NASA's chief of Mars exploration suggests that a manned mission to Mars in the 2030s or 2040s could return the robotic relic to Earth.
By Clay Dillow Posted 10.25.2012 at 4:30 pm 8 Comments

mars rover curiosity
Curiosity: Another Self-Portrait It's a vain little rover, isn't it? NASA/JPL-Caltech

Mars Rover Curiosity’s mission is slated to run for just two Earth years, but the directory of NASA’s Mars Exploration Program thinks it could have enough power to run for two decades. In fact, he says, Curiosity may actually return to Earth someday.

Not under it’s own power, of course. But NASA’s Doug McCuistion says it is his personal hope, if not that of the entire Mars team NASA, that humans will touch down on the Red Planet in the 2030s or 2040s. And if they do, there’s no reason why they might not pay a visit to some of the hardware we’ve left behind there. Some museum would likely be thrilled to have Curiosity, so why shouldn’t a manned mission bring it back to Earth?

Not to completely rain on McCuistion’s parade, but one obvious reason is weight. One can certainly imagine a manned mission to Mars landing a couple of decades from now, but it’s hard to imagine the return mission wasting payload capacity on a man-made rover when it could be returning sample materials native to Mars. Nonetheless, it’s nice to think we might someday safely return our rover to Earth if for no other reason than to say that we have the capability to do so.

[BBC]

8 Comments

Link to this comment
Greenmatrix
10/25/12 at 5:04 pm

Washington is 16+ Billion dollars (104%of GDP) in debt and rising like a Saturn V rocket. Lets face it. We are not going to see a Human Mars mission by NASA. We should hope for a commercial Mars mission like from MARS ONE with a global Big Brother/ Olympic TV Style mega show to pay for it. Going one way is 10 times cheaper then returning. The big problem though is becoming self sustainable with materials, plants etc. But there is more then enough experience for that with agriculture on earth and living on the ISS.

Link to this comment
Blackfire13
10/25/12 at 5:46 pm

@greenmatrix You gotta add a few 0s to that it's trillion not billion. Other than that your spot on.

Link to this comment
demej00
10/25/12 at 6:36 pm

Just bring back it's head - and mount it on a trophy plaque.

Link to this comment
TeslasDisciple
10/25/12 at 6:59 pm

The Martian Race, Gregory Bedford. This guy ^ must not have read it.

He raises good points though. NASA would never be able to establish funds for a manned mission. Not until we can pay the entire debt back in full. But I can foresee a worldwide, private sector siege of Mars. There's gonna be lives lost. Plenty of them.

Other than that, I just hope I will be able to have enough credentials to be part of this global program.

They're going to need a drone operator or two, so....

Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.
Mark Twain

Link to this comment
i9998217
10/26/12 at 5:49 am

Bad idea. Those Curiosity drives love it so much s they forgot about the science mission. A ton or so of Curiosity weight means almost nothing for science. It's better to spend those resources on something important, like making permanent base on Mars or Moon.

Link to this comment
Robot
10/26/12 at 8:34 am

So far up to know, going to space has been all R&D and no immediate pay back for the NASA folk. Sure the rest of society does make profit from the technology, but NASA does not. If we could only go to space, bring something back and profit for it, then NASA could really continue to venture out to the cosmos!

While going to space is a goal. The goal does not create technology. People on Earth create technology, for the goal. As in medical science or any other science and their goals technology is made on Earth. It is not a requirement for society to go to space for better technology.

The USA is broke with the national debt and unless and investment towards of R&D shows a payback like organizations NASA, they will immediately start cutting back as of Jan 1st 2013.

We need cheaper, cleaner more available energies. We need medical science. Going to in space is not a need, just a wish and not a necessary goal.

NASA needs to be self-sustaining and make a profit.

Link to this comment
killerT
10/26/12 at 1:14 pm

LOL What a joke!
NASA has been saying all along it is WAY too expensive to return ANYTHING from Mars in the near future, now they think they can return a team of humans PLUS whatever junk they feel like just for fun?

Im looking forward to China's next HD streaming space mission.
In the mean time it looks like the space race is on again.

Link to this comment
arathorn867
10/27/12 at 2:25 am

Going to mars is a waste of time period. Did you know we know almost as much about mars as we do the ocean floor? we know more about the surface of the moon than 73% of the surface of our planet. And Greenmatrix, the debt problem is over a thousand times worse than you think, try 17 trillion.

Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind. Albert Einstein



June 2013: American Energy Independence

Five amazing, clean technologies that will set us free, in this month's energy-focused issue. Also: how to build a better bomb detector, the robotic toys that are raising your children, a human catapult, the world's smallest arcade, and much more.


Online Content Director: Suzanne LaBarre | Email
Senior Editor: Paul Adams | Email
Associate Editor: Dan Nosowitz | Email
Assistant Editor: Colin Lecher | Email
Assistant Editor: Rose Pastore | Email

Contributing Writers:

Kelsey D. Atherton | Email
Francie Diep | Email
Shaunacy Ferro | Email

circ-top-header.gif
circ-cover.gif