Dragnmoon |
I had to share this... this is so cool...
Here is a short video of earth filmed by the Deep Impact spacecraft at a distance of 31 million miles from earth..
Darrin Drader Contributor |
Very cool.
One of my friends and I were discussing the proposed Mars mission the other day and were wondering what sort of psychological effects it will have on the crew. Not only will the astronauts be trapped in a tiny space for three years, but they will also be the first humans ever to watch the Earth completely disappear from view as they leave orbit and proceed to Mars. He thinks that the mission would have a high chance of failure due to human created problems. He feels that the astronauts would have a pretty high chance of developing psychoses, which could put the mission at risk. I think he raises some interesting questions about what kinds of stresses human beings really can and cannot handle.
I brought up the lunar missions, and his response to that was that at no time did the lunar missions ever leave Earth's orbit. Yes, it's a ways out there to the moon, but it isn't so far that a return home can't be done in a matter of days. Mars, at some point during the mission, could be on the opposite side of the solar system from Earth. You can't simply pack up and go home at a moment's notice. You have to wait for the right launch window.
Molech |
Well, NASA hasn't been to Mars yet but I've been in Uranus.
--------------------
Yeah, 3 years alone with only a handful of astronauts.
Damn.
Wait a minute, if they were all beautiful women, strong chess players, well read & educated and were die hard Gamers, and at least one of them was a great cook --
Why, it sounds like paradise.
Add that to the fact that your name would go down in history BIGGER than Armstrong's! And when you did get back in 8 years or so you'd be a world hero and get all the ladies you could ever have...!
-W. E. Ray
Jal Dorak |
Very cool.
One of my friends and I were discussing the proposed Mars mission the other day and were wondering what sort of psychological effects it will have on the crew. Not only will the astronauts be trapped in a tiny space for three years, but they will also be the first humans ever to watch the Earth completely disappear from view as they leave orbit and proceed to Mars. He thinks that the mission would have a high chance of failure due to human created problems. He feels that the astronauts would have a pretty high chance of developing psychoses, which could put the mission at risk. I think he raises some interesting questions about what kinds of stresses human beings really can and cannot handle.
I brought up the lunar missions, and his response to that was that at no time did the lunar missions ever leave Earth's orbit. Yes, it's a ways out there to the moon, but it isn't so far that a return home can't be done in a matter of days. Mars, at some point during the mission, could be on the opposite side of the solar system from Earth. You can't simply pack up and go home at a moment's notice. You have to wait for the right launch window.
They worried about the same things when putting humans out of the atmosphere, and then for spacewalks, and then for lunar missions. Hence all the poor dogs and monkeys. Each time, humans adapted beyond the belief of the skeptics.
If anything, the mission will fail because of NASA's conceits about safety.
waltero |
Apollo missions 8 and 10-17 all entered lunar orbit with 11, 12, and 14-17 landing on it. I think that qualifies as leaving earth orbit. It's true they were only 3 days away from earth, but at the time NASA would have no way to get another mission to them to save them had they experienced a problem. There simply wasn't a stack of rockets ready to go at any given time. That makes Apollo 13's survival all the more fascinating.
Jal Dorak |
Apollo missions 8 and 10-17 all entered lunar orbit with 11, 12, and 14-17 landing on it. I think that qualifies as leaving earth orbit. It's true they were only 3 days away from earth, but at the time NASA would have no way to get another mission to them to save them had they experienced a problem. There simply wasn't a stack of rockets ready to go at any given time. That makes Apollo 13's survival all the more fascinating.
I think they meant that by going to the moon, which is in Earth Orbit, they were still orbiting the earth - which is a lot less margin of error than Mars.
Hey, if it makes NASA feel any better, at least they aren't leaving Sol Orbit!
Galdor the Great |
Has anyone read The Case for Mars by Robert Zubrin? This book shows the "correct" way of planning and implementing a manned mission to Mars. I won't go into detail of the specific technologies mentioned, mainly due to the fact that the book came out in the mid-90s and I'm not sure if the technology mentioned is any more or less feasible now than it was a decade ago.
Chapter 5: Killing the Dragons, Avoiding the Sirens talks about some of the current objections to a manned Mars mission. The hazards listed are Radiation, Zero Gravity, Human Factors, Dust Storms (on Mars), Back Contamination (if Martian life was to be found), and finally Zubrin explains why the missionto Mars doesn't require a build up of assets, or prequel missions, to the moon.
Zubrin's essays on these topics can be found by doing some internet searches for Robert Zubrin, Mars Direct, or by going to the Mars Society website.
I don't claim to have any relevant knowledge in any of these fields to support or deny the claims but Zubrin does make some valid points.
I strongly suggest that anyone interested in a manned mission to Mars check out his book.
Molech |
If anything, the mission will fail because of NASA's conceits about safety.
Yeah, that's a good point. Safety shouldn't be too high on the priority list. Heck, all those guys on the Apollo 13 mission lived right? And afterall, human life and billions of dollars of equipment and research are replaceable.
-------
To this day, when someone asks me what NASA stands for I reply, "Needs Another Seven Astronauts."
-W. E. Ray
Molech |
I think Disney stole the idea of a certain cartoon dog from the planet pluto.
I've been pissed my whole life about the naming of the planets.
WTF do we need Mercury for, huh? And while Uranus jokes never, never get old -- Ever -- we don't need to name a planet after Kronos's Dad!!!
Jupiter, Neptune, Pluto -- all good.
BUT WHERE THE F*#k IS Minerva?!?! And Juno? And Apollo?
For that matter -- why the HELL are we using the cheap ass Roman names?!? Ancient Rome is worth dripping dingleberries compared to the Greeks!
We need to start a movement to change the names of the planets to their REAL names!
(I guess this isn't really a reply to your post, Eileen, but it's what I thought of when I read your "Pluto" post.)
-W. E. Ray