Do you think it's right for NASA to run the 'One-way trip to mars' misson?

[-Danube-]

Many people would love the chance to go into space and even Mars, but do you think it's right that NASA should be able to cut costs by not allowing the people who go on this pioneering mission to return? One of the main reasons why it is so expensive is because we do not have the exact correct equipment and technology at this time, but still the USA and NASA want to be the first people to land people on Mars but do you think that this is fair to come at the cost of human lives, even if they are volunteers.

One of the main problems is the solar radiation that they will be exposed to on their way to Mars, there are ways to shield this but the equipment is too heavy at this time and would take far too much fuel to lift off. This means that the passengers aboard would be put at a very high risk of developing aggressive cancers which will kill them in a short space of time. To be an astronaut you have to be quite physically and mentally fit, so by NASA doing this program, just because they want to win the race to the red planet, they are going to let perfectly healthy people die.

Do you think it's the own fault of the volunteers if they die as they knew what they were signing up for? Or do you think it is unfair of NASA to tempt people onto this mission that will end in their deaths in the name of science? Should we just wait until we have the technologies to do a safe mission to Mars?


DEBATE!

[Conservative,]

They need to wait until the technology is ready.

Having said that im sure all people going on this trip would be told about the consequences and dangers and therefore will be doing it at their own risk.

So concluding...I think that they should do it when the technology to protect ect is ready.

[Gina]

I think it can be risky as for the moment we're still discovering new things and at the moment I dont think all the technology we need is here

I think they need to wait untill they've got the technology Its a bad danger risk

In the future they may do this again and find out they've got the tech now, so why did they do it before

If People do choose to do it, sure they may be told this will happen, this may happen, whats the point, if they wait a few years
We could have the same thing but they have the tech and money to send people back ad so they know what was going to happen

[Eoin247]

There are very few things a person can do in life to distinguish themselves out of over 5 billion people. The people who go on this trip will be made immortal. They may not live forever but they will be remembered forever as people who gave their own lives for the human race.

This is why i am for NASA doing this mission. I think you will find that there is a huge amount of people who would do anything to go on this mission even if it means they wont return. The people who are given the opportunity realise that if they ever want to get off the earth before they die, this is their sole chance.


I believe that this mission is not "inhumane" its in fact very humane as it gives a few people the chance to do something that nobody else their age will ever get to do.

[SirTezza]

Radiation from deep space is a very real and very dangerous factor when talking about a voyage to Mars. Without the protection of a planets atmosphere the astronauts and their vehicle will feel the direct impact of that radiation. I think they need to work on that more before they talk about sending people to Mars.

I do disagree with sending people on a one way ticket to the Martian surface purely to cut the cost by about 70%. In my opinion they should concentrate on building a space station to orbit the surface and work from there, however this also proves very costly.

Communication between here and Mars will be very crazy. If the sun is in between Mars and the earth, which it is every 768 days, then the radio communication signal would take 21 minutes to reach the other end, and this would happen for several weeks, until the sun was out of the way. If the sun is not in the way, it will take about 4 minutes for the signal to reach. Meaning that an astronaut could say something, and mission control will not hear it for either of those minutes, and vice versa.

So back to the main topic, I think at this time it is unfair to send people to Mars at all, let alone on a one way ticket. There is a lot to consider and they should take their time.

[Eoin247]

I do disagree with sending people on a one way ticket to the Martian surface purely to cut the cost by about 70%.

Well actualy it's not purely about the money, NASA do want to colonise mars. Also that 70% equates to many many billions . Spending that much money to bring back volunteers who are getting the chance of many lifetimes just doesn't seem right to me. I saw an add on the tv the other day that my one dollar per day will save an African child per day. I know it's a bit off the point but do the math XD.

Communication between here and Mars will be very crazy. If the sun is in between Mars and the earth, which it is every 768 days, then the radio communication signal would take 21 minutes to reach the other end, and this would happen for several weeks, until the sun was out of the way. If the sun is not in the way, it will take about 4 minutes for the signal to reach. Meaning that an astronaut could say something, and mission control will not hear it for either of those minutes, and vice versa.

200 years ago, even less , It took 21 minutes for a message to get from a little country cottage to a town. Nobody knew what was going on in the world (or even country!) around them. Im sure this "message lag", is one of their least problems considering that at its closest mars is 54.6 million km away from earth.

[HotelUser]

The astronauts know there's danger to it, and if they decide to take part in a trip with just one ticket that's their decision. As long as they make it without influence I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to.

[Moh]

It's not so much the technology, it's all the testing that's required (cost-prohibitive) for it to be used and the fact the whole computer system NASA use is designed to work as a closed system. Most of the technology NASA use is from the 1970s.

I think it's totally up the astronauts, they will know it's a one way ticket.. although will life insurance cover it?

[Conservative,]

although will life insurance cover it?

Good question lol.

[SirTezza]

200 years ago, even less , It took 21 minutes for a message to get from a little country cottage to a town. Nobody knew what was going on in the world (or even country!) around them. Im sure this "message lag", is one of their least problems considering that at its closest mars is 54.6 million km away from earth.

This is a null point. Mars being that far away is not a problem. The vehicle will have enough fuel to launch and then complete course correction burns on the way to keep them going to mars. When they are not doing that they will be coasting, without using fuel towards their target, because there will be no gravity pulling from any other planets as they progress, so I can assure you that the distance isn't the problem.

The means of communication is BIGGER than the distance of the planets. When they are at their closest points, they are in a straight line, so then it will take 4 minutes to receive a message. They will overcome this, of course they will - but it is bigger than the importance of distance.

If they wanted to send people to mars it would be easy. On a 3 stage rocket they would have more than enough stowage to keep their food in. After all the first probe that touched the surface of mars was in the 1970's, so it really is not the distance.

This is why they are saying they will use a 1 way ticket to mars. Because getting there, quite simple and a lot cheaper. Getting them back, that will require more invested money, more cargo to stow, more course correction burns on the way back, so all in all, even more fuel.