PDA

View Full Version : 'Mars Is the Planet of Our Destiny'



Kampfbaer
07-12-2009, 11:23 AM
SPIEGEL INTERVIEW WITH NASA MANAGER
'Mars Is the Planet of Our Destiny'
By Olaf Stampf

Four decades after the first moon landing, NASA is setting its sights on Mars. NASA manager Jesco von Puttkamer talks to SPIEGEL about the lure of the red planet -- and its potential as an alternative base for human life.

SPIEGEL: Mr. Puttkamer, the first person set foot on the moon exactly 40 years ago. Why does NASA want to return to that barren, lifeless place?

Puttkamer: The Apollo astronauts were only able to spend a couple of days up there -- that was just a quick visit. When we fly there again in 2019-2020, we'll stay much longer. The four-person team will gain experience for the real long-term goal -- the journey to Mars. We want to build a lunar station where people could live for weeks or even months, as preparation for the larger Mars project.

SPIEGEL: So NASA is not preparing to populate the moon?

Puttkamer: No, the lunar station won't be capable of continuous operation 365 days a year, since we'll need to supply it constantly with air, water and food from Earth, and that would be insanely expensive. But the living conditions on Mars are actually very different. There are many natural resources there, and our probe just recently discovered traces that could originate from liquid water. It's also been known for a long time that water in solid form -- in other words, ice -- exists there in large quantities.

SPIEGEL: Will America fly to the moon alone again?

Puttkamer: Certainly not -- and especially not when we want to reach more distant destinations. The age of going it alone is over. The Apollo project took place during the Cold War, when we were involved in a dramatic race with the Soviets. But a lot has changed since then. We've moved away from that competitive way of thinking, and everyone is invited to take part in future missions. It functions that way already on the International Space Station, where 16 countries work together in an exemplary way. We've created a kind of United Nations in space.

SPIEGEL: Yet the United States is going to build the new moon rockets alone again.

Puttkamer: Unfortunately it can't be done any other way. After our shuttle fleet is withdrawn from service next year, we're going to need a new space carrier of our own as quickly as possible. To that end, we needed to commission industry to develop the new Ares rocket and the accompanying Orion spaceship as soon as possible. Then there's also the Altair lunar lander. But in any case, the European Space Agency is already very interested in helping with the construction of infrastructure on the moon later. Our Russian partners would definitely participate as well. And I personally would be very happy to also see Germany involved.

SPIEGEL: Aren't you worried that enthusiasm for conquering the moon will drop off again just as quickly as it did after the Apollo flights?

Puttkamer: That's a danger we certainly can't dismiss. Back then, we were definitely also a victim of our own success. The public got bored quite quickly because the Apollo flights proceeded with such breathtaking perfection. We launched a total of 13 Saturn V rockets, and almost every time it went like clockwork. That means the sense of adventure faded quickly among the general public. So that means we now face the challenge of getting people excited about lunar flights again. And we have to explain to the skeptics that the moon is the most important stopover on the way to Mars. If everything goes well, we could head for the red planet in just 25 years. The future Mars astronauts have already been born -- they're already little rugrats running around among us.

SPIEGEL: Why is it so important to you to send people to Mars?

Puttkamer: Mars is the planet of our destiny. There's the well-founded hope that we might find traces of extraterrestrial life there for the first time, even if it's only fossilized microbes. A human scientist who can take and analyze samples on the ground is much better suited to this search than a robot, no matter how sophisticated it is. But the most important thing is the fact that people will one day set foot on Mars and populate it. The red desert planet Mars, provided it doesn't have any life of its own, could become a green Mars through so-called terraforming -- in other words, the active transformation (of its environment). If that's successful, humankind will have created itself a second home, just in case an asteroid impact or other major catastrophe wipes out life on Earth. Only through having Mars as a reserve planet will the human race really become immortal.

SPIEGEL: The trip to a desert of a planet, millions of kilometers away, could end up as a journey of no return. Do you really believe the spacefaring nations will take this risk?

Puttkamer: We are unfortunately lacking in Apollo-era daring these days, no question. When the German-born rocket scientist Wernher von Braun got President John F. Kennedy fired up about lunar flight in 1961, no one knew if the adventure would be successful or if we could bring the astronauts safely to the moon and back. A new TV documentary on the anniversary of the first moon landing shows the sense of excitement that prevailed then very well. Today, however, politicians, managers and engineers shy away from the risk, because they're afraid they'll be the ones crucified if something goes wrong. Yet if we want to venture forth in the universe, we need to overcome our exaggerated concerns about safety. If I could take a warm sweater with me, I'd board a Mars spaceship immediately.

Interview conducted by Olaf Stampf.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,635223,00.html

XShipRider
07-12-2009, 12:27 PM
Unless we have a plan for turning it blue and green, as in water and arable soil, let's save the trillions. Forget space adventurism and let's concentrate on the global issues before us.

deagle
07-12-2009, 12:29 PM
guess it makes sense....them martians must have it so good, they would never want to come to earth. therefore, we should goto mars and mess up that planet also.

will need vulcan logic to verify if its sound or valid or something.

Eagle The Lightning
07-12-2009, 12:34 PM
Interesting story

Kit
07-12-2009, 01:45 PM
Tell the Spanish there's gold there.

Ulytau
07-12-2009, 02:17 PM
Reminds me this cartoon rofl

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/3286/globalwarmingp.jpg

hskywalker
07-12-2009, 02:24 PM
If one big part of the money used on healthcare can be diverted to mars exploration, then it means less population and potentially more space. Good for human race in the long term.
Sounds a bit evil though.

The Dane
07-12-2009, 02:36 PM
Interesting reading, but a bit long


The Economic Viability of Mars Colonization

Robert Zubrin
Lockheed Martin Astronautics

Abstract


The economic viability of colonizing Mars is examined. It is shown, that of all bodies in the solar system other than Earth, Mars is unique in that it has the resources required to support a population of sufficient size to create locally a new branch of human civilization.

It is also shown that while Mars may lack any cash material directly exportable to Earth, Mars' orbital elements and other physical parameters gives a unique positional advantage that will allow it to act as a keystone supporting extractive activities in the asteroid belt and elsewhere in the solar system.

The potential of relatively near-term types of interplanetary transportation systems is examined, and it is shown that with very modest advances on a historical scale, systems can be put in place that will allow individuals and families to emigrate to Mars at their own discretion. Their motives for doing so will parallel in many ways the historical motives for Europeans and others to come to America, including higher pay rates in a labor-short economy, escape from tradition and oppression, as well as freedom to exercise their drive to create in an untamed and undefined world.

Under conditions of such large scale immigration, sale of real-estate will add a significant source of income to the planet's economy. Potential increases in real-estate values after terraforming will provide a sufficient financial incentive to do so.

In analogy to frontier America, social conditions on Mars will make it a pressure cooker for invention. These inventions, licensed on Earth, will raise both Terrestrial and Martian living standards and contribute large amounts of income to support the development of the colony.


The rest : http://www.aleph.se/Trans/Tech/Space/mars.html

deagle
07-12-2009, 02:48 PM
how much will our taxes be raised to fund this endeavor again ?

The Dane
07-12-2009, 02:58 PM
how much will our taxes be raised to fund this endeavor again ?

Not much, because NASA is far behind. Branson will sell one-way tickets to Mars within 10 years p-) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1004516/Branson-hopes-begin-Mars-colonisation-10-years.html

Fat Lazy American
07-12-2009, 03:04 PM
Not much, because NASA is far behind. Branson will sell one-way tickets to Mars within 10 years p-) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1004516/Branson-hopes-begin-Mars-colonisation-10-years.html

For a second I thought this meant Branson, Missouri. Andy Williams and Yakov Smirnoff, space pioneers.

Skutatos
07-12-2009, 04:26 PM
Unless we have a plan for turning it blue and green, as in water and arable soil, let's save the trillions. Forget space adventurism and let's concentrate on the global issues before us.

There are many different theories on how to achieve it...it will be VERY VERY difficult and possibly take centuries(depending on technology)...but it can be done.

dava
07-12-2009, 07:06 PM
Impossible! As we all know, humans are totally uncapable of having an impact on the climate.
We ll just have to wait until Mars comes into its part of the 'fertile cycle'

Jobu
07-12-2009, 07:12 PM
Only through having Mars as a reserve planet will the human race really become immortal.

I dig this Puttkamer guy.

ATLAS10
07-12-2009, 09:09 PM
Tell the Spanish there's gold there.

ah! good one!

Elbs
07-12-2009, 09:12 PM
how much will our taxes be raised to fund this endeavor again ?

I sure as hell don't give a damn if they use my tax dollars for this. I'd rather have that money go to the space program than to old neighbors on welfare who felt they just had to have new rims for their Escalade :bash:

Hot Lips
07-12-2009, 09:22 PM
Unless we have a plan for turning it blue and green, as in water and arable soil, let's save the trillions. Forget space adventurism and let's concentrate on the global issues before us.

Agreed. It seems like a huge waste of money and effort otherwise. I'm sure we can accomplish more right here on Earth without this as a distraction.

Elbs
07-12-2009, 09:27 PM
Right, because nothing beneficial ever came out of the space program. Things that we take for granted today that have helped improve the lives of many on earth can be traced back to developments made by NASA. Rather see my money go towards advancing science than lining the pockets of some bum who'd rather stay at home and watch Judge Judy instead of finding an honest job

JKD
07-12-2009, 09:31 PM
The original space race produced benefits far beyond simply landing men on the moon and collecting rocks. An undertaking to go to Mars would do likewise.

towelie
07-12-2009, 09:45 PM
I dont see why people think going to mars will cost trillions. Id rather invest trillions in new science and engineering than see trillions wasted on financial companies that will more likely than not put is in the same situation in a couple of years.

If we as a species want to survive, we have to move on from earth, earth can only support so much. Short of a pandemic or targeted genocide the population will continue to grow, and if not population growth, then growing wealth in developing nations will create an unsustainable demand for raw materials. There is only so much that can go around.

If a mission was designed efficiently and not carried out by the gov, Id say 30 to 50 billion could get us there. Most people say why not fix the problems on earth with that money, but lets be serious, most of the problems we have now-a-days we will continue to have into the foreseeable future. Poverty, crime, dishonesty, and other shyte human problems where here before us, and they will be here after us.

2495
07-12-2009, 09:51 PM
Who ever and what ever made this cairn might have some thing to say about humans being on Mars.

http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/9505/3109widencloser.jpg

Uh huh, and I hope it turns out to be .......

http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/6158/marvinc.jpg

szr
07-12-2009, 09:52 PM
NASA--one government agency in an age when there are almost as many government agencies as there are tax dollars to spend--has a list of accomplishments including some which can stand among the greatest achievements of mankind through the entire arc of human history to the present. NASA's relatively small slice of the yearly budget pie is probably more an investment in the longterm viability of our species than all the social entitlement programs we pay for, combined. I'm more willing to shoulder the financial burdens of the good work NASA does than I am for a lot of the other things we pay for every year...

Elbs
07-12-2009, 09:55 PM
NASA, as a government agency, has a list of accomplishments including some which can stand among the greatest achievements of mankind through the entire arc of human history to the present. NASA's relatively small slice of the yearly budget pie is probably more an investment in the longterm viability of our species than all the social entitlement programs we pay for, combined. I'm more willing to shoulder the financial burdens of the good work NASA does than I am for a lot of the other things we pay for every year...

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Eagle The Lightning
07-12-2009, 09:56 PM
NASA should build a space station on mars

Migs
07-12-2009, 09:58 PM
Wait a sec, do we really have to go to Mars? We should stop trying to impress ourselves and focus on the more important issues of oh-i-dont-know Earth.

Elbs
07-12-2009, 09:59 PM
NASA should build a space station on mars

Worst idea ever!!! Don't you remember what happened the last time we had a station on Mars? p-)
http://www.submiturpics.com/images/rp3nh48xyqm023wfxvq.jpg

Eagle The Lightning
07-12-2009, 10:05 PM
Worst idea ever!!! Don't you remember what happened the last time we had a station on Mars? p-)
http://www.submiturpics.com/images/rp3nh48xyqm023wfxvq.jpg
roflroflrofl
The best game of all time happed, even more of a reason to go there ( Maybe not of all time just on windows 98 )

Ratamacue
07-12-2009, 10:20 PM
The US government has basically spent a trillion dollars on stimulus plans that noone is sure will work or not. On the other hand, NASA has achieved some of the greatest scientific, technological, and exploratory advances in the history of mankind. And their FY 2009 budget? A humble $17.6 billion.

Not only is that mere pocket change to the US government, but "fixing things on Earth" and expanding the space program are not mutually exclusive. Anyone that doesn't believe that space exploration has a direct effect on the economy and common-use technology is misinformed or downright ignorant. Moreover, when do things become good enough on Earth that we can finally say "well now it's okay for us to venture out into space"? When we have a utopia and everything down here is perfect? Well, then where will be the drive to go out into space to pioneer and hope for a better future?

How many of the engineers today developing the newest technology were children of the Cold War, inspired by the Space Race to excel in math and science? I can tell you that space exploration is the #1 reason that I want to become an engineer, and hopefully work for NASA one day. Regarding the danger involved, I'm willing to put down money that if you ask all the astronauts in the employ of the various space agencies whether they'd be willing to risk very possible death for a chance to set foot on Mars, 99% of them would say "yes."

The best reason to explore? To prove we can. Aspiration, ambition, and intrepidity are some of the greatest human traits. Complacency is not one of them.

Kit
07-12-2009, 10:50 PM
The best reason to explore? To prove we can. Aspiration, ambition, and intrepidity are some of the greatest human traits. Complacency is not one of them.

Besides, what if Europe stayed in the Old World? The world would be a much different place.

Trouble
07-13-2009, 01:16 AM
Unless we have a plan for turning it blue and green, as in water and arable soil, let's save the trillions. Forget space adventurism and let's concentrate on the global issues before us.

We came from Mars. Why not finally go back?

MaverickCowboy
07-13-2009, 01:52 AM
SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH only some of us are from mars.

King of the Grey
07-13-2009, 02:06 AM
By Mars! We've been exposed!

Quick! Send out our cargo!! THIS PLANET IS OURS! :) :)


*on a more serious note, i believe space exploration would benefit the overall technological capability of the participating countries. I mean, do you really believe all the miniaturization and robotics the Japanese has been perfecting for the last 50 years are only dedicated for Terran-use? Sure, the techniques were probably invented in the West, but the Japs took it much further.

and for reverse-engineering, just off the top of my head, probably the cushions used to land the Mars Explorer can be implemented as disaster-relief modules after earthquakes, or the 'chopstick' sampler on the Beaver can be used for medical purposes in the future??

ATLAS10
07-13-2009, 02:29 AM
We came from Mars. Why not finally go back?


why? maybe cuz' we fuk it up already?

Finn76
07-13-2009, 04:46 AM
Agreed. It seems like a huge waste of money and effort otherwise. I'm sure we can accomplish more right here on Earth without this as a distraction.

A lot more money is being wasted on warfare at the moment than on any spaceprogram.

PeterRJG
07-13-2009, 05:07 AM
We came from Mars. Why not finally go back?

Speak for yourself.

7thKeeper
07-13-2009, 06:01 AM
I say we try to colonize Venus first :P It's closer anyway. Terraform it or colonize the higher regions where the pressure won't crush you in an instant or the heat boil you.

JDBL14
07-13-2009, 07:40 AM
Manifest Destiny on a planetary scale?

seraosha
07-13-2009, 10:19 AM
Getting all our eggs out of one basket is more important than any social program, by any country, at any time. Getting into orbit, lunar bases' and eventual Mars colonisation ought to be our number one goal.

One asteroid approximatly 6 miles in size wiped out 75% of life on Earth...and it could happen again at any time.

Azatavrear
07-13-2009, 10:23 AM
Space exploration is something that we cannot effort not to do. The riches of materials and knowledge out there are beyond our imagination. It would be important to establish a way station either on our moon or in Mars where launching space crafts will be much easier due to low escape gravity. Our scientists have their eyes on the moons of Jupiter that have rich minerals and plenty of water to be used as fuel to explore beyond our solar system. Also an observatory could be setup on one these moons and scientists can take on tours of duty.

The biggest problem is human body’s reaction to extended low gravity conditions that must be solved before anything like this can even happen……this includes going to Mars.

brainplay
07-13-2009, 12:45 PM
Can someone explain to me why a human on Mars collecting rocks that will sit in a museum be their top goal instead of exploring a Moon colonization testbed? I mean if we can't even setup shop and prove a lunar base is viable and potentially profitable (in tech or resources) why waste cash on a Mars propoganda run?

seraosha
07-13-2009, 12:55 PM
The argument for Mars is the long-term viability of a base...water, oxygen, minerals, etc...are all available, while on the Moon, besides the H3 in the regolith, everything has to be transported. Centripetal force can be used to combat long-term exposure to microgravity, with the associated bone/muscle loss on the way to Mars, but all things being equal, I'd like to see a "proof of concept" on the Moon before spending the loot to get to Mars.

Azatavrear
07-13-2009, 02:04 PM
The argument for Mars is the long-term viability of a base...water, oxygen, minerals, etc...are all available, while on the Moon, besides the H3 in the regolith, everything has to be transported. Centripetal force can be used to combat long-term exposure to microgravity, with the associated bone/muscle loss on the way to Mars, but all things being equal, I'd like to see a "proof of concept" on the Moon before spending the loot to get to Mars.


There is talk of abandoning a lunar outpost all together and just go for Mars. I agree with you that we should practice, experiment, and work out the bugs (from long duration flights to working out the tooling and remote robotic controls) on the moon first before committing ourselves to such mission. Also the chance of having a lunar base is much better than going to Mars by 2020.

It seems the problem for NASA is from the public's standpoint……………going back to the moon would not invoke the same sense of awe and inspiration it did 51 years earlier when it was a seemingly impossible task."



This is from JPL and an analysis of issues to confront when using moon as a launching platform.

http://mepag.jpl.nasa.gov/meeting/mar-09/LEAG_Theme_2_MEPAG_Presentation.pdf

MichaelF
07-13-2009, 02:14 PM
I doubt He3 is going to be a huge impetus for Lunar activity.

By the time we are capable of removing and processing 250,000 mt of regolith for 1Kg of He3...we'll not be doing it. We'll just skim it out of Saturn's* atmosphere.
Yes, the relative efficiencies are that steep. If we can do the first, it makes more sense to do the second, instead.

*-Saturn, while more distant, hasn't got the sleeting radiation hazards that Jupiter does, and the DeltaV budgets are similar. Doing it robotically, it makes much more sense than playing with Lunar regolith on a million-ton scale.