U.S. Politicians Debate About NASA Options to Prepare Mission to Mars

The U.S. House Subcommittee on Space held one of their hearings today on the topic of possible options for the next steps in human space flight and how these options move the U.S. closer to a human mission to Mars and beyond. Participating witnesses debated whether the Obama administration's proposed asteroid rendezvous mission is a better precursor for an eventual manned mission to Mars compared to other missions, such as a return to the Moon.

On the visionary project to fly to Mars, Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) said: "Human space flight represents the aspirations and ambitions of the American people. Not long ago, the exploration of Mars was considered science fiction. Today, with two active Martian robotic missions on-going, it's no longer fiction at all. Space exploration goes beyond rockets and avionics; it is about hope for the future. NASA should have a well thought out and convincing plan before committing scarce resources. The trip to Mars will not be a direct one. We will need to train for it before we send a crew, much like the Apollo missions."

As NASA prepares to take the next steps in human exploration of the solar system there are many unanswered questions about the correct path to Mars. NASA will need to acquire new capabilities to travel to Mars and beyond. The two most commonly discussed possibilities for precursor missions to Mars involve manned missions to the Moon or an asteroid.

Space Subcommittee Chairman Steven Palazzo (R-Miss.): "As we move forward in the next few months with the NASA Authorization Act, Congress must address our path to Mars and beyond so there will be no question as to where we are headed and how we will get there. I believe the decisions we make today will determine whether the U.S. maintains its leadership in space tomorrow. In the future, as in the past, I hope we will be able to focus mission priorities and goals to ensure our best chances of success."

There are several compelling reasons for using the Moon as a training ground to prepare for more complex missions. Landing on the Moon would develop technical capabilities for landing on and launching from a large celestial body, something NASA has not done for more than four decades. Establishing a semi-permanent or permanent presence on the Moon would give astronauts an opportunity to work and live in an environment radically different from Earth.

The Obama administration has instead proposed a robotic capture and redirection of an asteroid to lunar orbit for astronauts to later visit. The mission concept is based on a study by the Keck Institute for Space Studies that estimated the cost of such a mission at approximately $2.6 billion. NASA has not identified a budget profile for this mission beyond FY 2014.

Notable criticism about this decision was voiced by Lamar Smith: "Without a consensus for the original plan, NASA haphazardly created a new asteroid retrieval mission. Unfortunately, NASA did not seek the advice of its own Small Bodies Assessment Group before presenting the mission to Congress. If NASA had sought the advisory group's advice, they would have heard it was "entertaining, but not a serious proposal." Maybe that's why they didn't ask."

But hopefully the whole debate will be overtaken on the right lane by innovative and dynamic private endeavours like Mars One or SpaceX, who aim to enable missions to Mars that are much cheaper and faster. Competition like this could be a great thing to accelerate the ultimate success, and China might also join the race after they accomplished mankinds return to the Moon.