manned Mission to Mars discussion

Discussion in 'Science and Technology' started by jefferiestubes8, Jun 22, 2009.

  1. jefferiestubes8

    jefferiestubes8 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Location:
    New York City
    science of mission

    Since this is the Science and Technology forum I'd like to address the trip from Earth to Mars. I believe it will be the 7 month journey but to the astronauts it will feel like they are just on the Intl.Space Station and not moving.
    Will any EVAs be required every 60 days for inspections of the hull? Will a robotic arm with an HD camera be able to do it?
    Is a centrifuge like in "Mission to Mars" (2000), "Red Planet" (2000) and "2010" (1986) going to really happen?

    Re: Budgetary/Funding discussion
    I swear I am going to create a thread in the Misc. subforum for that!. Please can you get back to the Science and Technology of the topic? As science fiction fans we all are speculating on the science anyway...
     
  2. SilentP

    SilentP Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 21, 2009
    Location:
    is in a very lonely Corner of the Circle
    Re: science of mission

    Agreed, I'll stick with the actual topic.

    I'd definitely say that EVA walks will be necessary, even in addition to a robotic repair arm. I mean, what would you do if the arm itself was what needed repairing/inspection? How easy it would be to repair may be another matter, or the hull in fact.

    I'm not sure about a centrifuge being used for such a journey, how big would a vessel have to be for the circular nature of the floor not to be unobtrusive (if that concern means anything)? Such curvature in a small vessel might make the actual design of the workspaces inflight more complicated to make the simulated gravity worth anything.

    Unless say you were to have certain sections with a centrifuge, say the gynasium, which I'm pretty sure would be required in a vessel for such a long journey, if the astronauts are to keep up their muscular strength.

    Such modularisation might require a lander module, for a dedicated landing and take off, while other modules are responsible for intra-planetary flight control and the like.
     
  3. Daedalus12

    Daedalus12 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2002
    Location:
    Transatlantic Flights
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/11/29/nasa_mars/

    Well yes NASA has mentioned as it a major stumbling block in their manned proposals. The other one being cost of course.

    I can tell you for sure that NASA scientists now think it's one of the major engineering challenges. It's a stumbling block in the sense that NASA won't do a manned mission to Mars until the magnitude of the radiation risk is well-known. Right now there is a large uncertainty. If risk turns out to be great (which some of them already think so) then some sort shielding must be included in the final plan. No it can't be lead because of mass issue. There are plenty of technical documents (both public and private) from NASA dealing with this topic. No I don't get my information from the Discovery channel or any space news media.
     
  4. SilentP

    SilentP Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 21, 2009
    Location:
    is in a very lonely Corner of the Circle
    I may be incorrect, and they've actually done it, but wouldn't you have thought with all the probes being sent towards Mars and in that general direction, that they would have fitted the in-transit vehicle with some form of radiation sensors to get a feel for the amount of radiation present in the open vacuum?
     
  5. Daedalus12

    Daedalus12 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2002
    Location:
    Transatlantic Flights
    The amount of radiation is well-known. The total amount of exposure expected for a 2.5 years manned mission is equivalent of about few hundred years here on Earth. It's the effect on human body that is not well-known i.e. how much is the increase in the risk of dying from cancer. The estimates vary widely and there is no good way to test it. I admit NASA is very much conservative on this front. Actually they are very conservative on most fronts. But the risk is real and not some figment of imagination.
     
  6. SilentP

    SilentP Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 21, 2009
    Location:
    is in a very lonely Corner of the Circle
    Gotcha.

    As for a type of protection, you'd be correct in that lead would be right out, due to mass.

    Would it perhaps be possible for a ship to carry a device to replicate the effect of a planet's magnetosphere? I'll admit right off that I don't know enough geology to know how the Earth create's it's mangentosphere or if it's possible to replicate on a small scale, but something like that could reduce the amount of radiation absorbed by the craft and crew...
     
  7. Daedalus12

    Daedalus12 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2002
    Location:
    Transatlantic Flights
    For the more instantly lethal radiation events like a massive dose of fast traveling protons from a solar ejection a modest amount of aluminum would be enough. Although I don't know precisely all the details.

    The higher priority placed by NASA admin. is on the type of radiation (coined HZE) that would pose more long-term health risks. Most of the risk uncertainty and technical challenge comes from these radiations. There has not been any technical demonstration but theoretically it could be as you said magnetic based.

    You can read this paper if you have AIAA membership or if you are at an university with AIAA subscription. It's an old one but it's good.

    HZE particle shielding using confined magnetic fields
     
  8. chardman

    chardman Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2001
    Location:
    The home of GenCon
    So no actual links, just some figures you pulled out of your ass, eh?

    But assuming you are right this time, you've just proven that there's plenty of money for a NASA Manned Mars Mission. Because NASA has put forth less ambitious manned mission scenarios with estimated budgets of only about $30bn. Utilizing the noknowes magic cost overrun ratio of roughly 4.44 to 1, that gives us a grand total of less than $150bn to fund one of these alternate mission plans.

    I also notice you've totally ignored addressing the propulsion issue.

    Not at all surprised.
     
  9. Daedalus12

    Daedalus12 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2002
    Location:
    Transatlantic Flights
    Actually here I'll just provide the paper if the Mods would indulge this slight violation of AIAA rules on distribution.

    Paper
     
  10. SilentP

    SilentP Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 21, 2009
    Location:
    is in a very lonely Corner of the Circle
    Hopefully they will, the first page view they allow on the website has me interested, but I couldn't follow it further.

    I'll have to look at it when I get home however, since my work net won't allow access to 'Personal Network Storage' sites :(
     
  11. Daedalus12

    Daedalus12 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2002
    Location:
    Transatlantic Flights
    Well the basic conclusion of the paper is that a reasonably sized magnetic based shielding system that you can fit a small spacecraft heading for Mars would be useless against HZE. :(
     
  12. SilentP

    SilentP Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 21, 2009
    Location:
    is in a very lonely Corner of the Circle
    Well that sucks balls :(

    I don't suppose grasping at straws by asking how 'small' is small would do any good? :p
     
  13. Daedalus12

    Daedalus12 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2002
    Location:
    Transatlantic Flights
    Well here is the second page. Small as in not something on order of a large space habitat i.e. think of launching something like the ISS to Mars.

    [​IMG]
     
  14. Daedalus12

    Daedalus12 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2002
    Location:
    Transatlantic Flights
    Don't get me wrong guys. I am just very confident that all other challenges like better propulsion, more accurate landing system and ISRU, etc can be solved more easily because they are purely engineering challenges unlike the radiation risk which will probably involve quite a bit of non-technical subjective judgments. By that account I am actually an optimist for a manned mars mission.
     
  15. noknowes

    noknowes Lieutenant Commander

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Previous studies have shown cost over run ratios of between at least 3 to 10.The figure i gave is the weighted average of these.

    Study date used included the Osprey,the F22,the ISS,Apollo program,Star Wars missile defence and the Abrams tank as well as the wait for it..The Space Shuttle Turkey!

    Also you have not even taken into account INFLATION and technical difficulties.So my figure of $2 trillion is not exagerration but conservative.

    The people who pulled the $450 billion got it from their ass as no way in hell is that enough.It is simply a ruse to get funding.
     
  16. Urge

    Urge Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    Location:
    Norway
    No new technology, no competition in the form of a Sovjet-block or something else that creates a space-race.....

    Im sceptical. Im not sure if we will even make it back to the moon. The human race has deteriorated and become more silly and more stupid since the 1960s.
     
  17. jefferiestubes8

    jefferiestubes8 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Location:
    New York City
    There is now a thread on the funding/politics of funding of a manned mission to Mars (and Moon).
    http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?p=3126285
     
  18. jefferiestubes8

    jefferiestubes8 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Location:
    New York City
    Is Hypersleep/stasis/ hibernation technology from

    Alien (1979) for a long flight a real possibility in the next 25 years?

    Used in the episode Space Seed on the S.S. Botany Bay.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasis_(fiction)

    "2010: The Year We Make Contact" (1984) [called cryosleep] shows it.

    Supernova (2000/I), Event Horizon (1997), and Aliens (1986) films and the Half-Life videogame all use it.

    Event Horizon mentions it is also for protecting the body from major G-forces and I believe they call it a "grav-couch" or maybe that was Supernova.

    While they wake up as if from regular sleep in Aliens it looks unrealistic.
    2010 and Event Horizon really show a realistic-looking awakening effects on the human body from the stasis. A nice touch.

    As far as work going on now about it I bring up these two articles:
    Hibernation Method Tested for Space Travel
    April 4,2008

    Hibernation and Space Travel: Science Fiction or Science Reality?

    Do we really need 8 months of food/water/waste water management/oxygen? Could these stasis chambers have enough shielding for radiation too? Computer-controlled to open during wakeup procedure?
     
  19. sojourner

    sojourner Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Location:
    A Long Time Ago...
    ^That's the same article posted on 2 different sites.

    I am not sure it is possible in the next 25 years, maybe the next 50 though. Why shield the individual stasis chambers? Just shield the room they are in.
     
  20. jefferiestubes8

    jefferiestubes8 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Location:
    New York City