Humans to Mars with current technology, within NASA budget
July 2, 2015 11:15 AM Subscribe
A recent paper describes a credible, achievable plan for a crewed Mars mission. Plans for human exploration of Mars tend to suffer from two problems: too expensive, and/or relies on technology that doesn't exist yet and may never exist. A group of mission planners at JPL has come up with a plan that uses existing technology, and can fit within the NASA budget projections from now to 2050. It relies on SLS launches, a habitat on Phobos, and practice descent/ascent on the Moon.
Mod note: One comment deleted. If you don't want to talk about Mars or you think it's boring and stupid, just skip the thread. We had that fight most recently a month ago and we don't need to do it again.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 11:25 AM on July 2, 2015 [19 favorites]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 11:25 AM on July 2, 2015 [19 favorites]
Anything involving the phrase "habitat on Phobos" is automatically a good idea that should be funded with great vigor and furious engineering.
posted by aramaic at 11:28 AM on July 2, 2015 [39 favorites]
posted by aramaic at 11:28 AM on July 2, 2015 [39 favorites]
*jumps up and down, waves hand frantically* I'm here! I'm ready! I'm a geologist,** I'm cheerful, and I don't ever get seasick, that's all you need, right, right? I'd even give you whatever is in my savings account to help fund this, I've got. . . hundreds of dollars.
I'm happy to see the "use what we already have and know" approach instead of the "well, maybe someday after this and that" kind of thinking. And I don't care what some of you smart people are going to say about the problems with this, I'm willing to go on any mission to Mars whose main architect is named "Hoppy Price".
**Not with the personality of an Ann Clayborne, though
posted by barchan at 11:31 AM on July 2, 2015 [15 favorites]
I'm happy to see the "use what we already have and know" approach instead of the "well, maybe someday after this and that" kind of thinking. And I don't care what some of you smart people are going to say about the problems with this, I'm willing to go on any mission to Mars whose main architect is named "Hoppy Price".
**Not with the personality of an Ann Clayborne, though
posted by barchan at 11:31 AM on July 2, 2015 [15 favorites]
I've been following the Orion project pretty closely the last couple years. Firstly, NASA needs their own heavy launch vehicle. We also need manned capsules to put people into earth orbit, but Orion will follow along, as we get people beyond Earth orbit, budget willing.
I'm mainly extremely curious about how we set down on Mars then take off again, so I need to thoroughly peruse the link tonight & catch up. Looks like it goes into more detail about the end-to-end process than what I'd seen before.
posted by Devils Rancher at 11:31 AM on July 2, 2015
I'm mainly extremely curious about how we set down on Mars then take off again, so I need to thoroughly peruse the link tonight & catch up. Looks like it goes into more detail about the end-to-end process than what I'd seen before.
posted by Devils Rancher at 11:31 AM on July 2, 2015
Just glancing it over, but it doesn't affordable at all. According to this image, six SLS launches would be needed per mission and that's just crazy and unsustainable. SLS is going to be super powerful, but also super expensive.
'Course there's the practical question of do humans really need to go, especially with the advances in robotics.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:33 AM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
'Course there's the practical question of do humans really need to go, especially with the advances in robotics.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:33 AM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
Also, I'm sorry, but this is a great opportunity for another shortly-held dream of mine.
posted by aramaic at 11:33 AM on July 2, 2015
posted by aramaic at 11:33 AM on July 2, 2015
*jumps up and down, waves hand frantically* I'm here! I'm ready! I'm a geologist,** I'm cheerful, and I don't ever get seasick, that's all you need, right, right? I'd even give you whatever is in my savings account to help fund this, I've got. . . hundreds of dollars.
This is my kid, as well. She's working literally next door to the Orion capsule at the cape, & her dream job is firstly help build it, then get inside & go.
posted by Devils Rancher at 11:33 AM on July 2, 2015 [4 favorites]
This is my kid, as well. She's working literally next door to the Orion capsule at the cape, & her dream job is firstly help build it, then get inside & go.
posted by Devils Rancher at 11:33 AM on July 2, 2015 [4 favorites]
I see nothing about shielding those marsonauts from radiation. I presume we're going to send elderly people who have less to lose from the almost-guaranteed tumors that will result...?
posted by IAmBroom at 11:34 AM on July 2, 2015 [4 favorites]
posted by IAmBroom at 11:34 AM on July 2, 2015 [4 favorites]
(Halfway serious. That IS the easiest solution to radiation poisoning.)
posted by IAmBroom at 11:34 AM on July 2, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by IAmBroom at 11:34 AM on July 2, 2015 [3 favorites]
I literally stayed up all night reading The Martian in one sitting last night, so this is very relevant to my interests.
posted by Rock Steady at 11:37 AM on July 2, 2015 [13 favorites]
posted by Rock Steady at 11:37 AM on July 2, 2015 [13 favorites]
I see nothing about shielding those marsonauts from radiation. I presume we're going to send elderly people who have less to lose from the almost-guaranteed tumors that will result...?
There has been a proposal that would address not only radiation shielding, but what to do with human waste at the same time.
posted by chambers at 11:39 AM on July 2, 2015 [3 favorites]
There has been a proposal that would address not only radiation shielding, but what to do with human waste at the same time.
posted by chambers at 11:39 AM on July 2, 2015 [3 favorites]
See above for great advice. The Martian is excellent. And I'm not sure this isn't guerilla marketing for the upcoming film version.
posted by Keith Talent at 11:39 AM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by Keith Talent at 11:39 AM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
Rock Steady has the answer -- this is how we get rid of Matt Damon, people.
posted by Etrigan at 11:39 AM on July 2, 2015 [18 favorites]
posted by Etrigan at 11:39 AM on July 2, 2015 [18 favorites]
Also, I thought the Mars Direct idea was deemed the way to go with this? "Living off the land" and reusing elements is supposed to make it sustainable. Still not sure how well the human body will do it.
Plus there's the question of dust. The Apollo missions were starting to into problems with so much dust, would Mars be that different?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:39 AM on July 2, 2015
Plus there's the question of dust. The Apollo missions were starting to into problems with so much dust, would Mars be that different?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:39 AM on July 2, 2015
Seconding the Martian approach. Let's send all the supplies there now and figure out what to do with them later.
Also, poop is for growing potatoes, not for shielding.
posted by blue_beetle at 11:44 AM on July 2, 2015 [5 favorites]
Also, poop is for growing potatoes, not for shielding.
posted by blue_beetle at 11:44 AM on July 2, 2015 [5 favorites]
Devil's Rancher, tell your daughter that a random internet stranger sends her encouragement and support for her dream of being an engineering type aresonaut. To roughly quote James Mitchner from his book "Space": Scientists dream about doing great things, and then engineers do them.
Unless she's more on the science side, then tell her that scientists dream of the great things first so they can use engineers to make them happen. ;)
posted by barchan at 11:54 AM on July 2, 2015 [7 favorites]
Unless she's more on the science side, then tell her that scientists dream of the great things first so they can use engineers to make them happen. ;)
posted by barchan at 11:54 AM on July 2, 2015 [7 favorites]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Phobos has basically zero gravity, so it would be basically like of the ISS for a year, after the what, 9 month journey? We'll need a better understanding of extended stays at zero gravity and the effects on the human body before that becomes a good idea, I would think.
posted by Existential Dread at 12:07 PM on July 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by Existential Dread at 12:07 PM on July 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
I'll pitch in another $10 to send barchan to Mars.
posted by Confess, Fletch at 12:08 PM on July 2, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by Confess, Fletch at 12:08 PM on July 2, 2015 [3 favorites]
We'll need a better understanding of extended stays at zero gravity and the effects on the human body before that becomes a good idea, I would think.
We already know that despite two hours of exercise a day, the human body doesn't zero g very well, but it's doable. The really fascinating aspect is that something in eyes of men deteriorates, but not those of women. Add in the general lower caloric needs of women and their lighter weight, and at least on paper, an all female crew makes strict practical sense. Doubtful it would ever happen though.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 12:14 PM on July 2, 2015 [6 favorites]
We already know that despite two hours of exercise a day, the human body doesn't zero g very well, but it's doable. The really fascinating aspect is that something in eyes of men deteriorates, but not those of women. Add in the general lower caloric needs of women and their lighter weight, and at least on paper, an all female crew makes strict practical sense. Doubtful it would ever happen though.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 12:14 PM on July 2, 2015 [6 favorites]
'Course there's the practical question of do humans really need to go, especially with the advances in robotics.
Well, if you consider the fact that ALL of our eggs are, quite literally, all in one basket, then yes, yes we need to go.
posted by sexyrobot at 12:16 PM on July 2, 2015 [6 favorites]
Well, if you consider the fact that ALL of our eggs are, quite literally, all in one basket, then yes, yes we need to go.
posted by sexyrobot at 12:16 PM on July 2, 2015 [6 favorites]
Meanwhile, here's one guy's view of how China could get a person on the moon by 2020 with current technology and items they already have.
posted by filthy light thief at 12:20 PM on July 2, 2015
posted by filthy light thief at 12:20 PM on July 2, 2015
'Course there's the practical question of do humans really need to go, especially with the advances in robotics.
Well, if you consider the fact that ALL of our eggs are, quite literally, all in one basket, then yes, yes we need to go.
"Asteroids are nature's way of asking: 'How's that space program coming along?'" -- Neil deGrasse Tyson
posted by Etrigan at 12:25 PM on July 2, 2015 [30 favorites]
Well, if you consider the fact that ALL of our eggs are, quite literally, all in one basket, then yes, yes we need to go.
"Asteroids are nature's way of asking: 'How's that space program coming along?'" -- Neil deGrasse Tyson
posted by Etrigan at 12:25 PM on July 2, 2015 [30 favorites]
We'll need a better understanding of extended stays at zero gravity and the effects on the human body before that becomes a good idea, I would think.
Conveniently, this is the objective of the ongoing ISS long-stay mission.
posted by fifthrider at 12:25 PM on July 2, 2015
Conveniently, this is the objective of the ongoing ISS long-stay mission.
posted by fifthrider at 12:25 PM on July 2, 2015
Conveniently, this is the objective of the ongoing ISS long-stay mission.
Certainly, but in this case we're talking about tripling the length of stay over an on-going experiment, the results of which we won't know for some time. Combine that with unfiltered solar radiation, dust, and whatever else, and effects on the human body could be pretty devastating.
Would a subterranean habitat on the Martian surface be a solution to the radiation question? If not, it probably doesn't matter if our eggs are in one basket or two; the second basket's conditions make it unlikely for those eggs to hatch.
posted by Existential Dread at 12:32 PM on July 2, 2015
Certainly, but in this case we're talking about tripling the length of stay over an on-going experiment, the results of which we won't know for some time. Combine that with unfiltered solar radiation, dust, and whatever else, and effects on the human body could be pretty devastating.
Would a subterranean habitat on the Martian surface be a solution to the radiation question? If not, it probably doesn't matter if our eggs are in one basket or two; the second basket's conditions make it unlikely for those eggs to hatch.
posted by Existential Dread at 12:32 PM on July 2, 2015
Rock Steady: " stayed up all night reading The Martian in one sitting last night"
EVERYONE DOES.
My four-year-old is obsessed with Mars, and has a children's book about the Mars rovers, so all day, every day, I listen to factoids about Mars and NASA and when they will send people astronauts to Mars because, as my four-year-old reminds me every hour or so,
"Mom, did you know all the 'asternotts' on Mars right now are ROBOTS?"
(Imma go read the whole article and find a fact he DOESN'T ALREADY KNOW, and BLOW HIS MIND.)
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 12:34 PM on July 2, 2015 [18 favorites]
EVERYONE DOES.
My four-year-old is obsessed with Mars, and has a children's book about the Mars rovers, so all day, every day, I listen to factoids about Mars and NASA and when they will send people astronauts to Mars because, as my four-year-old reminds me every hour or so,
"Mom, did you know all the 'asternotts' on Mars right now are ROBOTS?"
(Imma go read the whole article and find a fact he DOESN'T ALREADY KNOW, and BLOW HIS MIND.)
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 12:34 PM on July 2, 2015 [18 favorites]
Landing on Phobos, eh? Interesting... interesting. Maybe we'll see an extension of the plan that involves hollowing out Deimos, turning it into a multi-generational colony ship, taking it to Tau Ceti, and making things really intense.
posted by Halloween Jack at 12:39 PM on July 2, 2015 [5 favorites]
posted by Halloween Jack at 12:39 PM on July 2, 2015 [5 favorites]
I literally stayed up all night reading The Martian in one sitting last night, so this is very relevant to my interests.
Holy shit, I did too. Finished it right before bed. Good read.
posted by echocollate at 12:40 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
Holy shit, I did too. Finished it right before bed. Good read.
posted by echocollate at 12:40 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
The really fascinating aspect is that something in eyes of men deteriorates, but not those of women.
Cite? I wonder if this is related to the same difference that gives women a problem with VR than men do not have, the shape-from-shading thing.
posted by phearlez at 12:46 PM on July 2, 2015 [4 favorites]
Cite? I wonder if this is related to the same difference that gives women a problem with VR than men do not have, the shape-from-shading thing.
posted by phearlez at 12:46 PM on July 2, 2015 [4 favorites]
Marvin will never stand for this.
posted by jonmc at 12:47 PM on July 2, 2015 [5 favorites]
posted by jonmc at 12:47 PM on July 2, 2015 [5 favorites]
Plus there's the question of dust. The Apollo missions were starting to into problems with so much dust, would Mars be that different?
Dust has three main ways to cause problems that I can think of: mechanical (by eventual clogging/jamming), abrasive (reducing the usable life of anything from a spacesuit to conduit, as well as lung damage), and conductive (eventually shorting out equipment).So you have to deal with it in two ways: prevent as much of it as possible from getting inside, and collecting from the air and surfaces the remaining dust that does get inside.
The effects of dust must be taken into consideration when designing almost every piece of the habitat, no matter if its on the Moon, Mars, or Phobos. I would venture it would be wiser to develop a series Roomba-like vacuums first, varying in size from a grasshopper to a basketball in size. Making them small isn't much of a problem, as there have been years of research and development put into flying surveillance robots smaller than my thumb. These could be re-purposed and built upon to collect dust from hard to reach areas like the insides of electronics, with the added benefit of having low to no gravity to contend with and only short distances to travel. They would be much like bees collecting pollen, collecting as much as it can and either dropping off the dust to a collection area only a few feet away. The collection process itself would not be just vacuuming, but most likely also dealing with it by magnetic and electrostatic means. Once you have a standardized set of cleaning robots as well as human operated tools, equipment can be designed or adapted to accommodate them. Will this cause problems with size, weight, and efficient use of space? Absolutely, but these are solvable problems.
The moon seems the best place to tackle this problem, and not only can we find the best ways to combat dust there, we can also be working on how to make that dust work for us (interesting research paper about this very thing here, and related research about dealing with dust here, here, here, and here ).
posted by chambers at 12:49 PM on July 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
Dust has three main ways to cause problems that I can think of: mechanical (by eventual clogging/jamming), abrasive (reducing the usable life of anything from a spacesuit to conduit, as well as lung damage), and conductive (eventually shorting out equipment).So you have to deal with it in two ways: prevent as much of it as possible from getting inside, and collecting from the air and surfaces the remaining dust that does get inside.
The effects of dust must be taken into consideration when designing almost every piece of the habitat, no matter if its on the Moon, Mars, or Phobos. I would venture it would be wiser to develop a series Roomba-like vacuums first, varying in size from a grasshopper to a basketball in size. Making them small isn't much of a problem, as there have been years of research and development put into flying surveillance robots smaller than my thumb. These could be re-purposed and built upon to collect dust from hard to reach areas like the insides of electronics, with the added benefit of having low to no gravity to contend with and only short distances to travel. They would be much like bees collecting pollen, collecting as much as it can and either dropping off the dust to a collection area only a few feet away. The collection process itself would not be just vacuuming, but most likely also dealing with it by magnetic and electrostatic means. Once you have a standardized set of cleaning robots as well as human operated tools, equipment can be designed or adapted to accommodate them. Will this cause problems with size, weight, and efficient use of space? Absolutely, but these are solvable problems.
The moon seems the best place to tackle this problem, and not only can we find the best ways to combat dust there, we can also be working on how to make that dust work for us (interesting research paper about this very thing here, and related research about dealing with dust here, here, here, and here ).
posted by chambers at 12:49 PM on July 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
an all female crew makes strict practical sense
So, what you're saying is Mars Needs Women! was more of a documentary, then?
posted by briank at 12:50 PM on July 2, 2015 [4 favorites]
So, what you're saying is Mars Needs Women! was more of a documentary, then?
posted by briank at 12:50 PM on July 2, 2015 [4 favorites]
Anything involving the phrase "habitat on Phobos" is automatically a good idea that should be funded with great vigor and furious engineering.
I now have an image in my head of a recording studio employee working the soundboard in a half-crazed frenzy during the production of my band's next album. We have to re-record one cut because flying spittle shorts out some of the electronics.
posted by Greg_Ace at 1:10 PM on July 2, 2015
I now have an image in my head of a recording studio employee working the soundboard in a half-crazed frenzy during the production of my band's next album. We have to re-record one cut because flying spittle shorts out some of the electronics.
posted by Greg_Ace at 1:10 PM on July 2, 2015
The really fascinating aspect is that something in eyes of men deteriorates, but not those of women.
Here's a link about that effect and there's more info if you Google around.
"Asteroids are nature's way of asking: 'How's that space program coming along?'" -- Neil deGrasse Tyson
Eh, I'm dubious of this. Humans evolved to live on Earth. Trying to live anywhere else is fraught with problems we just don't understand. Asteroids might just be nature's way of saying life is hard and unfair.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:16 PM on July 2, 2015 [3 favorites]
Here's a link about that effect and there's more info if you Google around.
"Asteroids are nature's way of asking: 'How's that space program coming along?'" -- Neil deGrasse Tyson
Eh, I'm dubious of this. Humans evolved to live on Earth. Trying to live anywhere else is fraught with problems we just don't understand. Asteroids might just be nature's way of saying life is hard and unfair.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:16 PM on July 2, 2015 [3 favorites]
Step one: Do no involve Brian DePalma. He spent $100M just to make a movie about a mission to Mars and it (the movie) fulfulled none of its mission objectives. Might as well jump.
Speaking of millons of dollars:
within NASA budget
The word "cost" and "budget" appear several times, but the word "dollars" -- I would particulary like to see the word with a number in front of it -- is not to be found.
posted by Herodios at 1:27 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
Speaking of millons of dollars:
within NASA budget
The word "cost" and "budget" appear several times, but the word "dollars" -- I would particulary like to see the word with a number in front of it -- is not to be found.
posted by Herodios at 1:27 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
Humans evolved to live on Earth.
And yet just in the last century we learned to fly, travel across small distances in space, explore the depths of the oceans, go to the south pole without having to eat your dogs or colleagues at any point, and to create machines that can be our proxies for doing the same and even more so. All while giving these things tiny a fraction of our collective attention, because we prefer to spend time, money and lives on massive wars and fizzy brown sugar water.
As long as the net result of our evolution was, in this seemingly rare case, a consciousness bearing system that can intelligently adapt, shape its environment, make whatever shit it needs and basically just figure things out, it'd be insane for some of us not to try find out if we can make some kind of life that's not on this pillaged globe, just to be on the safe side. Even if we just end up being the precursors to A.I.s that don't much care where they live.
posted by George_Spiggott at 1:29 PM on July 2, 2015 [7 favorites]
And yet just in the last century we learned to fly, travel across small distances in space, explore the depths of the oceans, go to the south pole without having to eat your dogs or colleagues at any point, and to create machines that can be our proxies for doing the same and even more so. All while giving these things tiny a fraction of our collective attention, because we prefer to spend time, money and lives on massive wars and fizzy brown sugar water.
As long as the net result of our evolution was, in this seemingly rare case, a consciousness bearing system that can intelligently adapt, shape its environment, make whatever shit it needs and basically just figure things out, it'd be insane for some of us not to try find out if we can make some kind of life that's not on this pillaged globe, just to be on the safe side. Even if we just end up being the precursors to A.I.s that don't much care where they live.
posted by George_Spiggott at 1:29 PM on July 2, 2015 [7 favorites]
"Asteroids are nature's way of asking: 'How's that space program coming along?'" -- Neil deGrasse Tyson
I love the man, but I think asteroids are nature's way of saying "your existence has no meaning to the universe", if you're talking about the all-our-eggs-in-one-basket scenario. It'll take more than a Mars base doesn't change that. It'll take a terraformed Mars to even make a difference.
A space program might be useful to defend against asteroid impact. But as a means of ensuring the existence of humanity beyond the destruction of Mother Earth, well, that's something else altogether.
posted by 2N2222 at 1:32 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
I love the man, but I think asteroids are nature's way of saying "your existence has no meaning to the universe", if you're talking about the all-our-eggs-in-one-basket scenario. It'll take more than a Mars base doesn't change that. It'll take a terraformed Mars to even make a difference.
A space program might be useful to defend against asteroid impact. But as a means of ensuring the existence of humanity beyond the destruction of Mother Earth, well, that's something else altogether.
posted by 2N2222 at 1:32 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
Not to worry; the oil & gas industry has it covered.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 1:33 PM on July 2, 2015
posted by ZenMasterThis at 1:33 PM on July 2, 2015
Mod note: Folks, maybe we can steer this back toward the actual link rather than just repeating the same "but should we go to Mars" thing that we've gone over and over?
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 1:35 PM on July 2, 2015 [6 favorites]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 1:35 PM on July 2, 2015 [6 favorites]
I actually think this would be a great application for genetic engineering. Creating a habitat that would allow humans to live comfortably on Europa? Really hard and quite possibly pointless. Creating posthuman great-grandchildren designed to find Europa a paradise just as it is? Who knows?
posted by George_Spiggott at 1:37 PM on July 2, 2015
posted by George_Spiggott at 1:37 PM on July 2, 2015
I'm always kind of baffled as to why going to Mars is seen as such a holy grail when the moon is right there. I'm not arguing whether we should go to Mars or not--I think it's a grand idea. Just seems to me that building a colony on the moon allows us to figure out a lot of solutions, and make mistakes, with resupply/rescue being no further away than the ISS or Earth, instead of the nine months it takes to get to Mars. (Is it nine? I think it's nine.)
I mean with Mars we get exactly one shot. If something goes catastrophically wrong, they're dead. With the moon, there's a fighting chance.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 1:49 PM on July 2, 2015 [5 favorites]
I mean with Mars we get exactly one shot. If something goes catastrophically wrong, they're dead. With the moon, there's a fighting chance.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 1:49 PM on July 2, 2015 [5 favorites]
Given human nature we will undoubtedly send people to Mars. We might even be able to bring them back. Perhaps even alive! Ain't technology grand? Too bad Mars will prove to be almost as f'king boring as the moon so the public's attention will be quickly distracted by some shiny object and the funding will wither away. And this will make the aerospace sector cry. They will be somewhat comforted however by the gazillions of tax dollars they pocketed in the process...
posted by jim in austin at 1:50 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by jim in austin at 1:50 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
Eh, the study itself doesn't seem practical. For instance, it suggests testing the Mars Landing vehicle on the Moon first. That makes literally no sense, as its two different environments. The problem with landing on Mars is that it has just atmosphere that you have to account for it, but not enough to actually slow anything down, hence the sky crane method. Testing a Mars lander on the Moon would just add significant cost, with little technological reason.
It's also counting on the ISS functioning until 2028, but it's only been approved through 2024 and eats up a significant chunk of money. Hell, the proposed mission to Phobos involves FOUR SLS launches, and other hardware which hasn't been invented, let alone man rated.
Look, we only got to Moon, a three day journey, by spending 4-5% of the entire US budget for several years. Trying to get to Mars and back safely on less than half percent is going to be very difficult.
The Mars lander they propose is kinda interesting, in that it doesn't involve any parachutes. I dunno if that's wise, as parachutes would cut down on the need for fuel, but I don't know enough to really say. There doesn't seem to be a lot of shielding on it, for radiation and where's the rover? If you're gonna go that far, you gotta take a rover with you. Otherwise, how you gonna rove?!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:54 PM on July 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
It's also counting on the ISS functioning until 2028, but it's only been approved through 2024 and eats up a significant chunk of money. Hell, the proposed mission to Phobos involves FOUR SLS launches, and other hardware which hasn't been invented, let alone man rated.
Look, we only got to Moon, a three day journey, by spending 4-5% of the entire US budget for several years. Trying to get to Mars and back safely on less than half percent is going to be very difficult.
The Mars lander they propose is kinda interesting, in that it doesn't involve any parachutes. I dunno if that's wise, as parachutes would cut down on the need for fuel, but I don't know enough to really say. There doesn't seem to be a lot of shielding on it, for radiation and where's the rover? If you're gonna go that far, you gotta take a rover with you. Otherwise, how you gonna rove?!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:54 PM on July 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
I'm always kind of baffled as to why going to Mars is seen as such a holy grail when the moon is right there. I'm not arguing whether we should go to Mars or not--I think it's a grand idea. Just seems to me that building a colony on the moon allows us to figure out a lot of solutions, and make mistakes, with resupply/rescue being no further away than the ISS or Earth, instead of the nine months it takes to get to Mars. (Is it nine? I think it's nine.)
Nobody wants to set up a colony which will then be able to bombard them easily when the inevitable tea party happens. Sun Tsu said something about not picking fights from the deeper gravity well, I think.
posted by phearlez at 2:04 PM on July 2, 2015 [8 favorites]
Nobody wants to set up a colony which will then be able to bombard them easily when the inevitable tea party happens. Sun Tsu said something about not picking fights from the deeper gravity well, I think.
posted by phearlez at 2:04 PM on July 2, 2015 [8 favorites]
The Mars lander they propose is kinda interesting, in that it doesn't involve any parachutes. I dunno if that's wise, as parachutes would cut down on the need for fuel, but I don't know enough to really say.
Viking didn't have any major trouble. One of the reasons that the current Mars rovers don't just retro-rocket all the way down to the surface, sans parachute and aside from propellant mass considerations, is that landing on a full retro rocket might do a lot of damage to a place that you want your rover to then roll out of. As it is, there was a fair bit dirturbance of the surface under Curiosity even with the skycrane.
posted by chimaera at 2:05 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
Viking didn't have any major trouble. One of the reasons that the current Mars rovers don't just retro-rocket all the way down to the surface, sans parachute and aside from propellant mass considerations, is that landing on a full retro rocket might do a lot of damage to a place that you want your rover to then roll out of. As it is, there was a fair bit dirturbance of the surface under Curiosity even with the skycrane.
posted by chimaera at 2:05 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
I mean with Mars we get exactly one shot. If something goes catastrophically wrong, they're dead.
What if being dead isn't bug, it's a feature? Let's say I have suitable science and engineering degrees, I'm about a decade away from my projected life expectancy and still healthy. Someone says, "you can be on the first team to Mars, you'll have a few weeks of food and air and a full slate of worthwhile science to do during that time. And that's all you get, no return trip." I'd take it. Millions would. I bet a lot of aging astronauts would. And not only do you save on radiation shielding, but you don't send a return vehicle or fuel or even liftoff capability.
We don't really go in for suicide missions in our culture, though.
posted by George_Spiggott at 2:07 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
What if being dead isn't bug, it's a feature? Let's say I have suitable science and engineering degrees, I'm about a decade away from my projected life expectancy and still healthy. Someone says, "you can be on the first team to Mars, you'll have a few weeks of food and air and a full slate of worthwhile science to do during that time. And that's all you get, no return trip." I'd take it. Millions would. I bet a lot of aging astronauts would. And not only do you save on radiation shielding, but you don't send a return vehicle or fuel or even liftoff capability.
We don't really go in for suicide missions in our culture, though.
posted by George_Spiggott at 2:07 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
To be more specific, Viking did have a parachute, but it landed on a retro rocket. There's also LDSD (Low Density Supersonic Decelerator) in development which includes a parachute and an "airbag" for deceleration, which is intended to land larger, heavier payloads onto Mars than ever before.
posted by chimaera at 2:08 PM on July 2, 2015
posted by chimaera at 2:08 PM on July 2, 2015
*jumps up and down, waves hand frantically* I'm here! I'm ready! I'm a geologist,** I'm cheerful, and I don't ever get seasick, that's all you need, right, right?
Naw, I think they'd want a health physicist, with experience living in and maintaining the mechanical systems of a confined space like a submarine. Who is already a GS employee with a security clearance and rad health physical and is a lighter weight than average. Ok, I'll do it.
posted by ctmf at 2:10 PM on July 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
Naw, I think they'd want a health physicist, with experience living in and maintaining the mechanical systems of a confined space like a submarine. Who is already a GS employee with a security clearance and rad health physical and is a lighter weight than average. Ok, I'll do it.
posted by ctmf at 2:10 PM on July 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
Someone says, "you can be on the first team to Mars, you'll have a few weeks of food and air and a full slate of worthwhile science to do during that time. And that's all you get, no return trip." I'd take it. Millions would.
I would, and my family knows it. It's so unlikely as to be completely discounted, but if someone said I could be on the first team and it wasn't around trip, I'd raise my hand so fast I'd dislocate my shoulder and give people within a 10-foot radius whiplash.
posted by chimaera at 2:12 PM on July 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
I would, and my family knows it. It's so unlikely as to be completely discounted, but if someone said I could be on the first team and it wasn't around trip, I'd raise my hand so fast I'd dislocate my shoulder and give people within a 10-foot radius whiplash.
posted by chimaera at 2:12 PM on July 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
To roughly quote James Mitchner from his book "Space": Scientists dream about doing great things, and then engineers do them.
Hah, that's great. She's an electrical engineer doing missile component testing for various & sundry rocketry things L.M. is involved in. She got her start designing & wiring robots for Dean Kamen's FIRST robotics challenges in high school. She once asked for a soldering iron for her birthday.
posted by Devils Rancher at 2:13 PM on July 2, 2015
Hah, that's great. She's an electrical engineer doing missile component testing for various & sundry rocketry things L.M. is involved in. She got her start designing & wiring robots for Dean Kamen's FIRST robotics challenges in high school. She once asked for a soldering iron for her birthday.
posted by Devils Rancher at 2:13 PM on July 2, 2015
>With the moon, there's a fighting chance.<
Yes, they might even throw rocks at us.
posted by twidget at 2:15 PM on July 2, 2015
Yes, they might even throw rocks at us.
posted by twidget at 2:15 PM on July 2, 2015
Oh, lots of thoughts here:
First off, if the mods are ok with my mentioning the "why humans" question, a prerequisite to answering that is to understand the "how humans" question, that is, how would a mission happen, how much time would be spent on Mars, what would the payload and power budgets for experiment packages be, how much would it cost, etc. This is all about that part.
About the Mars Direct plan: that's got major risks. It requires a heavy-lift rocket that hasn't been designed yet, versus this plan which uses a rocket (and the Orion vehicle) that are already being built. Even during the space race, when the U.S. was rushing as fast as it dared to land on the Moon, they sent up many multiple test missions to developed the needed technology and skills. This plan has similar test flights built in, Mars Direct goes for the much riskier "fly untested hardware straight to Mars" idea. Then, Mars Direct uses a nuclear-powered methane generator; that's something that a more cautious plan would put on a robotic sample-return mission or something first.
About the rocket budget: there isn't really a per-mission cost because each mission would be different: the early test flights near Earth wouldn't all require SLS launches I don't expect, but it's not clear how many they plan for there. Putting people on Phobos would cost 4 SLS launches, the short-stay Mars mission costs 6 launches, the long-stay Mars mission costs 10 launches (!) to start but then only costs 2 launches per year as long as we keep going.
As for radiation shielding, they say the bulk of Phobos or Mars would block half the radiation exposure field of view, while the habitats (midflight or lander both) are described as having radiation shielding. These habitats aren't completely designed but people have been doing design work on their underlying ideas quite a bit lately so presumably they have some idea how to shield the habitats well enough. The ISS is doing detailed shielding-measurement research right now.
There's a rover (looks like the same rover NASA has been working on, with six wheels and a "back porch" that their space suits would dock into directly) on the long-stay diagram. It looks like it would be delivered on the supply/logistics lander.
posted by traveler_ at 2:15 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
First off, if the mods are ok with my mentioning the "why humans" question, a prerequisite to answering that is to understand the "how humans" question, that is, how would a mission happen, how much time would be spent on Mars, what would the payload and power budgets for experiment packages be, how much would it cost, etc. This is all about that part.
About the Mars Direct plan: that's got major risks. It requires a heavy-lift rocket that hasn't been designed yet, versus this plan which uses a rocket (and the Orion vehicle) that are already being built. Even during the space race, when the U.S. was rushing as fast as it dared to land on the Moon, they sent up many multiple test missions to developed the needed technology and skills. This plan has similar test flights built in, Mars Direct goes for the much riskier "fly untested hardware straight to Mars" idea. Then, Mars Direct uses a nuclear-powered methane generator; that's something that a more cautious plan would put on a robotic sample-return mission or something first.
About the rocket budget: there isn't really a per-mission cost because each mission would be different: the early test flights near Earth wouldn't all require SLS launches I don't expect, but it's not clear how many they plan for there. Putting people on Phobos would cost 4 SLS launches, the short-stay Mars mission costs 6 launches, the long-stay Mars mission costs 10 launches (!) to start but then only costs 2 launches per year as long as we keep going.
As for radiation shielding, they say the bulk of Phobos or Mars would block half the radiation exposure field of view, while the habitats (midflight or lander both) are described as having radiation shielding. These habitats aren't completely designed but people have been doing design work on their underlying ideas quite a bit lately so presumably they have some idea how to shield the habitats well enough. The ISS is doing detailed shielding-measurement research right now.
There's a rover (looks like the same rover NASA has been working on, with six wheels and a "back porch" that their space suits would dock into directly) on the long-stay diagram. It looks like it would be delivered on the supply/logistics lander.
posted by traveler_ at 2:15 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
If you're gonna go that far, you gotta take a rover with you. Otherwise, how you gonna rove?!
Bikes? (There's a big push towards less bulky spacesuits, basically using super-strong spandex to replicate earth atmospheric pressure as opposed to the cumbersome pressure suits of today. This makes bikes on mars a viable possibility.)
posted by sexyrobot at 2:16 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
Bikes? (There's a big push towards less bulky spacesuits, basically using super-strong spandex to replicate earth atmospheric pressure as opposed to the cumbersome pressure suits of today. This makes bikes on mars a viable possibility.)
posted by sexyrobot at 2:16 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
a habitat on Phobos
Seems like a better idea to hollow that sucker out and put the habitat inside.
Just need a name for it. Something that invokes persistence, longevity, but also achievement...
posted by the man of twists and turns at 2:18 PM on July 2, 2015 [5 favorites]
Seems like a better idea to hollow that sucker out and put the habitat inside.
Just need a name for it. Something that invokes persistence, longevity, but also achievement...
posted by the man of twists and turns at 2:18 PM on July 2, 2015 [5 favorites]
Bikes?
Bikes were considered for the Moon, but deemed not a good idea.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:22 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
Bikes were considered for the Moon, but deemed not a good idea.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:22 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
There's a big push towards less bulky spacesuits, basically using super-strong spandex to replicate earth atmospheric pressure as opposed to the cumbersome pressure suits of today.
I'm sort of amazed that this works, if it does. Any tendency to bunch at the joints as you move, flex, stretch, twist, etc and you're looking at the world's worst hickeys.
posted by George_Spiggott at 2:22 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
I'm sort of amazed that this works, if it does. Any tendency to bunch at the joints as you move, flex, stretch, twist, etc and you're looking at the world's worst hickeys.
posted by George_Spiggott at 2:22 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
Brandon Blatcher: "spending 4-5% of the entire US budget for several years"
Wow, was it really that much? I never realized!
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 2:34 PM on July 2, 2015
Wow, was it really that much? I never realized!
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 2:34 PM on July 2, 2015
Seems like a better idea to hollow that sucker out and put the habitat inside.
Send up a bunch of drill workers and some jackhammers. Hmm, that reminds me of a movie....
posted by Existential Dread at 2:36 PM on July 2, 2015
Send up a bunch of drill workers and some jackhammers. Hmm, that reminds me of a movie....
posted by Existential Dread at 2:36 PM on July 2, 2015
Wow, was it really that much?
Yep, here's specifics.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:45 PM on July 2, 2015 [3 favorites]
Yep, here's specifics.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:45 PM on July 2, 2015 [3 favorites]
Existential Dread: Hmm, that reminds me of a movie....
Speaking of which, I've been looking through one of the alternatives, the NASA Design Reference Architecture for a human Mars mission. They spend quite some time talking about plans for deep-drilling operations on Mars to examine subsurface geology, and how much of that could be handled by robots versus people. Apparently once you get deep enough augurs don't work and you have to use drilling mud, so they talk about what to do about that…
I would be so tickled if they really do end up asking roughnecks to train astronauts how to drill rock!
posted by traveler_ at 2:53 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
Speaking of which, I've been looking through one of the alternatives, the NASA Design Reference Architecture for a human Mars mission. They spend quite some time talking about plans for deep-drilling operations on Mars to examine subsurface geology, and how much of that could be handled by robots versus people. Apparently once you get deep enough augurs don't work and you have to use drilling mud, so they talk about what to do about that…
I would be so tickled if they really do end up asking roughnecks to train astronauts how to drill rock!
posted by traveler_ at 2:53 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
Oh and P.S. it looks like there's serious talk about suspended animation for Mars missions based on medical hypothermia techniques. Closer to sci-fi every day.
posted by traveler_ at 2:54 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by traveler_ at 2:54 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
> "Asteroids are nature's way of asking: 'How's that space program coming along?'" -- Neil deGrasse Tyson
New Scientist had an interesting article about this recently (perhaps behind a paywall). While we should be spending significantly more than we are on this, it also might be the case that Asteroid Day, one of the louder voices pushing for this, is asking for far more than we either can do or need.
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 3:31 PM on July 2, 2015
New Scientist had an interesting article about this recently (perhaps behind a paywall). While we should be spending significantly more than we are on this, it also might be the case that Asteroid Day, one of the louder voices pushing for this, is asking for far more than we either can do or need.
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 3:31 PM on July 2, 2015
Whichever plan we choose, why aren't we sending supplies right now?
posted by Monochrome at 3:35 PM on July 2, 2015
posted by Monochrome at 3:35 PM on July 2, 2015
The moon dust problem has nothing at all to do with the Mars dust problem.
Nothing. At. All.
There is functionally no atmosphere and no water on the moon, nor has there ever been. There might be some ice, but it's never flowed for any real time. The dust that exists has been created by millennia of micrometeoroid impacts. It is sharp edged, abrasive as hell, incredibly fine, and has basically never been sorted -- there are fines mixed with coarse mixed with rocks and boulders.
Mars has an atmosphere. Thin, compared to ours, sure, but more than enough to loft dust. That means that dust moves, which both sorts it - fines are lifted, coarse grains stay put or move little, and that moving wears those surfaces down. Mars dust will be much less abrasive. This is one of the reasons they the Mars rovers last so long - Mars dust isn't very abrasive. Moon rovers don't. Moon dust is hell.
Mars also had flowing water, and may well still have flowing water at times, which traps the very finest fines as mud, rather than letting them gum up your gears.
Airless bodies don't teach you much of anything useful about Mars. Really, you want a practice ground for Mars? Antarctica is a really good spot. Well, other than all the air.
posted by eriko at 3:45 PM on July 2, 2015 [7 favorites]
Nothing. At. All.
There is functionally no atmosphere and no water on the moon, nor has there ever been. There might be some ice, but it's never flowed for any real time. The dust that exists has been created by millennia of micrometeoroid impacts. It is sharp edged, abrasive as hell, incredibly fine, and has basically never been sorted -- there are fines mixed with coarse mixed with rocks and boulders.
Mars has an atmosphere. Thin, compared to ours, sure, but more than enough to loft dust. That means that dust moves, which both sorts it - fines are lifted, coarse grains stay put or move little, and that moving wears those surfaces down. Mars dust will be much less abrasive. This is one of the reasons they the Mars rovers last so long - Mars dust isn't very abrasive. Moon rovers don't. Moon dust is hell.
Mars also had flowing water, and may well still have flowing water at times, which traps the very finest fines as mud, rather than letting them gum up your gears.
Airless bodies don't teach you much of anything useful about Mars. Really, you want a practice ground for Mars? Antarctica is a really good spot. Well, other than all the air.
posted by eriko at 3:45 PM on July 2, 2015 [7 favorites]
This is a great paper and I admire the authors for presenting to the Future In-Space Operations (FISO) working group.
I disagree with the implication that the subject of this paper relies on technology that exists. For example: show me a working example of the SLS, the 100 kW Solar Electric Tug was only the subject of an American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA, full disclosure I'm an AIAA member) paper, and the Phobos habitat is the subject of yet another AIAA paper. I'm certain all those papers are quite good and the designs are sound, but it's a stretch to say those vehicles exist. Call me a purist, but "exists" to me means past Phase A, budget in place, flight hardware, and your flight and science teams being hired.
And while SLS program has begun and is working to their first launch, Constellation was building hardware when it was cancelled by President Obama, the continuation of the SLS program by a future President is not a done deal. What happens to this proposed architecture then?
Conspicuously absent from this report are hard budget numbers. Do you know what makes a launch vehicle go up in the air and keeps spacecraft in orbit? Buckets of money! It's all about the buckets of money. I see Figure 12, but what I would like to really see is budget for this program contrasted with other projects.
NASA's mission is to promote the general welfare of hard-working American taxpayers. If those taxpayers decide that this (or any crewed Mars mission architecture) is how they want their money spent, then that's what will happen.
posted by Rob Rockets at 3:47 PM on July 2, 2015
I disagree with the implication that the subject of this paper relies on technology that exists. For example: show me a working example of the SLS, the 100 kW Solar Electric Tug was only the subject of an American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA, full disclosure I'm an AIAA member) paper, and the Phobos habitat is the subject of yet another AIAA paper. I'm certain all those papers are quite good and the designs are sound, but it's a stretch to say those vehicles exist. Call me a purist, but "exists" to me means past Phase A, budget in place, flight hardware, and your flight and science teams being hired.
And while SLS program has begun and is working to their first launch, Constellation was building hardware when it was cancelled by President Obama, the continuation of the SLS program by a future President is not a done deal. What happens to this proposed architecture then?
Conspicuously absent from this report are hard budget numbers. Do you know what makes a launch vehicle go up in the air and keeps spacecraft in orbit? Buckets of money! It's all about the buckets of money. I see Figure 12, but what I would like to really see is budget for this program contrasted with other projects.
NASA's mission is to promote the general welfare of hard-working American taxpayers. If those taxpayers decide that this (or any crewed Mars mission architecture) is how they want their money spent, then that's what will happen.
posted by Rob Rockets at 3:47 PM on July 2, 2015
Rob Rockets: "NASA's mission is to promote the general welfare of hard-working American taxpayers."
But what about the lazy American taxpayers? What is NASA doing for me?
My tempur-pedic mattress on which I take my lazy-person naps, you say? Fiiiiiiiiiine. You win this round, NASA.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 4:44 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
But what about the lazy American taxpayers? What is NASA doing for me?
My tempur-pedic mattress on which I take my lazy-person naps, you say? Fiiiiiiiiiine. You win this round, NASA.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 4:44 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
The various Mars mission proposals all strike me as not even close to half baked. Take the one-way mission so many people have an attraction to: how does such a mission end in a way that's not a complete horror? What happens if someone develops dementia and their judgement declines faster than their ability to open an airlock? What happens when the frequency of technical problems increases as the crew's technical expertise dies off?
More generally, what are the science objectives for a crewed mission to Mars? Why do so few of these proposals address the problem of bringing back Mars rocks, for instance (I hope no one's planning on going to Mars without eventually bringing back a literal ton of souvenirs)? The article mentions recovering robotic samples from orbit as a possibility, delta V permitting, but that's it. Wouldn't sample return be a requirement of a Mars mission?
And what about planetary protection? A good case is being assembled that Mars was once a habitable environment, so evidence may exist for past or present Martian life. How do you send people to the surface of Mars in such a way that the mission doesn't contaminate the very thing you would go to study? Back contamination prevention is one area where a suicide mission excels, at least.
Where's the proposal for a Mars mission that does more than just prove you can get there and optionally back without dying?
posted by ddbeck at 5:20 PM on July 2, 2015
More generally, what are the science objectives for a crewed mission to Mars? Why do so few of these proposals address the problem of bringing back Mars rocks, for instance (I hope no one's planning on going to Mars without eventually bringing back a literal ton of souvenirs)? The article mentions recovering robotic samples from orbit as a possibility, delta V permitting, but that's it. Wouldn't sample return be a requirement of a Mars mission?
And what about planetary protection? A good case is being assembled that Mars was once a habitable environment, so evidence may exist for past or present Martian life. How do you send people to the surface of Mars in such a way that the mission doesn't contaminate the very thing you would go to study? Back contamination prevention is one area where a suicide mission excels, at least.
Where's the proposal for a Mars mission that does more than just prove you can get there and optionally back without dying?
posted by ddbeck at 5:20 PM on July 2, 2015
This sounds similar to the Boeing study which also features SLS, Orion and SEP tugs but includes a "Translunar Gateway" where the crew will presumably play air hockey and grab a soda on the way to Mars.
4-10 SLS launches per missions may sound like a lot, but think of how many dozen launches have been necessary to build and support ISS, just to fart around in LEO. Maybe once SpaceX gets their act together we can use the Falcon Heavy for some of the payloads.
It might be fun to use SEP tugs to drag some heavier robots to Mars/Phobos/Deimos, too. I'm happy as long as we're doing something with propulsion beyond what was available in the 1960s.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 5:23 PM on July 2, 2015
4-10 SLS launches per missions may sound like a lot, but think of how many dozen launches have been necessary to build and support ISS, just to fart around in LEO. Maybe once SpaceX gets their act together we can use the Falcon Heavy for some of the payloads.
It might be fun to use SEP tugs to drag some heavier robots to Mars/Phobos/Deimos, too. I'm happy as long as we're doing something with propulsion beyond what was available in the 1960s.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 5:23 PM on July 2, 2015
4-10 SLS launches per missions may sound like a lot
Last I heard, each launch will be close to a billion dollars, so 4-10 launches is a lot for an agency that only has a 17 billion a year budget.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:28 PM on July 2, 2015
Last I heard, each launch will be close to a billion dollars, so 4-10 launches is a lot for an agency that only has a 17 billion a year budget.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:28 PM on July 2, 2015
For all the challenges of landing on Mars, there's a nice overview in the spectacular short Seven Minutes of Terror about the Curiosity skycrane.
Whatever we do, let's send more than potatoes and disco along with the astronauts. (aresonauts?)
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 5:35 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
Whatever we do, let's send more than potatoes and disco along with the astronauts. (aresonauts?)
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 5:35 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
I keep reading that as "arseonauts."
posted by Existential Dread at 5:54 PM on July 2, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by Existential Dread at 5:54 PM on July 2, 2015 [3 favorites]
Maybe we'll see an extension of the plan that involves hollowing out Deimos, turning it into a multi-generational colony ship, taking it to Tau Ceti, and making things really intense.
Or maybe we'll get advances in teleportation that go horribly wrong.
posted by The Great Big Mulp at 5:58 PM on July 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
Or maybe we'll get advances in teleportation that go horribly wrong.
posted by The Great Big Mulp at 5:58 PM on July 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
The Shuttle was more than a billion dollars per flight, and took 37 launches to assemble the ISS (and that doesn't count Russian launches). And yeah, for being one of the smallest parts of this plan I'm really excited about the electric tugs. They mention that paying a small fuel cost would let them return to a usable orbit, so I have visions of longer-term tugs just cycling between Earth and Mars, moving bits of hardware out including plenty of robots to keep their fans happy. And occasionally we send fast rockets with people in them to take care of the people work.
Asking whether the technology exists is something of a matter of degrees. Did the Dyna-Soar "exist"? Parts of it were built, test hardware flew, astronauts were named. I think when they talk about the technology existing they're contrasting it with alternative plans that involve nuclear thermal rockets, or nonexistent launch vehicles.
On planetary protection: there's some good stuff about that in the NASA reference plan. They've already done some work on identifying areas of Mars where either Earth organisms might survive, or Mars life might likely exist if it does—these "special regions" are off-limits except to sterilized hardware. Meanwhile they plan to identify the opposite, regions where robotic probes have already shown the risk of contaminating Mars or of it contaminating us are minimal, and keep the human operations there. Incidentally since Antarctica was mentioned, we used a similar plan down there: high-impact areas where it was accepted that we'd be setting up tents, walking around, etcetera; medium-impact areas that you could travel through but don't muck up the place, and no-go areas where you needed special permission from an international committee to even think about touching.
And I don't get what the problem is about science objectives or sample return. The objectives are basically the same as if you'd sent robotic probes, just with wider-ranging travel, faster deployment of hardware, and better decision making and bug fixing. Humans are (so far) just better at using force feed back and multiple-degree-of-freedom control algorithms to finesse a rock drill versus robots. They also don't have a speed-of-light delay in figuring out how to get a rover's wheel unstuck from the loose sand. And if you're returning your astronauts to Earth, you might as well bring some rocks back too, it's the same basic requirements.
posted by traveler_ at 6:09 PM on July 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
Asking whether the technology exists is something of a matter of degrees. Did the Dyna-Soar "exist"? Parts of it were built, test hardware flew, astronauts were named. I think when they talk about the technology existing they're contrasting it with alternative plans that involve nuclear thermal rockets, or nonexistent launch vehicles.
On planetary protection: there's some good stuff about that in the NASA reference plan. They've already done some work on identifying areas of Mars where either Earth organisms might survive, or Mars life might likely exist if it does—these "special regions" are off-limits except to sterilized hardware. Meanwhile they plan to identify the opposite, regions where robotic probes have already shown the risk of contaminating Mars or of it contaminating us are minimal, and keep the human operations there. Incidentally since Antarctica was mentioned, we used a similar plan down there: high-impact areas where it was accepted that we'd be setting up tents, walking around, etcetera; medium-impact areas that you could travel through but don't muck up the place, and no-go areas where you needed special permission from an international committee to even think about touching.
And I don't get what the problem is about science objectives or sample return. The objectives are basically the same as if you'd sent robotic probes, just with wider-ranging travel, faster deployment of hardware, and better decision making and bug fixing. Humans are (so far) just better at using force feed back and multiple-degree-of-freedom control algorithms to finesse a rock drill versus robots. They also don't have a speed-of-light delay in figuring out how to get a rover's wheel unstuck from the loose sand. And if you're returning your astronauts to Earth, you might as well bring some rocks back too, it's the same basic requirements.
posted by traveler_ at 6:09 PM on July 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
There's a big push towards less bulky spacesuits, basically using super-strong spandex to replicate earth atmospheric pressure as opposed to the cumbersome pressure suits of today.
I'm sort of amazed that this works, if it does. Any tendency to bunch at the joints as you move, flex, stretch, twist, etc and you're looking at the world's worst hickeys.
Oh yeah, they have working prototypes and they're kind of amazing (the neck and helmet are somewhat conventional). Earth air pressure is only 15lbs per sq inch. So basically you just need to double that (which is similar to being like 6 ft under water)...imagine being naked...then imagine a garment that's twice as tight. You can wear it in normal atmosphere and it's not overly uncomfortable. The super neat feature is the seaming...there are all these 'lines of constant circumference' all over the body...like when you flex your bicep, it gets bigger around, but there are odd diagonals which stay the same circumference...ditto all over the body for bending, flexing, twisting. So this suit has basically rigid strapping tape all seamed along these lines. It kind of follows the musculature, but not quite...the look is kind of odd, but the engineering behind it is fascinating.
posted by sexyrobot at 6:44 PM on July 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
I'm sort of amazed that this works, if it does. Any tendency to bunch at the joints as you move, flex, stretch, twist, etc and you're looking at the world's worst hickeys.
Oh yeah, they have working prototypes and they're kind of amazing (the neck and helmet are somewhat conventional). Earth air pressure is only 15lbs per sq inch. So basically you just need to double that (which is similar to being like 6 ft under water)...imagine being naked...then imagine a garment that's twice as tight. You can wear it in normal atmosphere and it's not overly uncomfortable. The super neat feature is the seaming...there are all these 'lines of constant circumference' all over the body...like when you flex your bicep, it gets bigger around, but there are odd diagonals which stay the same circumference...ditto all over the body for bending, flexing, twisting. So this suit has basically rigid strapping tape all seamed along these lines. It kind of follows the musculature, but not quite...the look is kind of odd, but the engineering behind it is fascinating.
posted by sexyrobot at 6:44 PM on July 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
Oh also, one of the neat things about mars is that the solar radiation is less than 1/4 that on the moon (since it falls off at the inverse square of the distance). So there's that in the plus column. Although, that goes for sunlight as well, so Seasonal Affective Disorder (and growing crops, and solar panels) might also be an issue. But people survive in Antarctica for months of darkness.
posted by sexyrobot at 6:50 PM on July 2, 2015
posted by sexyrobot at 6:50 PM on July 2, 2015
imagine being naked...then imagine a garment that's twice as tight
[Insert customary "stupid sexy Flanders" joke here]
posted by Greg_Ace at 7:22 PM on July 2, 2015
[Insert customary "stupid sexy Flanders" joke here]
posted by Greg_Ace at 7:22 PM on July 2, 2015
Feels like I'm wearing...nothing at all!
nothing at all!
nothing at all!
nothing at all!
posted by Existential Dread at 7:34 PM on July 2, 2015 [3 favorites]
nothing at all!
nothing at all!
nothing at all!
posted by Existential Dread at 7:34 PM on July 2, 2015 [3 favorites]
Ayup - that's the one.
posted by Greg_Ace at 7:56 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by Greg_Ace at 7:56 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
Take the one-way mission so many people have an attraction to: how does such a mission end in a way that's not a complete horror?
And there lies the paradox. Anyone who who volunteers for a suicide mission is by definition unqualified for a long term mission. No one would bring a suicidal person on a climb to Mt. Everest, a trip to the South Pole, a sailing voyage around the world. None of the famed explorers -- Columbus, Magellan, Marco Polo, Shackleton, Hillary -- were suicidal. They all planned to return. As Ed Viesturs said "if you don't come back alive, it doesn't count." Edmund Hillary said the same about George Mallory.
posted by JackFlash at 8:11 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
And there lies the paradox. Anyone who who volunteers for a suicide mission is by definition unqualified for a long term mission. No one would bring a suicidal person on a climb to Mt. Everest, a trip to the South Pole, a sailing voyage around the world. None of the famed explorers -- Columbus, Magellan, Marco Polo, Shackleton, Hillary -- were suicidal. They all planned to return. As Ed Viesturs said "if you don't come back alive, it doesn't count." Edmund Hillary said the same about George Mallory.
posted by JackFlash at 8:11 PM on July 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
Last I heard, each launch will be close to a billion dollars, so 4-10 launches is a lot for an agency that only has a 17 billion a year budget.
That's ok, because NASA's worry right now is that the SLS won't have frequent enough missions to safely sustain the program. Thus the effort to find a minimal mission profile that will use the Congress-mandated-monster-rocket but that can ramp up quickly and survive on the scraps left over.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 8:16 PM on July 2, 2015
That's ok, because NASA's worry right now is that the SLS won't have frequent enough missions to safely sustain the program. Thus the effort to find a minimal mission profile that will use the Congress-mandated-monster-rocket but that can ramp up quickly and survive on the scraps left over.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 8:16 PM on July 2, 2015
And there lies the paradox. Anyone who who volunteers for a suicide mission is by definition unqualified for a long term mission.
That's some catch, that Catch 1022.
It's the best there is.
posted by Herodios at 8:22 PM on July 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
That's some catch, that Catch 1022.
It's the best there is.
posted by Herodios at 8:22 PM on July 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
Surely we should be using all our advanced technology for redirecting comets to crash into Mars? Once we've got enough water there, it gets real simple.
posted by blue_beetle at 8:28 PM on July 2, 2015
posted by blue_beetle at 8:28 PM on July 2, 2015
None of the famed explorers -- Columbus, Magellan, Marco Polo, Shackleton, Hillary -- were suicidal. They all planned to return..
The robots are the famed explorers, in this case, and returning to Earth is meaningless to the robots.
The people volunteering for these one-way missions are pioneers. It's not suicide to live out your life on the frontier. It's the driving impulse of human migration. You'll die out there, but you're going to die anywhere. And if you've procreated or otherwise created something that assists in the next generation's existence in this colony, you've done exactly what we have all evolved to do.
The early European colonies on North America's eastern seaboard had terrible survival rates, but it was ultimately good enough to build permanent colonies that eventually became new nations.
posted by kenlayne at 11:36 PM on July 2, 2015 [5 favorites]
The robots are the famed explorers, in this case, and returning to Earth is meaningless to the robots.
The people volunteering for these one-way missions are pioneers. It's not suicide to live out your life on the frontier. It's the driving impulse of human migration. You'll die out there, but you're going to die anywhere. And if you've procreated or otherwise created something that assists in the next generation's existence in this colony, you've done exactly what we have all evolved to do.
The early European colonies on North America's eastern seaboard had terrible survival rates, but it was ultimately good enough to build permanent colonies that eventually became new nations.
posted by kenlayne at 11:36 PM on July 2, 2015 [5 favorites]
It's not suicide to live out your life on the frontier.
There's a difference between living out your life on the frontier and committing suicide by taking a one-way trip to the bottom on the ocean in a submarine, which is equivalent to what is being talked about here.
posted by LastOfHisKind at 8:09 AM on July 3, 2015
There's a difference between living out your life on the frontier and committing suicide by taking a one-way trip to the bottom on the ocean in a submarine, which is equivalent to what is being talked about here.
posted by LastOfHisKind at 8:09 AM on July 3, 2015
There's a difference between living out your life on the frontier and committing suicide by taking a one-way trip to the bottom on the ocean in a submarine, which is equivalent to what is being talked about here.
This particular plan isn't a one-way mission. From Toward a Permanent Outpost, near the bottom of the linked article:
This particular plan isn't a one-way mission. From Toward a Permanent Outpost, near the bottom of the linked article:
As the Mars base expands, some crew would stay for the minimum cycle time of about 350 days, but others could possibly stay for a much longer time and wait for the next Earth return opportunity.posted by Etrigan at 8:29 AM on July 3, 2015
Earth air pressure is only 15lbs per sq inch.
Don't use the words "only" and "15lbs per sq inch." in the same sentence.
Really.
15psia is a really large amount of force. The only reason we cope with it down here is that we're vented to ambient, so we have 15psi pushing out as well as in, so we measure 0psig.
15psi against 0pis means there's roughly a ton of force per square foot. (2160 pounds to be precise, but...)
So, yeah, "only" is the wrong word. There's a reason we built a lot of spacecraft to run at 5psia. Because 15psia made them too heavy, and caused too many problems.
posted by eriko at 1:49 PM on July 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
Don't use the words "only" and "15lbs per sq inch." in the same sentence.
Really.
15psia is a really large amount of force. The only reason we cope with it down here is that we're vented to ambient, so we have 15psi pushing out as well as in, so we measure 0psig.
15psi against 0pis means there's roughly a ton of force per square foot. (2160 pounds to be precise, but...)
So, yeah, "only" is the wrong word. There's a reason we built a lot of spacecraft to run at 5psia. Because 15psia made them too heavy, and caused too many problems.
posted by eriko at 1:49 PM on July 3, 2015 [1 favorite]
Fry: How many atmospheres can the ship withstand?
Prof. Farnsworth: Well, it's a space ship, so I'd say anywhere between zero and one.
posted by Greg_Ace at 2:32 PM on July 3, 2015 [2 favorites]
Prof. Farnsworth: Well, it's a space ship, so I'd say anywhere between zero and one.
posted by Greg_Ace at 2:32 PM on July 3, 2015 [2 favorites]
(NB: The ocean's water pressure adds ~0.43 psi/ft.)
posted by ZenMasterThis at 8:49 AM on July 7, 2015
posted by ZenMasterThis at 8:49 AM on July 7, 2015
« Older They decorated the sky for Canada's birthday | DarkAngelØne Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by chambers at 11:24 AM on July 2, 2015 [9 favorites]