Quote - It takes too long to get to mars and back IMO for a mission there to be feasible and there are too many political issues that would have to be settled first. 

 

With long term space missions, the astronauts have to make special accommodations to keep their bodies healthy because they would deteriorate otherwise in a zero gravity environment.  It takes a lot of food to feed a person so to feed a crew of 100-200, you’d need a ton of room to grow everything plus you’d have a lot of people unhappy they can’t get a burger or a steak.

???
I never said anything about hundreds of people. Try around 18-24, crew and explorers. MRE's aren't all that cool, but they would do in a pinch (never minding the garlic fart smell of the things....); but the food and waste management is part of that regenerative life support system I was talking about. There have been a couple of experiments, but with more flash than substance. And research has already shown that resistance can ameliorate the degeneration, and a simple pressurized section that rotates fast enough to provide 'gravity' for excercise would make it even less of an issue. Not for the whole ship, but if the crew could work out daily in abnout .7g, things would stay in much better shape. > Quote -  

A nuclear power plant?  We are starting to run into a power shortage here in the US, our nuclear plants are getting too old and we haven’t been able to build a new one in over 20 years.  I think there’d be too much fear of the shuttle or rocket transporting it blowing up during launch or in orbit to allow something like that to happen.

That has been due to ignorance and scaremongering....and reality is going to force that construction again, unless someone finally teases fusion out of the works. And only an idiot would be concerned about such a possibility, because the vessel would never be launched fueled to begin with. The fuel rods would go up much later, after the thing was installed...and there is a significant difference between radiological signatures between an unused fuel rod, and one that has enjoyed critical mass. Admittedly it wouldn't be good for you to take home and sleep with it, but the gamma output of unexcited uranium fuel is not going to make you glow if you see it. > Quote -  

Then you’d have to worry a lot about crew composition.  In the early 70s, it wasn’t as big a problem when we had a bunch of guys going to the moon, today an all-male crew would be a tougher sell.  So are you going to add women to the crew?  If yes, you are going to have to expect some hanky-panky going on and account for it somehow.

A mixed gender crew would be needed for psychological reasons, as well as politically correct ones. And as for hanky and panky, let em get a room. That's what condoms and birth control pills are for. Keep in mind that astronauts are not stupid people, and getting knocked up a million miles from the ob-gyn (never mind the the store that sells 0g pampers) would be the height of stupidity. No doubt there would be no copulating agreements that the crew would have to sign....which would be worth hanging on the wall in the toilet after the ship was underway.

Now there -would- have to be at least on psych on board, to do whatever (s)he could to keep any personal issues from flaring into fights and what not. But that will happen sooner or later, just as it was inevitable that we would lose people in operations. I would have preferred if Challenger hadn't been lost to bean counterism....but Columbia was pure Demon Murphy. > Quote -  

What about pregnancy?  Are you going to encourage it for research purposes?  Are you going to have the facilities and people on board who can deliver a child as well as enough baby food on board in the event that a baby or 3 do come along?  Are you going to require the women to take birth control for two-three years or have the facilities on board to have an abortion?  Or is everyone going to be sterilized in some way?  Every decision you make is going to cause controversy and if you do allow unsterilized women on board, you are going to have to add extra weight for their reproductive “needs”, whatever you’ve deemed those to be, and have to do defend the costs and morality associated with the decision.

If it really is a worry, they can sterilize both sexes with surgical clips, making it reversible upon return. And no, halfway to Mars is no place to find out about pregnancy complications. > Quote -  

What about religion?  If you do have a small community instead of a small crew, they may ask for a pastor.  Now it’s a right for the crew members to practice their own religion.  But if you bring a priest on board the ship, that’s going to cause atheist lawsuits because there is going to be prayers and possibly marriages and communions.  Atheists won’t like that.  Now if you only choose atheists or agnostics well then you are being discriminatory against other religions.  If you tell people they can’t be religious while on board you are denying them their human rights.

Religion hasn't been an issue so far in any space travels, has it? Because you can bet all the various astronauts and cosmonauts have had differing views of God and Man and The Universe. I could see a no prostelythizing agreement, simply to keep the tensions down. But what one does in the privacy of their quarters is their own business. > Quote -  

Finally who’s going to be the first person to step on Mars?  With Apollo 11 we had the choice between 2 white guys so it wasn’t an issue.  However if we have a diverse crew going to Mars and a white guy is the first person to step on Mars, we are racist and sexist for letting a white man be first again.  However if a woman or a non-white steps on Mars first there are still going to be charges of sexism and/or racism because that person will have allegedly been choose specifically because they weren’t a man or a white.  Then you’d have a counter allegation and instead of a great moment for humanity, you’d leave a bad taste in everyone’s mouth over allegations of (reverse) sexism/racism.  Plus you'd ruin the experience for the person who made that first step.  If that person decides to quote the bible or makes a religious statement, it’s going to cause a stir.  If that person isn’t allowed to, it’s denying him his rights and will cause a stir.

 

I’m sorry for bringing politics into this discussion, but do you guys see where I am going with this?  I’ve tried to keep things neutral but in order for a mission to mars, especially one with a larger crew, there are going to have to be a lot more things you will have to take into account before hand and you are going to have to realize there are going to be a ton of ramifications no matter what course you choose to pursue.  So if you are planning to make it another great moment for humanity instead of fodder for a political fight, lots of things will have to be worked out first.

Not to be a naif, but screw politics. If you play that game, you'll spend so much time trying to be oh so PC you'll never acomplish one bloody thing. This wouldn't be a feel good encounter session; it would be a trip to our closest planetary neighbor. One that has an atmosphere, and all the dangers that arise from moving dense gases. Not to mention all the things that could be in the deep dark between here and there that could reduce that ship to a smear of metal and frozen meat. You get the best people you can find, period. And you make the process transparent, so that there is no question in a rational mind as to the fairness of it (those who want to take umbrage will, regardless, so why even worry about them).

I don't claim this would be cheap; just that it would be the most economical. Building the thing would be hideously expensive, no two ways.....on the first trip. On the second trip, its the cost of refit and resupply. That is why the supercarrier, for all its expense, is still a viable warship. Over its life, you get more than your money's worth out of it. It would be the same with this hypothesized ship. Say you got 15 missions out of her before retiring her. You only built her once, and got 14 freebies for your money. And that doesn't count all the science and experience she brought back. IF we go the capsule route again, it will be build it, use it once, stick it in a museum, wash rinse repeat. Manned missle vehicles couldn't have done a fraction of what the STS has done....and cheap is not a virtue...