one. Aurora. It calls for a manned mission in 2020 or 2030 (
I can't remember which ). The problem is that only a very preliminary
part has been aproved.

ESAs Aurora program is a perfect example of how the manned exploration
of Mars should *not* be initiated. As Robert Zubrin shows in "The Case
for Mars", we have the necessary technology today - there is no need to
"develop new technologies"; this technology development process is not
the way to go to Mars - in fact, it is a great way of avoiding going to
Mars. We don't need "technology demonstrating missions".

We do? I don't think so. Even sending unmanned simple probes to Mars is
still problematic and nobody has done a sample return mission yet. Just
becuase peopel have a dream of a Mars mission doesn't really make it
possible or even make it neccessary.

Also note that a high-profile failed manned mission will set manned space
exploration back for decades.


- Just do it.

Personally, I don't see Aurora as the way to Mars - I see it as an
obstacle, blocking our way to Mars.


So build the rocket and go?

--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++

"Steen Eiler Jørgensen" wrote in message
...
Christopher wrote:

Thanks for that-and the other posters-looks like it'll be 2050 at
least before we go, and I'll probably be dead by then.

Why 2050? One of the reasons, the manned missions to Mars have taken so
long to materialize, is that evolution in space travel has largely been
seen as "automatic". In the sixties, we thought we'd probably have lunar
bases around 1980 and manned Mars missions around 1995. Why did we think
that? In 1985, we thought we'd have manned missions to Mars by 2000.
What did we base that on? Now you say 2050, but based on what?

Nothing happens by itself. Nothing just comes into being. Someone has to
say "let's do it!" and then do it.

(This isn't meant as an advertisement, but seriously: support the Mars
Society. As I view it, it's our best chance to show the politicians that
we think something ought to be done.)

No, it's not. The Mars Society will be 100% irrelevant whe the
ultima decision is made to do a manned Mars mission. It's just a
way for people to get together and feel good about something.

Our best chance is to wait for a Presidential candidate who
vocally advocates a manned Mars mission, and then vote for
them.

Bruce