.. will require very-high reliability, yes? And the availability of reliable and capable repair equipment. AND, the survivability of reliable and capable technicians .. and so on, until a type of critical success point is reached when reliable self-sustaining manufacture takes off, on Mars ..
So yes, Mars Direct, and ultimate colonization, is a great idea, and viable. But just getting there and back would be a miracle with our present capacities IMHO .. and as I keep saying, more to the point: we want to go there NOW to EXPLORE, not to colonize, and so I don't think we should be selling the colonizing aspect big-time right now. One thing at a time. Face it Mark, we barely know the planet, it will be a miracle to survive there for 18 months with our present state of ignorance. Unfortunately, that's the only realistic crewed option, if you discount the idiotic alternative of staying there for a day or two .. however, I'm just saying, don't underestimate the unknown dangers, and don't focus too much on the distant future as a motivation for present action.
Space/Science » in reply to That's The Problem With Setting Your Sites On A Resource Poor Destination
technology for in-situ survival on Mars
The whole thread (51 posts)
- Reasons
- An anti-imperialist view
- Our purpose to expand into space is to propogate and protect Gaia
- Very interesting thoughts. Thanks
- I'm sure you're with me on this
- Not so much "manifest destiny" as biological imperative
- You really do suprise me
- Going To Mars Does Not Require Any More Than Going To The Moon
- You make a good point...
- You really do suprise me