Space X: Why Take Unnecessary Risk?
Jan 22, 2024 3:13:13 GMT -5
Post by Radrook Admin on Jan 22, 2024 3:13:13 GMT -5
Space X: Why Take Unnecessary Risk?
I recently watched a video which enumerates the challenges involved in achieving a soft landing on the surface of the planet Mars. It described the achievement as allowing no mistakes. It is either 100 percent or a horrendous disaster will ensue.
Now, there have been many failures in sending probes to Mars because of this difficulty. But fortunately, none has involved the danger of losing a single human life. However, in the case of Space X, the lives a crew of a hundred people will be hanging on acing that difficult maneuver. One slight error, in any of the areas needing perfection, and all will go plummeting to oblivion.
Now, one might imagine that taking such a dangerous risk is absolutely necessary to achieve the goal of establishing a human settlement on Mars. But curiously, that is absolutely not the case. You see, there is an alternative and much easier method that would significantly reduce the necessity of so much precision.
What method would that be? Ironically it is very simple, an establishment of a base on one of the Martian moons, such as Phobus, in order to refuel the Space x ship there, and then attempting a landing on Mars with the full power of the retrorockets.
So if indeed the landing on Phobos or Deimos significantly reduces the risk by narrowing the margin of error, and subsequently increasing the survival potential of the 100 human crew members, why isn't this not the method being planned?
Of course, if indeed this well-known alternative isn't chosen, and a disaster occurs, then those responsible for not employing it will come under severe criticism for having taken a totally unnecessary risk.
Now, there have been many failures in sending probes to Mars because of this difficulty. But fortunately, none has involved the danger of losing a single human life. However, in the case of Space X, the lives a crew of a hundred people will be hanging on acing that difficult maneuver. One slight error, in any of the areas needing perfection, and all will go plummeting to oblivion.
Now, one might imagine that taking such a dangerous risk is absolutely necessary to achieve the goal of establishing a human settlement on Mars. But curiously, that is absolutely not the case. You see, there is an alternative and much easier method that would significantly reduce the necessity of so much precision.
What method would that be? Ironically it is very simple, an establishment of a base on one of the Martian moons, such as Phobus, in order to refuel the Space x ship there, and then attempting a landing on Mars with the full power of the retrorockets.
So if indeed the landing on Phobos or Deimos significantly reduces the risk by narrowing the margin of error, and subsequently increasing the survival potential of the 100 human crew members, why isn't this not the method being planned?
Of course, if indeed this well-known alternative isn't chosen, and a disaster occurs, then those responsible for not employing it will come under severe criticism for having taken a totally unnecessary risk.