I'm not saying it can't be done, just that the technology required will take many decades to develop and there will also need to be a huge amount of preparation - the size and mass of the craft will likely have to be huge compared to the ISS as it will have to store supplies and fuel for that period as well as have sufficient radiation shielding, so it will likely have to be assembled in orbit.People currently stay alive perfectly fine on the space station. I think the record stay on the space station was just over a year. I think 14/18 months. It can be done. Like I said, we just need someone willing to take a chance.
Thanks, gives me something to watch for tonightThere is a Netflix series called "Mars" that explains how they want to achieve this:
Mars | Netflix
Mars. 2016 13+ 1 Season. Fact meets fiction in this docudrama chronicling the journey of a spacecraft crew as it embarks in 2033 on a mission to colonize the .
Don't think that will happen.Matter of time. Dont know if we will set foot on Mars in 2030, but I do believe that Humans will colonise other habitable planets. Please just leave the religious zealots behind... Dont need them on another planet... Let them stay behind on their flat earth.
I think it's far more likely now that the Chinese will get there first. While the rest of the world argues about how many genders there are, they're making vast strides in all the areas that require large technological infrastructure discipline.I'm still disappointed they didn't do it by 1990, as the space buffs said when the Apollo program ended.
Maybe it'll need another Cold War to get them going...
Couldn't agree more. It will definitely happen between 2030 and 2040 sometime. We might as well start now. We literally only have 3 million years +- to spend on Earth before it's consumed by the sun as the sun reaches its dying days. Baby steps.You know over the course of the day I've thought long and hard about this question. I suspect we'll be a few years behind. Most likely in the year 2033.
this,No, I think funding and as it is USA and China already fighting over REM metals - which I am sure will e a big component in such a venture. Anyhow I think scientists should rather put effort into cleaning the mess that is earth and supply us all with food, shelter, water and clothing than some stupid rock in space. And I have a couple of "people" I would pay for to go to Mars, Moon, venus any place that is very very far.
A law signed in March 2017 by US President Donald Trump gives NASA an annual budget of about $19.5 billion (R264-odd million), and it may rise to $19.9 billion in 2019.
Either amount sounds like a windfall — until you consider that the total gets split among all of the agency's divisions and ambitious projects: the James Webb Space Telescope, the giant rocket project called Space Launch System, and far-flung missions to the sun, Jupiter, Mars, the Asteroid Belt, the Kuiper Belt, and the edge of the solar system. (By contrast, the US military gets a budget of about $600 billion (just shy of R2 trillion) per year. One project within that budget — the modernisation and now expansion of America's nuclear arsenal— may even cost as much as $1.7 trillion over 30 years.)
"NASA's portion of the federal budget peaked at 4% in 1965. For the past 40 years it has remained below 1%, and for the last 15 years it has been driving toward 0.4% of the federal budget," Apollo 7 astronaut Walter Cunningham said during a 2015 congressional testimony.
In 2004, for example, the Bush administration tasked NASA with coming up with a way to replace the space shuttle, which was due to retire, and also return to the moon. The agency came up with the Constellation programme to land astronauts on the moon, using a rocket called Ares and a spaceship called Orion.
NASA spent $9 billion over five years designing, building, and testing hardware for that human spaceflight programme. Yet after President Barack Obama took office — and the Government Accountability Office released a report about NASA's inability to estimate Constellation's cost — Obama pushed to scrap the programme and signed off on the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket instead.
Trump hasn't scrapped SLS. But he did change Obama's goal of launching astronauts to an asteroid to moon and Mars missions.
Such frequent changes to NASA's expensive priorities has led to cancellation after cancellation, a loss of about $20 billion, and years of wasted time and momentum.
Astronauts explain why nobody has visited the moon in more than 45 years — and the reasons are depressingAstronauts often say the biggest reasons why humans haven't returned to the moon are budgetary and political hurdles — not scientific or technical challenges.www.businessinsider.co.za