backtop


Print 11 comment(s) - last by The Raven.. on Apr 13 at 11:29 AM


  (Source: scienceblogs.com)
NASA plans to explore Mars sometime in the 2030's

NASA recently announced that it has committed to a manned mission to Mars at an unspecified point in the future, and that the International Space Station will be a crucial part of reaching that goal.

Charles Bolden, NASA administrator, announced the Mars mission to a group of educators, scientists, astronauts and industry members at the International Space Station and Mars Conference on April 6. The conference is a two-day event that is presented by Explore Mars at George Washington University. Explore Mars promotes the search for technology that aids in the exploration of Mars. 

Bolden discussed the use of the International Space Station as a research and testing facility for future Mars expeditions, noting that such a voyage to our neighbor in the solar system would serve as "inspiration for a whole new generation." 

"I know my granddaughters will be witnessing humans arriving at Mars," said Bolden. "Like the President, I believe such a journey is possible in my lifetime. But what I know today is that we have an amazing engineering resource in space right now - the International Space Station. and we're moving out on the innovation and technological breakthroughs that are required to get us to our neighboring planet."

The International Space Station was built in 1998, and was the result of five space agencies representing 15 countries. This space station took $100 billion to construct and is the largest structure made in space by humans. 

"Over the next 10 years, we'll continue to collaborate with other nations to live and work together in space, and perform cutting edge research and technology demonstrations that are critical to eventual exploration into deep space with humans," said Bolden. "The ISS is the most realistic analog we have to test life support and other technologies, ensuring they function in space, and most importantly, that they are reliable.

"Any mission to Mars is likely to be a global effort. The ISS is a blend of goals among the participating space agencies, and it is truly beautiful in that regard alone."

Bolden mentioned that NASA plans to explore Mars sometime in the 2030's, but plan to travel to an asteroid as soon as 2015. In addition, NASA hopes to keep the International Space Station open until at least 2020. 




Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Never cut NASA
By ranran on 4/9/2011 7:46:09 PM , Rating: 5
Please, let's all remember that the NASA budget subsists on LESS THAN 1% of the total federal budget. Cuts are important, but NASA and a healthy space program are essential to this country's future, 'lest we turn so inward thinking that all we do is gaze at our figurative belly button lint instead of looking ahead while the rest of the industrialized nations leave us in the dust.

I sure am glad Columbus was allowed to go on that cruise of his...




RE: Never cut NASA
By The Raven on 4/13/2011 11:29:50 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Please, let's all remember that the NASA budget subsists on LESS THAN 1% of the total federal budget.

This is everyone's excuse for wasting money. At home, in business, in gov't. But at home and in business this sort of thing is certainly cut when we find that we can't afford it through financial evaluation. In gov't, it always seems to come down to this as an argument to keep crap. Well I'm no rocket scientist, but it adds up when your gov't is as big and bloated as ours.

So if you want to keep NASA around, help cut all the other crap programs that the gov't blows our money on. And I'm not just talking about the <1% of the budget types, though again, that is no excuse. I'm talking about 'defense' spending and the ponzi scheme known as social security.

No offense, but it is just that everyone uses that <1% crap excuse as an reason to argue that,"Oh since it is less than <1% of the budget we can still afford it." We should be hearing things like, "It is too bad that it has gotten to the point where we need to cut NASA. Now let's bring down social security so we can once again afford it!"

But at this point "Never cut NASA" is an asinine demand. I can't believe how many out of reality people agree with you. Well actually I can, since that is how we got into this mess.
quote:
while the rest of the industrialized nations leave us in the dust

Who has terraformed Mars? Who is even close? How are we left in the dust if we shut the program down for a few years? Earthlings haven't done JS with the moon since we touched down there. Hell, we've haven't done JS with Nevada!
Why do you think it is such a priority. I certainly can understand some importance and appreciate things that NASA has done. But to stress that it should be one of our top priorities is crazy.
quote:
I sure am glad Columbus was allowed to go on that cruise of his...

Why? You have a problem with Europe, Africa, or wherever your family is from? You hate the indigenous peoples of North and South America? You don't know that the first European to land in North America was Leif Eriksson (who did it on his own dime BTW)? Come on man, this land is great and I love it, but Columbus' 'discovery' was far from all roses (unless you were Spain).

At this point we know how to get into space and land on whatever we want. No one is leaving us in the dust (even if that was definitely a bad thing). Let's pump the brakes and wait until the ROI is MUCH greater. And certainly when we just can't afford it.


Commitment
By drycrust3 on 4/9/2011 2:16:03 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
NASA recently announced

I see that it is "NASA announced" and not "The President announced". The reason NASA got the funding to go to the moon was because President Kennedy committed America to going there, and especially that they would do it in ten years. This lack of commitment from the US President means the mission will have to be done within the normal budget constraints, and it is likely the total amount of US Government funding to NASA will be cut considerably within the next 30 years.
While sending pilots to the moon was impressive, I've heard it said that the only mission with value was the one where a geologist was sent.
A much more affordable idea would be to send robots that are able to move around more efficiently than the current lot, and have vision that was much more comparable to a human. That way, there is no moral obligation to make the trip a return trip, a one way mission on a cheap "no frills" rocket is acceptable. Also, it won't need to drop in to the ISS, it can shoot straight past.
Then if something goes wrong, such as the landing is a disaster (as happened to the European robot a few years back), NASA will be able to do their public hand wringing, say they are very sorry for wasting so much American taxpayers money, do a quick inquiry, fix the few obvious flaws, and then take another robot off the shelf and pop it on the next rocket going that way.
This way, not just a few geologists, but lots of geologists (as well as the rest of us) can see Mars as it really is.




RE: Commitment
By Guspaz on 4/11/2011 12:13:53 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
This lack of commitment from the US President means the mission will have to be done within the normal budget constraints, and it is likely the total amount of US Government funding to NASA will be cut considerably within the next 30 years.


Even at the height of the Apollo program, the budget hit a high point of $33.5 billion USD in 2007 dollars (in 1965). Apollo 17 was staged at a time when NASA's budget was $15.1 billion USD in 2007 dollars.

NASA's 2010 budget was $17.8 billion USD in 2007 dollars. That's right, their budget is currently higher than it was when they were still landing astronauts on the moon.

Consider that NASA can save an enormous amount of money contracting out launch services to companies like SpaceX (who can put payload into orbit at less than ten percent the cost of NASA themselves), and that $17.8 billion budget can probably be stretched pretty far. Certainly, it's far more than would be needed to land a man on the moon again.


RE: Commitment
By zixin on 4/11/2011 12:41:57 PM , Rating: 2
What you forgot is that back in the 70's the mission to the Moon was the bulk of NASA. Now most of that money goes to the ISS and there are now more robotic exploration than back in the 70's. Also, SpaceX maybe able to put payload into orbit, but they are not rated for human travel. Getting that certification is going to raise the cost by a lot.


Hmm..
By TEAMSWITCHER on 4/9/11, Rating: -1
RE: Hmm..
By thorr2 on 4/9/2011 5:46:09 PM , Rating: 2
While I agree that spending cuts are necessary, I don't feel that space exploration is the place to make the cuts. When we get to the asteroid, it will be totally awesome and make me proud to be a part of history. You don't get to watch since you think it is a waste of money. :-P


RE: Hmm..
By iceonfire1 on 4/11/2011 2:10:43 AM , Rating: 1
Troll much, "Teamswitcher"?


RE: Hmm..
By Iketh on 4/11/2011 5:34:57 AM , Rating: 1
you're breed will die with the rest of you 1000 years from now as the rest of us will spread throughout the universe

keep acting like you're perfectly safe on this planet without a need for an alternative


RE: Hmm..
By The Raven on 4/11/2011 3:13:59 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
as the rest of us will spread throughout the universe

Like a plague...
It would be great if you and your out of reality types colonize Mars, only to be smashed by an asteroid.

So much for safety.


RE: Hmm..
By Mogglewump on 4/11/2011 9:43:10 AM , Rating: 1
I think the important word here might be 'International'. It may come as a surprise, but it's not actually an American space station but rather belongs to all of the countries that invested in it and assisted in it's construction.

Once the shuttle's finished in July it'll be predominantly Russian rockets which go up to resupply and rotate personnel.


"Spreading the rumors, it's very easy because the people who write about Apple want that story, and you can claim its credible because you spoke to someone at Apple." -- Investment guru Jim Cramer
Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki