Mars landing tonight

[Dave Krall CFII]

Well done. Compared to our moon, I don't think most people realize how many more magnitudes difficult it would be to put 2-3 people on Mars for a few days, let alone bring them back alive....

 

[olasek]

let alone bring them back alive....

Apparently there is a sizable group of one-way volunteers

 

[Concorde]

New HD pic from Mars !

 

[flightwriter]

New HD pic from Mars !

I hear that the original rover design included two amplified external speakers, and a Slim Whitman CD permanently mounted.

 

[azure]

Looks like some smog in the distance. Apparently the idea that smog is man-made is a hoax.

More likely dust hanging in the Martian air.

And that is one AWESOME photo. Gawds.

 

[olasek]

And they managed to complete the panorama, eliminating most of the offending "black" squares, this is a 9 MB medium resolution, there is also a pretty insane 34 MB version.

http://www.db-prods.net/marsroversimages/Curiosity/2013/Sol170_176_Mastcam34_m.jpg

 

[azure]

And they managed to complete the panorama, eliminating most of the offending "black" squares, this is a 9 MB medium resolution, there is also a pretty insane 34 MB version.

http://www.db-prods.net/marsroversimages/Curiosity/2013/Sol170_176_Mastcam34_m.jpg

Hmmm, not sure I agree. This one seems to have even more black squares than the previous one. They're all toward the top though, so all they block is the sky. It's like standing under a big black funny shaped awning.

Here's a better version:
http://www.db-prods.net/marsroversimages/Curiosity/2013/Sol170_176_Mastcam34_m_postcard.jpg

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

Hmmm, not sure I agree. This one seems to have even more black squares than the previous one. They're all toward the top though, so all they block is the sky. It's like standing under a big black funny shaped awning.

Here's a better version:
http://www.db-prods.net/marsroversimages/Curiosity/2013/Sol170_176_Mastcam34_m_postcard.jpg

Great PIX, land doesn't look too good for farming though, -maybe after building lots of stonewalls.....

 

[us AAirways]

Well done. Compared to our moon, I don't think most people realize how many more magnitudes difficult it would be to put 2-3 people on Mars for a few days, let alone bring them back alive....

I would think they would have to be there for more than a few days considering it takes 6-9 months to get to Mars.

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

I would think they would have to be there for more than a few days considering it takes 6-9 months to get to Mars.

That would be nice, and very cool. But we don't even have close to the technology to get a team through something as simple as the routine 5 day Martian sand storms, let alone get them there, much less a chance of getting them back. And even if we did have the hardware to give it a good shot, we don't really have the money to blow for an in-person exploration.

For now, robot rovers are our only realistic alternative and give huge bang for our planetary exploration buck.

 

[Skylane81E]

That would be nice, and very cool. But we don't even have close to the technology to get a team through something as simple as the routine 5 day Martian sand storms, let alone get them there, much less a chance of getting them back. And even if we did have the hardware to give it a good shot, we don't really have the money to blow for an in-person exploration.

For now, robot rovers are our only realistic alternative and give huge bang for our planetary exploration buck.

The tech we have, and have for a while. Technologically it wouldn't take much more than Apollo, once you get humans out of earth orbit I'd argue that going to mars is a logistics exercise.

Now the machines, or the money to build the machines, or the drive to raise the money is severely lacking.

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

The tech we have, and have for a while. Technologically it wouldn't take much more than Apollo, once you get humans out of earth orbit I'd argue that going to mars is a logistics exercise.

Now the machines, or the money to build the machines, or the drive to raise the money is severely lacking.

Has the tech improved recently? A few years ago I saw them try to keep a simulated life module going in a simulated Martian sandstorm and it couldn't make it for 20 minutes, let alone the usual 5 days.

Obviously we can get the smallest ships there one way, of a much smaller size and complexity than that needed for a human mission. Think of all the huge tonnage of nutrients and water and heating fuel. Maybe a mother ship launched from Skylab but how big would it have to be? The surface launcher would have to be way more substantial than the one used in the Moon's low gravity.

 

[gismo]

The tech we have, and have for a while. Technologically it wouldn't take much more than Apollo, once you get humans out of earth orbit I'd argue that going to mars is a logistics exercise.

Now the machines, or the money to build the machines, or the drive to raise the money is severely lacking.

I think there's a very good reason ironically based on the realities of life support that most sci-fi trips to other planets involved either a rate of speed we can't accomplish, some form of suspended animation, or both.

 

[olasek]

through something as simple as the routine 5 day Martian sand storms,

I seriously doubt it is a serious threat, because of extremely thin atmosphere these sand-storm do not compare to sand storms here on Earth.