I was thinking about this recently. I’m admittedly not up on the space race like I probably should be, but I seem to recall some articles suggesting that there is a real possibility that, unlike the race to the moon, the race to Mars might be won by another country. Not only that, but it might be won by a country that we’re ideologically opposed to, and who knows, we might be quite possibly in a state of cold war in the future.
Even so, considering the great achievement that it would be for humankind to make it to Mars and put live human boots on the red planet, would it be inspiring that we’re able to do such a thing? Or would you have a hard time getting past the fact that a competitor beat us to the punch? Would you feel different if, say, a more closely allied country were to somehow pull that off (EU, Japan)?
Personally, I wouldn’t be upset at all. I’d look at it as a great achievement regardless of who gets there first.
The race to the moon was really a race in the sense that both contenders were trying hard to come out first. I suppose that if the race to Mars were similar, there would be some reason for the loser to be disappointed or upset. Especially in the US, because it might indicate that the country had lost its technological advantage.
But if you do not “win” simply because your administration decided that it could do better things with your tax money - not so much.
I guess I’d be a little upset (in a way I wouldn’t if the UK or Japan or Korea did it), but not too much. It’s mostly because I think space travel is cool and it would be disheartening that people who aren’t exactly our closest allies are prioritizing it more than us.
And it’s just that, priorities, manned flight to Mars is at this point an issue of funding, willingness, and logistics far more than it is a “new frontier” level technological hurdle like Sputnik or Apollo 11 was.
It wouldn’t really scare me or anything, though, I don’t think there’s huge practical utility here. Some scientific value, to be sure, but I don’t think Russia or China landing on Mars is going to give them any real advantage in terms of economics, military, or anything else other than a small bit or international prestige. If it were deemed that there was huge value in setting up a Martian colony, then I have no doubt that our friends could work something out pretty damn quickly, regardless of whether or not Russia or China has already had a short manned mission.
If I were an American astronaut and I really wanted to be among the first on Mars, I’d view Russian and Chinese astronauts as competitors and I’d be pissed. But I’m not an astronaut so there’s no difference to me if the folks on Mars have names like Bud Powers or Wang Shi Liu or Max Rockatansky.
I don’t see anything that humans can do on Mars that unmanned craft couldn’t do much cheaper. We’re never going to do it, costs way too much. If the Russians want to do it, knock yourselves out. I’ll celebrate your success if it happens.
If we were in a RACE (fast or slow) and we had some bad luck or they had some good luck or were just a bit better and got there first that really wouldn’t bother me.
If we didn’t even try, then it’s not that we didn’t win. Its that we didn’t try. And I would worry that that says something about us as a nation/people that might not be a good thing.
Only insofar as I’m be disappointed that my own country isn’t doing more…we certainly COULD go to Mars (or have already gone) if we wanted too. We have the capability, we have the money for it…we simply have too many folks (see below) who don’t see the need or think all manned space exploration is a waste or simply don’t care about pushing the frontiers of our scientific and engineering knowledge. But I’d be glad that someone was doing it. I’d also be pretty surprised if either China or Russia could pull it off and bring the crews there and back. I simply don’t think that either of those countries has the ability to put a manned crew on the Moon, let alone Mars, but if they do then I wish them all the luck and I’d be rooting for them big time.
[QUOTE=BobLibDem]
I don’t see anything that humans can do on Mars that unmanned craft couldn’t do much cheaper. We’re never going to do it, costs way too much. If the Russians want to do it, knock yourselves out. I’ll celebrate your success if it happens.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=ralph124c]
Not at all-I say let the bigger fool waste the money. Sending humans to Mars would be ruinously expensive, and accomplish very little.
[/QUOTE]
And here are perfect examples of the kinds of heads buried in the sand and divorced from reality thinking that held back our own manned exploration of Mars. Nothing to see there…just a big waste of money…only a fool would go.
I’d be incredibly excited that humans landed on Mars (finally!). That would be very slightly dampened by a bit of disappointment that the US couldn’t make it happen first. But overall I’d be very excited.
I’d be all for it if I thought there was something a human could actually do on Mars to justify the cost. So what is it that you want the people to do that robots couldn’t?
Total Parenteral Nutrition (intravenous feeding) was developed by NASA in an effort to sustain astronauts without biological waste products. It was unsuccessful, if you don’t count the thousands and thousands and thousands of people it has saved.
More recently, NASA discovered that a light they were using to grow plants in space reduces the symptoms of chemotherapy.
There is always value in expanding our knowledge of the universe, even if they results aren’t readily apparent.
To answer the question, though, no, I wouldn’t be upset. What, we gotta be number one all the time?
Move more than 40km in a decade? Drill more than 3 feet into the ground? Do scientific experiments on the planet? Be able to look left if they see something interesting? Have more than one set of eyes TOO see something interesting? Climb up a rock wall, take out a pick axe and gather a sample? This is, of course, not an exhaustive list.
Rovers can certainly do a lot. But a human that is there is going to be able to do a hell of a lot more. The guys who went to the Moon were there for days and we are STILL analyzing the data. These guys would be on Mars for over a year. I’m thinking they could do a bit more than all the rovers ever sent or that are in the planning stages to be sent.
A few trained geologists and biologists with shovels and a small laboratory could do more science then hundreds or perhaps thousands of robots. They could dig more than a few centimeters into the Martian dirt; they could reach cliffs and steep hills; they could move heavier rocks; they could instantly react to unusual circumstances (for example, if something moves on Mars they’d be much more likely to get a picture of it); they could improvise and follow up on things that weren’t expected; etc. They could pretty definitively answer a lot of the questions about Mars.
Exactly. It would answer a LOT of our questions about the planet…questions that, at the pace we are currently doing for exploration could take decades or even centuries. Also, it’s not an either or type of thing…if we sent people there I’m thinking we will almost certainly also send smaller rovers or other automated drones as well. The difference will be that the guys on the planet will be able to access them in real time. It would be a huge leap forward for our understanding of Mars if we sent humans there. It’s really frustrating when people on this message board automatically dismiss human exploration as foolish or stupid or needless when it’s anything but. They do it because there seems to have been a collective decision in the past in some thread or other that manned flight was a waste, and so they just keep parroting the standard line.
At any rate, as I said wrt the OP, I’d be happy if China or Russia managed such a mission. They would certainly learn a lot, and what they learned would raise up our collective knowledge of the planet, it’s past, and almost certainly answer the real question of whether or not life did exist on Mars in the past and, perhaps, still exists in some extreme environments today. What a huge thing to learn!
The NASA association is uncorroborated by the first three Google hits I looked at. Certainly the medical need for TPC has been obvious from the beginnings of modern scientific medicine. It appears really scientific TPC began in the early 1950s, unmotivated by considerations of human space travel.
Fine, but a program as elaborate and expensive as manned planetary exploration cannot be justified by the hope for spin-offs and useful unintended consequences which might never materialize.
I will go along with knowledge for its own sake, but there are many opportunities for that which can be met by unmanned exploration. No need to go manned for the foreseeable future.
Yes, we do gotta be number one on as many important projects as possible. What’s wrong with successfully competing for first place? As it is no other one country will be in the running any time soon.
I would be extremely upset and rant about our failure to beat them there. But I’d also realize those guys will never make it back to earth and I’d be more upset about that. It’s just flat out stupid to send a manned mission to Mars in the foreseeable future.