Scholarship table
It’s not time or distance, it’s launch mass savings. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsiolkovsky_rocket_equationGoing to Mars will take lots of ship (mass) and fuel for trans-Martian-orbital-insertion maneuver (more mass). Launching from earth means fighting earth gravity for every kg you send up the well. Using a lunar base station that can access lunar ice and refine fuel means you fight the 1/3g of lunar gravity to refuel before continuing to Mars and thus have significantly lower costs.
I guess so. Of course you are completely ignoring the massive cost of creating a Lunar base.
Who cares.
??? He was responding to Jockey. I understand why its easier to go to Mars from the Moon rather than from Earth. I just don't understand why we are sending humans to Mars - or even to the Moon. We have the capability to send probes and rovers. We are even proposing to retrieve some samples. Which is really cool.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_sample-return_mission
You dismissed the idea in your first post, then continued to dismissed it.I'll correct my post:Sultan and Jockitch > Tsiolkovsky
I worked for a federal lab the first 7.5 years of my work career.Nothing as prestigious as NASA.But my feeling now is that they are a tremendous waste of some of our brightest minds.Sometimes they barely have the money to pay salary and keep the lights on.If you have the drive, go into private industry. That is where mankind really advances. IMHO.
Kinda like dis, hey?
OK, I get the thirst for knowledge bit, and all.But I have to ask, is going to the Moon really worth the cost? Will we find anything groundbreaking that changes the trajectory of life on Earth? Candidly, I seriously doubt it. One looks at NASA today and grimaces. Bill Nelson, a tottering, over-the-hill vanquished Senator is now NASA Administrator. He's asleep even when he's awake. Once upon a time, going to the Moon was a big deal. It had everything -- national pride, entertainment value and technological advancement. Now, it's just a weak attempt to recapture the imagination of the NASA of old.NASA would be wise to review what happened on Moon missions after Apollo 11 -- public interest waned dramatically. What had been Must-See TV was now ho hum. Absent a fuel tank exploding, there isn't the interest. Especially when you compare a Moon mission to what's happening with the James Webb telescope.Been there ... done that.
OK, but why go to Mars?
Because the federal government has the ability to piss away more taxpayer money.And we know what the federal government loves.