• Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish
    26·
    1 month ago

    I mean the technical hurdles aren’t insurmountable. But we lack the political will power to put resources needed into it.

    It would take 60s moon landing level of commitment for 10-15 years to do any sooner.

      • Crashumbc@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4·
        1 month ago

        I wasn’t commenting on whether we “should” go, only that I felt we had the resources/ability to go…

    • dustyData@lemmy.worldEnglish
      10·
      1 month ago

      It’s technically feasible in the bare minimum “Got there” sense. Bringing someone and getting them back. But we learned a lot by the moon exploration, and that is that we aren’t ready for colonization. Living there, for a long time, let alone indefinitely, that is where the million details are still unresolved. I think that’s the problem that is worth tackling. We already know we can live in space for a long time as long as there are continuous shipments of resources from Earth. We could just flood the logistics problem with money and get to mars next year if we wanted to. Other than the psychologically horrifyingly long distances involved, of course.

      • chaogomu@lemmy.world
        4·
        1 month ago

        I’ll say that Andy Weir got most of it right on how to do manned missions to Mars.

        You build a huge space station, and then use that as the ship that goes to and from Mars.

        Then the actual mission on the surface lasting a month or three before the astronauts pack up and head home.