Slashdot Mirror
Why NASA's Road To Mars Plan Proves That It Should Return To the Moon First
MarkWhittington writes: NASASpaceFlight.com published the results of current NASA thinking concerning what needs to be launched and when to support a crewed mission to Phobos and two crewed missions to the Martian surface between 2033 and 2043. The result is a mind-numbingly complex operation involving dozens of launches to cis-lunar space and Mars using the heavy lift Space Launch System. The architecture includes a collection of habitation modules, Mars landers, propulsion units (both chemical rockets and solar electric propulsion) and other parts of a Mars ship.
It doesn't "prove" a damn thing. NASA has been saying that a lunar base is a step to Mars for a decade at least .
From this article published in 2006 on NASA's website regarding why we should return to the moon:
Exploration Preparation
Test technologies, systems, flight operations and exploration techniques to reduce the risks and increase the productivity of future missions to Mars and beyond.
source: http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/home/why_moon.html
Anything that can survive on Mars will do just fine on the Moon, and the Moon can be a nice test bed for Martian equipment.
Uh, no. For the reasons you list and more, there is very little that will work on both the Moon and Mars, unless it's massively over-engineered.
Moon has 1/6 gravity, Mars has 1/3. Moon has no atmosphere worth speaking of, Mars has some. Moon has huge temperature variations between light and shade, Mars has far less. Moon has highly abrasive dust, Martian dust is worn down by the storms.
The list goes on and on.