Mission to Mars

[Rosey]

I really like the movie "Mission to Mars" .. has there ever been an addon for this?

I would love to see .. :speakcool:

1. Launch from KSC to the World Space Station
2. Launch of Mars 1 to Mars then the landing
3. Launch of Mars 2 rescue to Mars
4. The engines explode and you have to EVA to the remote lander
5. The Earth return vehicle takes the three astronauts back to earth while Jim McConnell takes off in te Martian space craft towards the unknown

 

[Jebusy]

good idea for an add-on...bad movie

 

[perseus]

the addon Mission To Mars in
http://www.avsim.com/
[FONT=verdana, sans-serif]Filename:[/FONT][FONT=verdana, sans-serif]mission-to-mars.zip [/FONT][FONT=verdana, sans-serif]License:[/FONT][FONT=verdana, sans-serif]Freeware [/FONT][FONT=verdana, sans-serif]Added:[/FONT][FONT=verdana, sans-serif]19th January 2003 [/FONT][FONT=verdana, sans-serif]Author:[/FONT][FONT=verdana, sans-serif]Kev Kelcey [/FONT][FONT=verdana, sans-serif]Size:[/FONT][FONT=verdana, sans-serif]2442kb[/FONT]

 

[Deke]

Went and saw it when it came out.

Walked out right after the dude lifted his helmet off while falling to Mars.

 

[Rosey]

Oh I thought it was a great movie .. you don't need monsters to have good science fiction. I had the above mentioned addon .. not to good for today's program in my opinion

 

[ryan]

I thought it was a good movie too. Good story plot odd ending though.

 

[Andy44]

I forgot to mention this awful film in the "crappiest sci fi" thread.

I'll skip the giant rant and say this: part 4 in the original post is impossible to model in Orbiter, because it totally defies physics. The remote lander was in orbit around Mars, the astronauts abandonded their stricken vessel before it had inserted itself into orbit. No way those little cold gas thruster things they were using had enough delta-V to put them into orbit and align planes with that remote lander thing.

The part where Tim Robbins takes off his helmet and offs himself was good, not because it was realistic (which it wasn't), but because Tim Robbins took off his helmet and removed his character from the remainder of the film.

 

[Linguofreak]

I forgot to mention this awful film in the "crappiest sci fi" thread.

I'll skip the giant rant and say this: part 4 in the original post is impossible to model in Orbiter, because it totally defies physics. The remote lander was in orbit around Mars, the astronauts abandonded their stricken vessel before it had inserted itself into orbit. No way those little cold gas thruster things they were using had enough delta-V to put them into orbit and align planes with that remote lander thing.

Yeah, I was thinking that, but I couldn't remember the movie very well (only saw it straight through once, plus I think a few times when I saw brief fragments).

If the ship was making a close enough pass on the lander, they might have been able to use their suits' thrusters to set up a close enough rendezvous to use the lander itself as reaction mass to get the DV to match velocities. Of course, the lander might not survive the process, given Robinson's First Law.

 

[ryan]

Well we dont really know how the human body will be like when somebody takes off there suit in space. It could release itself of all bodily fluids.

 

[Andy44]

Yes, we do know exactly what will happen to the human body in a vacuum. Data has been collected from experiments, and at least one accident in which a man in a vacuum chamber was exposed for several seconds and nearly killed.

 

[Linguofreak]

Well we dont really know how the human body will be like when somebody takes off there suit in space. It could release itself of all bodily fluids.

Actually we do. There have been a few incidents in vacuum chambers on Earth, as well as incidents in high altitude aircraft. (As far as the human body's reaction to exposure is concerned, anything above 60,000 feet (~20km) or so is pretty much the same as space).

There have also been experiments on animals.

http://www.sff.net/people/Geoffrey.Landis/vacuum.html

 

[80mileshigh]

The spacecraft design in this film was its redeeming feature though.

As a point of trivia, the Mars transfer vehicle was designed by Syd Mead, who previously designed the Leonov for 2010.

 

[jedidia]

If the ship was making a close enough pass on the lander, they might have been able to use their suits' thrusters to set up a close enough rendezvous to use the lander itself as reaction mass to get the DV to match velocities.

Not sure what you mean. In the film, they just flew into it and hooked on. Now maybe you could hit it only using an MMU if you pass close enough, but you'd hit it with a few 1000 meters per second... no good Idea!

Anyways, I liked the movie non the less. At least it tried to do something different for once, and when it comes to wierd endings in SF nothing beats 2001 anyways...

 

[Rosey]

Hey gang, it was just a fun movie!!! It was not meant to be shown on the NASA channel as science fact.

I am a big "Trekkie" and most of the Star Trek stuff is impossible in real life, but I still enjoyed it How many movies have large space ships with almost unlimited fuel fly to the planets. Even Von Braun wanted a single large ship for the first moon ship, but some engineer figured out the the ONLY way they were going to the moon within 10 years was with a lunar lander and rondevous. Von Braun finally realized that he was wrong. In the movie "Countdown" they land a Gemini style craft on the moon and that is a fun movie too. If you watch the old "Flash Gordon" serials, they fly through space .. with clouds??? In "Robinson Carusoe on Mars" .. they took pills so they could breath the Martian air and eat Martian Sausage!!! And of course thay had to take at least one woman on these trips .. so they would have someone who could scream at the monsters!!!

Movies are fun, documentarys are real.

 

[Linguofreak]

Not sure what you mean. In the film, they just flew into it and hooked on. Now maybe you could hit it only using an MMU if you pass close enough, but you'd hit it with a few 1000 meters per second... no good Idea!

Which is why I said that the lander might not survive due to Robinson's First Law, which reads: "An object impacting at 3 km/s packs kinetic energy equal to its weight in TNT."

 

[ar81]

I am tired of crap in space movies or other movies.

Indiana Jones in Peru where indians listen mexican music and surviving a nuclear explosion inside a refrigerator.

In Jurassic Park you have a shot of San José Costa Rica in the beach, with palm trees. If you want to see San José, compare this http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~dfk/trips/2004CostaRica/SanJose/huge/SanJose-01.jpg
with the beach town that is shown in the movie. Just for information, San José is surrounded by mountains.

Or how about 10000BC where you have hairy mammuts in the desert building pyramids... How do you feed them? How do you prevent them to die overheated?

Armageddon is another sad case... no need to say what is wrong with it.
The excuse of Hollywood for their ignorance is that they say "we did not intend to make a documentary" or "we did it to entertain".

What Hollywood is doing is reinventing history. And now they are adding gym actors. The good news about it is that Oscars will be given to european actors who were not trained as actors in a gym but an acting school.

Mission to Mars is a movie that is worthy to be remembered just like the movie Solarbabies.
If you watch the japanese anime Planetes, or read the japanese manga 2001 nights you will see a great difference. And you will understand why Mission to Mars is just crap.

 

[zerofay32]

All I have to say is that 10000BC was never meant to portray an actual time in history. You’re reading too much into this. You sound like you're saying "if it’s in a movie, then it has to be real!" You fail to mention horror films and Harry Potter. If everyone thought the way you do, then kids would apply to Hogwarts after High School. Ridiculous. Have the common sense to realize that they are only movies and all movies are made to make money by entertaining the general public.

Zerofay32

 

[ar81]

You sound like you're saying "if it’s in a movie, then it has to be real!"

No, I was showing how ridiculous the movie was.
It is a sign that the maker of the script did not take the time to think.
Even if I ignore the mammuth problem, it is still crappy.
I never asked for reality, just common sense.

There is a lot of talent in USA, but their ideas are not getting funded. It seems that many movies in Hollywood are using the following formula:

Movie = Rich producer + Mediocre scripter + Gym actors

It seems like for some reason movie and talent are taking a different path.
I dare anyone to rent a movie called Solar babies and see what I mean with common sense. Be aware that at the end you may feel you wasted your time and your money.

 

[Ghostrider]

If everyone thought the way you do, then kids would apply to Hogwarts after High School. Ridiculous.

You can't apply to Hogwarts, you receive a letter of invitation. And you are invited at 11, not after High School.

 

[Hartmann]

The movie is decent until when they fired the damaged engine, after this point all is ridiculous.

The movie could be correct at this point if the engine blow up in the last second of the insertion, before shut down the main engine, so the travel to the lifeboat module could be possible.

It´s impossible go to the orbital module if you don´t do the orbit insertion before, unless you have Uber suits' thrusters.

Also ..could the poor lost astronaut reenter by only a few meters per second of movement difference compared with the module...probably not. or it will last some hours or days in orbit.

But after this, with the face , no detected before with any spacecraft, the aliens ,and other things, the movie is a crap.

I prefer a lot more the movie "Red planet" despite that it has some flaws but is nice for me.