** The Official Space Flight Thread - The Space Station and Beyond **

He said that separation and second stage ignition worked fine. What broke off there was the nose cone. Which they had to remove and replace on the day. Not sure how it was attached but in the blog post you can see someone with a screwdriver. Stronger bolts needed i think :D

Impressive acceleration stats on that thing though, 20G?
 
SlyReaper said:
What amuses me are the comments I've seen floating around about how $2.5bil is a waste of money for a Mars rover. This is in the same week we're running a sporting event that cost about 6 times that much.

*despair*
Click to expand...

I know,would be good to hear their excuses why they think in a negative way about science projects.
We would still be living in caves if they had it there way is not to far from the truth.:(:(
 
sigma said:
I can't believe that I have only just stumbled across this:

http://mars-one.com/en/

I would love to go!
Click to expand...

Oh wow, same I would spend the rest of my life there.

Not convinced they will pull the funding off. Technically possible. NASA has been working on it for decades and it's certainly doable. Still I suppose not long to wait for the first satelite launch. Let's see if they even hit that target.
 
There really needs to be more research into the conditions of Mars before a manned mission is a go, particularly the rather missing EM field and how that will be for anyone there.

Perhaps they will go crazy because of it?
 
StriderX said:
There really needs to be more research into the conditions of Mars before a manned mission is a go, particularly the rather missing EM field and how that will be for anyone there.

Perhaps they will go crazy because of it?
Click to expand...

Or they do what's in the photos and simply burry the living modules in mars rock. Which will shield them from radation. Like has been discussed and accosted for years.
 
Glaucus said:
Or they do what's in the photos and simply burry the living modules in mars rock. Which will shield them from radation. Like has been discussed and accosted for years.
Click to expand...

The missing field is what i am wondering about, not the obvious radiation problem.

We know for a fact that EM fields have a profound effect on the mind/brain, it does change someone's attitude, how will a planet with basically none of this or at least very little of it effect any settlers?

The ISS is also not a good example of what i mean, it still remains inside the envelope of Earth's field.

I am probably wrong, but even the slightest chance of this is too much.
 
Last edited:
StriderX said:
The missing field is what i am wondering about, not the obvious radiation problem.

We know for a fact that EM fields have a profound effect on the mind/brain, it does change someone's attitude, how will a planet with basically none of this or at least very little of it effect any settlers?

The ISS is also not a good example of what i mean, it still remains inside the envelope of Earth's field.
Click to expand...

How about the moon, NASA and others have been looking at mars for years, they see no issues, well plenty of issues, but nothing unworkable. So I don't see it as a problem. Isn't it also massive em fields that affect humans, rather than low to zero.

Slightest chance is to much? The rocket could explode on takeoff. Pioneers, are not put off by such risks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom