Talk:Manned mission to Mars

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I made some slight edits to the criticism section. The article does seem a little unbalanced to me, a disporportionate amount of the article was discussing criticisms, and the article is proportionately light on actual discussion of missins to Mars. The specific mod I made was to change the sentence: the American Physical Society stated that "shifting NASA priorities toward risky, expensive missions to the moon and Mars will mean neglecting the most promising space science efforts. In fact, careful reading of the report referenced shows that in fact it was the ad-hoc subcommittee on the funding of astrophysics that released this report, not the whole APS. Geoffrey.landis 17:29, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/11/26/219877/nasa-manned-mars-mission-details-emerge.html

Maybe we should mention tha project in the article? --The monkeyhate 16:11, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] final goal

My attempt to give the endeavors a direction failed. From my viewpoint manned missions are not good for just scientific purpose, because they are far too expensive. The same purpose (and even more) can be fulfilled with automatic probes and rovers. I think this article should have a statement about the final goal: Foundation of a human colony on Mars. What else should be the final goal? Why shall be send humans to Mars? -- The Cascade (talk) 10:47, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

• This article is about the history of manned Mars expedition proposals, and colonization was not usually the goal for these proposals. By and large it still isn't except perhaps as an extremely long term idea. There's a separate article on Mars colonization. andy (talk) 11:27, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Why do you think that "colonization was not usually the goal"? I guess you are talking about short term goals, and in this context you are right. I am talking about the long term goal (= final goal). As far as I see the manned missions to Mars have been planned with just that final goal. What else can be the final goal? This article should be written in a wider context. -- The Cascade (talk) 07:59, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

The "ultimate goal" is also backed by The_Case_for_Mars#Colonization. -- The Cascade (talk) 10:48, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

No, the article should not be "written in a wider context". It's simply an article about proposals for missions to Mars and not about anything else such as the future of the human race, space colonization or whatever. It should be done the other way round - articles with a wider context, such as the one about colonization - should point back to this one. andy (talk) 11:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

... and not about financial, science, terraforming, the prevalence of life throughout the universe, China's plans of robotic mission and the shortages of russia etc. So, the article really needs some cleaning. Okay, if this is your opinion and unlike Robert Zubrin you do not want to see it in a context, how about renaming the article to "List of proposals for missions to Mars"? A list should suit your idea best. Also, most of the paragraph "Criticism" and "Preparedness" is pure speculation or long-term intentions and should be removed. By the way, do you believe that anything about manned missions to Mars is more than some future fantasy? -- The Cascade (talk) 12:01, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with the article. It's a very simple article, just a list of proposals. It's not about visions, ideas, goals, whatever. It's not about Exploration of Mars nor Colonization of Mars, still less Terraforming of Mars... there are dozens and dozens of articles about everything Martian and this is only one of them. Just an overview of mission proposals, their technology and some human and engineering issues. Nothing else. You're quite at liberty to create another article about anything you like but please don't mess with this one. andy (talk) 13:05, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

What I wanted to say is: The article is already messed (with financial, science, terraforming, the prevalence of life throughout the universe, China's plans of robotic mission and the shortages of russia). It really needs some cleaning. Just read it carefully. -- The Cascade (talk) 13:15, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

The "ultimate goal" is also backed by NASA Administrator Michael Griffin: See citation in the article Space colonization. Andy, you seem to be the only person not to see this point. -- The Cascade (talk) 13:26, 20 March 2008 (UTC)