It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is the Mars rover ever coming back

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 9 2005 @ 08:56 PM
link   
So we now have the land rover running around on Mars taking pictures and such but is it ever coming back?

Is it collecting rock or soil samples? If it is how is it going to send them back to earth?





posted on Apr, 9 2005 @ 09:13 PM
link   
Spirit and Opportunity are not sending anything back. They have the equipment needed to analyze soil and rocks and send the data back along with microscopic pictures. But the next generation rovers may possibly have a means to return samples to Earth. You can get the latest on the rovers here.



posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 03:28 AM
link   

Hal9000
But the next generation rovers may possibly have a means to return samples to Earth.

doubt it.

The next rover mission will be almost the size of a mini van and will be nuclear powered and roam around for over 2 years. Nasa hasn't yet pinned down a date for a soil return mission, I would expect that to be around 2015-2020.



posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 05:45 AM
link   
Maybe someday a manned flight will bring it back so they can stash it in a museum somewhere. It wont be coming back on it's own nor will NASA and such waste resources in any unmanned retrieval.



posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 06:44 AM
link   
When we get to mars properly with manned missions then all the rovers will be brought back and maybe we will find out what happened to beagle.



posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 10:43 AM
link   
Terapin, can you tell us if the Spirit and Opportunity rovers have the ability to detect the bacteria from soil samples? In other words can they detect life, and have not found it? I believe there were something like three tests to run, but can't remember. Each one if positive, increased the chances, but it would not be definitive unless the sample was brought back. I might be thinking of the Pathfinder mission where they thought they had detected something, but proved to be false. Thanks.



posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 12:48 PM
link   
Hal, what is often is done is that they can detect the evidance of bacteria. methene is one of the biggest ways. But it does not (nor was it designed to) have the abiity to create cultures of whatever is on there.

The Rover missions were to find evidance of water... not life.

One of the other reasons why samples are not being broguht back is that unlike the Manned moon missions of the late 60s and early 70s electornics are compact enough and small enough that we can send the equipment over there.



posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 01:23 PM
link   
That is amazing a little rover can do so much



posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 04:54 PM
link   
If only we had the ability to actually travel to Mars. Build a huge spaceship with a lab and go over to Mars! But we are not able to do that because

Not good enought technology
Too expensive
Need long lasting energy source

When do you think we will be able to travel to Mars as if we were to go to the supermarket



posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by balon0
That is amazing a little rover can do so much


They're big. Very big. 1.5m tall, 2.3m wide, 1.6m long.

howstuffworks.com

[edit on 4/10/2005 by Amorymeltzer]



posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 07:02 PM
link   
actaully, we coudl send a Manned mission to mars with todays technology. It is just a bit pricey, and no one wants to pay for it



posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 07:55 PM
link   
i think there is no need for them to come back to earth...

they were made to be a "lab on mars"...

there purpose: to get info about mars and send it to us via satellite...





posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 08:27 PM
link   
If there was any trace of oil discovered on Mars, do you think Bush would do everything he can to get us on Mars?

If NASA ever do get to land on Mars, would Mars belong to United States?

Does the moon belong to the United States? Since Americans were the first ones to land there.



posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 08:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by balon0
If there was any trace of oil discovered on Mars, do you think Bush would do everything he can to get us on Mars?

If NASA ever do get to land on Mars, would Mars belong to United States?

Does the moon belong to the United States? Since Americans were the first ones to land there.


I don't know... maby he would, maby he wouldn't.

No it wouldn't, I think the best thing would be to claim both the moon and all of space for mankind rather then a particular country. It would be compeltely devistating if we where to spread into space as seperate nations.

More likely whoever colonises mars it will develope its own culture and be its own planet.



posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 09:09 PM
link   
All land in space is currently neutral. Mainly cause nobody lives there. But as cownosecat said

More likely whoever colonises mars it will develope its own culture and be its own planet.


And that right there is the starter for any of a dozen sci-fi novels.



posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 11:54 PM
link   
THe rovers aren't, as far as I know, supposed to come back. If there are ever 'colonies' on mars, the landing sites will probably be National Parks and what not! Heh.



posted on Apr, 11 2005 @ 12:11 AM
link   
Why bother with rovers? Lets just build a big arse rocket and send a man to the moon already or at least a monkey to see what happens.



posted on Apr, 11 2005 @ 01:00 AM
link   
America has no money



posted on Apr, 11 2005 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by balon0
If only we had the ability to actually travel to Mars. Build a huge spaceship with a lab and go over to Mars! But we are not able to do that because

Not good enought technology
Too expensive
Need long lasting energy source

When do you think we will be able to travel to Mars as if we were to go to the supermarket



1. course we have the technology. The US air force probably has better tech than NASA.

2. its expensive but just wait till Japan goes to the moon(very soon). The US will not be bettered when it comes to space travel so im sure a manned mars mission will be financed as soon as Japan has a moon base.

3. Nuclear power is long lasting. Definitley lasting long enough to fly to Mars and back!

I would like to see a manned mission to Mars before 2015. All NASA needs to do is launch unmanned pods with fuel, supplies etc (even another craft if need be) so when the astronauts arrive they have supplies already on Mars.



posted on Apr, 11 2005 @ 06:55 PM
link   
Nuclear power??! Isnt that very dangerous? Do we have the technology use nuclear power safely? If we do how come we are not using it on our space shuttles today instead of buring tons and tons of fuel.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join