Slashdot Mirror
NASA's Deep Space Habitat Could Support the Journey To Mars and a Lunar Return (spaceflightinsider.com)
MarkWhittington writes: Back in 2012, when NASA first proposed building a deep space habitat (DSH) beyond the moon, the Obama administration took a dim view of the idea. However, fast forward over three years, and the idea has become part of the Journey to Mars program. According to a story in Spaceflight Insider, the deep space habitat will be deployed in cis-lunar space in the 2020s to test various technologies related to sending humans to Mars. The DSH could also be part of an infrastructure that would support a return to the moon should the next administration decide to go that route.
The current ISS doesn't have the additional radiation shielding that an station in cislunar space would require. Additionally, it's design and instruments are pretty well tuned for its current mission. We're far better off with a new station.
It would be great if an international cooperative effort could be made in this direction, but in the current political climate, I think that level of cooperation between the space powers is extremely unlikely. We certainly shouldn't wait until everything here is hunky dory before we move forward with exploration.
"Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
Years ago I read an article somewhere about protection from Cosmic Rays. It made an impression, and what's also made an impression is that I don't think I've ever come across anything else about it in the discussions about plans to send people to Mars. I gather though, that cumulative damage from Cosmic Rays are a serious enough issue that it would be criminally negligent of the powers to be if they didn't offer protection. So, what to do about Cosmic Rays? This is from memory about what the article said and may not be quite right but:
1. 3 feet of water offers as much protection from Cosmic Rays as the earth's atmosphere (maybe it was the atmosphere as it is in Denver, Colo.) So a ship going to Mars could be sheathed in a water jacket. That's a lot of mass, but, the bigger the ship, the less the total percentage of mass would be dedicated to the water jacket. Also, the water could be used for drinking, then purified and recycled. (Also, since the article came out, I've read about water being found on the Moon. Getting water from the Moon for the water jacket might be more practical as it has less of a gravity well to be hauled up from.)
2. Alternatively, a very strong magnetic field around the ship would deflect the cosmic rays. This would be less massive. Methinks it would have to be a very powerful field and I'm wondering a bit at the technology to do it.
In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they're different. (Yogi Berra & A. Einstein)
You *do* realise that all the Golgafrinchans who *weren't* on the B ark, died, right? Wiped out by a virulent disease contracted from a dirty telephone...
I'd rather that they spend tax money on US Congressional Districts than hand it to a corporation that passes it to the Chinese.
At least government pork is local, benefits Americans and keeps American jobs alive.
You're gonna love this one then.
"Congress has officially mandated the creation of such a module."
Really - this needs to stop. Congress should mandate broad projects with goals that support the nation as a whole (e.g., the Interstate Highway system). They should stay away from legislating where overpasses go.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
But that was before everyone had their own individual phones, so nobody needs a phone sanitizer nowadays. That's why they still go on the B Ark :-)
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
By compelling, I mean, demonstrating some objective benefit that we mostly agree on.
What's the objective benefit of Spirit and Opportunity? Sure, a bit of knowledge that's mostly useless outside Mars but has it produced any tangible benefits for mankind? Robots do it cheaper, but you don't get a return on investment, at least not measured in dollars. Not that space exploration is alone, what's the ROI on CERN? National parks? Protecting endangered species? Preserving historic artifacts and buildings? Supporting art and culture? Sure, some people only care about what directly impacts their lifestyle and wallet. But I'm glad that some look longer than the tip of their nose.
Pushing our science and knowledge is the way we create capabilities and very often the tangible benefit is the culmination of a long series of not so obviously beneficial advances. We know that doing a manned Mars mission requires solving many technological challenges, that I would argue by themselves have value. For example, maybe we have to find a way to fix radiation damage to the cells, that could have far-reaching applications. Sure we could just not go and not have the problem, but often it's our desire to go faster and higher for less time and resources that trickle down to commodities.
As for preservation our culture is in constant change, I can't be my parents. My children - if I get around to having any - can't be me. Mars couldn't be a museum of human culture, nor should it. But it's the carrying on of human culture, that we as a people don't disappear. From the chanting it sounds like a lot of Americans feel the same about their country. If you can feel that strongly about 300 million people, why not about 7 billion people? In any case, Mars will be nothing like that for ages. For the foreseeable future it'll be a research outpost like Antarctica, just more inhospitable.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings