Nasa proposes robotic rocket-plane to explore Mars

The Aerial Regional-scale Environmental Surveyor (Ares), around the size of a small plane, will be folded into a rocket and launched to the red planet. It would be the first aircraft ever to fly over another world.
After entering the atmosphere in a capsule, the aircraft would deploy parachutes and unfold its wings and tail, before firing its rocket motor and flying around a mile above the surface of Mars for around an hour and a quarter.

The idea is that an atmospheric craft like Ares can explore far more ground than existing rovers, like Spirit and Phoenix, but in much more detail than an orbital spacecraft. It is hoped that it could cover as much as 600 square miles in its short flight.

LINK www.telegraph.co.uk...
Just found this so what do you think about this idea
I found this bit interesting.

While the idea was tabled several years ago, with suggestions it could even have launched by 2007, no progress has so far been made.

Very old idea so why go with it now
I personally think NASA as lost its way and has no clue what its doing but that is just my opinion.
Another link marsairplane.larc.nasa.gov...

THANKYOU

NASA is a funnel. Money goes in, money goes out. Do you think it really costs $1,000 for a space hammer?
Better than orbital surveyors?
We have military and spy sats that could read a stamp on a cracker from space, Hubble can see 12 billion light years away. We do not need this. Feed some poor people for the same cost.

reply to post by dashen


I agree in part that NASA just wastes money like that stupid space station and this thing is only a drone and it will only stay in the are for a couple of hours at the most.
I think they should get man back on the moon that is a lot closer and there is so much we do not know about it that makes it worthwhile.

THANKYOU

Yeah... how about we turn some of that money inward, you know.. towards the ailing residents of planet earth, instead of hucking it into space.

When was the last time NASA did something really useful? I mean, literally worthy of praise for advancing science in a rewarding fashion. Not "prestige", I'm talking something worthy here, like a mission to determine how feasible it would be to colonize the moon, for instance.

Launching rockets into space is no longer useful. It's lost it's charm and reward. Oooh... Look at the multi-billion dollar project launch, how pretty. What is their mission? Oh, you know, just go into space and sit around and do basically nothing, then come back.. really rewarding. Oh no, the rocket exploded and everyone died....

The time has come to pool our money elsewhere until we're ready for Real space missions. NASA just isn't what it used to be.

[edit on 26-11-2009 by SyphonX]

Originally posted by SyphonX
Yeah... how about we turn some of that money inward, you know.. towards the ailing residents of planet earth, instead of hucking it into space.

Why are some people under the impression that NASA fills all there rockets full of money, launching it all into space, never to be seen again? You realize that the money goes to peoples salaries, equipment etc. All the money is spent here on Earth, creating high tech jobs and business as well as spin-off technologies. Not to mention the knowledge we gain, which you can't put a price on.

Take a look at the Distribution of NASA funds by state. Every State benefits in some way with funding from NASA.

Back to the OP.

I like the idea of a flying vehicle to explore Mars, but I wonder if a balloon or a blimp might be better. Especially if it could land and take off again or at the very least, be able to hover over an area of interest, if the winds aren't too strong.

[edit on 27-11-2009 by jra]

reply to post by mars1

The airplane has a 6.25 m wingspan with a total wet mass of 185 kg and has to ability to fly over 600 km through the atmosphere of Mars with 45 kg of MMH / MON3 propellant.

ntrs.nasa.gov...

In five years, the two Mars Exploration Rovers have covered a combined distance of about 21 km.

It sounds pretty cool but I doubt it will be selected.




[edit on 11/27/2009 by Phage]

Originally posted by Phage
...In five years, the two Mars Exploration Rovers have covered a combined distance of about 21 km...

This is a fact that few people realize.

Many people think the rovers can drive all over Mars...but actually, if the rovers were put in the middle of a small Earth city, the distance each has covered in over 5-1/2 years would barely put them on the outskirts of that same city.

It would take me less than 2 hours to walk the distance each rover has covered in over 5 years.


[edit on 11/27/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


You make a good point there it really puts it in prospective i think they should put at least two mapping satellite's up there with a high quality camera on board Mars needs to be mapped in more high quality could solve some mysteries too the drone is not a good idea because it will not cover a lot of ground.

THANKYOU

Sounds like a waste to me.

Robots are fine, but they are worth a lot more when there are humans nearby; they should supplement, not replace, human exploration.

For my money the best plan is to commercialize space by getting a real space station built for zero-g manufactures, tourism, and research. Use it to establish not a base but a city on the moon. The current best bet is using the recetnly discovered lava tubes as building sites.

Then on to Mars, with people, not just lame robots.

reply to post by mars1

Right now there are two very good satellites in orbit around Mars; Mars Express and Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter.

ARES would be able to perform tasks that neither an orbital or surface platform can.

reply to post by Phage


Are you on about this phage.

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. - -- In the wake of criticism that NASA's next-generation Constellation Program rockets are behind schedule and over budget, agency engineers are hastily reviewing alternative designs for a new heavy-lift rocket capable of exploring the solar system affordably and relatively quickly.
Among the options they are looking at: a rocket made of the space shuttle's external fuel tank, engines and solid-rocket boosters that has been championed by freelance engineers and hobbyists, and a successor to the Saturn V that once carried astronauts to the moon.

LINK www.chicagotribune.com...
If so looks like it's not in there plans if it's not this you are talking about is there another ARES program sorry for sounding a little uneducated on the subject you have a lot of knowledge on this sort of thing thanks.

THANKYOU

NASA is currently developing ARES rockets as part of its CONSTELLATION program.

ARES I

ARES IV

ARES V



then there's the ARES Mars scout proposal

Aerial
Regional-scale
Environmental
Survey of Mars

ARES Scout Proposal



is it just a case of NASA running out of acronyms? or could they have another totally different but much more sinister ARES program hiding in plain sight?

"yea, we need to spend this much for the ARES program. what do you mean which one? i mean the "ARES" program!"

right.

[edit on 11.27.09 by toreishi]

reply to post by mars1


No.
I'm talking about your OP.
Aerial Regional-scale Environmental Surveyor

reply to post by Phage


Thank you Phage but the problem with it is it will not stay up for long so it's not going to cover much ground but the ground it covers there would be some good image's.
But NASA are at a point where they do not know what to do at the moment.

THANKYOU

the good thing about this ARES scout program is that it gives NASA the flexibility to go to specific places which they deem interesting, and it won't just be collecting images, it'll also carry a mass spectrometer to analyze gases and their chemical composition in order to assess if there are living systems on Mars.

reply to post by toreishi


Thank you for the video's after watching them all i got to say is this is absolutely ridiculous its like a toy plane it would probably fail.
Im glad im not putting money into this if they go with this i think it will fail.

THANKYOU

this one looks a lot worse than the ARES scout



it looked ridiculous and it flew and i guess it failed those people who were hoping that mankind wouldn't be able to fly. luckily, most people don't think like the poster above me does, or do they?

[edit on 11.28.09 by toreishi]

reply to post by toreishi


Now now it's nice to see you have a sense of humour what i was trying to say is to me it seems a step backwards that's all.
Like i said above somewhere if it works it will get some good image's and data but it will not cover a lot of ground so please do not say it like i have a closed mind i am no expert in the subject i am here to learn like most and i have my own opinions just like you.

THANKYOU