Interesting, but the abstract ignores the issue of longer exposure to low g one of the great boogeymen standing in the way of missions to Mars and supposed justifcations for going to the Moon first. To prevent a much longer exposure to low g the misison profile would have to include only a short stay. Those types of missions (opposition versus conjunction class)actually increase cosmic ray exposure another boogeyman of Mars missions. Teleoperation doesn't seem like such a big deal if it's short term. I can see this as a precurser mission, but it seems to have a whole lot less relative value to me than Apollo 8 given the risks of such a long mission for so little payback. I need to read what Buzz has to say on the issue to get an idea of why a diehard Mars fan would actually support this.
Phobos would be far better however than our moon as a place to look for impact debris from the mother planet. It would probably be much more like antarctica than looking for meteorites at random elswehere which is what I think looking for Earthly debris on the Moon would be. The alternative though is simply target the type of bedrock you are interested in on Mars.
Regards,
Mark
Space/Science » in reply to A synopsis of why Phobos makes a good platform for exploring Mars
re: A synopsis of why Phobos makes a good platform for exploring Mars
The whole thread (59 posts)
- Panel says not enough funds for Mars or the Moon
- Thanks To Everyone For A Great Thread
- Forget the Moon. Forget Mars.
- re: Forget the Moon. Forget Mars.
- Forget Lifeless Rocks?
- Whats wrong with geology?
- NASA's focus on Exobiology is turning out to be a pact with the devil
- This "lifeless rocks" attitude is one reason why NASA is in the trouble it is in now
- Whats wrong with geology?
- Just how bad...
- NEA and Phobos missions...
