Missions to Mars
 
Missions
Expenditures
Manned Missions and Colonization
The Biosphere Projects


Missions to Mars have had an inconsistent past. The United States started with flybys missions called the Mariner mission set. Each one of them returned anywhere from 20-7000 images as they whizzed by. They were very successful. However the former Soviet Union has had great difficulty in their missions. Out of 16 total missions, 10 failed completely by not reaching Earth orbit or due to software malfunction or human error. Two more missions crashed into the surface of Mars, and yet 2 more crashed into Phobos, leaving only 2 successful missions. The Soviet Mars 3 lander relayed 20 seconds of video data and then failed, but its orbiter transmitted data a little less than a year. The Mars 5 orbiter successfully collected imaging data for the Mars 6 and 7 landers which failed. As you can see, early Mars exploration, orbiter and lander missions were not easily executed.

If you have either Netscape 4.0 or IE 4.0 or higher, click here to see Earth and Mars and their orbits

    Mars is extremely far away. In order to get to Mars quickly, missions must be launched in two year increments. This is when Mars is the closest to the Earth. If you are using a DHTML capable browser you can click on the link above and see the approximate orbits of Earth and Mars. You can see at which points the Earth and Mars are closest to each other(780 days or, approximately 2 Earth revolutions or 2 Earth years). For every Mars revolution, Earth has made two revolutions. It usually takes from 6-12 months to travel to Mars. There are two main ways of getting to Mars. The first is to go directly, leaving Earth when the planets are closest to each other. The only problem with this approach is that it requires a huge amount of energy and money. Its main advantage is that if the crew members don't like each other the mission is kept short. The image to the right shows the quick, yet expensive route. Click on it for a larger, more detailed version.

The second way results in a low cost mission. This mission would use the least amount of energy, yet it would take a much longer time. For this mission, the crew would leave Earth and travel to Mars in the same manner as the quickest trip to Mars, but the crew would then stay on the surface for more than an Earth year which could be dangerous. The mission would be even longer than the biosphere experiments. This image left shows the most cost effective way to travel to Mars. Note, the extremely long time the scientists would have to stay on Mars. Click on the image on the right for a larger version.


Expenditures

 On the right is actual federal budget for the 1996 fiscal year (click for a bigger version). NASA is marked in red. As you can see, NASA is fairly low priority on the budget list. Below left is an expenditure chart showing the top 8 countries / agencies that are investing in space and how much (in billions) they spend. Since a manned mission to Mars is estimated by some at 400 billion dollars, you can see that in order for a manned mission to be accomplished it will take more than a single country. You can see in the below right image the cost of the Mars Pathfinder, Global surveyor and Mars 98 (in millions). The cost of the Viking missions is estimated at 15 billion. The Pathfinder mission would have doubled its cost to meet the Viking standard for sterilization and would not have been financially feasible. As a result, the Mars Pathfinder Probe carried approximately 24,000 spores to Mars. NASA has dominated the field of Martian exploration in success.


 COUNTRY / AGENCY

$ in Billion (1996)

NASA $13.884
ESA $3.594
JAPAN $2.102
RUSSIA $0.445
INDIA $0.3050
CANADA $0.175
BRAZIL $0.150
S-KOREA $0.067

 TOTAL

$20.722
 

MPF

 MGS

 Mars 98

 Development

174.2 + 25 (rover)

 130.7

193.1

Mission ops + data analysis

 15.5

46.4

76.2

Launch Support

50.3

52.6

83.1

Tracking + Data Support

0.7

1.6

 0.9

 TOTAL

 265.7

 231.3

 353.3