posted
Mars astronauts should never return to Earth, says Buzz Aldrin
By Daily Mail Reporter Last updated at 4:10 PM on 24th October 2008
The first astronauts sent to Mars should be prepared to never return to Earth, according to moonwalker Buzz Aldrin.
Like the European pioneers who set out for America they should set out knowing they will spend their lives there, the second man on the Moon said. Though presumably they would hope to survive longer than their first harsh winter.
Some scientists fear a mission to Mars would be expensive and the astronauts would struggle to survive, much like in the film Red Planet
In an interview the outspoken former astronaut said the Red Planet, which appears to have fast reserves of frozen water at each pole, has far greater potential for habitation than the Moon.
'It is nearer terrestrial conditions, much better than the Moon and any other place,' the 78-year-old said.
More...
* 'What a ride!' Space tourist and Russian cosmonauts return to Earth in 'flawless' landing
'It is easier to subsist, to provide the support needed for people there than on the Moon.'
Buzz Aldrin along with Neil Armstrong and Michael Collins spent eight days travelling to and from the Moon in July 1969, aboard Apollo 11.
But while the Moon is 238,000 miles away, the closest Mars comes to our planet is 34 million miles and furthest at 250 million miles. A round trip would take at least a year and a half.
'That's why you (should) send people there permanently,' Aldrin told AFP.
'If we are not willing to do that, then I don't think we should just go once and have the expense of doing that and then stop.'
In the film Red Planet starring Val Kilmer, astronauts sent to our neighbouring planet struggle to survive after their equipment fails. Many scientists believe this is a distinct possibility if such a mission goes ahead.
They argue that sending humans to Mars is a waste of money compared with unmanned missions that have more scientific benefit and don't put astronauts under psychological stress or in danger of cosmic rays.
But Aldrin defended the epic journey. He insisted such a trip would be 'innovative, new, pioneering.'
NASA and the European Space Agency (ESA) are sketching tentative plans for a manned mission to Mars that would take place around 2030 or 2040.
The mission would entail about six people, with life-support systems and other gear pre-positioned for them on the Martian surface.
Aldrin said the vanguard could be joined by others, making a colony of around 30 people.
'They need to go there more with the psychology of knowing that you are a pioneering settler and you don't look forward to go back home again after a couple a years,' he said.
'At age 30, they are given an opportunity. If they accept, then we train them, at age 35, we send them. At age 65, who knows what advances have taken place. They can retire there, or maybe we can bring them back.'
posted
Will the astronaut be leucoderms?? Afterall they are talking about abundant UV rays and the possibility of massive bone loss due to low/no gravity.
So why not send the "first man"? Makes sense.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic