Space/Science — HabitableZone

Space/Science » in reply to Lunar options; & other architectures

I agree with your analysis
Stars In My Eyes — (archived)

It's a false dilemma, Luna OR Mars, as if both are equally accessible and affordable. Any Mars mission is going to cost at least 10x a lunar expedition with travel times at least 30x greater. In terms of energy, hardware and money required, the debate should be Luna or NEOs first. The two are much more comparable in terms of accessibility and cost. As you point out, the cost of a slow flyby etc of a NEO would not be much more than a single shuttle launch. An analysis comparing Luna, NEOs and Mars would conclude NEOs are the most doable.

However, most of us still suffer from "planetary bias" and think we must go into space in order to land somewhere else inside a gravity well. Space agencies are no exception. No government or corporate entity is seriously looking at a manned NEO expedition scenario even though it IS afforable and doable NOW. :-( Meanwhile, the rate of NEO detection continues to accelerate. Sooner or later, an object with a very favorable delta-V, inclination and spectral class is going to be discovered early enough to provide adequate preparation time to fund, design, develop and launch a manned mission.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (51 posts)