Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[WillowLuman]

Could prove quite problematic. It may not require full Earth gravity for healthy bones, ~1/3rd Earth gravity could be enough. We only have data for microgravity, no one has ever stayed for an extended period on any extraterrestrial body. So there's simply no way to tell until we see the effects on adults staying there for decades.

[PTTG??]

I don't expect they'll be reproducing there immediately... but neither do I think it would take all that much tech to build a larger and more comfortable settlement.

There's neither rain nor earthquakes on Mars (at least, not much). Compressed earth blocks would be a pretty decent way to make above-ground structures, and mining and tunneling only makes sense.

As far as treaties go, I find it hard to believe that any terrestrial government would actively stop someone from investing large amounts of money into their industry and taking excess people away. Who cares about what happens to Mars? It's Not Our Problem.

[10ebbor10]

They do care, that when something bad happens, they're legally responsible for all damage and bringing the people back.

[Sheb]

Plus, they're going to take only a few people, and by the look of it not invest much cash.

[GiglameshDespair]

Or the various governments will just say "Well, they signed the release forms, and are too far to help realistically. Sorry, mate, they're dead unless they fix things themselves."

[10ebbor10]

In such a sudden disaster, they're not going to get rescued. Everyone knows that.

 But what will happen if, for example, MarsOne goes bankrupt. (Because, surprise, Martian Reality television is boring) The Colony relies on biyearly supply runs from earth for mission critical equipment. Each of these missions cost 4 billion dollars. While you can probably reduce this pricetag significantly by only sending what is needed most, I doubt the government will be willing to foot a 1 billion paycheck each year just to keep a useless outpost running.

Not that it matters anyway, as I honestly doubt that MarsOne will reach their 6 billion target needed to launch the first manned mission.

[GiglameshDespair]

Well, obviously, the success of shows like Jersey Shore means we want to send a bunch of fratboys to mars, and document their attempts to score with the martian ladies.

[Morrigi]

The real issue with sending help to Mars is that it would take a minimum of 6-8 months to get there, assuming the orbits were perfectly aligned. Otherwise you might have to wait a year or two for the right launch window, and it might take 3 years overall to get the ship there in a worst-case scenario. They'd have to tough it out until then.

Also, the operators of the launch pad in question (NASA, ESA, etc.) would be perfectly within their rights to deny launch clearance to a launch that they consider to be unsafe. I personally doubt that Mars One will ever get launch clearance in its current state.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The real issue with sending help to Mars is that it would take a minimum of 6-8 months to get there, assuming the orbits were perfectly aligned. Otherwise you might have to wait a year or two for the right launch window, and it might take 3 years overall to get the ship there in a worst-case scenario. They'd have to tough it out until then.

Also, the operators of the launch pad in question (NASA, ESA, etc.) would be perfectly within their rights to deny launch clearance to a launch that they consider to be unsafe. I personally doubt that Mars One will ever get launch clearance in its current state.

This is one of the reasons Buzz Aldrin suggests we set up bases on Phobos and/or in Martian orbit before having a human presence on the ground. Much easier to send help that way.

[10ebbor10]

The mission will be launched by SpaceX, IIRC. By 2016, they will have their own Launchpad. So, ...

((On a side note, they also rely on SpaceX to develop the capsule, the launchrocket, and other technical aspects.))

[Mephansteras]

It seems unrealistic to me to send people and assume that no procreation is going to happen, unless you either send all males or make sure everyone is sterile. Otherwise, you kind of have to assume that at some point someone is going to have kids.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

That assumes that they can have kids. .3G may well be too low for successful human fetal development.

[Mephansteras]

That assumes that they can have kids. .3G may well be too low for successful human fetal development.

Sure, but you can't exactly go into this assuming that no one can/will have kids. You have to plan for that eventuality.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Most of what we know about fetal development suggests that the only kids they could have would be malformed stillbirths.

[Mephansteras]

Most of what we know about fetal development suggests that the only kids they could have would be malformed stillbirths.

Yes, but we have no studies of human fetal development in .3G conditions. For all we know it could work fine. Or, worse, produce viable children but with birth defects that will require additional medical support to survive. It could even be one of those cases where 90% will fail, but if even one live child is born you have to have facilities and plans to handle that eventuality.

People take the lives of children very, very seriously. As a matter of risk you have to assume that it can and will happen and have a plan for it. Anything less is likely to be considered criminally negligent.