Moon or Mars?

Settle in Moon as base and launch to Mars would make much easy. Of course, the fund can be the problem unless, together with several other countries work team and well fund would be great.
 
I think you're confusing nazi with Germans...... Not all Germans were nazis...

Germans willing to work for the demented Nazi party... those poor germans must have been tricked into thing they were making toys santa
 
ISS is not even completed yet


Yes I am well aware of its current status. It is my understanding that the astronauts are about to install the final module which was made in Japan, on ISS soon.

What I am saying is the NASA could make a long term plan and budget to make their ultimate goal which is to go to Mars straight instead of Moon in 15 to 20 years' time.
 
we merely landed and hopped around Moon. We know nothing about establishing space station so Moon is the safe bet for it. Mars? you're really screwed if anything happens. You're on your own because it takes 6 months to get there so there's no coming back. What you fly with you is what you will have for next several months.

Establishing a complete space station on Moon is the most logical and safest way to do it. Lunar Station can serve as refueling/supply/communication/etc. station for Mars.

I understand your points. We do not have to build Martian station when we arrive there for the first time. We can stay there for two to three days to collect data, soils, and so on and bring them home. In 5 to 10 years we can go to Mars to build stations and hubs there.
 
Yes I am well aware of its current status. It is my understanding that the astronauts are about to install the final module which was made in Japan, on ISS soon.

What I am saying is the NASA could make a long term plan and budget to make their ultimate goal which is to go to Mars straight instead of Moon in 15 to 20 years' time.

a long-term plan and budget is pretty tough to stay on the track because the next Administration dictates those term for NASA.

Short-term Presidency and long-term NASA plan do not go well with each other :( That's why I support privatization of space sector
 
If we go straight to Mars, landed on it, hopped around... all with success. Great!!! But... so what? I can guarantee you that we do NOT have the capability to stay in Mars long term (or even getting there in the first place). This would require a HUGE investment with nil return. Let's face it, the space industry isn't profitable at all. However, going to the moon and setting up a long term base is potentially profitable (both financially and scientifically). If you look at the comments by those who want to go to Mars, 90% of them say "Well I want to see it in my lifetime!". Kind of selfish if you ask me.

Moon first, then Mars. We don't need a ego booster trip to Mars, especially in this economy.

Nil return? Profitability? We can be successful when we bring a great return and profitability which are great deal of knowledge, interests, education and children and grandchildren.

Economy? It requires a long term plan like 15 to 20 years in time so the economy can be boosted by creating long-term direct and indirect jobs.
 
lol! good rhyming!


:eek3: shocking yet interesting

CC Sinned, you meant Werner Von Braun?

If so, did you know that he hated Adolf Hitler and Nazis? He wanted to see rockets for space travel, not weapons.
 
Nil return? Profitability? We can be successful when we bring a great return and profitability which are great deal of knowledge, interests, education and children and grandchildren.

Economy? It requires a long term plan like 15 to 20 years in time so the economy can be boosted by creating long-term direct and indirect jobs.

Check out why the Apollo Program got shut down.... I'm willing to bet that if we go to Mars, the program will be shut down soon after.

You get more of a knowledge setting a long term base on the Moon than having 2 days on Mars. We WILL go to Mars eventually, so it isn't as if we are saying no to Mars. We just have to be smart about it.
 
I would prefer to focus on Mars because the Sun is growing bigger and bigger which will push the habitability zone from Earth to Mars, and Mars have the ice cap on south and north poles which feature the water, and also Olympus Mon, at 90,000 feet high (the highest mountain in whole of solar system) which can be very benefitically for the water source. I just have more faith in Mars than the Moon, Moon is just a rock ball that goes around Earth.

By the way, I agree with some others that Moon can be good for start, but Mars would be even more great benefits.
 
I think, if moon is successful, then any team could start to work on a project for Mars. I think it would be more safer. So, first is Moon for the first testing, and then second is Mars if the first testing is passed.

As for me, I'm not interested to go there if they are successful and be ready for people to land on either moon or Mars. I prefer to stay my home, anyway. :)

So... my questions are...

I already know Mars flag look like, but what is flag look like for Moon? Lastly, I think there would be new flags for countries of Moon (or Mars). Do you think so?

Sorry for being off topic a bit. This thread got me curious. :P
 
Check out why the Apollo Program got shut down.... I'm willing to bet that if we go to Mars, the program will be shut down soon after.

You get more of a knowledge setting a long term base on the Moon than having 2 days on Mars. We WILL go to Mars eventually, so it isn't as if we are saying no to Mars. We just have to be smart about it.
yeah. so we should start and do a little at a time. begin with the closest and than move further out..
 
Building a base on a moon is more cost efficient. It's also a lot safer, since there will be constant communication and the moon doesn't exactly have any unpredictable weather patterns. I also think launching a spaceship to and from the moon would require a lot less fuel and planning.
 
Back
Top