Panel to Obama: Tell NASA to Skip the Moon and Head to Mars

Illustration for article titled Panel to Obama: Tell NASA to Skip the Moon and Head to Mars

An independent commission has advised the White House to have NASA ditch plans to go back to the moon, setting its sights on Mars and beyond instead. I can get behind these suggestions.

The committee outlines eight options. Three of those involve a "flexible path" to explore someplace other than the moon, eventually heading to a Mars landing far in the future. The flexible path suggests no-landing flights around the moon and Mars.

Landing on the moon and then launching back to Earth would require a lot of fuel because of the moon's gravity. Hauling fuel from Earth to the moon and then back costs money.

It would take less fuel to land and return from asteroids or comets that swing by Earth or even the Martian moons, Phobos and Deimos, Augustine said.

Eventually, Augustine said NASA could return to the moon, but as a training stepping stone, not a major destination, as the Bush plan envisioned.


Really, we've been to the moon. It's old news. We're pretty positive there are no aliens there. Any possibility of life in our solar system exists further out, possibly on liquidy moons of the gaseous giants. So why waste time and money on the moon? Let's go to where the real action is. [USA Today via Dvice]

Share This Story

Get our newsletter



I agree that the moonlanding is old hat, but I would really love for the scoffers, mockers and brain-dead hoax-slinging slack-jawed yokels to suck on landing No. 2. But really, I'd probably be glued to the TV on updates on a manned Mars mission and make sure that absolutely nothing got in the way of being able to see a live stream of the first person to step foot on Mars....

AND, they can make sweet deals with big businesses to make it cheaper to go to Mars through paid advertising.

That's one...small step for a man, one giant leap for Fry's Electronics, WOW what a deal!