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."

Comments

Apart from that Ms. Lincoln... how was the show?

[GodInHell]

"apart from the gravity aspect"

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

Err...

[transami]

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?

Re:Apart from that Ms. Lincoln... how was the show

[AnonymmousCoward]

"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.

Bummer

[bill_mcgonigle]

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.

Re:Well, they need to do SOMETHING with the ISS

[blair1q]

I'm pretty sure they have reams of proof that your statement is false, and you have none that it's true.