Slashdot Mirror
The Space Station As a Simulated Mars Mission?
astroengine writes "NASA is looking at using the International Space Station as a testbed for a human mission to Mars, beginning with a planned week-long simulation to be staged next summer. Preliminary tests would involve working on systems that give astronauts more autonomy, perhaps culminating in a full mission analog, sealing a crew inside a separate module of the station with minimal interaction with the rest of the station and mission control. 'We want to use the space station as a way to get smarter about what a mission to Mars or a mission to an asteroid might look like,' space station flight controller Pete Hasbrook told Discovery News."
I think this simulation is a bit more realistic (apart from the gravity aspect): http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41192648/ns/technology_and_science-space/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyM1bgKWzng
Adjust the ISS stay so that the astronauts bodies weakened condition (from lack of gravity) vs earth's gravity matches what they would be like on Mars. Since Mar's gravity is less than Earth's a shorter stay in orbit would be required, perhaps 2-3 months instead of 6.
This is a HUGE Waste of my planet's resources.
I would think Antarctica is a better choice for this kind of experiments. Apart from the gravity difference, it's as hostile an environment as you can get on our own planet, plus it's way easier to get there if there's a problem.
Coming out in a year and a half
I feel sorry for people that don't drink, because when they get up in the morning, that's as good as they're gonna feel
They need to set up a torus for artificial gravity, allowing them to perform experiments on all kinds of gravity levels.
If it rhymes it must be true.
That's not a quickly overlooked triffle. Low gravity causes loss of bone and muscle density and allows organs to shift about in ways that could make it extremely difficult to do the work an mars explorer would be required to accomplish in the first few weeks. Think about it, not only do they have to survive land-fall (sudden jarring impact after months losing bone and muscle mass -- remember, there's no water or runways on Mars to take the edge off that landing) but they then need to be able to get up and do whatever equipment setup NASA dosen't leave to robots (more below).
Then, they either need to bring enough equipment with them to establish a long duration stay on Mars or jump back out before their bodies have had time to rebuild. That's a pretty scary scenerio.
Which brings me to the part that always bugs me -- why land at all? It's a huge waste of resources. If they got close enough to direct robotic explorers with real-time control, that would be a major advancement. And, if we build it right, they could leave some of their equipment in orbit -- contributing to a space station on the Mars side. This eliminates some problems (fear of gravity wrecking astronauts) and introduces others (at least twleve months in low gravity is not terribly safe).
What I'm curious about, and maybe someone can explain this -- why don't they just design the entire craft to tumble -- the whole centrifugal gravity concept that's been with us since serious futurists first looked at the problem of low gravity and said "hey, wait, here's a replacement." I'm betting the answer is something borring like "dosen't work" or "tears the craft apart" . . . yes/no?
-GiH
"as a way to get smarter about"
Huh?
AS A WAY TO GET SMARTER ABOUT?
Does he mean "to learn more about"? Or is that too 'normal speak' for him, so he thought he'd make up some 'management speak'. (You know, idiocies like "speak TO the paper". You can't speak TO a paper, you can only speak ABOUT it. Or like "in order to LEVERAGE so and so". Leverage is a NOUN, not a verb.)
To really simulate a Mars mission, have this module run full duration without any resupply or deliveries of failed equipment i.e. Elektron oxygen generator. Ugh, if module has life threatening failures of equipment then either let them figure it out or die, or provide backup equipment and then disqualify the simulated mission. However, we have seen what is needed for a long duration mission. I never could understand how they regard the Orion as being a Mars vehicle when it has no room for exercise equipment. ISS crews workout a lot and equipment is much more than a bungee cord that was used on Gemini.
mfwright@batnet.com
I don't know. Maybe the MOON would make a good testbed!
Doesn't it seem like all we do anymore is prognosticate about what we are going to do, but when the time actually comes to get going we just pull the funding?
:T:R:A:N:S:
Maybe someone should write a package about life in a mars colony. They could allow you a first person pount of view, with some limited interaction with the enviornment. We could call it something like "Doing Our Own Mission". Maybe just abbreviate it for simplicity.
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
Because people like to see people go and achieve things..
The trip to mars will have robots. Lots of them probably, but also people.
People can do things robots can't.
The issues you describe are engineering issues, and not insurmountable to solve, just costly.
While we work on that, we should be sending more robots, and once we have a mission at the point where we are building a ship, we should seen tons of supplies to mars.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Yeah..no. It's to test specific things, not a complete Mars test. and no you don't let them die.
What are you, an animal?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
When they were talking about using the Orion as a Mars vehicle, they meant that it was the part that the crew rode up to the Mars transit vehicle, and then rode back down to Earth when they came home.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
I'm a bit disappointed that the article doesn't mention the cosmonauts that are already on their simulated way back from their simulated 520-day Mars mission:
Mars 500 timeline
Only half a year more and then they'll be let out of their Moscow container!
To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
"apart from the gravity aspect"
That's not a quickly overlooked triffle.
I would agree, however, the point of the experiment in the aforementioned article was to see if humans could feasibly be confined for a duration of a trip to Mars. The reason gravity is not an issue here is that we already have data from past experience in this domain. Take for example Expedition 14 to the ISS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expedition_14). This expedition lasted for 215 days, in which two crew members were weightless that entire time. In comparison, this article is talking about spending a week (or few months) in space. This is pale in comparison to anything we have already done, and frankly I don't see the point of it at all. I don't doubt that the space station could be vital in testing planned missions to Mars, but I don't see anything useful coming from this simulation.
So, I guess this means they've given up on a using a rotating space ship for the trip to Mars? That's disappointing, it would make growing food easier and keep the people healthier.
Landing people on Mars as a first priority seems silly. We should build a rotating Mars space station here in an appropriate orbit, have Space X push it to Mars, then, once we have a space station in orbit of Mars, start attempting landings. Maybe the first crews never go down to the planet, they just do science from LMO. Then, send landers/ascenders to Mars as needed to keep the traffic going up and down. Preferably mostly down, so they can build a rocket facility on Mars before the end of the century.
And, before we send one of those rotating space stations to Mars, we should have one here, for practice. Maybe with real commercial lift about to become a reality it'll turn out that Branson gets one built before NASA.
Crawl, walk, run, in that order. I'm not all that eager to send a bunch of sickened guys in a tin can so they can plant a flag on Mars.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
It would be nice to see that they can do something with the ISS. Science certainly hasn't been one of them after all these years.
We already have people having lived close together in very cramped conditions for long periods of time, like say submarines.
We already have plenty people that have been on very isolated research outputs with little to no chance of evacuation.
We already have people having stayed in space as long or longer than the proposed Mars trips.
I think the human aspect is highly exaggerated and a smokescreen for what we don't have. Launch, transfer and landing vehicle, mars habitat and likewise for the return trip. I think we have a pretty good idea what man can survive, what we don't have is the means of doing a Mars mission within those parameters. Like something that won't leave them a smear on the surface as landing like the mars rovers would, because we do have a pretty good idea what humans definitively won't survive.....
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Lets say, oh, I don't know, like maybe the Moon?
You need to leave the Earth's magnetic field for a valid test. Right now, we just don't have the technology to safely get a human-being to Mars and back. They'll just be killed from exposure to radiation, micro-metorites, lack of gravity and so on. There are technologies to prevent this - we'll need about 6 feet of lead shielding between the capsule and exposure to the sun's radation and using a rotational section to create gravity for the long journey. Still iffy though since we don't have any known shielding against micro-meteorites. If they hit a storm of those, everyone will be dead. Also, the ship would just have to be huge that we send and I don't think anyone would fund such an operation especially since we don't have an answer about how to keep the crew alive in certain situations. I'm sure we could chance it, but why invest that much if there is a probability everyone would be killed?
It has a shitty atmosphere and no magnetosphere. The only thing Mars would be good for it to drop a ton of robots on to mine a bunch of resources so we can build a real space ship to take us somewhere worthwhile.
No but as soon as you have to replace key equipment to prevent death, then the Mars simulation is disqualified. Specific test that needs to be done is a full duration test (i.e. testing an emergency 24-hr generator has to be tested 24 hours, not 10 minutes).
mfwright@batnet.com
I wonder how serious they were on this vehicle, that "Apollo on steriods" never impressed me that much except it would be the last manned (HSF) spacecraft this country would produce. oh wait, Elon may come up with something...
mfwright@batnet.com