I've always said the same thing re: a proposed manned mission to Mars....

[Nomad]

...that it's a stupid idea and it would be pointless.

I agree 100%. I think we gain plenty of knowledge by sending unmanned probes with robotic exploration vehicles and orbiting space based telescopes.

Risking the lives of humans and spending the zillions it would take to do so, is just not worth it, IMO.

**********************************

Sending astronauts to Mars would be stupid, astronaut says
By Tom Green
BBC Radio 5 Live

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/science...nment-46364179

Bill Anders, lunar module pilot of Apollo 8, the first human spaceflight to leave Earth's orbit, said sending crews to Mars was "almost ridiculous".

Nasa is currently planning new human missions to the Moon.

It wants to learn the skills and develop the technology to enable a future human landing on Mars.

Nasa was approached for a response to Anders' comments, but hasn't responded.

Anders, 85, said he's a "big supporter" of the "remarkable" unmanned programmes, "mainly because they're much cheaper". But he says the public support simply isn't there to fund vastly more expensive human missions.

"What's the imperative? What's pushing us to go to Mars?" he said, adding "I don't think the public is that interested".

Meanwhile, robotic probes are still exploring Mars. Last month, the InSight lander, which will sample the planet's interior, successfully touched down at Elysium Planitia.

In December 1968, Anders, along with crewmates Frank Borman and Jim Lovell, lifted off from Cape Canaveral in Florida atop a Saturn V, before completing 10 orbits around the Moon.

The crew of Apollo 8 spent 20 hours in orbit, before returning to Earth.

They splashed down in the Pacific on 27 December, landing just 5,000 yards (4,500 metres) from their target point. They were picked up by the aircraft carrier USS Yorktown.

It was the furthest humans had ever been from their home planet at that point - and a vital stepping stone on the road to Apollo 11's historic moon landing just seven months later.

But the former astronaut is scathing about how Nasa has evolved since the heady days of President John F Kennedy's pledge to land a man on the Moon by the end of the 1960s.

"Nasa couldn't get to the Moon today. They're so ossified... Nasa has turned into a jobs programme... many of the centres are mainly interested in keeping busy and you don't see the public support other than they get the workers their pay and their congressmen get re-elected."

Anders is also critical of the decision to focus on near-Earth orbit exploration after the completion of the Apollo programme in the 1970s. "I think the space shuttle was a serious error. It hardly did anything except have an exciting launch, but it never lived up to its promise," he said.

"The space station is only there because you had a shuttle, and vice-versa. Nasa really mismanaged the manned programme since the late lunar landings."

It's a view that might seem surprising from a proud patriot and servant of the US military, who still remembers his own mission to space with great fondness. It's also a view that Anders accepts doesn't sit too well with some in the space community.

"I think Nasa's lucky to have what they've got - which is still hard, in my mind, to justify. I'm not a very popular guy at Nasa for saying that, but that's what I think," he explained.

His former crewmate, Frank Borman, who commanded the Apollo 8 mission and also spent two weeks in Earth orbit during the Gemini programme, is slightly more enthusiastic.

"I'm not as critical of Nasa as Bill is," he told 5 Live. "I firmly believe that we need robust exploration of our Solar System and I think man is part of that."

But asked about the the plans of Space X founder Elon Musk and Amazon boss Jeff Bezos - who have both talked of launching private missions to Mars, Borman is less complimentary.

"I do think there's a lot of hype about Mars that is nonsense. Musk and Bezos, they're talking about putting colonies on Mars, that's nonsense."

Apollo's legacy
Reflecting on their own historic mission to the Moon, Borman described Apollo 8 as a "great endeavour" and agreed that it had won the space race.

Anders said he felt that the lasting legacy of the mission would be "Earthrise" a photo taken by the crew showing humanity's home planet hanging in the blackness of space above the lunar horizon.

Speaking to BBC Radio 4's PM, their crewmate Jim Lovell also reflected on the Earthrise moment: "When I looked at the Earth itself... I started to wonder why I was here, what's my purpose here… it sort of dawned me," he said.

"And my perspective is that God has given mankind a stage on which to perform. How the play turns out, is up to us."

Frank Borman and Bill Anders were speaking to BBC Radio 5 Live as part of a special documentary on the 50th anniversary of their historic lunar mission. Apollo 8: Christmas On the Far Side of the Moon will be broadcast on 5 Live on 24 December 2018 at 20:00 GMT.

[Irish Exit]

It would be stupid but progress is often written in human blood. The pointless trip to mars today might yield technology that allows us to project ourselves into space faster and with greater precision in order to blow up incoming planet-killing asteroids and alien space craft and the like before they get here. Nuking a meteor off the starboard bow isn't going to do us a lot of good if the billion pieces still are going to reach the atmosphere.

[Cypress]

I've always said the same thing re: a proposed manned mission to Mars....that iI've always said the same thing re: a proposed manned mission to Mars....

...that it's a stupid idea and it would be pointless.

I agree 100%. I think we gain plenty of knowledge by sending unmanned probes with robotic exploration vehicles and orbiting space based telescopes.

Risking the lives of humans and spending the zillions it would take to do so, is just not worth it, IMO.t's a stupid idea and it would be pointless.

I agree 100%. I think we gain plenty of knowledge by sending unmanned probes with robotic exploration vehicles and orbiting space based telescopes.

Risking the lives of humans and spending the zillions it would take to do so, is just not worth it, IMO.

It's a perfectly reasonable opinion, and I cannot say there is anything wrong with it.

I would just point out that exploration is hard wired into human DNA. And I think that means actually human beings setting out for terra incognita.

I don't think a human being really needed to go to the south pole - but not only was it considered important, but there was a race to do it.

We didn't need to send humans to the bottom of the Marianas Trench. But we did.
Scientific research was obviously a secondary consideration of the moon landings.

In fact, I think you could go back 40,000 years and find that human migration across Eurasia, Australia, and the Americas occurred so rapidly, our homo sapien ancestors - at some level - must have been wondering what was across the next mountain range, or what lay across that open strait of water.

[Nomad]

I get what Kacper and Cypress said and I agree, but I think we still have a way to go before we are technologically ready for such a mission.

I'm thinking maybe we should get some more practice by going back to our own moon a few more times.

Try establishing a colony up there, first. If something were to go wrong, we could have a rescue ship queued up and ready to come to the rescue.

With the trip being so much shorter in terms of time and distance, the chances of success would be greatly improved. Plus, we might learn some very valuable lessons through any potential failures that could serve us well on any future Mars mission.

[Cypress]

I get what Kacper and Cypress said and I agree, but I think we still have a way to go before we are technologically ready for such a mission.

I'm thinking maybe we should get some more practice by going back to our own moon a few more times.

Try establishing a colony up there, first. If something were to go wrong, we could have a rescue ship queued up and ready to come to the rescue.

With the trip being so much shorter in terms of time and distance, the chances of success would be greatly improved. Plus, we might learn some very valuable lessons through any potential failures that could serve us well on any future Mars mission.

Indeed, we are probably decades away from having the technology for sending humans to Mars.

I grew up with Apollo, so I have remained a space geek my whole life, and I do not see human missions to Mars as either futile or meaningless. I think, in some sense, it captures what it is to be human. I also think a human Mars mission should be an international effort, because that is the kind of crap that can facilitate meaningful international cooperation and good will. That is such a net positive that one cannot even put a price on.

[Nomad]

Indeed, we are probably decades away from having the technology for sending humans to Mars.

I grew up with Apollo, so I have remained a space geek my whole life, and I do not see human missions to Mars as either futile or meaningless. I think, in some sense, it captures what it is to be human. I also think a human Mars mission should be an international effort, because that is the kind of crap that can facilitate meaningful international cooperation and good will. That is such a net positive that one cannot even put a price on.

I guess I should have clarified by saying "at the present time".

Re: the Apollo missions, I grew up in Brevard County, Florida about fifteen miles "as the crow flies" from the launch pads they blasted off from.

Just step out in the yard and watch the big candle flame rise up through the clouds while the doors and dishes in the cupboards rattled and shook. Along with the ground.

Had several friends over the years who worked at "the cape".

[Controlled Opposition]

What about those silly Van Allen radiation belts which make the Earth a closed system?

[USFREEDOM911]

I get what Kacper and Cypress said and I agree, but I think we still have a way to go before we are technologically ready for such a mission.

I'm thinking maybe we should get some more practice by going back to our own moon a few more times.

Try establishing a colony up there, first. If something were to go wrong, we could have a rescue ship queued up and ready to come to the rescue.

With the trip being so much shorter in terms of time and distance, the chances of success would be greatly improved. Plus, we might learn some very valuable lessons through any potential failures that could serve us well on any future Mars mission.

The biggest positive of using the moon as a "launch pad", is the size and shape of the ship isn't limited to having to escape earth's gravity.

It could be round like a Death Star, square like a borg ship, or any shape we desire.

Plus we might also be able to use "solar sails" for propulsion, instead of solid or liquid fuel.

[Nomad]

The biggest positive of using the moon as a "launch pad", is the size and shape of the ship isn't limited to having to escape earth's gravity.

It could be round like a Death Star, square like a borg ship, or any shape we desire.

Plus we might also be able to use "solar sails" for propulsion, instead of solid or liquid fuel.

I wasn't thinking in terms of using the moon as a launching base, but it's an interesting idea.

Long way off if it ever happens.

[USFREEDOM911]

I wasn't thinking in terms of using the moon as a launching base, but it's an interesting idea.

Long way off if it ever happens.

It would also be easier moving around the things needed to build a craft.