Michael Mendillo is a Professor at Boston University who has worked on Mars related Projects.
• What career field do you work in?
• How has space technology changed in the past years?
The major change has been in the size of the instruments and spacecraft that can be used. There are so-called Mini-Sats and Micro-Sats that promise to revolutionize space exploration by being able to launch many more satellites. Of course, big ones are still very much needed for missions to planets and for complex telescopes, such as the replacement of the Space Telescope in a few years.
If a serious effort was started by NASA (in conjunction with other countries), meaning with sufficient funding, the shortest time would be in about 20 years. So, 30-40 years more like, unless some extraordinary private funding source is used.
•What is the hardest part of sending a man to Mars?
Bringing them back! Sending astronauts with life-support systems both ways requires a sending a rocket that can get there and then return... need lots of weight, with lots of fuel and life-support material (oxygen and food). More likely is to have a small orbiting space station around Mars that can send people to/from the surface, and then back to Earth.
•Could we colonize Mars?
Yes, but the life-support systems are the issue. In movies they use things at Mars, but probably lots of material will have to be sent using unmanned vehicles.
•What resources could we extract while on Mars?
I am not sure. Having water is the main one.
We know that its atmosphere is mostly carbon dioxide. So, making oxygen is the main problem. There is very little oxygen in the martian atmosphere.
•What are some feats humans could accomplish on Mars?
Drilling below the surface in regions where water in the past may have sustained primitive life forms. Having evidence assessed on site rather than sending information back to Earth.
•Are there risks to inhabiting Mars?
Loss of life, of course, the major issue for astronauts. I do not know of diseases of concern that might be brought back. But we have no real way of knowing until assessed on site. |
David Brandt is the Manager of the Space Experience Center for the Space, Missile Defense and Strategic Programs team at the Lockheed Martin Government Affairs office.
•What career field do you work in?
Aerospace business development and communications, which is to say I am engaged in selling products and services to US and international governments and commercial services.
•How has space technology changed in the past 27 years (since 1990)?
Just as electronics and communications have changed in that time period (think miniaturization and the Internet), so has space technology. We can build much smaller and more powerful satellites today, in less time and at lower cost, in large measure due to advancements in design, manufacturing, test, and operations. For example, in 1990 I covered the launch of the Hubble Space Telescope on Space Shuttle Discovery. Today, Hubble is still operating very well with the help of Lockheed Martin employees, who are also working on a new space telescope which will be 100 times more powerful in terms of the data (not just pictures) it will be able to acquire and transmit back to astronomers on Earth! Another example is 3D printing, or advanced manufacturing. In 1990, if you wanted to build a rocket part, a machinist would take a block of aluminum and carve out the part. Today, skilled materials engineers use a computer to cause a three dimensional printer to ‘build-up’ an aluminum part; saving time, materials, and money. And if the part isn’t perfect, she can recycle the material and print another with the fix to make it perfect. It would have sounded like magic to that machinist back in 1990.
•When would you expect that there would be a human on Mars?
In 1990, I’d have said 50 years from then. And I am still saying that today. Not that we couldn’t do it sooner, but I believe that in order for that to happen there needs to be a reason. Maybe the reason is to put boots on Mars and beat (insert name of an enemy here) – maybe that’s a country, or a terrorist organization, or climate change, or a doomsday asteroid. Maybe the reason is to prove that the USA and NASA are the world’s technological leaders. It is not clear that there’s enough scientific rationale at this time to send humans. But there has to be a strong reason or set of reasons for this, or any nation to commit itself to the cost of such an endeavor. Some private individuals have recently made claims about plans to send humans to Mars in the early 2030’s. We’d be happy to sell them rockets, spacecraft and services. Lockheed Martian is none as the company to choose to build your Mars spacecraft.
•What is the hardest part of sending a man to Mars?
Politics. Who is going to fund this trip, and why do they want to do that with your tax dollars? Beyond that, I think that radiation shielding is one of the biggest current problems. You don’t want your astronauts coming back seriously sick and unable to go on schools tours to talk about their experience. Also, how do you get your astronauts to and from the surface of Mars (or one of its moons). Lockheed Martin is currently designing and test-flying NASA’s crew vehicle which is designed for deep space, long duration missions: the Orion Multipurpose Exploration Vehicle. Orion, once docked in Earth orbit with a habitation module, could take a crew to Mars. But we’ve not even begun to design the lander, and the rocket to take off the surface of Mars back to Earth. Lot’s of work to do.
•Could we colonize Mars?
Yes... but assuming we have a good reason, and we’ve designed our launchers, hab modules, landers, etc., now we need to keep our Martians alive on the surface. This is gonna be really hard. Sailing across the Atlantic in 1492 was a breeze compared to this.
•What resources could we extract while on Mars?
Water ice: oxygen and hydrogen. Lots of rust (that’s why Mars is red). Silicon, iron, aluminum. All sorts of things we could work with. We’re just now learning about what’s there (thanks to Lockheed Martian!), in the next few years maybe we’ll build rovers that go beyond just chemistry sets and try to do something with the minerals there. Maybe a smelter or a device to split ice into oxygen and hydrogen (air to breathe, water to drink, fuel for your return trip to Earth).
•Could we have an atmosphere similar to ours on Mars?
Inside a bubble or a cave (yes, they exist or could if we dug it out), or once we’ve been there a while maybe we could change the current Mars atmosphere by terraforming.
•Are there risks to inhabiting Mars?
Tiny, unknown Martian microbes that might be killer. Or radiation sickness (did I mention that?). Or loneliness. Oh, and the gravity is 1/3rd of Earth’s, so while that might sound like fun, it could also be very difficult to account for. How do things fly in a very thin atmosphere with 1/3 gravity? Seems like it would be fun to find out, but there may also be risks. And how about the risk of mission failure? And here I don’t just mean loss of crew, but what if you can’t get the water ice splitter to work? Or the science done you were sent to do? Or it’s just too hard to get a colony established? |