We will probably perform a human mission and return samples before a robot goes and picks up the Perseverance samples.
We’ve been mars-capable since Apollo. It’s a matter of will, which is a political function of cost, which is falling rapidly.
We’ve been mars-capable since Apollo. It’s a matter of will, which is a political function of cost, which is falling rapidly.
serious citation needed!
you cant make shit up. Apollo and saturn5 were nowhere near getting humans to mars. Not even close.
It got us to moon with bare minimum. A weekend trip vs 6 months trip.
The scale up of needed resources is mind boggling. At every step. I mean pick any step and explain how Apollo could achieve it.
The gist of it is that the Saturn V has enough delta v to get to Mars, on the count of Mars having an atmosphere, which can be used for aerobraking.
Given the capability of reaching Mars with a Saturn V, the rest of the plan revolved around using Apollo hardware, with some modification, for both transport and habitats(re-use of empty stages featured prominently).
Ultimately even if we had hit some roadblock with martian soil or what have you, in an alternate timeline we could have at least sent uncrewed test flights to Mars and back.
You have roughly 40t at best for a craft that needs to land there.
quick google. astronauts need around 1.7kg of food per day, x3 crew, x(8x30) days is:
thats 1200 kg of food - one way - just to get there food.
And then you are doing to do what exactly?
> the rest of the plan revolved around using Apollo hardware, with some modification, for both transport and habitats(re-use of empty stages featured prominently).
This is basically handwaving problems away, massive problems.
The best I can agree is that a crewed fly-by could have been possible. But landing on mars would mean death sooner or later.
It's over 400 pages and contains some of the details you seem to be curious about.