[guenthert]

The average lifetime of probes landing on Venus counting in minutes might have something to do with that?

"So that’s the bad part. But once you move past it, you start to notice that everything gets easier on Venus."

If wishes were fishes ...

[mrweasel]

Venera 12 holdes the record I think for 110 minutes.

[roer]

Did you read the rest of the post? The author acknowledges the lander issues as well

[dingaling]

Yes, but he only looked at Venus from the aspect of research which is missing half, or more, of the point of a Mars mission.

The advantage of Mars is that it is ( hypothetically ) acceptably compatible with persistent surface-based habitation. Not an easy life, certainly not compared to Earth, but more sustainable than balloons floating in sulphuric clouds.

Venus doesn't offer an 'alternative cradle' option unless we invent anti-gravity. Until then the emphasis will be on finding a way to improve human civilisation's resilience.

[decimalenough]

The point of the blog post is that while flying humans across the solar system to Venus so they can float in clouds of opaque sulfuric acid above a hellscape of certain death sounds and objectively is ridiculous, it's still easier and arguably more sensible than trying to send humans to Mars and back.

[curiousObject]

Yes, that is the point. It’s a good point.

But, if our airship in the Venusian atmosphere finds nothing interesting (no life signs), then there’s not much more to do at Venus, because atmosphere is all mixed and all the same. Going to the surface, even for a day or two, is hard and very expensive.

OTOH Mars - that can be explored for many years, on the surface and below the surface. We might still find nothing, but it’ll take hundreds of years to be sure.

[childintime]

So they solved the refueling problem you'll have when "floating" in the Venus atmosphere? Seems to me going to Venus is a one way trip.

[decimalenough]

The same problem exists on Mars and is even harder because you're at the bottom of a gravity well.