NASA to release findings relating to Martian atmosphere on.....

hippy240980

Member
Maybe they found a button
 

safcalibur

Distinguished Member
I didn't want to start a new thread so thought I'd resurrect this one.

Did anyone see a BBC four documentary, I'm sure it was a repeat I saw as it was on at some ridiculous time early this morning but it was about how preparation is going for the first manned mission to Mars. They say it's provisionally set for 2033 (I'd be 51!!) but it was amazing seeing just how much work is going into planning and hopefully executing it.

From the challenges of spending more than a year or two in space and on Mars to having enough water to drink (there is research ongoing about recycling urine to use as water as well as looking to extract water from solid waste), how to survive solar flares and their resulting radiation, the psychological effects of being in a confined space with the same people for so long to actually landing on Mars itself which is one of the biggest challenges and then if we get that far, to survive for approx a year on Mars!!

They showed that there are dust storms that occur on Mars that can potentially go on for months and engulf the surface and that some of the particles in Mars area carcinogens so the space suits are being redesigned.

It was incredible seeing the amount of research that's going on here on earth and the number of teams involved looking at every little stage of the mission.

The one thing they still haven't figured out is how to get the astronauts back home! It got me thinking that we've done some amazing things in terms of space travel and the curiosity landing on Mars had got to be right up there. If we manage to send a manned mission up there in my lifetime I'd be in awe.

Apparently according to the Dr that landed curiosity, we could have a manned expedition to Mars within ten years if we wanted to but it would be at the expense of the astronauts safety, but herein lies the problem, at what point do we say the benefits outweigh the risk and give that mission the green light? I know I wouldn't be brave enough to be amongst the first in that rocket going to Mars having what I assume would be a one way ticket.

Just curious as to what others thought and whether you think a manned mission well ever be possible? I don't have a lot of knowledge about this sort of stuff, relativity and time and time shifts really do bend my mind and I had to watch the movie interstellar more than once and even then never really got it! However, I find space, space travel and discovering our universe absolutely fascinating. Watching that documentary really made me think how small we are in the grand scheme of things and how much there is out there to be discovered and I've for nothing but respect and admiration for those people that do it! :)

Edit: it was the horizon man on Mars documentary which was first shown in 2014 so it's a couple of years old! Still bloody interesting though :)
 
Last edited:

Tempest

Distinguished Member
Sorry, but as VR advances more and more and humanoid robots (DARPA?) etc, advance more and more the point of sending a human is IMHO more and more pointless.

You have all the problems of keeping a human alive, and illness along the way, accidents? medical supplies, food, poo air, all of that.....

When we sent men to the moon, yup sure a man was the only thing that could do the job.

But at the speed we are improving VR now and, the Darpa etc robots.

It will get to a point where someone will wear a full VR suit and headgear, be all connected up and be able to walk around a large open studio on earth, whilst the robot walks around on Mars etc.
Without needing air, heating, cooling, foot etc.

Other than the fact we have transported an organic human to the planet, everyone else would be worse than doing it virtually and limit everything you can do.
the robot/robots could be up there for a year or years even?
 

smallclanger

Well-known Member
Sorry, but as VR advances more and more and humanoid robots (DARPA?) etc, advance more and more the point of sending a human is IMHO more and more pointless.

You have all the problems of keeping a human alive, and illness along the way, accidents? medical supplies, food, poo air, all of that.....

When we sent men to the moon, yup sure a man was the only thing that could do the job.

But at the speed we are improving VR now and, the Darpa etc robots.

It will get to a point where someone will wear a full VR suit and headgear, be all connected up and be able to walk around a large open studio on earth, whilst the robot walks around on Mars etc.
Without needing air, heating, cooling, foot etc.

Other than the fact we have transported an organic human to the planet, everyone else would be worse than doing it virtually and limit everything you can do.
the robot/robots could be up there for a year or years even?

There is a big problem to solve first, the time delay at the moment would make that impossible.
 

lucasisking

Distinguished Member
Sorry, but as VR advances more and more and humanoid robots (DARPA?) etc, advance more and more the point of sending a human is IMHO more and more pointless.

You have all the problems of keeping a human alive, and illness along the way, accidents? medical supplies, food, poo air, all of that.....

When we sent men to the moon, yup sure a man was the only thing that could do the job.

But at the speed we are improving VR now and, the Darpa etc robots.

It will get to a point where someone will wear a full VR suit and headgear, be all connected up and be able to walk around a large open studio on earth, whilst the robot walks around on Mars etc.
Without needing air, heating, cooling, foot etc.

Other than the fact we have transported an organic human to the planet, everyone else would be worse than doing it virtually and limit everything you can do.
the robot/robots could be up there for a year or years even?

Sending robots might be practical for achieving technical tasks, but the real point is to expand human exploration. Our imperative to explore, to see, to feel, and to experience something first hand. No, we have to go. Sending machinery isn't enough.
 

safcalibur

Distinguished Member
Sending robots might be practical for achieving technical tasks, but the real point is to expand human exploration. Our imperative to explore, to see, to feel, and to experience something first hand. No, we have to go. Sending machinery isn't enough.
Agreed. Sending robots might be the 'safer' option but is really about us as humans physically getting there and actually exploring, feeling, observing with our own senses. Plus the actual challenge and overcoming it of getting there would improve our knowledge and understanding of how the universe works better than just being able to send a robot. Imagine the learning and findings that would come out of getting a bunch of astronauts to Mars, land, explore, live and safely return. That would be an immense achievement.

According to the documentary it would take an international effort to make this happen. Imagine that, the whole world working towards a common goal, how unifying as a species would that be.
 

reiteration

Distinguished Member
Agreed. Sending robots might be the 'safer' option but is really about us as humans physically getting there and actually exploring, feeling, observing with our own senses. Plus the actual challenge and overcoming it of getting there would improve our knowledge and understanding of how the universe works better than just being able to send a robot. Imagine the learning and findings that would come out of getting a bunch of astronauts to Mars, land, explore, live and safely return. That would be an immense achievement.

According to the documentary it would take an international effort to make this happen. Imagine that, the whole world working towards a common goal, how unifying as a species would that be.

imo the only way there would be a way of unifying humans on earth is if there was a perceived threat of aliens from another world and people seeing how little we actually are...
 

safcalibur

Distinguished Member
imo the only way there would be a way of unifying humans on earth is if there was a perceived threat of aliens from another world and people seeing how little we actually are...
Well I wish they would hurry up and invade already as we need something fast to unite us all! :)
 

Tempest

Distinguished Member
Sending robots might be practical for achieving technical tasks, but the real point is to expand human exploration. Our imperative to explore, to see, to feel, and to experience something first hand. No, we have to go. Sending machinery isn't enough.

So. Are you ruling out non organic lifeforms?
Say in 50, 100 years time we had a "commander data"
No food, no air, can just turn off for the years of travel, would that still not count as good enough?
You say we must see and feel it.
But nor you or I will be the ones seeing and feeling it.

It will be someone else, who will just relate verbally what it's like, together with video footage.
Does the "thing" that's relating the audio/explaining things, need to be another human for the information to be valid for the listener (you and I?)
 

lucasisking

Distinguished Member
So. Are you ruling out non organic lifeforms?
Say in 50, 100 years time we had a "commander data"
No food, no air, can just turn off for the years of travel, would that still not count as good enough?
You say we must see and feel it.
But nor you or I will be the ones seeing and feeling it.

It will be someone else, who will just relate verbally what it's like, together with video footage.
Does the "thing" that's relating the audio/explaining things, need to be another human for the information to be valid for the listener (you and I?)

Who's ruling anything out? I'm just saying the endeavor of exploring the universe is a human one. We send robots in lieu of humans, not instead of.

Lay people don't care about the Mars Opportunity rover. They would care about the first man or woman to step onto the surface of another planet. The value of that -symbolically alone- would be incalculable.

It's also easier for humans to do things. Think how logistically difficult it is to command a rover to move its robotic arm to scoop up a bit of soil. Massive amounts of data being transmitted and relayed to achieve something a toddler could, and with a high chance of failure. An experienced human on the surface however could achieve so much more.

There's really no comparison between a robot exploration and a human one.
 

Indiana Jones

Moderator
Sorry, but as VR advances more and more and humanoid robots (DARPA?) etc, advance more and more the point of sending a human is IMHO more and more pointless.

You have all the problems of keeping a human alive, and illness along the way, accidents? medical supplies, food, poo air, all of that.....

When we sent men to the moon, yup sure a man was the only thing that could do the job.

But at the speed we are improving VR now and, the Darpa etc robots.

It will get to a point where someone will wear a full VR suit and headgear, be all connected up and be able to walk around a large open studio on earth, whilst the robot walks around on Mars etc.
Without needing air, heating, cooling, foot etc.

Other than the fact we have transported an organic human to the planet, everyone else would be worse than doing it virtually and limit everything you can do.
the robot/robots could be up there for a year or years even?

They talk about this in some detail in the extras on The Martian Extended Edition Blu-ray about how the first mission to Mars probably won't land but just go into orbit around Mars or one of the moons and they will conduct surface experiments, construction etc via robots controlled from orbit.

Controller probes/rovers etc directly from Earth isn't practical due to the time delay which can range from 3-21 minutes.
 

IronGiant

Moderator
I'm sure they've thought about this but could you send two (or more ) missions, one with the people in it and unmanned one(s) with the equipment required to come home?
 

aVdub

Distinguished Member
I'm sure they've thought about this but could you send two (or more ) missions, one with the people in it and unmanned one(s) with the equipment required to come home?
One sitting in orbit which could be used for a pod leaving the planet and returned back to earth.
 

imightbewrong

Distinguished Member
Controller probes/rovers etc directly from Earth isn't practical due to the time delay which can range from 3-21 minutes.

I wonder how much the time delay really matters - it's not like anything (other than the equipment) is moving on Mars. You could maybe imagine say:

- Robots go to Mars
- Sets up an 'explorer' with supporting cameras around it.
- Cameras send back to earth a model of the area around the explorer
- Operator on Earth controls the explorer by driving a simulation on Earth and saving the commands
- These are then played into the explorer which executes them within certain tolerances and automated cutoffs
- Cameras re-position
- Repeat (from 2 :) )
 

stunno

Well-known Member
I'm sure they've thought about this but could you send two (or more ) missions, one with the people in it and unmanned one(s) with the equipment required to come home?
I've always thought that it was the fuel for the return journey that caused them the biggest headaches. I wonder why they couldn't send it a year or so early and have it orbiting until it was needed?
 

Tempest

Distinguished Member
Prison Colony on Mars ;)

One way ticket
 

Indiana Jones

Moderator
I'm sure they've thought about this but could you send two (or more ) missions, one with the people in it and unmanned one(s) with the equipment required to come home?

Much like in The Martian where the habitation area and ascent vehicle are sent and assembled on the surface in advance of the human mission so when they arrive they already have everything they need to work/live on the surface and then return to orbit.

I wonder how much the time delay really matters - it's not like anything (other than the equipment) is moving on Mars. You could maybe imagine say:

- Robots go to Mars
- Sets up an 'explorer' with supporting cameras around it.
- Cameras send back to earth a model of the area around the explorer
- Operator on Earth controls the explorer by driving a simulation on Earth and saving the commands
- These are then played into the explorer which executes them within certain tolerances and automated cutoffs
- Cameras re-position
- Repeat (from 2 :) )

Well they have already done tests with astronauts on the space station controlling rovers on Earth so they seem to believe that is the way forward.
 

IronGiant

Moderator
I haven't seen the Martian, looks like one to catch :thumbsup:
 

Indiana Jones

Moderator
I haven't seen the Martian, looks like one to catch :thumbsup:

Oh most definitely, one of my fav films from last year and a glimpse into the future of the challenges a manned mission to Mars could face but thankfully such violent storms are not one of them.
 

imightbewrong

Distinguished Member
Well they have already done tests with astronauts on the space station controlling rovers on Earth so they seem to believe that is the way forward.

Yes - it does involve putting someone in Mars orbit though.
 

imightbewrong

Distinguished Member
I haven't seen the Martian, looks like one to catch :thumbsup:
Yes it's pretty good - I watched it at the weekend. Wasn't going to mention the above due to er you know but was wondering if you'd seen it for the same reason :)
 

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Q Acoustics Q3030i, Humax Aura, Roku Streambar & WandaVision Reviews and more...

Latest News

Philips unveils 9636 and 9506 MiniLED TVs
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Philips announces 806, 856 and 706 OLED TVs for 2021
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Falcon Acoustics launches Q7 speaker kit
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Polk launches React soundbar with Alexa
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
What's new on Amazon Prime Video UK for February 2021
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom