Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Why are we not going to Mars moons phobos 1st. instead directly to Mars.?

13 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    3 months ago

    because your gay

  • Tom
    Lv 7
    3 months ago

    Why go there when MARS is RIGHT THERE, Minutes away?   Make the 6 month trip worth while.   Besides, the moons are no bigger than a couple of asteroids just a few miles wide (or less) and no gravity to speak of.

  • 3 months ago

    That is not as stupid as it sounds, in the event that you are in a rush to investigate Mars on a careful spending plan, and you're not an extremely rich person making flying grain storehouses in Texas. A trustworthy sounding arrangement was distributed by the Planetary Society in 2015 recommending only that. However, NASA has their own thing proceeding to will utilize the Moon as training for arrivals and distant stations, so on the off chance that they can nail that, why not really land?

  • Anonymous
    3 months ago

    That's not as dumb as it sounds, if you are in a hurry to explore Mars on a budget, and you aren't a billionaire making flying grain silos in Texas. A credible-sounding plan was published by the Planetary Society in 2015 suggesting just that. But NASA's got their own thing going and will be using the Moon as practice for landings and remote outposts, so if they can nail that, why not actually land?

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • D g
    Lv 7
    3 months ago

    The only reason we went to OUR  moon was it was close ..  the reason to go to mars moon  would  not  be the same it would be eseentially just as far..

    so it would cost just as much..

    the first trip to mars would be just an orbit to see if  they can get there and get back anyway..

    it would be on later missions that they land after they are sure the  ship design is  adequate

  • 3 months ago

    Because going to Phobos would be more like docking with a spaceship than landing on something.

  • Anonymous
    3 months ago

    What do you mean by "we going"? Humans landing on it? It doesn't even have an athmosphere.

    Machines have landed on Mars, and one is scheduled to pick up some material from Phobos in 2024 - and bring it back to earth

  • 3 months ago

    Basically there is nothing special on Phobos apart from its natural Crater Stepney

     it would be handier to land  retrorockets on it to slow down its orbital speed

    As it is, it is slowly spiralling in towards Mars

     Collision is inevitable, if it was sped up it would add much needed mass to the planet

    To make its Gravity higher and maybe begin to make Mars more Habitable

  • 3 months ago

    There've been some proposals to visit the moons, which are thought to be captured asteroids.  The real value of a space mission to Mars is going to the planet, however... visiting *our* moon was valuable, in that we learned how alike it is with Earth, and that bolstered the theory of it's creation... Mars' moons, however, won't give us much insight to the planet; being captured asteroids, they likely formed in a different location than Mars, and ultimately are thought to be very dissimilar to the planet...  So, you'd *want* to land on Mars. 

  • 3 months ago

    We have already gone directly to Mars. At least three rovers have been there, as well as a few other robotic spacecraft. There's not much there except dry dust. The moons are simply asteroids that have been captured by Mars. Other asteroids such as Bennu are easier to reach and tell us the same as what the moons of Mars would.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.