Re:Why Not Mars
by moffkalast on Monday January 02, 2023 @01:19PM
(#34221478)
Believe it or not it's around a 60% reduction in launch mass, so it should cut costs significantly. Tsiolkovsky equation do be like that. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20140009943
As for all the human related needs, the ISS has been a decades long study on practically all of those. That's kind of why we have it.
Supplying the mission isn't really a fundamental problem since you can send multiple times redundant amounts of all the supplies there on the previous cycle. But yes if something goes wrong they're on their own to solve it for (2 years - time spent there), much like any other mission not in close proximity to Earth. That's why you don't send idiots.
And you're right that there's no point in debating it further, because no amount of arguing will stop humans landing on Mars sooner or later.
As for all the human related needs, the ISS has been a decades long study on practically all of those. That's kind of why we have it.
Supplying the mission isn't really a fundamental problem since you can send multiple times redundant amounts of all the supplies there on the previous cycle. But yes if something goes wrong they're on their own to solve it for (2 years - time spent there), much like any other mission not in close proximity to Earth. That's why you don't send idiots.
And you're right that there's no point in debating it further, because no amount of arguing will stop humans landing on Mars sooner or later.