Slashdot Mirror


Crew Ends 100 Day Mars Simulation in Arctic

Paul server guy writes "According to Wired Science the seven person F-XI LDM crew that has been stationed at the Mars Society's FMARS station has completed their unprecedented 100 day simulation. (Actually 101 days, because for 37 they lived on 'Mars time' adding 39 minutes to each day) According to the mission's remote science principal investigator Chris McKay, of NASA Ames. 'Their pioneering simulation of crew operations on Mars time is by far the best work on this topic ever done. It sets the standard for future Mars mission simulations.'"

10 of 147 comments (clear)

  1. Still very far away by JakeD409 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "It sets the standard for future Mars mission simulations." The fact that it says "for future Mars mission simulations" instead of just "for Mars missions" shows how far away we really are.

  2. Re:Its not a simulation by NatasRevol · · Score: 4, Insightful


    Think of it more as a psychology experiment than a real space experiment. Maybe you won't be so testy then.

    Of course, if it were a real psychology experiment, they should have at least lived on Mars time the whole time, and not just for a third of it. Makes you wonder why they stopped using Mars time...

    --
    There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  3. Re:Its not a simulation by ookabooka · · Score: 4, Insightful

    TFA said they used Mars time during the 24-hour sunlight, they simply covered their windows from 8am to 8pm. If they used Mars time continuously sunset/sunrise would slowly shift around and would probably really mess up their circadian rhythm.

    On a side not you are correct that it was more of a psychology experiment, though that wasn't the extent of their goals. They did things like try to figure out ways to minimize their water usage, etc. Basically anything they could simulate and figure out here on earth they did. Now when NASA says "Ok, how are we going to decrease water usage by 10%" they actually have a very well documented simulation to review through and see what works and what doesn't. Basically before this everything was open to conjecture, now we have tangible information to work with, though not 100% accurate to a real mars mission it is better than nothing.

    --
    If you are about to mod me down, keep in mind that this post was most likely sarcastic.
  4. Re:Its not a simulation by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You're completely missing the point. It's not about whittling down a pile of celebrities or game show contestants, it's about making sure a group of intelligent people with a common goal of research can exist in the psychological environment they would need to on Mars. Once you've got that major factor nailed down as much as possible, then you can go to the trouble and expense of simulating the other physical variables.

  5. More theory than reality by Joseph1337 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The test probarly produced results known decades ago. The main problem - effects of long human exposure to microgravity are still barley known. It resembles some similiar tests that were conducted , that as it was revealed were fraudy and had little scientific results

  6. Re:It was a simulation by Billosaur · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Except that a preliminary Mars mission profile says that one possible mission is a short stay, 30 to 90 days. Now, you might ask why you'd go all that way and not stay longer, but realize that we'll be landing on a world we've never been to (not counting robotic probes) and while we are confident we understand the environment, we don't know how much conditions on Mars will differ from simulations. It will important for the first mission to be long enough to justify the expense while at the same time short enough that the astronauts can return and impart what they've learned to the colleagues, to allow for better mission planning, simulation, and training.

    The same thing occured with the Moon landings. Neil and Buzz were only on the surface a little over two hours, for the reason that the information they needed to gather in that time was more important than exploration of the Moon's surface and they wanted to ensure that there were sufficient resources available in case of trouble. The first landing on the Moon was a test to ensure that the training and procedures would allow a crew to get down and back up successfully. Mars will be a bigger risk, so landing and then leaving immediately would be expensive and counter-productive, but NASA managers won't want to stay any longer than necessary to minimize the potential risks.

    --
    GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
  7. Soil chemistry? by SuperKendall · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's not like they are supposed to get scientific results back the same as on Mars - part of what they are doing though is living in the same islotation, and working outside in realistic suits just as they would be on mars. They are seeing what works with transportation and tools that can be operated when you have to maintain a reasonable level of isolation from the environment around you. Working the Arctic helps because you are approximating the cold temperatures on Mars.

    As for gravity, it's not like the moon. No it's not as much as Earth but it's still a very solid level of gravity that is comparable.

    What you don't understand about the Mars people is that the end goal is a private mission to Mars - why wait around for the government? And, they have a reasonable plan for doing so with current technology.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  8. Why all the disappointment? by Natros · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can't believe how many people seem to think this was a pointless waste of time. Sure, it's a very limited simulation, but it's a very good proof-of-concept study, and hopefully provided additional data on the psychological stresses that would be placed on a team of astronauts trying to establish an extraterrestrial base. By all means, they should incorporate more variables (true self-sufficiency, extended duration, etc) in future studies, but let's applaud an effort to study the human factors involved in space exploration.

    --
    Where are we going, and why are we in this handbasket?
  9. I wonder which crew member got voted out first. by timias1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I wonder which one is the: Bitch, Naive Girl-Next-Door, Surfer Dude, Homosexual, Playa, Joe Schmoe, Drama Queen

  10. Problem Solved by mooterSkooter · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "But while the Apollo lunar lander weighed approximately 10 metric tons, a human mission to Mars will require three to six times that mass, given the restraints of staying on the planet for a year. Landing a payload that heavy on Mars is currently impossible, using our existing capabilities" Well, I see a simple solution; Build a spacecraft that splits into several separate parts (of approximately "10 metric tons") before entry! Problem solved.