Launch Manifest For NASA's "Road To Mars" Takes Shape But Questions Remain

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Launch Manifest For NASA's "Road To Mars" Takes Shape But Questions Remain

Posted by samzenpus on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:47AM from the this-is-how-we'll-do-it dept.

MarkWhittington writes: NASASpaceFlight.com reported that NASA's so-called "Road to Mars" is starting to take shape. The deep space program that would conclude with human astronauts departing for the Red Planet in 2039 would require just over 40 launches of the heavy-lift Space Launch System, including an uncrewed flight in 2018 and one flight a year to cis-lunar space starting in 2021 lasting until 2027. A flight in 2028 would launch something called the Pathfinder Entry Descent Landing Craft to Mars as a precursor for a human landing. Then the Mars program begins in earnest with a mission to Phobos in 2033 and missions to the Martian surface in 2039 and 2043.

15 of 130 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-23 05:57 · Score: 3, Insightful

Something doesn't add up here - afaik the outer-space radiation problem hasn't been solved yet. The Apollo moon landings were all short-duration flights, and the MIR and ISS operations take place inside the somewhat protective Van-Allen belts. What is going to protect the astronauts on the long-duration flights to Mars and back again from solar bursts and other deep-space radiation hazards?
Am I missing something here?
1. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-23 06:08 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Not really, Obama just issued an executive order for it. Congress isn't onboard yet.
2. Re:Huh? by MrTester · 2015-09-23 06:15 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  No no no, you uninformed ninny!
  As Fox news will tell you solar radiation is actually a lie spread by the UN as part of their plans for world government.
  
  Its unclear to anyone, including the UN, exactly what one has to do with the other, but its in the plan, so....
3. Re:Huh? by kellymcdonald78 · 2015-09-23 06:23 · Score: 2
  
  It's not as big an issue as you make it out to be. Most prospective designs include a storm shelter to ride out any solar events, and the Van Allen belts don't protect against deep-space radiation events. The biggest protection ISS has against these is the fact that 50% of the "sky" is blocked by the Earth
4. Re:Huh? by Coren22 · 2015-09-23 07:15 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Yes, most. Gamma rays need some serious shielding to block, but aren't very harmful.
  http://www.passmyexams.co.uk/G...
  Cosmic rays can be harmful to electronics, and there isn't much that can stop them (other than serious magnetic fields or large quantities of heavy metals).
  Different radiations have different penetration depths, and different effects on the human body.
  Most radiation damage happens when you ingest an alpha emitter, alpha waves can be blocked by a sheet of paper, but once inside the body, they can do serious damage to DNA. But, a spaceship made out of anything stronger than paper would block most alpha particles, and the sources of those particles.
  Radiation is a complex subject.
  
  --
  APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Manifest? by Coren22 · 2015-09-23 05:58 · Score: 2

Where is the manifest? Both of these articles talk about it, but don't actually include it.
It looks like this manifest being referred to is behind a login prompt.

--
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
cis-lunar space by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-23 06:00 · Score: 2, Funny

one flight a year to cis-lunar space
No flights to trans-lunar space?
SOMEONE ALERT TUMBLR!
32 launches for a single mission?? by TheDarkMaster · 2015-09-23 06:03 · Score: 2

WTF? How the responsible hopes that the Congress will approve a mission spending so many launches for sending a single crew? And expecting to use a rocket that not even exist yet?

--
Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
Better by sycodon · 2015-09-23 06:15 · Score: 2

All this time, money and effort would be better spent designing and building an actual space ship that could leave orbit, come back, be resupplied, go somewhere else, etc. A phalanx of ion drives, the EM drive (if it's real), etc. powered by a multi megawatt reactor, a rotating crew module for artificial gravity, long cycle life support systems, magnetic shielding, etc. The Real Deal.
Then you could go to Mars, asteroid belt when you want and come back when you want.

--
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
1. Re:Better by sycodon · 2015-09-23 06:43 · Score: 2
  
  I 50% agree.
  But nothing can replace people on site, making decisions, and fixing stuff.
  Just look at the Hubble telescope. It has far exceeded it's expected life and is still sending images back. Not possible without people in orbit and putting hands on.
  You don't need someone to traipse across Mars, but having someone being able to change the tire on a rover enables it to continue its mission.
  I see stuff like this as the primary mission of a real space craft...tending to various automated exploration vehicles, refueling satellites, etc.
  
  --
  When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
2. Re:Better by Tim+the+Gecko · 2015-09-23 07:14 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Just look at the Hubble telescope. It has far exceeded it's expected life and is still sending images back. Not possible without people in orbit and putting hands on.
  It would be much less expensive to construct ten telescopes and send one up every year or two on the cheapest possible launcher. Human repair only makes sense because you've already spent so much on the Space Shuttle.
  
  You don't need someone to traipse across Mars, but having someone being able to change the tire on a rover enables it to continue its mission.
  Rovers are cheap and patient. Humans are super-expensive and the costs for their consumables rack up very fast. We returned 12 humans from the Moon, which costs quite a lot of money. We have left dozens of landers on the Moon and Mars - although parts of Surveyor 3 came back with the Apollo 12 astronauts.
3. Re:Better by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-23 07:18 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Just look at the Hubble telescope. It has far exceeded it's expected life and is still sending images back. Not possible without people in orbit and putting hands on.
  And at some point - and that point is "relatively quickly after leaving earth orbit", it becomes cheaper to launch a replacement machine then it is to launch a bunch of humans off into space to catch and repair the broken machine, while keeping all those humans alive, and returning them back to earth.
  We need to stop with this "manned space travel" inanity. It's MULTIPLE orders of magnitude cheaper to send robots and machines to do the work, because machines don't breathe, eat, sleep, poop, piss, get cancer, and die. Humans do all of those things, which means you have to plan for their occurrence, and ship food material, medical material, atmosphere, and a whole lot of other shit along with the humans - this adds stupid amounts of weight, which means stupid amounts of cost, all so we can say "hurr durr some dude stood on a barren rocky surface, for no fucking purpose whatsoever, except for us to be able to dick-measure and say 'we've done that.'"
4. Re:Better by DanielRavenNest · 2015-09-23 14:01 · Score: 2
  
  > Humans are super-expensive
  They are only super-expensive because we have crappy logistics support from Earth. If we had space mining and production of basics like fuel, oxygen, and water, keeping people alive wouldn't be so darned expensive because we would not have to bring it all from down here.
Re:Serious challenges remain by Anonymous Coward · 2015-09-23 06:57 · Score: 4, Informative

you forgot the most serious challenge. 2015 - 2039 is 24 years. That is 6 Administrations, 4 Congressional Terms and 12 terms for the House of representatives.
I do not see any NASA Program survive 24 years of dividing up the Pork. The only way this is going to happen is when it becomes a matter of national security or a new space race takes place. Both of these are external circumstances and fully out of NASA's control.
every pres pulls dis sheet on the way out by Thud457 · 2015-09-23 07:05 · Score: 2

2039?
That's like 12 congressional election cycles from now. Might as well be fornever.

--
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff