ADVERTISMENT
 
 
1 Dec 2008

Human life on Mars?

- 7 Aug 2007
By Marie McCulloch   
Page 1 of 2
It's been over 30 years since the last human beings ventured out of the relative safety of earth orbit and stood on another world.

On December 11, 1972 two out of the three member crew of Apollo 17 landed on the moon. While Ronald Evans remained in lunar orbit, watching over the spacecraft which would later return the trio to earth, Gene Cernan - officially the last man on the moon – and Harrison Schmitt, the only scientist (a geologist) to walk on the moon spent almost 72 hours on the surface, 22 of which were outside of their landing craft.

Humans on Mars?

Now, more than thrity years after Apollo 17, it appears that financial planners are prepared to spend the money to develop the technology and infrastructure required to send people out of earth orbit – but the object of these initiatives are much further and much more difficult to achieve than the moon. Recently, on August 4th 2007, NASA launched a spacecraft on a nine-month journey to Mars, where it will dig below the surface for clues to the existence of past or present life. The Phoenix probe will aim to reveal not only on the history of the water ice on Mars, but also on whether the region could support microbial life. This mission follows the two robotic ‘geologists’, Spirit and Opportunity, which landed on Mars in January 2004. In the same month, US President George Bush unveiled an ambitious plan to return to the moon by 2020 and to use the mission as a stepping-stone for future manned missions to Mars and beyond.

If the program is successful in getting started, it will be the most far-reaching space agenda since President Kennedy launched the Apollo program in 1961. And NASA isn’t alone in planning a journey to Mars, the European Space Agency (ESA) has a plan, dubbed Aurora, which aims to put people on Mars by 2030.

There is a lot to consider before undertaking a manned mission to Mars. Before the astronauts take their first steps on the red planet, there is the monumental task of simply getting them there. Previous experience with manned space operations, such as the Apollo programme will be valuable, however, there are big differences in travelling to the moon compared to Mars.

The moon is relatively close to Earth, at a distance of 385,000 kilometres, it takes just three days to get there. A mission to Mars, would require astronauts to live on the spacecraft for several years, as the journey could take over 6 months.  In approximate terms, Mars at it's closest to earth is 36 million km away - at it's farthest, over 250 million km.  There is a planned experiment currently looking for recruits to study the effect, (psychologically and physically), of being in a confined space for that length of time.

How to get to Mars?

Prior to the recent success of Spirit and Opportunity, Mars has proven to be a challenging destination for robotic space probes. Historically, two out of three attempts to land spacecraft on Mars have failed – the bulk of these failures occurring early in the history of Martian exploration, starting in the 1960’s. So, if getting a relatively lightweight robotic craft to the surface is fraught with dangers, how do you get a far heavier and more complex manned craft down safely? Spirit and Opportunity used large airbags to cushion the rover’s landing. However, during an airbag landing, payloads are subjected to forces of between 10-20G. This is beyond the tolerance for the human body, so would not be a suitable method to land a manned spacecraft safely.

Atmospheric braking, followed by the deployment of a parachute has been used on many Earth re-entries, in fact prior to NASA’s space shuttle, this was the only method for returning human beings from space to the surface of the earth.. How it works is a craft uses the planet’s atmosphere to slow its descent, then parachutes are deployed to reach a safe landing speed. The problem with using this method to land on Mars is that the atmosphere is less than 1% of the density of Earth’s atmosphere, so it offers little resistance to a falling craft. For atmospheric braking to work, a landing craft hurtling into Mars’ thin atmosphere would require a large surface area to slow itself down through friction - this heat-shielded surface would need to be so large, that it could not launch from Earth. If parachutes are to be used, the spacecraft must be slowed to a speed where the fabric of the chutes won’t be torn apart. Also, it has been calculated that a parachute would need to be more than 100 metres in diameter so slow a shuttle-sized vehicle to a safe speed.

To get the Apollo landers onto the lunar surface, thrusters were used to slow the vehicle’s decent. This method, however, would use vast amounts of fuel; for a craft to do this on Mars it would have to carry six times its own weight in fuel. Due to Mars’ atmosphere, during a thruster descent, the craft would be subject to forces equivalent to a category five hurricane; the stresses that result could very well destroy the vehicle.

It would appear that a combination of these methods would need to be employed. To make a safe landing, a manned spacecraft would have to successfully slow down from 5000kph (3,000mph) to less than a thousand, re-orientate itself from spacecraft to lander, deploy parachutes, fire thrusters and make gentle touchdown – all in 90 seconds! It seems that the scientists have their work cut out to provide solutions so that humans can travel to Mars. But once people have landed on the Martian surface how will they survive?

 
Have your say
 
everything we do that is worth while has always cost a lot of money (panama canal, defeating the Japanese, building the Hoover damn) but they have alway benefited far beyond the cost it took, like in the past, this is no different.
Posted by: dreammaker - 2007-08-10 - 10:24 GMT

No one has ever estimated the
cost of a manned Mars mission at anywhere close to a trillion dollars. This is simply a figure that gets
repeated over and over -- someone heard it somewhere, and put it in an article without citing sources. Once
it's in an article, it becomes a "source," and other people quote it.

The origin of this fallacy is probably the infamous "90-day report" from NASA in (I think) 1990. But there
are three facts to note here.

1. This report gave a price tag of 450 billion.
2. Far more importantly, there was MUCH more included
in that report than a simple Mars mission. It included
everything from a space station to an orbital
construction facility to a lunar base.
3. Other estimates from NASA in recent years are all
below 60 billion dollars (or 6% of a trillion).
Depending on scenarios, they range from 35-55 billion
dollars. Some sources have even estimated that a
private mission (bypassing government inefficiency)
might be done for 10 billion or less.

Bear in mind also that 50 billion dollars is less than
5% of our annual federal budget.

More importantly, bear in mind that a Mars mission
would take several years to plan and execute, and the
cost would be distributed over that time.

Manned missions to Mars can be done cheaply, using
less than one percent of the federal budget. As such, it is our duty to future generations to move outward into the cosmos.

Columbus did not solve all the problems of Europe before he sailed; neither did Magellan or Polo or any other explorer.

Lewis and Clarke did not solve all the problems of the US before they scouted the Lousisiana Territory (and yes, this was a government-financed mission).

And by the way, the reason we bought the Louisiana Territory... was for the money we would make from *the fur trade.* I doubt that the residents today, 200 years later, consider that the real value of their birthplace. What will Mars and other worlds hold for
us that we cannot yet imagine?


Hal Fulton
Vice President
MarsDrive, Inc.

Posted by: hal9000 - 2007-08-09 - 17:10 GMT

It seems that the Apollo programme had many valuable spin-offs - solar panels, light-weight construction materials, cordless electrical tools, and so on. Mars will almost certainly involve the creation of new materials and technologies. We should definitely go now!
Posted by: Ash - 2007-08-09 - 17:06 GMT

Post new comment
Please copy the 5 symbols from this security code image into the box below to submit comment.

I agree to terms and conditions       
 
FirstScience.com

About | Privacy policy | Terms & conditions
© 1995-2008 All rights reserved

Related articles
Life at the Extremes
Some living species are able to thrive in inhospitable...
Are we all Martians?
    Credit: NASA   The face on Mars:...
Alien Life - Official: it's stranger than you think...
What are the limits to life in planetary systems? A new study...
Try these books...
Expedition Mars (Springer Praxis Books / Space Exploration)
$44.95
$29.67
>More Info
Planet Mars: Story of Another World (Springer Praxis Books / Popular Astronomy)
$39.95
>More Info
Human Missions to Mars: Enabling Technologies for Exploring the Red Planet (Springer Praxis Books / Astronautical Engineering)
$139.00
$110.66
>More Info
Latest News
> Find 1000s more science gadgets & gizmos