One-Way Trip to Mars

So what is this single human on mars going to do? MUCH cheaper and more practical to use robots. You can have them working there for years. It wouldn't be practical to send a human and all the life support equipment and supplies that would be required to achieve the same results. We need to focus on more beneficial goals like increasing our launch efficiency. Once we can pull stuff out of earth's gravity well for a more reasonable price, a trip to Mars will be practical. I think there should be more focus on building a space elevator. Supposedly, we already know how to make material strong enough for the cables. Something like this will require a lot of international negotiation. IE where to locate the base, construction of materials. Launch of facilities into orbit, etc... Treaties to protect it, etc... Once it's in place, colonizing the moon, building space stations, or going to mars will be a cinch.

Doug-
There is nothing news worthy concerning a suicide mars mission. No engineer in their right mind would work on such a project. Any science section in any periodical should approach the subject of space travel with some seriousness. Sending someone on a "one-way" mars mission is nuts

Some of these responses are ridiculous. Do you realize how many people died trying to make the first powered flight? The Wright brothers weren't the first people who tried to fly, nor were they the last. Even after they were successful plenty of people got themselves killed trying to repeat what they did.

Also the whole 'wait for the technology to come' argument is completely illogical. Technology is not some disembodied force that propels itself along. The only way to advance the state of technology (remember, technology is applied science) is to actually go and do it, to actually go an apply it.

You have to actually read the original article. It isn't a death mission at all. The idea is that you'd continue to send a stream of astronauts, each one carrying a larger payload faster as each successful mission lead to advances in the next. Eventually you'll start sending more people, building up a colony and infrastructure, and eventually you'll be able to make return trips. Yes, the first people that get there likely will die there, but they won't necessarily die tragically or alone.

We're all going to die someday. The only difference is when and how.

I think we should. This is the perfect opportunity to capture some of the some excitement an sense of common purpose that was around during Apollo, but on an international scale.

Sure...We could pipe David Bowie ("Space Oddity") into the spaceship as the volunteer astronaut journeys toward Mars. You know...the song that starts with, "Ground Control to Major Tom..."

Wow, I've got a long list of people that would be perfect for a one way trip! And I bet they could be trained to be an astronaut too.

Could they make it for two so bush and cheney could go together.... ?

There really is no point in sending a single person on a one-way trip. You need a team of scientists who specialize in different disciplines, you need samples selected by humans to be returned to earth (which robots can do, but not as effectively), and a human needs companionship during such a long trip. Going to Mars is not just about getting someone there, to say we've made it, but to lay the groundwork for scientific exploration, colonization, and resource exploitation.

Such limited thinking didn't get us to the Moon and back! We should be figuring out how to do the whole mission right. I'm certain people thought the same thing when first considering sending someone to the moon!

Why not send the means to get off Mars and back to earth on a separate mission, either before or after you send a man (or woman). On trips to the moon the main ship remained in orbit while another ship landed and returned the astronauts.

I'm sure if you ask around you will find plenty of people who can come up with ideas that will work!

Outdoors safety courses emphasize the importance of hiking with a buddy, who can help you in an emergency. We are thinking of sending a man alone to Mars? It's a death sentence. One accident or medical condition and who is going to help him? Solitary confinement is a tough sentence, that leads to depression and madness. Confined on Mars, millions of miles from the next person will leave us one unhappy Martian. I agree robots are cheaper, require less life support and no moral issues of abandonment.

The bigger question is that with our country 9 trillion dollars in debt, and 47 million Americans have no heath insurance why on Earth ( or Mars) would we want to spent more billions to explore a place that cannot benefit us in the least?

not a good analogy at all Mist.

for 1 thing , the quest for man to fly had benefits that were immediate for humanity in general , eg ; once we actually had airplanes that were somewhat reliable (which were themselves foreseeable by most engineers and scientists of the early 20th century) the first thing we did was employ them for useful purposes such as carrying the mail/medicine ,transport over otherwise non negotiable terrain ,aerial cartography ,etc.

and whats the immediate usefulness of a man on mars? uniting the planet? Haw! unlike early airplanes and aviation technology , todays engineers and scientists cant even foresee or imagine the basic technical advances needed to make the basics of a mission to mars (and back) a plausible effort in the first place,not now or even in the near future ,according to them anyway .

so it can be done...thats never a particularly good reason to do anything . i dont see humanity gaining alot from one man (or even a colony) on mars. at least not anything nearly like the ability to fly has given mankind.

robotics and such can largely do the same things as humans ,much more efficiently ,they are ethically easy to replace and without worry in many other respects as well ,compared to the human counterpart that is.

I second the nomination to send George W. Bush!

SCREW MARS... if this is going to be a one way mission... lets send them into the sun... way cooler and think about how many people would watch and they could load the ship with fireworks and time it for 4th of july and we could all jump up and down waving little american flags!

Paul Carpenter
Why do you say that there is no benefit?

Maybe if we called it "homesteading" instead of a one way death mission it would stand a better chance of happening. Maybe even send along a tent and some light weight furniture. lol.

I honestly believe we should wait on this. Technology as it is won't help us, and neither will the current affairs of the world. All this will do is create yet another conflict and Mars will become something to fight over.

And as for this article...it could use some improvement. The tone is horribly biased, it seems. That's just what I think.

I thought there would be many more people who would be very interested to participate even though it is a one-way mission. My husband and I talk about this all the time and would both go in a heartbeat. We dream about going into space and could care less if we ever come back to this planet. We are so fascinated with outer space and what it holds that we don't give staying on Earth permanently a second thought. We're ready to move on to new frontiers. More than anything we simply think it is fascinating.

Some immediate candidates for the one-way trip come to mind. For example, (1) Hillary Clinton; (2) B. Hussein Obama; (3) Harry Reid; (4) Howard Dean; (5) Jack Murtha; (6) Nancy Pelosi; (7) Charlie Rangel; (8) Bill Clinton; (9) Jimmy Carter; (10) Chuck Schumer; (11) Jim Webb; (12) Barbara Boxer; or (13) Diane Feinstein.

I think my point is clear. Any chance to send any of these idiots above to space, forever, would greatly benefit our nation.

I'll be your huckleberry. Who knows? I might outlive the other 6 billion (minus 1) if things keep going the way they are now...

A Sun trip might work. Don't worry about being burned up. We will just make sure we leave at night.