Space/Science — HabitableZone

Space/Science » in reply to Is This NASA's Problem?

There is no disagreement
Gary — (archived)

Mark said:

>3) This is also where I disagree with Gary on a related infrastructure issue. I
>don't think we can commit to Martian colonization and cycler spacecraft until we
>send some missions of exploration there. I also think we need CATS for
>colonization.

There maybe no disagreement here. There would have to be initial exploration missions (small crews with the option of return). One could not assume the right location for a Martian colony had been found until pioneers had gone there and performed an extensive survey. Obviously there would have to be abundant near surface ice, metal ore deposits and sufficient nearby minerals to support human physiology. Where Mark might disagree with me: I think we should start the project with the optimistic assumption that we will find a suitable colonization site on Mars (Mars does have the same surface area as the contential surface area of the Earth). Their are technological issues that would take at least a decade to unravel, e.g. the actual vehicles to land the colonists on Mars are nontrivial to design. Also there is a whole array of basic technologies that would have to be reinvented in a Martian context, e.g. how do you smelt steel when you don't have coal, free oxygen or the usual materials for fluxes? By the way, this reinventing of basic technologies is probably where the real payoff for a Mars colony would come from. Private enterprise by its very nature is too focused on short term profit to perform significant R&D investment. Imagine the commercial spinoffs when every single basic technology must be reinvestigated by bright people who by definition must be "looking outside of the box".

Gary

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (44 posts)