manned Mission to Mars discussion

manned mission to Phobos [moon of Mars]

July 1, 2009 SOURCE
A mission to a moon of Mars?
Here is the relevant info:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phobos_(moon)

Not a terrible idea. Let's see where the sample return mission Phobos-Grunt and Yinghuo-1 survey lead us...

 

If you are landing on Phobos, it might be just as good to just stay in orbit. Its no point in digging into a big rock just in order to digg into a big rock. Being on Mars on the other hand, might be slightly better then space since it has good shielding against radiation - at least down in the valleys where the atmosphere-ponds are.

 

Those "atmosphere ponds" are still very good vacuums by earth standards and would not provide any more appreciable radiation shielding.

The argument for missions to Phobos are from a logistics standpoint. It has no gravity to speak of so can be easily "landed" on or docked with. It is thought to have a large amount of water ice for a core making it a natural fuel depo. Being virtually weightless would make it easy to create a radiation shielded structure. Once you have a decent base worked up, you can then explore mars at your leisure with a safe haven in orbit.

 

Scientists have proposed a Manned Mars mission since the 1950s..
Chemical, Nuclear and Ion propulsion systems have been studied..and with all this research, http://www.astronautix.com/craftfam/martions.htm

I think that the final problems such as radiation and the like can be solved..some of the studies in the article included putting water or fuel in tanks around the crew compartment to shield against much of the radiation..limited lead lined shelter rooms were also proposed for solar flares and other such hazards.. Perhaps a combination of methods will be used..similar to Earth in that the planet uses several methods to protect life from radiation.

The answers to these and the other questions would create a quantum leap in technology, such as that leap that followed the Apollo project in terms of energy useage, signals, insulation, power generation and delivery, light-weight structures, software,hardware and many more..this is an investment in America's future and one we shouldn't walk away from because it's "hard"...

 

Bolded for emphasis, as it's a near QFT. It's not just an investment for America but the entire species.

 

Sorry to double post, but I didn't think this question would warrant a thread on it's own.

For any eventual terraforming efforts that may be made to make Mars more habitable, what kind of resource drain of Earth would we be talking about in terms of 'seeding' Mars (though this may be a general question for any planet)? Would Mars have enough raw materials for Terran life to be able to convert the planet to be liveable? Hopefully these questions make sense, or at least the spirit of them.

 

simulated mission to Mars 105-day test ends

28 July 2009
http://www.newscientist.com/article...st-difficult-part-of-simulated-mars-trip.html

Hey at least they are testing this. NASA hasn't quite got there.



The annual 4-month tests at the desert station simulates the actual Martian surface itself. Photo:
http://desert.marssociety.org/media/mdrs/fs08/images/crew76/c76d01atv02.jpg

 

Basically humans are too stupid/the universe sucks ass too much for ftl to happen. Therefore a manned mission to mars, while looking cool, is a waste of time and effort. Until humans get smarter its really just mickey mouse.

 

This is the Science and Technology subforum.
Discuss the topic specifically.
john titor if you have nothing to add to the topic then please do not respond. This is a topic about a planned mission.

 

Re: training for interplanetary mission

http://gizmodo.com/5537053/nasa-finds-outer-space-65-feet-underwater
via the NY Times
Absent a Moon or Mars, Recreating Space 65 Feet Under the Sea
By KENNETH CHANG
Published: May 10, 2010
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/11/science/space/11neemo.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
​

 

Mars500 project begins

3 June 2010
And now the 520-day project begins for 6 astronauts.

Volunteers begin Mars500 isolation

At the link is a description of the modules, layout diagram of the 5 modules as well as photos of the space suits and videos.

 

semi-related...There is now a network TV fictional series in development about a manned mission to Mars.

"Mars Direct" NBC series in development about a mission to Mars

let's see what happens in 2011 if it gets greenlit to series.

 

Nasa mulling one-way manned Mars mission

The astronauts would be sent supplies from Earth on a regular basis but they would have to become self-sufficient as soon as possible.
Oct 29, 2010
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/6832690.cms

Internet rumor? No. Multiple sources.

first reported here last week:
NASA Ames’ Worden reveals DARPA-funded ‘Hundred Year Starship’ program
October 18, 2010


A new Journal of Cosmology article lays out the details:

http://www.upi.com/Science_News/201...might-be-a-one-way-ticket/UPI-21821288314944/

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2371219,00.asp

related a paper from 2008:
Davies, P., Schulze-Makuch, D. (2008) A one-way human mission to Mars. Astrobiology 8, 310.

 

I can see the logic in sending a mission to Phobos as a stepping stone. It's got a lower gravitational field strength than Mars, so the required delta-V would be a lot lower. Also, if it's as pourous as it's been theorised, it perhaps wouldn't be out of the question to expand the base underground, since there's a chance it won't take much effort to remove the material (which in itself could be repurposed for manufacturing) to go underground, and the base can benefit from additional 'shielding' from radiation by living subsurface.

 

a 2009 plan Austere Human Missions

A great 41 page PDF file from a 2009 plan Austere Human Missions to Mars from NASA with 6-person crew:
http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstream/2014/41431/1/09-3642.pdf
pages 7-9 have some good diagrams of size of ships and how it would get there (manned, unmanned)

With a lot of diagrams its pretty easy to view.

 

Private manned Mars mission gets sponsors for crew selection

I decided to put this in this thread rather than making a private funding manned Mars mission thread.
a permanent Mars colony privately funded.

Surely to be controversial since sending man on a one-way trip would be considered suicide and not in good spirit. This is sure to go against NASA and the US government. The Mars-One group will become more niche have a harder time finding enough funding.
Manned Mars mission wins initial funding

Sort of like The Truman Show? At least this has an interest like the Olympics in many countries. It could be our first Truman Show style reality-TV type documentary series. As they say in the U.K. Factual documentary.

Since it will be 40 people though I guess it would be under the competition-based reality TV genre.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/03/mars-one-manned-mission-sponsors_n_1850244.html

Here is the Mars One intro film (4 minutes) at Youtube:
Mars One introduction film (updated version)


The whole reality show of the selection to 40 astronauts and their training could run for years including athlete endurance-style training, military-type bootcamp physical training, simulating desertlike conditions out in Utah. It is similar to the idea I had in this thread:
idea for science docu-reality TV series
It would be documented anyway but sure why not make it a series and international TV market coverage?

 

Re: Private manned Mars mission gets sponsors for crew selection

I don't think the Mars One people are too well grounded in reality. Setting the technical hurdles aside, No reality show has made close to the money they would need to cover costs. Hell, I don't think the most popular sports in the world make that money on a per season basis off broadcasts.

 

This is the silliest idea I've ever heard in my life. A one-way Mars mission funded by reality-television dollars?

Now, if they instead went to a much closer place (i.e. the Moon), and DID have some means of returning to Earth if funding ran out, then it might be more feasible.

 

you need to bring everything with you to Mars including the return trip. The return trip is already bought and paid for when it gets there. Sending people on a one way trip to Mars is basically creating a hostage situation, the hostages are the people sent, and unless the public funds a resupply mission, they die!

 

This is really the place to have a discussion on nuclear power concepts. Right now the controversy on responsible missions to Mars means limiting transit times and thus rad-dosing of astronauts--ironically nukes mean less radiation exposure for astronauts.

There is a big arguement between nuclear thermal (NERVA type systems favored by Stan Borowski) and nuclear electric systems like Chang Diaz's
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1896/1

That is fission end of things.

New fusion drive proposed
http://www.gizmodo.com/5921673/nucl...-a-spacecraft-to-mars-in-just-weeks?tag=space
http://uah.edu/news/items/10-research/2501-slapshot-to-deep-space
http://www.universetoday.com/95991/new-flying-tea-kettle-could-get-us-to-mars-in-weeks-not-months/
http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php/135865-New-%E2%80%9CFlying-Tea-Kettle%E2%80%9D-Could-Get-Us-To-Mars-in-Weeks-Not-Months
https://plus.google.com/u/0/105704136900260060076/posts
http://www.csnr.usra.edu/

More on the Z-pinch
http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/07/washington-plasma-startup-creates-euv.html#more

This technology can therefore be dual use--for smaller computers and Mars ships.

The way we go to Mars now is that we only use the LV to punt a wide warhead and let Mars run into it. That is the payload-centric course by folks who don't respect rocket-centric MSFC types who worry about how a spacecraft can slow itself down do the descent stage doesn't have to slam into Mars as hard.

Stan Borowkski's Nuclear Thermal seems most do-able in that we tested NERVA systems way back when when rocket engineers opinions counted for more than they do now.

The best approach--as per Stan Borowski
http://www.forbes.com/sites/brucedorminey/2012/04/02/time-for-nasa-to-go-nuclear/
http://www.racetomars.ca/mars/marsRising/episode3.jsp


A nuclear rocket loaded with enough liquid hydrogen propellant would allow for one-way Mars transits as short as three months. That would also mean that the six-man crew would be exposed to much less space radiation enroute than during transits using conventional chemical propulsion.


To make the journey, the nuclear spacecraft’s three engines would be loaded with a total of 120 kgs of enriched Uranium-235, less than 1% of which would be fissioned during a round trip mission to Mars. That means the craft could be used on multiple missions providing it’s parked in earth orbit and resupplied with liquid hydrogen upon its return.


This is good for the folks who want depots.