Slashdot Mirror
First Mars-Goers Should Prepare For a One-Way Trip
Luminary Crush writes with this excerpt from PhysOrg about the permanance of leaving Earth for Mars, at least for early travelers: "The first astronauts sent to Mars should be prepared to spend the rest of their lives there, in the same way that European pioneers headed to America knowing they would not return home, says moonwalker Buzz Aldrin. '[the distance and difficulty is why you should] send people there permanently,' Aldrin said. 'If we are not willing to do that, then I don't think we should just go once and have the expense of doing that and then stop.'" On the other hand, maybe they'll catch a ride back with Carrie-Anne Moss.
Do we get to nominate people to go?
Would it be by lottery?
Perhaps, you buy your way?
Convict Volunteers?
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.
The American pioneers were preceded by explorers that not only did not intend to stay permanently, but (mostly) returned home safely to tell the tales. Otherwise, there wouldn't be any maps to guide the pioneers later.
The first explorers on Mars should use modular equipment that can be used to build up a permanent infrastructure for use by a later permanent outpost staff. Zubrin's approach makes use of modular hab units that can be connected to create a permanent outpost from individual (temporary) missions. That makes sense. Sending astronauts to Mars to stay permanently, without any experience of the efficacy of the technology, is inviting disaster. Jamestown over and over and over again.
In his novel Red Mars Kim Stanley Robinson tells of Mars being colonized by the First Hundred, a wave sent out after the first manned expedition, who would have to remain there forever. There are some interesting asides into the fact that, to want to leave behind your loved ones and all you know for a barren rock, you're probably not what the government bureaucrats who vet you would consider psychologically stable.
Ok, if it were to be a one-way mission, and there wasn't even a major plan for long-term survivability when getting there, why not consider the possibility of offering a once-in-a-short-lifetime trip to people who have a terminal illness. Obviously it'd have to be something they could survive the trip out with. But what a better way to spend your last years/months alive?
Please read my Canon EOS tech blog at http://www.everyothershot.com
"The first astronauts sent to Mars should be prepared to spend the rest of their long, luxurious, comfortable lives there, free from the risk of attack from unfriendly Indians and wild animals."
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
Then you use the Constellation/Orion/CEV stuff to get from Earth to the cycler, and LEM-like craft between the cycler and Mars.
The resources for the Mars base, including lots of emergency provisions and an escape vehicle or two (extra LEM-like craft to return from Mars surface to Mars orbit and dock with the cycler) can be sent to Mars in advance. It doesn't make sense to send people until the provisions etc. are in place.
For redundancy, you'd probably build and launch two cyclers.
The drawback of all this is that it takes longer to build and deploy than a one-shot Apollo-style mission, but it's worthwhile because it provides an infrastructure for maintaining a permanent base and rotating crews.
The crews would still be committing to spending quite a few years to a mission, but not the rest of their lives.
As they mention the damage from cosmic rays/radiation will probably shorten the travelers life considerably. Still, I'd go even if it takes a yer to get there and I get 2 full years of decent life there (and then 6 months till cancer takes me). I'm so there... There should be a poll connected to this article. :)
Going to mars?
* I'm game!
* No way!
* Send the Cowboy
$HOME is where the
-- silver_p
Since I was a kid, space travel has been the single most fascinating thing in the universe to me.
It has only been recently that I've come to realize that manned space flight is perhaps not the right direction. This was an extremely difficult decision for me to make, but I've made it.
The money spent on a a manned mars trip would be better invested in robotics research.
We need to get off this planet. Human beings do need to go to mars, but more robots need to go first, and will need to go with humans on their trips as well.
My (perhaps weak) analogy is that while it is possible for a human to swim the english channel unaided, it is wiser to use technology to allow the feat to be easier, safer and better in general.
Read my Very Short "Stories"
No Democrats/Republicans, no stock market, no poverty, no orwellian wars on drugs.... Sounds like paradise
What a lot of rot. If we rely on chemical rockets, then yes, Mars will be a one-way trip.
On-orbit assembly of nuclear powered reusable spacecraft would completely change the game.
We need to stop thinking small and start asking, "How big can we build a Mars ship?" Heck, we know how to build a substantial space station in earth orbit.
Stick Men
Have you seen the maps that the settlers of the US western territories used? Not what you're probably thinking of when you make a mental image of "map", I assure you.
Most navigation of the West in the early days was done landmark-to-landmark. Between and around the known landmarks was just wide open empty spaces. A lot of settlement parties tried various promising shortcuts through places like the Great Salt Desert and Death Valley, which worked out well for some, less well for others.
In the early days of the U.S. space program, there was some talk of sending someone on a one-way trip to the moon, there to wait until larger rockets could deliver a vehicle able to make the return trip. One-way supply rockets would keep the poor guy alive while work progressed on the big boosters. It was a desperate plan to beat the USSR.
Aldrin, in his astronaut days, was not one of the proponents of that scheme.
Yeah, you probably should have just read the article.
Just some bar room style conjecture. Pull up a beer and jump in.
We should have a functional space elevator in place here on Earth first, used regularly to haul heavy cargo into orbit.
An interplanetary vessel should be assembled in orbit from components manufactured on Earth. Once the ship is built, cargo to support the first expedition can be sent up, followed by consumables for the trip, followed by the explorers themselves.
If the whole space elevator thing works as we hope here on Earth, a similar system should be constructed on Mars to support long-term missions. Additionally we ought to have GPS and communications satellites in orbit around Mars before sending permanent colonists.
With space elevators in place on both ends, it becomes far less daunting to send the heavy cargo needed to build rugged and roomy shelters, greenhouses, etc.
Sending astronauts there for short term scientific visits is indeed a waste of time, money, and other resources. If the idea is to have a more permanent presence on the red planet at some point, we should be building out the infrastructure now that is needed to ensure the first colonists have what they need to succeed.
There's no reason for anyone to live on Mars. The only reason to visit Mars is because it's there. They need to plant a flag, take some pictures and then bug out, just like the moon, Mount Everest or the Mariana Trench.
Supporting a settlement on Mars would take continual resupply missions from earth costing hundreds of millions each. (There is no way that they locally could manufacturer all of the nutrition needs, drugs, advanced equipment spare parts, etc. they would need to maintain a colony.) This money would be better spent on other space missions, and the population on earth would quickly get bored of supporting a bunch of people sitting around twiddling their thumbs in an airless desert. It would undoubtedly be cheaper just to pay for one return trip for a Mars expedition.
What's more, life there would just suck. They would have to live below ground like rats in holes to try to shield themselves from deadly cosmic rays, occasionally darting into the sunlight before their max radiation doses were exceeded. They would never see a body of water, a natural plant, a cloud, or breath non-artificial air again. At any time whole groups of them could be killed by a single mistake with the life support systems. (Not to mention one of their team flipping out and intentionally pulling the plug.) Their resupply missions could get threatened by political turmoil on earth. It would be like a life sentence in prison, but much more lonely and powerless.
Highest regards for Buzz Aldrin, but that seems to me to be another classic case of pionieering gone wrong. Underestimate the terrain (Well, Houston, that surely LOOKED like ice from back home) Loose your crops get lost yourself and basta! Robinson Crusoe comes to mind. Read the classic and consider for a moment the hardships Rob had to endure without having to care about water, air and heating. (Or if you need something more visual, watch Tom Hanks in "Cast Away"). That should give you a pretty good perspective on how many things we take for granted in our daily lives and that we depend on for our (better than 50 % chance of ) survival (with a life expctancy of more than 45). Things that are produced, manufactured and maintained by hundreds of people. Ok, maybe no man eating savages on Mars (maybe not right away "Lord of the Flies" anyone?) Even with a monthly supply train, a bad tooth would kill you faster than a bullet, never mind taking the appendix out of your fellow astronaut. How many waves would Buzz be willing to sacrifice before establishing a viable foothold? There is absolutely no escape, when the next starbucks is one year away. That could be my limited perspective at the beginning of the century. On the other hand: Maybe they'll call it: "The Aldrin Barbecue".
That and explorers can move over any terrain without a penalty.
The question is, is it cheaper to organize a return trip, or is it cheaper to have them settle there permanently which means sending more equipment and making them pretty much self sufficient or supplying them with what they need including oxygen. These are your only 2 options (unless you're willing to abandon astronauts to die on Mars).
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
The guy who punched out a filmaker who accused him of lying about having landed on the moon.
First of all, I would want decent access to "the internet". Not sure how to do that, but one could imagine a somewhat intelligent web crawler spidering through pages that I've nominated as interesting and just sending that in big chunks.
I'd want access to movies - again, they'd need to be sent, so that's a tricky one like the one above.
Would be nice to have book. Lots and lots of books. OCR a few thousand+, ship it with me. Could do the same with movies and music I suppose.
One thing I don't think I'd want to be without would be Mechano/LEGO or something similar in large quantaties. Electric motors that would work with this and lots of solar panels.
Since this is a trip to Mars, every single piece of Mechano/LEGO going with me will be cataloged. This should be put on the internet on some kind of Wiki like website. Give others the chance to play around with what I have access to, build cool contraptions etc. Even stuff that'd come in handy for new mission style things.
LOTS of spares for everything that is brought. Not one computer, send 10 or 20 along.
Mars is aparently rich on methane, so something to use extract that with (oxygen as well). That way you could have external heating, gas powered vehicles etc.
I suspect the biggest problem (outside catastrophic problems, like immediate medical problems, base blowing up etc) would be cabin fever. Entertainment, books, movies, music, would probably aliviate that to a great extent.
Oh, and something to commit suicide with. Not a gun or anything like that. Give me ... 50 suicide pills. They should be painless, not work inside the first hour. And I'd want 49 antidotes. Might not need a single one, but ... just in case. Would be a shame to realise that you didn't bring any ;)
Sure going to mars is going to be a high risk proposition anyway, but not having at least the redundancy of a return capable vehicle for the first trip isn't a bright idea. Having a one way trip would be exponentially more massive an undertaking than going and returning, unless it's a suicide mission. You'll need to rely on scheduled supply runs, with massive redundancy built into them. (What's the current success rate of probes successfully reaching Mars, 60%?) A permanent colonization would require way more people than a quick visit. What happens when you have some catastrophe that shuts down the program for a few years while they re-design? What happens if your colony ship is en-route and the equipment sent earlier gets destroyed? What happens if something unforeseen makes staying there impossible without re-designing something? What if someone goes crazy?
Every time space travel appears on Slashdot...I get another opportunity to remind you'all that your country is broke. Which means that there isn't going to be a grand 21st century manned space program to other planets.
You can't lose a three trillion dollar war, buy-out the bunko mortgage of every half-wit burger flipper who scammed a half-million 'loan' for a McMansion, give 700 billion dollars to Wall Street sleezos and have a grand glorious space program on other people's money. Not anymore. No matter how many times that you remind them that you have 10000 hydrogen bombs.
You're broke. Your so-called government has spent already spent every tax dollar that you and your children and your grandchildren are ever going to have taken out of their paycheck.
And you got nothing out of it. You can't even get your teeth fixed. Do you have dental insurance? Every one else in the civilized world does. You don't.
There is no future manned space program. It's a fantasy.
Once again, I must remind you of this fact.
Thank you for your attention,
The rest of the world
P.S. you can go back to your comic book movies now.
The first astronauts sent to Mars should be prepared to spend the rest of their lives there
Sort of like an old folks home.
I am anarch of all I survey.
In fact, it was addressed pretty well at Universe Today back in March. They focused on a proposal called "Spirit of the Lone Eagle" by NASA engineer Jim McLane. I could say more but I'll leave it at RTFA.
It's all about the information. And what we do with it.
And that's the point of my plan. Offer to "bury" people by having their bodies shipped to Mars. The bodies can launch on low-fuel, high-g rockets and get there by equally low-fuel slow trajectories. Let's say delivery to Mars orbit within five or six years, depending on launch time. Then, when they get there, the bodies get dropped into a row on top of which lots of microorganisms are dropped and used to kickstart a soil supply. One that we then *know* will have the right balances of nutrients, have a decent amount of water, and a wide range of microorganisms. Add fifty or sixty pounds per body of biodegradable packing material (i.e. a coffin that will become part of the resulting biomass) and you'll really be in great shape. Include a translucent outer case with some insulating properties and you don't even need much of a greenhouse waiting at your destination. A job for Aerojel, seems to me.
Betcha it would work, too. Get the cost down to two or three million dollars each and you'll have to barricade the doors to keep rich, elderly techies from signing up too fast. I figure, what, a hundred million in development costs. About the same as the Indian moon mission. If costs can be brought down to two million per corpus and the charge kept at, say, three million, it shouldn't take more than fifteen years or so at worst to be in the black and, by the way, have developed a kickass set of launch expertise, facilities, and rights to tens of thousands of pounds of rich biomatter, all already delivered to Mars. If necessary, it could even be initially delivered to a Martian parking orbit to wait in deep freeze for an optimal location to be chosen.
Just think of the variations. Pet burial. The same technique delivered to a greenhouse on the Moon. And so on.
It's all about the information. And what we do with it.