NASA.gov Journey from Earth to Mars 2025-2030

www.nasa.gov...

NASA is developing the capabilities needed to send humans to an asteroid by 2025 and Mars in the 2030s – goals outlined in the bipartisan NASA Authorization Act of 2010 and in the U.S. National Space Policy, also issued in 2010.

The CGI illustrations are so inspiring!



Policy? Sounds Good!

The CGI illustrations are so inspiring!

You'll like Kerbal Space Program

And a slight gripe, but with the cool animations in the first video, you would've thought that the written narrative would've been done by someone who can actually write English

a reply to: letni

I'm still not convinced that NASA has the technology to send men into deep space and live.

Weightlessness..
Radiation..
Dust...

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: letni

I'm still not convinced that NASA has the technology to send men into deep space and live.

Weightlessness..
Radiation..
Dust...

While those are legitimate issues/concerns, it's probably irrelevant, at this point.

"Developing capabilities", and actually securing tax dollars to implement such a plan are two very different things.

a reply to: Bluntone22

Maybe not at this instant, but technology is evolving fast

Take JFK declaration in 1961 to land on moon before end of decade - this was 8 1/2 years

At that time the US had only managed to send man on 15 minute suborbital ride to 100 miles

in only few years had developed and launched massive SATURN V capable of sending men to moon and back

a reply to: firerescue

We've been in space for 50 years and still haven't figured a way to prevent the adverse effects of zero gravity.
There are still many questions about the radiation in space too.

I question if those will be resolved in the 5 to 10 year target in the article.

originally posted by: Mach2

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: letni

I'm still not convinced that NASA has the technology to send men into deep space and live.

Weightlessness..
Radiation..
Dust...

While those are legitimate issues/concerns, it's probably irrelevant, at this point.

"Developing capabilities", and actually securing tax dollars to implement such a plan are two very different things.

Ummm...fortunately for us...it wont be NASA that follows through...it'll be SPACEX...

And it wont be tax dollars footing the bill...

And the cost per launch and fabrication of the many...many "Star Ships"...will be exponentially smaller than NASA could ever accomplish...

We're not waiting for NASA...the future of space travel belongs to the corporations...where it belongs...





YouSir

a reply to: Bluntone22

You can excercise on the ship to keep musclemass.

You can train yourself to a triathlon athlete level before entering the ship and you will still be in better condition than most people on earth when you get out.
Your body will recover when you get to Mars.

You can live in a shielded space vehicle while going there.
You can live on Mars in shielded buildings.
You can go outside in a shielded suit.

Problems solved. Theres always a price to be paid if you want to take humanity forward.

originally posted by: SpaceBoyOnEarth
a reply to: Bluntone22

You can excercise on the ship to keep musclemass.

You can train yourself to a triathlon athlete level before entering the ship and you will still be in better condition than most people on earth when you get out.
Your body will recover when you get to Mars.

You can live in a shielded space vehicle while going there.
You can live on Mars in shielded buildings.
You can go outside in a shielded suit.

Problems solved. Theres always a price to be paid if you want to take humanity forward.

I have sent your details to Elon, you are a forward thinker!

a reply to: Forensick

Im not sure i woul trust his rockets.

I would rather fly with those ones, which took the current people on Mars there.

a reply to: SpaceBoyOnEarth

You can live in a shielded space vehicle while going there.

Yup.

What sort of shielding to keep a human safe through 6 months of cosmic radiation? How much does it mass? How much fuel will it take to push it towards Mars

But the OP is about a 2010 policy and the NASA link is from 2014. Mars in the 30s. Maybe. But there's that radiation thing.

Current status:

That uncrewed first flight, known as Artemis 1, will send NASA's Orion capsule on a trip around the moon, helping pave the way for a planned crewed landing near the lunar south pole by 2024.

www.space.com...

a reply to: Phage

Depends on type of radiation - there are 2 kinds, particle (protons, electrons, alpha (helium nuclei) accelerated to high speed by electric/magnetic fields and EM, electromagnetic such as X Ray or Gamma

Particle can be stopped by metal or by organic type materials (water, high density plastic. food, even excrement)
Materials which contain hydrogen or carbon atoms are most effective . Metals have problem that when high energy particles slam into them , emit showers of secondary radiation - neutrons, X Rays

One method of defeating a radiation outburst such as from a solar flare is by position of spacecraft - turning it to
present the greatest mass between capsule and radiation source - using the rocket engine, propellant tanks and heat shield to absorb the radiation

Another is to use the spacecraft food and water supply as shield One proposal is to have a storm cellar - a refuge lined with food/water, even bagged up excrement ro absorb radiation

a reply to: firerescue

Depends on type of radiation

Yes. That's why I specified cosmic radiation. Very high energy particles.

Particle can be stopped by metal or by organic type materials (water, high density plastic. food, even excrement)

Some can be absorbed, yes. But that means more mass. More mass requires more fuel. I said that. More mass is problematic.

One method of defeating a radiation outburst such as from a solar flare is by position of spacecraft

Cosmic radiation is isotropic. It comes from everywhere, all the time. That's the main problem. SEP events are of concern but they are actually rather rare for any particular Solar radiant. Luck of the draw, "phew, that was a close one."

NASA is trying to figure it out. It's problematic. On various levels. Taking the trip during Solar minimum would reduce the likelihood of a spacecraft effective SEP event, but would also mean that cosmic radiation levels would be higher.

I think many of you guys have forgotten about the money side pf things.
IMO Nasa is going to have the SLS rug pulled out from under them.
With the increasing budget deficits something has to go.
Musk is too far ahead in heavy lift to justify SLS.

In days of old no one but Nasa could build practical rockets.
Now we have several options to choose from.
It doesn't make sense for the gov to build their own computers or
cars and trucks.
Just buy a launch like everyone else.