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.

 

Astronauts Call For Manned Mars Landing

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Astronauts Call For Manned Mars Landing


www.ufodigest.com


Three of the 12 American astronauts who flew to the Moon in the space programs that began 30 years ago have called for a commitment to a mannedmission to Mars. The astronauts - Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin and Gene Cernan - made their appeal during a news conference at the Kennedy Space Centre in Florida to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the launch of Apollo 11, which took the first men to the Moon.

Neil Armstrong, who made the first historic Moon-walk, said the Apollo missions had demonstrated that "humanity was not forever chained to this planet", and that opportunity was unlimited.

He and his fellow Apollo 11 astronaut, Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin, said they would like to see man reach Mars within 20 years.

(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Now hands up who wants to go to Mars.

Here are some questions.

1. Should we go to Mars

2. Why should we go to Mars.

3, How can we get there

www.ufodigest.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 02:24 PM
link   
1. Hell yeah!

2. Because we can either spend our lives fighting over oil, or doing something that would actually elevate mankind for a change

3. Well i think we already posess the technology, just not the will.



posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by spoonbeater
1. Hell yeah!

2. Because we can either spend our lives fighting over oil, or doing something that would actually elevate mankind for a change

3. Well i think we already posess the technology, just not the will.


Couldn't have answered better myself.

I would also venture that the lack of will is caused largely by money.



posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by spoonbeater
 


I agree with your statement Spoon!

I think it's a very needed step in our evolution...to travel to another planet, and start colonizing, becoming the Columbus of our day! At least maybe there they can get along and actually advance our knowladge instead of us being down here with our thumb up our butts waiting for 1.a massive meeting be ETs, 2. Us dying in world war III, 3. using up our natural resources, 4. Mass doomsday event, et cetera....

but if they find somethin cool, it'll prolly be censored anyways....


Not that I have an opinion tho!


[edit on 20-3-2008 by unknownfrost]



posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Mars is a must in my opinion..even if there is nothing there we canu use it as a base to explore further

the technology is there...they could even borrow the russian shuttle design to lift payload into space ready

whilst the american economy is on it's knee's don't expect an announcment any time in the foreseeable future

However a mars mission manned might kick start the economy....

Maybe a private space company will get there first how long will it be before we start seeing companies appearing like weyland industries I know that that is sci-fi however terraforming starts somewhere.

I would expect Nasa to become less important and private companies to start taking over in this century leading in to 2100 and by 2300 i would think mars and the moon will be colonised and i think we will have reached our nearest star with probes by the end of 2050.

I would think that if NASA was going to continue leading the way they would announce long term exploration goals and to start getting bigger budgets.

Space should be starting to be big business...bigger than anything else soon.



posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by ian990003100
 



the technology is there...they could even borrow the russian shuttle design to lift payload into space ready


They do not have to use manned shuttles they could easily use ATV's (Automated Transfer Vehicles) like the ESA's Jules Verne.


Jules Verne is the first of a new fleet of unmanned spacecraft, called Automated Transfer Vehicles (ATVs), to launch fresh supplies to station crews through at least 2015. The 32-foot (10-meter) long cylinder with a diameter of about 14.7 feet (4.5 meters) and a roomy cargo hold for food, clothes, new equipment and rocket fuel for the space station.

It is the first new spacecraft in nine years to join the flotilla of U.S. space shuttles, Russia's manned Soyuz and unmanned Progress spacecraft that make station-bound flights, NASA officials have said.

"The ATV, as a logistics vehicle, carries almost three times the hardware, fuel, water and oxygen that a Russian Progress carries," said NASA's space station program manager Mike Suffredini. "It is a major contribution to the program."



Source

Everything needed for a manned mission except the men could be ready and waiting for the astronauts to arrive.



posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Actually I would like to see a permanent moon base, and missions to the asteroids, before we go to Mars.

Going to Mars once or twice, as a mission separate from a larger manned exploration strategy, is going to be just like Apollo - we went to the Moon a few times and never went back. It was a great publicity stunt, but then we dropped the ball.

Instead we should be building a manned program with an infrastructure that supports missions closer to home, moving outward slowly as we gain capability.

I'm not saying we shouldn't go to Mars, just that we should accomplish less ambitious and risky (but more practical) missions first, and then go to Mars and beyond.



posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 03:51 PM
link   
Sorry double post.

[edit on 20-3-2008 by sherpa]



posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by xmotex
 



Actually I would like to see a permanent moon base, and missions to the asteroids, before we go to Mars.


Yes I can see the point afterall launching from the moon's 1/6th gravity would be easier than from earth, however to make any logistical sense the payload would have to be manufactured on the moon.


I'm not saying we shouldn't go to Mars, just that we should accomplish less ambitious and risky (but more practical) missions first, and then go to Mars and beyond.


I am just curious what the practical missions could be, any time and money used on these practical missions wastes time and resources for a Mars mission now, they did it with the moon now lets go to mars.



posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 04:53 PM
link   
Here is a little after dinner mint from Pravda, yes I know Pravda is a little on the eccentric side but hey I thought it was a good read.

Spaceships of the future to take humans to Mars in 2.5 hours


Humans can build spaceships capable of reaching the Moon within minutes; a flight to Mars will take 2.5 hours, and a flight to Alpha Centauri, which is scores of light years away from Earth, will take a mere 80 days.

Spaceships of the future will take humans to the depth of the Universe.

Incredible journeys can be a reality, say two German Doctors of Physics who put forth an audacious theory. Walter Dresher from the University of Innsbruck joined forces with Joachim Hoiser, a leading scientist with the German company HPCC-Space Gmbh.

“The German physicists build their work on a theory formulated by the German scientist Burkhard Heim. The theory was put together in the 1950s,” says Vadim Pimenov, deputy director of the Institute of Theoretical and Applied Physics under the Russian Academy of Sciences, professor at the Lomonosov Moscow State University. “Heim, a brilliant physicist and philosopher, was the first scientist who began thinking over the principles of space flights using a “hyper-engine.”

The concept seems improbable at first sight. In actuality, it is a byproduct of the efforts aiming to combine the quantum mechanics and the general theory of relativity – two theories that so far have successfully foiled all the attempts to make them “friendly,” mostly due to differences in the interpretation of space and time. Heim made use of the Einstein concept regarding gravitation as a manifestation of distortions in the “fabric” of space and time. However, he suggested that all kinds of fundamental interaction be considered a manifestation of the complete set of spatial dimensions.

Heim introduced two additional dimensions since the existing ones were not enough for proving his theory. The physicist reportedly proved that gravitation and electromagnetism could combine in his 6-D space. He also maintained that a gravitational force could turn into an electromagnetic one, and vice versa, under certain conditions. It is still unclear whether Heim succeeded in combining the quantum mechanics and the general theory of relativity. For reasons unknown, the scientist refused to made public all details of his theory until he carried out a “decisive” experiment. The experiment did not materialize either due to technical reasons or a lack of funds.


More



posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 05:04 PM
link   
Nasa has a ION engine just they do not have the materials to wrap around it to keep space debris from slicing through a ship at speed.

www.nasa.gov...



new topics




 
1

log in

join