Slashdot Mirror
Proposed Hab Module For Asteroid Redirect Mission Could Support a Lunar Return
MarkWhittington writes Space News reported on Wednesday that NASA is mulling a hab module as part of the Asteroid Redirect Mission. The inclusion of the hab module would extend the mission from 28 days to as long as 60 days. The module would provide enough consumables such as food, water, and oxygen and other support to sustain the crew of astronauts for weeks while examining a small asteroid in orbit around the moon. The module might also support a return to the lunar surface, given certain modifications.
Considering that it's likely that in a few decades humanity will transition to machine bodies (or at least much more resilient organic bodies), I'd be fine with limiting space exploration for the time being to probes and rovers where one doesn't have to waste so much payload and resources on water, food and oxygen.
Yes, I support space exploration. However, I think the priority for now, our generation's Apollo moment, should be earthbound research into AI and neuroscience. Let's expand through the solar system after that has let us overcome our present need for an ecosystem to go along with us.
Nostalgia is fun, but frankly I think this moon travel nostalgia is a bit misdirected.
If you love the Apollo missions so much, just recreate the whole thing including the Saturn V rocket, LIM and command module with dodgy toilet and analog computers. Don't try for re-enactments with new hardware, that doesn't make sense on any level. Like a horse and buggy, but with the horse replaced by an atv you drive via two sets of reins. A bit ridiculous.
I think our race depends on us becoming a space fairing civilization. This is one of the first real steps in that direction habitation for commercialization
I guess they want to avoid any "28 days later" scenarios.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
humans on the moon make no sense, unless humans want to go there, AND will spend billions to to it. 2 billionaires might share a ride. thousands of tourists go to Antarctica. money to burn.
I would not be so certain strong EMPs are NOT going to hurt a majority of electronics. We have not seen the worst nature (on earth and in space) has to offer. As a side note ever seen the movie "the day the earth stood still?"
The real goal of the habitat is the Martian moon, Phobos, which is reachable for nearly the same expenditure of energy as the high retrograde lunar orbit planned for ARM. It would take a good deal longer, though, thus the need for a habitat.
If you think of ARM as a training wheels dry run for Phobos, you would not be far off.
as Orion has no toilet compartment, no sleeping bunks for off shift use, no air lock, no room for treadmill (kinds of stuff Shuttle orbiter mid deck had).
mfwright@batnet.com
And so are humans
Are we going to capture the rock?
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
swb's comment is insightful too. The best reason to go into space is because we are happy on Earth and want to grow that happiness further.
That said, it is not unreasonable to want a distributed population for reasons of backup and resiliency, as well as reasons for new perspectives/exploration/innovation. Humans run simulations to learn things, and space habitats may develop a variety of approaches to things that are new and useful.
Also, as human technological power grows, the Earth becomes ever smaller and the stakes for a global mistake (e.g. bioweapon, nuclear war) get every higher -- even as we should do what we can to reduce and contain those risks as appropriate.
See also:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/K...
"A planet is the cradle of mind, but one cannot live in a cradle forever."
NASA should have been doing these sort of hab missions decades ago IMHO. Better late than never!
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
I mean, at minimum, we should use the Soyuz approach: a "space-habitation" module and an "Earth return" module. Minimize the size of the Earth return module, and you get more room for what is needed only in space. But launching a second, larger space habitation module would be just as good. Hell, use a Dragon v2 and a Bigelow BEAM. Both can launch on a single Falcon 9 rocket. (Although that wouldn't accommodate beyond-Earth-orbit fuel.)
If only certain key congress members would stop dictating NASA design and build a big ass rocket that will be too expensive to use and really not needed, the resources NASA already has could go into Nautilus-X.
Pork, pork, pork All this could be done for 10th or 100th the cost with a robotic mission. This is all about directing pork to congressional districts, but science.
a faraday cage and circuit breakers can stop alot of shit. plus the sort of EMP that could fry those would have such an intense EM level humans would get roasted as well.