The One-Way Manned Mission to Mars

This is intriguing but potentially self defeating.

However, one former NASA engineer believes a human mission to Mars is quite doable, and such an event would unify the world as never before. But Jim McLane’s proposal includes a couple of major caveats: the trip to Mars should be one-way, and have a crew of only one person.

In McLane's opinion, such a mission would be more easily accomplished because of the reduced amount of supplies needed and the elimination of the biggest challenge-returning to Earth. He also believes that there would be plenty of pioneering, tough individuals who would be able and willing to enjoin such a mission. I agree with him on that, but there is always the risk of that individual cracking after months or years without any direct human contact. Man has lost people on space missions, but we have never lost a human to space. I can see the worst case scenario being so traumatic that it actually sets manned missions to Mars back by decades.

12 years to the moon, Alice

This kills me every time I read it.

Despite funding uncertainty, NASA is on track to return humans to the moon by 2020 and set up a lunar outpost to serve as a springboard to explore Mars, officials said Monday.

"Our job is to build towns on the moon and eventually put tire prints on Mars," NASA's Rick Gilbrech told reporters here, one year after the US space agency unveiled an ambitious plan to site a solar-powered, manned outpost on the south pole of the moon.

Ambitious? We got to the moon less than 10 years after making it our goal with, relatively speaking, primitive 1960's technology. Now it is going to take 12 years with much advanced technology. I'll put my money on the line by saying that we won't even be back to the moon by 2020 unless someone else beats us there and embarrasses us by doing so.

China Continues Offensive Military Space Program

Next time you see someone criticizing the U.S. for militarizing space, remember that we didn't start this fire:

A Chinese submarine will send test signals that could change the course of a satellite when China launches its first moon orbiter, as part of the country's effort to develop space war technology, a human rights watchdog said Tuesday.

The Information Center for Human Rights and Democracy said two survey ships are deployed in the South Pacific Ocean and South Atlantic Ocean to send signals to maneuver the lunar exploration satellite, expected to be launched Wednesday. At the same time, a nuclear-powered submarine will send simulated signals to the satellite as a test, it said in a statement.

Once the satellite-maneuvering technology matures, the group said, China would have the know-how to destroy other satellites in space in wartime. China could launch cheaply-made weapon-carrying objects into space and change their courses to destroy or damage satellites of other countries by sending signals from submarines, the center said.

China shocked the world in January by firing a missile at an old weather satellite without notifying anyone in advance, showing off its anti-satellite weaponry and its ability to shoot down satellites without being immediately noticed.

Some might point out that we got the ball rolling with 'Star Wars'. The 'Star Wars' missile defense idea, while partially located in orbit, is/was a defense system of earthly concern. The Chinese are aggressively pursuing offensive, space focused weapons, and unless we get on the ball soon, they are going to have us, and our communications, completely defenseless.

The Toothless Bear Growls Again

Russia continues its recent pattern of scare tactics:

Russia's military space commander vowed to retaliate with an arms race if any country started putting weapon systems into orbit, he said in remarks published on Wednesday.

"We need to have strong rules about space, to avoid its militarization and if any country will place a weapon in space, then our response will be the same," Space Forces Commander Colonel-General Vladimir Popovkin told the newspaper Trud.

I know that there is a strong sentiment out there against the militarization of space, but the realist in me says that it is unavoidable. Space wasn't militarized from the 60's to the 90's because: A) The USSR/Russia knew it couldn't compete with us and would lose any space militarization race B) We had little desire to militarize something that did not need military presence C) The technology and the sophistication wasn't their yet to do it at anything less than astronomical costs. All of that is changing now, though. Except for A. With China showing great interest in militarizing space, we leave our satellite dependent society very vulnerable if we are not prepared to do the same. Additionally, the next space race may be one with economic benefits, and as such there will inevitably be national conflict over space "turf". And the technology is there and space programs seem to be developing into more sophisticated programs that involve long term human presence in space and on other heavenly bodies, making a military presence more realistic than in the days of less than one week orbits and months spent confined to a space station.

Russia is rattling its sabers on this for the exact same reason it agreed to co-operate with us in space during the Cold War and for the same reason that it agreed to space being a demilitarized zone in the first place-because they know they cannot compete with us or the Chinese. If you can't do, then you can't lose much by trying to scare.