MovieChat Forums > Capricorn One (1978) Discussion > Ok let me get this strait

Ok let me get this strait

posted 11 years ago by thomaspc2
18 replies | jump to latest

The producers suggest that NASA in this move says 3 men in an Apollo sized capsule make it all the way to mars and back. Sitting on their backs for a total round trip time of 3 years ? Did the producers have a clue? The record for space endurance is half that and done on a space station where they could use special exercises equipment. Those who have been in space for 1 ½ years have had major problems with their bodies afterwards.

I used to like this movie but not anymore. I can understand suspending belief but not to this extent.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] spookyrat1 11 years ago

Where did you get "3 years" from?

Not sure from where the OP got that figure.

There are regular date headings through the movie.

[–] MerovingianGoddess 8 years ago

Thank you Mister Terry, I was kinda thrown by that 3 years thing myself.

Merovingian Goddess
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!

[–] ecky-684-830837 11 years ago

Good point from the OP.Besides that I still like this pic.

[–] spookyrat1 11 years ago

Good point from the OP

The OP was actually wrong as you can get wrong.

[–] persen1 11 years ago

Just putting in some reality, that does put the mission time mentioned in the movie to shame.

Spacecraft travel time Earth to Mars:
Viking 1 (1976) – 335 days
Viking 2 (1976) – 360 days
Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (2006) – 210 days
Phoenix Lander (2008) – 295 days
Curiosity Lander (2012) – 253 days

The two 1976 missions are the most interesting to look at, since they most likely would had used the same kind of technology on the Capricorn One, due to the technological status NASA only had a the time.
Now double these numbers to get the reality check on the actual Earth => Mars => Earth mission time.

[–] spookyrat1 11 years ago

No argument about the info. you provided and thanks.

My responses were based entirely in terms of the information provided by the (sci-fi) movie.

[–] balducci2 11 years ago

I believe the numbers you cite include extended periods spent on the surface of mars, or in orbit, exploring. Actual travel time is much less (see numbers below). (Of course with technology available today, they could probably do it in even less time now.) I did not pay enough attention to the movie to notice out how much time they were supposed to have spent on the surface.

http://www.universetoday.com/14841/how-long-does-it-take-to-get-to-mars/

Mariner 6, which blasted off on February 25, 1969 and reached [Mars] on July 31, 1969; a flight time of only 156 days. The successful Mariner 7 only required 131 days to make the journey.

Mariner 9, the first spacecraft to successfully go into orbit around Mars launched on May 30, 1971, and arrived November 13, 1971 for a duration of 167 days.

[–] KaZenPhi 10 years ago

Of course with technology available today, they could probably do it in even less time now

Not necessarily. You have to factor in major fuel constraints that still apply today. Unless a radically more efficient supply is found that won't change anytime soon. The difference in travel duration between the different quoted missions, anyone correct me if I'm wrong on this, is mostly due to the changing distance between the two planets, caused by their elliptical paths and different orbiting speeds.

[–] ralph_2ndedition 11 years ago

"...they most likely would had used the same kind of technology on the Capricorn One, due to the technological status NASA only had a the time."

I know 'Capricorn One' was released in 1977, but do we ever really find out what year the story takes place? As far as I remember we only get months and number of days, never a precise year.
If it is set in an undeterminable future doesn't that kind of void your above quoted statement, as NASA could then have had access to any imaginable as of yet uninvented technology?

[–] mcgill-646-33556 10 years ago

Spacecraft travel time Earth to Mars:
Viking 1 (1976) – 335 days
Viking 2 (1976) – 360 days
Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (2006) – 210 days
Phoenix Lander (2008) – 295 days
Curiosity Lander (2012) – 253 days

I think the novelisation (testing the memory, here) states the mission used a (fictitious) Saturn VB which, I assume, would allow them to use a faster, but much more expensive (energy-wise) flight. It is funny when we look at any plans for manned missions to mars these days that are either literally a one way trip or at least was a couple of years in length. After all, if one spends 18 months (the most efficient Hohmann Transfer Orbit) to get there, you wouldn't expect to just stay for a few days, would you?

[–] philoj 8 years ago

I think it's possible to be wronger.

For example, OP could've said they were on the mission for negative five days.

--
Philo's Law: To learn from your mistakes, you have to realize you're making mistakes.

[–] Strangerhand 11 years ago

Ok let me get this strait

Huh? Are you trying to put a straitjacket on by yourself? ???

You should head to a local hospital--they'll be all so very, very eager to give you one of those. Especially with conspiratorial/anti-conspiratorial talk like that!

The Status Quo must be strictly maintained or not strictly maintained!

[–] persen1 11 years ago

I believe the numbers you cite include extended periods spent on the surface of mars, or in orbit, exploring.

Nope, actual flight time Earth to Mars of these spacecrafts, which is why i point out that the 1976 missions are the most interesting to look at, as they also write on the page you link to your self:

"Why Does it Take So Long?
When you consider the fact that Mars is only 55 million km away, and the spacecraft are travelling in excess of 20,000 km/hour, you would expect the spacecraft to make the journey in about 115 days, but it takes much longer. This is because both Earth and Mars are orbiting around the Sun. You can’t point directly at Mars and start firing your rockets, because by the time you got there, Mars would have already moved. Instead, spacecraft launched from Earth need to be pointed at where Mars is going to be.

The other constraint is fuel. Again, if you had an unlimited amount of fuel, you’d point your spacecraft at Mars, fire your rockets to the halfway point of the journey, then turn around and decelerate for the last half of the journey. You could cut your travel time down to a fraction of the current rate – but you would need an impossible amount of fuel."

[–] libby2130 9 years ago

the speech at the funeral, it was mentioned the astronauts were gone for 8 months

[–] Blakefield 8 years ago

I agree, I'm sure eight months was said

[–] iPadCary 8 years ago

That's always bugged the *beep* out of me, too, about this movie.
I just assumed they thought the public would just look at it and think
"Space mission .... going to the Moon .... going to Mars .... Same deal."
I think that was the thought process going on.

[–] iPadCary 8 years ago

That's always bugged the crap out of me, too, about this movie.
I just assumed they thought the public would just look at it and think
"Space mission .... going to the Moon .... going to Mars .... Same deal."
I think that was the thought process going on.