Slashdot Mirror


NASA Has Explored Manned Missions To Venus (newsweek.com)

NASA recently developed a program for manned missions to explore Venus -- even though the planet's surface is 860 degrees, which NASA explains is "hot enough to melt lead." Long-time Slashdot reader Zorro shares this week's article from Newsweek: As surprising as it may seem, the upper atmosphere of Venus is the most Earth-like location in the solar system. Between altitudes of 30 miles and 40 miles, the pressure and temperature can be compared to regions of the Earth's lower atmosphere. The atmospheric pressure in the Venusian atmosphere at 34 miles is about half that of the pressure at sea level on Earth. In fact you would be fine without a pressure suit, as this is roughly equivalent to the air pressure you would encounter at the summit of Mount Kilimanjaro.

Nor would you need to insulate yourself as the temperature here ranges between 68 degrees Fahrenheit and 86 degrees Fahrenheit. The atmosphere above this altitude is also dense enough to protect astronauts from ionising radiation from space. The closer proximity of the sun provides an even greater abundance of available solar radiation than on Earth, which can be used to generate power (approximately 1.4 times greater).... [C]onceivably you could go for a walk on a platform outside the airship, carrying only your air supply and wearing a chemical hazard suit.

Venus is 8 million miles closer to Earth than Mars (though it's 100 times further away than the moon). But the atmosphere around Venus contains traces of sulphuric acid (responsible for its dense clouds), so the vessel would need to be corrosion-resistant material like teflon. (One NASA paper explored the possibility of airbone microbes living in Venus's atmosphere.) There's a slick video from NASA's Langley Research Center titled "A way to explore Venus" showcasing HAVOC -- "High Altitude Venus Operational Concept."

"A recent internal NASA study...led to the development of an evolutionary program for the exploration of Venus," explains the project's page at NASA.gov, "with focus on the mission architecture and vehicle concept for a 30 day crewed mission into Venus's atmosphere." NASA describes the project as "no longer active," though adding that manned missions to the atmosphere of Venus are possible "with advances in technology and further refinement of the concept."

122 comments

  1. This is an excellent example of modern news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NASA has done it again! They've fully explored plans of exploring Venus!

    You think you could have gotten away with that shit in the Good Ol' Days? "This just in! Leif Ragnarok spent the weekend thinking about conquest!"

    Fuck this soyboy world. Where are the Men?

    1. Re:This is an excellent example of modern news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good to know we have a plan of how to get rid of all that precious "content" you persist in creating.

    2. Re:This is an excellent example of modern news. by hey! · · Score: 1

      Yes, this is *exactly* how they started the ball rolling in the good old days, with spitballing mission concepts. The thing that made the good old days good, however, was that would be followed up with a hundred billion dollars in funding.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    3. Re:This is an excellent example of modern news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot the No Salt.

  2. Waste of resources... by sarren1901 · · Score: 3, Informative

    We are better off sending drones and satellites with science labs already onboard. This does sound better then a manned mission to Mars though. Being able to build a space craft or space station in the atmosphere of Venus sounds incredible and a whole lot more practical then going to Mars.

    Both seem like overly expensive, resource intensive activities that we would be better off sending more drones.

    1. Re: Waste of resources... by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Thank God you are not in NASA or science.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    2. Re:Waste of resources... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      The drones could build a cloud city like Lando Calrissian administered above Bespin.

      Once the city is completed, humans could colonize it and begin terraforming Venus from the cloud tops downward.

      This makes way more sense than a Mars colony. Those Mars nutters need to get a grip on reality.

    3. Re: Waste of resources... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you terraform Venus? You need to spin it up, and lose most of the atmosphere.

    4. Re:Waste of resources... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      So the all the experts focusing for decades mostly on Mars plans because of problems with Venus are "nutters" because a random slashdotter says Venus actually makes more sense....right, that makes sense, too!

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    5. Re:Waste of resources... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      I don't think I've seen the episode of Twilight Zone to which you refer, but "meh".

      An attempt to terraform Venus would certainly make more sense than trying to terraform Mars, because you wouldn't need to find and transport millions of volatile rich bodies from the outer solar system. Which bodies might simply not exist, or might be spread at multi-million km spacings through the outer 10^30-odd km^3 of the Solar system. Enjoy the hunt - it'll take the rest of your life.

      For Venus, the volatiles are there already. Some of them (well, 96% or so of them) need to be stripped out and thrown on the ground. Which is convenient, as we have multitudes of microbes that can convert the material (most) of Venus' atmosphere into materials that when heated will release water, oxygen and refractory carbon. OK, it'll take a few millennia to drop 95% of the atmosphere to the surface as carbon dust, and we'd probably need to do something to absorb some of the oxygen released. But hey, it's going to be orders of magnitude quicker than trying to collect the volatiles Mars needs.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    6. Re:Waste of resources... by Agripa · · Score: 1

      Once the city is completed, humans could colonize it and begin terraforming Venus from the cloud tops downward.

      There is millennia of red heat latent in carbonate formation.

  3. Seriously? by CaptainDork · · Score: 4, Funny

    As surprising as it may seem, the upper atmosphere of Venus is the most Earth-like location in the solar system.

    Earth is even more Earth-like. I say Venus may be the second most Earth-like location in the solar system.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    1. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, if we don't do something about CO2 emissions, then Earth will become more Venus like in the future...

    2. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " I say Venus may be the second most Earth-like location in the solar system." Well, that's bullshit.

    3. Re:Seriously? by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Maybe. Are you a cattle rancher?

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    4. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not possible. The earth is too far away from the sun to ever reach Venus like conditions even if the atmosphere was 100% CO2.

    5. Re:Seriously? by crunchygranola · · Score: 1

      So what you are saying is that there is no way it will ever get hot enough to melt lead, it could only get hot enough to melt tin! I feel so much better!

      --
      Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
    6. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it can never get hot enough to make earth uninhabitable ever.

    7. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering Earth was uninhabitable to oxygen breathing life not all that long ago, I declare you full of shit.

  4. Bespin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The cloud city of Bespin.

    1. Re:Bespin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But with Blackjack and hookers.

    2. Re:Bespin by Rei · · Score: 1

      While I'm not a huge Star Wars fan, I believe that in the canon it was supposed to be full of that sort of thing ;)

      --
      "What is the difference between a Ponzi Scheme and an Investment Bank?" -- Jon Stewart
  5. Fahrenheit on Venus? by zmooc · · Score: 4, Funny

    Nor would you need to insulate yourself as the temperature here ranges between 68 degrees Fahrenheit and 86 degrees Fahrenheit (...)

    I highly doubt that; temperatures in the Fahrenheit-range are found only in a handful of territories on Venus' planetary neighbor.

    --
    0x or or snor perron?!
    1. Re:Fahrenheit on Venus? by Rei · · Score: 1

      Yes, please may Earth leave that system behind... ;)

      Note that comfortable temperatures require either lower atmospheric pressures or high latitudes, ideally a combination of both. This is amplified by the fact that, at least in a Landis habitat, you're living inside a greenhouse, with its own greenhouse effect. Higher latitudes also equate to shorter day lengths. The main limitation on high latitudes appears to be the polar vortices (although we don't yet know just how turbulent they are). High latitudes also experience less light. A reasonable balance appears to be about 70 degrees north or south at about 0,5 ATM, where there's about a 48-hour day. 70N is IMHO more interesting than 70S geologically due to passing over Ishtar Terra.

      Note that when one says "0,5 ATM", that doesn't mean cutting the partial pressures of all gases in half equally. Instead you only cut the nitrogen partial pressure, leaving the oxygen partial pressure the same as on Earth. The medical studies on long-term survival in such atmospheres are limited, but appear to be very favourable in many regards (gas diffusion in the lungs is enhanced and it takes less effort to breathe), with the only apparent downside being that coughing becomes less effective at removing obstructions. Plants generally seem to love it, too (due to the enhanced gas diffusion), only suffering from falsely reacting as though experiencing drought. There are efforts underway to breed plants to not react as if experiencing drought, so that they only gain the positives of the reduced pressure environment.

      --
      "What is the difference between a Ponzi Scheme and an Investment Bank?" -- Jon Stewart
    2. Re:Fahrenheit on Venus? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Landis habitat

      That's not the same Landis who's posting up thread is it?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    3. Re:Fahrenheit on Venus? by mmutka · · Score: 1

      I think it is. But such a floating habitat on Venus might also be called a Zhitomirsky habitat, after Sergei Zhitomirsky. http://archivsf.narod.ru/1929/...

    4. Re:Fahrenheit on Venus? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are clearly not enough salty liquorice manufacturers in Venus to provide the 0 point for planet-wide application.

    5. Re: Fahrenheit on Venus? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To my shame, I could not understand the Fahrenheit numbers and had to translate them into Terran Standard so as to understand the article.

      Maybe a temperature analogy would have helped, like the Kilamanjaro thing for atmospheric pressure. Paris in the spring or something like that.

  6. Venus sounds perfect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for a sky-platform Death Match arena

    1. Re:Venus sounds perfect by Rei · · Score: 1

      The funny thing about a Landis habitat on Venus ( = transparent envelope, oxygen / nitrogen lifting gas, people live inside the lift envelope) is that even for a relatively small crew, it's large enough that you could skydive indoors. Perfect place for extreme sports.

      Of course, the real "extreme sport" would be going to the surface. Which actually is perfectly achievable with modern technology. It requires hard suits, not soft suits (more akin to the NASA AX-series, or more accurately, akin to atmospheric diving suits used in ocean exploration), along with heavy insulation, and either a phase-change heat absorbing material (such as used by the Venera probes) or a heat pump. Not only would you be exploring a very alien world (where high altitude frosts and snows are made of metals and/or semiconductors), but you could fly up with a small bellows on your back and glide around with small winglets. Ascent back to habitat height requires a two-stage balloon system.

      --
      "What is the difference between a Ponzi Scheme and an Investment Bank?" -- Jon Stewart
    2. Re:Venus sounds perfect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck it sounds sick,, But wouldnt that kill you? The would electrical frost. The bellows could be like an accordian, and when you fly it plays a chromatic scale, so you can ascend to habitat on cthulu notes

  7. Not TV friendly by Tim+the+Gecko · · Score: 2

    Basement: Can't see anything outside; able to study radar images and scientific data transmitted from Venus probe; can go outside if necessary; cheap.

    Manned Venus mission: Can't see anything outside; able to study radar images; able to go outside to stand in corrosive acid cloud (assuming you wear the right suit); super-expensive.

    1. Re:Not TV friendly by Rei · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So, what you can see depends on the design approach. I'm not a big fan of the HAVOC approach, where people live in a little capsule under the lift envelope; the Landis approach, where people live and farm in the (huge) lift envelope itself makes far more sense. Therein you have a vast, bright open space full of life and where you can live basically wherever you want; the lowest-mass option for crew quarters is just large tents hanging from catenaries (non-rigid) or the frame (rigid). Don't get along with someone? Move half a kilometer away from them, to the opposite side of the habitat.

      What you see outside: With the possible exception of the polar vortices, you never see either the ground or the sun. You have a brightness gradient, where above you is somewhat brighter than below you. You do pass through convective weather systems however that are surprisingly similar to those in Earth's troposphere. We don't know at this point whether there's any precipitation or frosts in these (that's how pathetically little we know about Venus : The data from the Vega balloons has alternately been argued to confirm or deny precipitation and/or frosts), but as far as what you'd see, these clouds would be visible, albeit in relatively low contrast.

      As for stepping outside: barring precipitation (which, as mentioned, we don't know whether it actually exists), the outside environment isn't like a sulfuric acid bath. It's several to several dozen mg/m^3 of sulfuric acid mists. By contrast, OSHA allows people to breathe up to 1 mg/m^3 for an entire 8-hour shift. Now, the acid concentration on Venus is higher than it would be on Earth (H2SO4 is highly hygroscopic and absorbs moisture from the air to self-dilute), but the key takeaway is, the environment is more like a very bad smog (or more accurately, vog). The H2SO4 is far more of a resource than a hazard, and it would actually be convenient if it were more common (heating first drives off free H2O; further heating decomposes H2SO4 to SO3 + H2O; and further heating of SO3 over a vanadium oxide catalyst decomposes it to SO2 and O2; contrarily, SO3 can be reused in the gas scrubber as a nucleating agent to help capture free H2O after doing an initial electrostatic and/or ionic liquid scrubbing of the H2SO4 mists).

      --
      "What is the difference between a Ponzi Scheme and an Investment Bank?" -- Jon Stewart
    2. Re:Not TV friendly by careysub · · Score: 1

      Therein you have a vast, bright open space full of life and where you can live basically wherever you want; the lowest-mass option for crew quarters is just large tents hanging from catenaries (non-rigid) or the frame (rigid). Don't get along with someone? Move half a kilometer away from them, to the opposite side of the habitat.

      You can't do this on Earth - live where ever you want. Why would this be possible in the far, far more space constrained Venus colony structure?

      On any off-world colony, where all available space is part of a man-made structure (and in this case all space not just habitable living space) it will be at a premium and will be strictly allocated by a management/legal system (like land, or apartments, or offices, here on Earth).

      The lifting capacity of Venus's atmosphere does not lead to living on an almost empty open plain under a huge empty volume, it leads to an apartment and office building in the sky that keeps its average density to below 0.5 kg/m^3. In Landis's piece he links to he describes living on Venus as "The result would be an environment as spacious as a typical city", and as long as he means "a typical well built-up city" I agree.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    3. Re:Not TV friendly by Rei · · Score: 1

      What do you mean you can't move anywhere you want on Earth? Of course you can. I could move half a kilometer away from where I'm at tomorrow if I wanted to.

      On any off-world colony, where all available space is part of a man-made structure (and in this case all space not just habitable living space) it will be at a premium

      It doesn't work that way, at least until you get to extremely large habitats. The amount of volume you need for lift means that the overwhelming amount of your habitat is empty space. If you tried to "fill it all up", you'd sink. The only reason that this doesn't apply to extremely large habitats is that if you confine everyone to living in a 2d plane, then the volume of the habitat (and thus lift) grows with proportion to the radius cubed but the living area only in proportion to the radius squared.

      Not that you have to confine yourself to living in a 2d plane, of course.

      --
      "What is the difference between a Ponzi Scheme and an Investment Bank?" -- Jon Stewart
    4. Re:Not TV friendly by mmutka · · Score: 1

      One reason of putting people in a gondola under the balloon is because people and their equipment are much denser than air. In a passive scenario or the slow thrust of a dirigible, the righting torque of a buoyant body comes from the distance between the center of buoyancy and the center of gravity. Dirigible balloons are "flattened" vertically, which brings the center of buoyancy even closer. This is why in many early dirigible designs had the gondola suspended by rope a few meters below the balloon, increasing the distance and thus passive trimming.

    5. Re:Not TV friendly by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      I have a question...what do you need the meatbags for, other than a publicity stunt?

      Lets be honest here...taking meatbags to other planets? CRAZY expensive. Meatbags are such weak and spoiled for comfort little things, they need air and water and food and toilets and suits and gravity and are just a royal PITA with really no benefit other than publicity. With just todays bot tech you could easily have the bots do anything you'd want the meatbags to do only you could send 30 bots for the same weight as all the supplies you'd need for just one meatbag for a trip of that duration, so what is the point of the meatbags again?

      Look I get the appeal, cuz hey who don't like Star Trek, but with the technology in its current state "meatbags in spaaaaace!" for anything other than LEO is just crazy wasteful when it comes to resources and unlike the days of Apollo when the bots were barely better than tonka toys the bots today? A hell of a lot more versatile and with that big ball of power being as close as it is to Venus? Not like electricity would be an issue and for the cost of just sending 6 meatbags there for 6 months and back you could send hundreds of bots that could work there for years and actually get shit done, hell they could even use some of the resources they mine to make 3D printed parts and you could end up with more bots than you started, something not possible with the meatbags.

      So I really see no point in the meatbags, at this point it just seems silly, not like we need to rush to plant a flag to go "nah nah" at the other bunch anymore so why bother with meatbags when you can get so much more done with bots?

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    6. Re:Not TV friendly by Rei · · Score: 1

      The bulk mass certainly needs to be at the bottom, for stability reasons. But the mass isn't humans, or even agriculture; it's the ascent vehicle. More specifically, the propellant in the ascent vehicle. Particularly if you're using chemical rockets (as opposed to nuclear thermal), you're looking at something like 90% of your mass in the ascent stage on the underside. Where you put everything else is pretty much irrelevant in comparison.

      --
      "What is the difference between a Ponzi Scheme and an Investment Bank?" -- Jon Stewart
    7. Re:Not TV friendly by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      But the mass isn't humans, or even agriculture; it's the ascent vehicle. More specifically, the propellant in the ascent vehicle.Or, or a long term mission, the heavy life support machinery (the equivalent of Biosphere 1 & 2's "oceans") hangs down there. Along with any "ascent vehicle" that you're in the process of refuelling, for those faint hearts and administrators (or non-convicts) who might want to go back to Earth.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  8. Doomed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dooomed we are all gonna die won't somebody do something waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

    1. Re:Doomed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well thankfully you denialist retards ARE going to all die, yes. But we're not so much worried about that, more the destruction of the entire food web. Important stuff, not you. You don't matter worth a shit.

  9. Studies don't matter by Kjella · · Score: 2

    NASA has probably "explored" interstellar flight too, it doesn't mean it's anywhere near ready to go. Right now the US can't even send people to the ISS. Of course hand-waving is sometimes useful like "if we ignore all the problems of getting to Mars, what's the problems we have on Mars" but you got to take that into account. Sure at the right altitude Venus orbit is relatively human friendly. It doesn't mean we have the means to get people from Earth to there or back again. And we'd probably have to build the ship much more protected for the crew to survive the trip, so it would just be to go outside in order to go outside. Unlike Mars, where we could actually do something outside the ship.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  10. Do a robotic mission. by WindBourne · · Score: 2

    Automated Submarine/balloon would make sense for doing a mission.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Do a robotic mission. by Strider- · · Score: 1

      Been done already. The Soviet Vega probes deployed balloons into the Venus atmosphere. They were tracked from earth until they went behind the far side of the planet.

      --
      ...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
  11. Good luck with that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When they can't even get money for Venus robotic missions (the latest Discovery-class missions out of NASA steamrolled Venus in favor of not one but two missions to the asteroids), where are they going to get money for manned missions?

    1. Re:Good luck with that by Rei · · Score: 2

      I think that's sort of the point - so long as people see Venus as "uninhabitable", it'll keep being robbed of funding for robotic missions, as it has been for the past several decades. Having a manned program for Venus - even if manned missions are, for all practical purposes, decades off - has the potential to help get more funding for exploring the planet.

      --
      "What is the difference between a Ponzi Scheme and an Investment Bank?" -- Jon Stewart
    2. Re:Good luck with that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stick with your bullshit advocacy for self-driving cars you shilling moron.

    3. Re:Good luck with that by Rei · · Score: 1

      I'm not much of an advocate for self-driving cars. If plan to stalk me, please do a better job at it in the future.

      --
      "What is the difference between a Ponzi Scheme and an Investment Bank?" -- Jon Stewart
    4. Re:Good luck with that by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Waiting for AC to call you creimer.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    5. Re:Good luck with that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry, fat man, we can tell our idiots apart. In your case, we go by weight.

    6. Re: Good luck with that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am a Jedi Warlord capable of incredivle feats of mind control and telekinesis.

    7. Re: Good luck with that by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Ya, but yu cnt spel gud.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  12. Or send Venus Williams by ffkom · · Score: 1, Funny

    She seems qualified enough by her first name and could help reaching diversity goals at NASA.

    1. Re:Or send Venus Williams by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She will have a tantrum if she isn't selected to be the first person to go to the planet which is named after her :O

  13. Venus colonies by XXongo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This has been talked about several times, for example, "Why We Should Build Cloud Cities on Venus," here: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/539jj5/why-we-should-build-cloud-cities-on-venus
    based on this 2003 paper: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20030022668.pdf

    1. Re:Venus colonies by mmutka · · Score: 1

      Indeed, I don't see much new information: everything is still at concept stage. I collected some links on all I could find on the topic on my blog last spring: https://unfinishedwisdom.wordp...

  14. Yes, seriously by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 5, Interesting

    " I say Venus may be the second most Earth-like location in the solar system." Well, that's bullshit.

    No, at the right altitude-- about 56 km above the surface-- Venus is remarkably Earthlike.

    No oxygen, of course, but in temperature and pressure, very close.

    I wrote a paper about this: "Colonization of Venus", back in 2003. Glad to see my work is being taken seriously!

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    1. Re:Yes, seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it's a stretch to say it's being taken seriously lol. Don't sell your Venusian vacation timeshare packages just yet.

    2. Re:Yes, seriously by crunchygranola · · Score: 1

      I think there is some really serious sidestepping in your piece you link to Geoffrey:

      These materials, such as silicon, iron, aluminum, magnesium, calcium, potassium, sodium etc. can be mined from the surface material, which is apparently primarily a basaltic silicate. Access to the surface is relatively simple from an aerostat, since the thick atmosphere allows flight by airplanes or balloons... In an alternative scenario, an cable in the form of a high-temperature fullerene tether could be used to directly lift ore from the surface to the habitat. Since the habitat will be stationary with respect to the middle-atmosphere wind, the lifting will be done with the habitat in motion with respect to the surface.

      Relatively simple? Relative to what? You did mention at the start of the piece the conditions on the surface (from 735K to in excess of 975 K, and a pressure of 96 atmospheres), but not addressing those very significant issues when suggesting that mining on the surface might be feasible seems more than a bit of an oversight. There are probably no ore forming processes on Venus (no water, thick atmosphere prevents asteroid impacts) so extracting useful elements from undifferentiated basaltic lava will be required. Ore, oops, raw crustal rock, processing on the surface seems infeasible, so I guess we will be hauling the rock up to the balloons to do any extraction.

      We know surprisingly little about Earth's sea floor below 1 km (100 bar) even though the temperature is quite pleasant in comparison (3 C) and is not moving past us at 100 m/sec all the time. Sure the average pressure on the sea floor is higher - 360 bar not 98 - but it is only 3-4 km away, rather than 50 km, and that 735+ K (460 C) is a killer. It is easy to keep stuff warm where it is cold (insulation plus a heater), it is really hard to keep stuff cool where it is hot.

      I can see simply scraping up rock perhaps with a simple mechanical system, and hauling it up with a balloon brigade (exotic metal foil balloons at the surface, exchanging once or twice with lighter lower temp balloons at higher altitudes) - and maybe 50 km nanotube cables cable of taking 460 C will one day exist - but it is a very heavy lift for a off-world colony to obtain materials they need from processing lava rock -- something we never do here on Earth, with a huge industrial base. I'm not convinced that simply getting processed stuff shipped from Earth will not be more practical.

      Before that happens it is as likely that we build a sunshade to cool off Venus, which will take a several centuries to cool down. But then the balloon cities get too cold.

      --
      Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
    3. Re:Yes, seriously by Rei · · Score: 2

      Nice to see you back, Geoffrey :) Keep up the great work!

      I am curious what you think of the early-phase HAVOC approach, of having the crew slung underneath a lift envelope rather than living inside it. I have to admit, I'm not a fan (I also found some of their mass budget numbers in the initial proposal rather questionable). But it's still nice to see some work being done towards any Venus habitation concepts. :)

      I guess on the upside they can be freed from the need for a transparent envelope, and thus use, say vectran or similar. Liquid crystal polymers have such nice properties for an environment like Venus. But there's still great options for (layered) transparent envelopes. When analyzing possibilities it looked like optimal layers would be along the lines of a PCTFE outer layer, an EVOH or PVDC gas barrier layer, a potential fluoropolymer coating for antifouling / anticondensation properties, and CF reinforcement, if sustainability is taken into account (PCTFE minimizes the amount of F required, since it's only found in lower ppb quantities and can be melt-bonded with other layers; it's also extremely resistant to water permeation); EVOH is simpler to produce than the more commonly considered PET and also opens up a production path for adhesives. PVDC also looks attractive, at the cost of requiring more chlorine, which isn't in huge abundance (although certainly more abundant than fluorine). As for reinforcing fibres, CF is harder to produce than UHMWPE, but its low creep, UV resistance, and wettability probably makes this worth it.

      For our sample habitat, with an envelope fabric comprised of 20um PCTFE, 70um PVDC, and another 10um PCTFE, that worked out to 183g/m (not counting reinforcement) and had the following daily permeation rates w/continuous atmospheric scrubbing:

      H2O: -1.44 kg
      O2: -0.29 kg
      N2: -0.22 kg
      HF: 2.91 ppb
      H2S: 19.1 ppb
      HCl: 23.3 ppb
      H2SO4: 294 ppb
      SO2: 92.7 ppm
      CO: 98.8 ppm
      CO2: 11.9 kg

      Looks like that would (naively) require interior air scrubbing around 15 times per day to avoid reaching gas levels which would be harmful to agriculture. But probably not that bad in practice, as problematic gases like HF are hygroscopic and would be prone to being absorbed into condensation films and hydroponics channels, and with such tiny permeation rates, it might be worth considering just neutralizing them in the envelope itself. If the minor species can be dealt with, the bulk CO2 only requires about 1% of the envelope be scrubbed daily to maintain comfortable levels (and that's assuming no plant uptake). Oxygen and nitrogen losses are trivial, although the water losses are annoyingly high, even with the use of PCTFE; still, the losses are only about 5% of the water recovery rates we calculated for our scrubber.

      This is sort of a long-winded way of saying... a transparent envelope like your '93 paper called for looks perfectly workable, and sustainable. :)

      --
      "What is the difference between a Ponzi Scheme and an Investment Bank?" -- Jon Stewart
    4. Re:Yes, seriously by Rei · · Score: 2

      Oh yeah, I'm curious as to what your thoughts on sustainable ascent stages are. The early stages of HAVOC call for what's basically a gigantic Pegasus rocket... anything but sustainable, of course.

      Sustainable chemical ascent vehicles look possible, but are... annoying. It basically requires two stages, which you have to recover with balloons, and re-mate while they're hanging under your habitat, and the propellant to re-fill them requires the vast majority of your habitat's lift capacity. You're also limited to low-hydrogen fuels like carbon monoxide, acetylene or cyanogen, generally meaning some combination of poor performing or hot burning (cyanogen with a small fraction of methane or hydrogen mixed in looked best in terms of balancing performance, temperature, and hydrogen content). It's... workable, but not pretty.

      Nuclear thermal looked way better. You're stuck burning pure hydrogen, but don't actually need that much of it. And some nuclear thermal designs that incorporate compressors offer the potential to hover, allowing one to ditch balloon recovery. It's single stage, and allows for a significantly lower wet mass than a chemical ascent vehicle.

      Have you investigated sustainable ascent stages much? What were your thoughts?

      --
      "What is the difference between a Ponzi Scheme and an Investment Bank?" -- Jon Stewart
    5. Re:Yes, seriously by Rei · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There's much more detail about surface access and resources in much more detail in Chapter 8 here. Contrary to your assertion, Venus has all of the signs for heavy differentiation, both theoretical and observed: abnormally large melts, abnormally low viscosities, abnormally long cooling times, repeated remelting, structures associated with secondary differentiation on Earth (such as rhyolite domes, which are the most likely explanation for Venus's pancake domes), etc. Venera 8 and 13 measured U, Th and K levels that were so enriched over what's normally found in basalt that Venera 8 was initially thought to have sampled granite instead. Venus also shows signs of potential widespread carbonatite volcanism, which on Earth form some of the most valuable ores for a number of elements. Venus also has its own unique ore-forming processes, to the point that the planet literally vaporizes and plates out metals and/or semiconductors in the form of high-altitude frosts. Venus has no liquid water to assist in forming ores, but its dense, acidic atmosphere provides it with unique ore-forming properties not found anywhere else in the solar system.

      In some ways, Venus is a natural refinery, separating out different compounds into layers - there are three separate cloud decks (with a virga underlying the lowest). For example the dominant species in the upper two cloud layers is sulfuric acid, the most likely dominant species in the lower cloud layer (or at least a major species) is phosphoric. Even metals appear to be found in Venus's upper atmosphere - for example, iron has been detected, most likely in the form of iron chloride. There are some metals that we don't even know what's happened to them - for example, our models show that mercury should be common in Venus's atmosphere, yet it hasn't been detected at all; we have no clue what's happened to it.

      And as for "how to harvest" materials from the surface, the simplest method is one that we can't do effectively on Earth or Mars: dredging. Venus's atmosphere is dense enough that one could dredge fines using the same fan that the lander uses for propulsion. And as for the ability to land on Venus's surface, come on - that was achieved with 1960s/1970s Soviet technology. Yes, we're talking more complex systems, but nothing remotely beyond our reach.

      --
      "What is the difference between a Ponzi Scheme and an Investment Bank?" -- Jon Stewart
    6. Re:Yes, seriously by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

      It seems like this would be a one way trip. Since Venus has a gravity close to 1g, wouldn't the planet's escape velocity mean that this would be a one way trip?

      After all, it took something as powerful as a Saturn V to reach Terran escape velocity and get us to the moon. How would we manage to get a spacecraft that massive out there in order to bring our explorers back?

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
    7. Re:Yes, seriously by Rei · · Score: 1

      Gravity is simultaneously one of Venus's big advantages and curses. Advantages because it makes Venus so similar to Earth, and pretty much guarantees that people won't experience muscle and bone atrophy. But curse because, like Earth, it's hard to get off.

      You can escape with chemical rockets, although they have to be recovered with balloons (there was one rocket design in the 1960s on Earth being considered for doing the exact same thing), you have to re-mate the stages while they're hanging from the underside of the habitat, and the propellant mass takes up the vast majority of your habitat's lift capacity. Far more appealing are nuclear thermal rockets, which you can launch with a single stage and a significantly lower wet mass. Some designs which incorporate compressors for air augmentation can even hover.

      --
      "What is the difference between a Ponzi Scheme and an Investment Bank?" -- Jon Stewart
    8. Re: Yes, seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously how asteroids make ore veins on Earth? Have you mixed up asteroid mining with mineral ore vein creation due to vulcanism on Earth in ancient times which is what is going on on Venus now?

    9. Re:Yes, seriously by Agripa · · Score: 1

      No, at the right altitude-- about 56 km above the surface-- Venus is remarkably Earthlike.

      No oxygen, of course, but in temperature and pressure, very close.

      I wrote a paper about this: "Colonization of Venus", back in 2003. Glad to see my work is being taken seriously!

      Wouldn't the lack of hydrogen be a larger problem than the lack of oxygen? Oxygen is at least available bound with carbon dioxide but water vapor is just a trace.

  15. Seems hastily prepared by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And what precisely was NASA expecting to happen as a result of this study?

  16. Obligatory "Manned mission to Uranus." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Training for the mission will be conducted in Mianus.

  17. Fahrenheit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do it again, NASA. Do make sure that your suppliers use obsolete, imperialistic units.

    1. Re:Fahrenheit? by MS · · Score: 1

      I thought the same. This isn't real scientific research, if it doesn't use international, metric standards.

    2. Re:Fahrenheit? by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      They need to be very careful about this:

      [CNN: September 30, 1999] NASA lost a $125 million Mars orbiter because a Lockheed Martin engineering team used English units of measurement while the agency's team used the more conventional metric system for a key spacecraft operation, according to a review finding released Thursday.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  18. But what do you *do*, floating over Venus? by Dasher42 · · Score: 1

    What are the resources in the clouds above Venus? How do you get the raw materials to maintain the balloons? What's the economy there? What's the draw? How come we're not living in blimps floating above Earth?

    The one thing I see is more solar gain for energy, but that's better gotten in space. Terraforming? Even if you screened the planet from the sun entirely, it would take vast amounts of time for the heat trapped in the atmosphere to dissipate.

    Venus seems like the hot version of Antarctica; a place for long, quiet scientific missions, but hardly a place to live.

    I really think our chances for self-sustaining colonies elsewhere in the solar system are those places where we can dig in for protection from radiation, seal up a breathable atmosphere, and try to sustain an ecosystem. The lava caves on the Moon seem to me like the best place to do this. They're easier to reach, delay for signals to reach there isn't long, resupply and evac are doable. If we can get things right there, then I beieve we're ready for Mars and beyond.

    1. Re:But what do you *do*, floating over Venus? by Rei · · Score: 1

      What are the resources in the clouds above Venus?

      Chapter 5

      How do you get the raw materials to maintain the balloons?

      Chapter 8.

      What's the economy there? What's the draw?

      Chapter 8.

      How come we're not living in blimps floating above Earth?

      People live in the easiest location where it is to live, near where there's economic activity to sustain their presence. See Chapter 8 re: economic activity, and if you think you have an easier location to base operations for accessing Venus's resources than an aerostat habitat, then by all means, elaborate. :)

      The one thing I see is more solar gain for energy, but that's better gotten in space.

      If you're skeptical about how hard it is to get physical resources at an aerostat habitat, you should be all the more skeptical about how hard it is to get physical resources at a habitat drifting in a vacuum.

      Terraforming?

      An unrelated topic to aerostat habitats, but... Chapter 10.

      places where we can dig in for protection from radiation

      In a Venus habitat, you have the equivalent mass of five meters of water over your head as shielding. No digging required.

      seal up a breathable atmosphere

      The very air that lofts you on Venus is breathable. And is not difficult to acquire.

      and try to sustain an ecosystem.

      Abundant light and space (rather than living in a cramped pressure vessel) = much easier for agriculture.

      --
      "What is the difference between a Ponzi Scheme and an Investment Bank?" -- Jon Stewart
  19. Melt lead. by tsa · · Score: 1

    The melting point of lead is 327,5 C.

    --

    -- Cheers!

    1. Re:Melt lead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      327,5 is not a valid number. Learn to use decimal points correctly retard.

    2. Re:Melt lead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Many countries and regions use comma for the decimal point.

      By comparison, only three (US.of.A, Liberia and Burma) use non-metric. Retard.

    3. Re:Melt lead. by Zumbs · · Score: 2

      Many countries and regions use comma for the decimal point.

      Wikipedia has a nice overview. But this is an English writing site and English uses a dot as decimal separator.

      --
      The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
    4. Re:Melt lead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every country in the world uses mixed metric and imperial. Look at a cars tires. Every car everywhere in the world will have r#. That # will represent the diameter of the wheel in, wait for it, inches retard.

    5. Re:Melt lead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong metric faggot. Every country in the world uses imperial. Time, angles, latitude and longitude and all based on an imperial system. Also remember that the United States has more than enough nukes to wipe your pathetic Third World nation out of existence. So it’s best you remember your place metric faggot.

    6. Re:Melt lead. by samwichse · · Score: 1

      That escalated quickly.

  20. Terraform Venus! by Grog6 · · Score: 2

    Use several large asteroids, then some smaller ones...

    Step 1: Blow of 90% of the atmosphere with a large heavy asteroid.
    You could also tip the planet a bit, and add some spin.

    Step 2: Hit it with another asteroid heavy enough to penetrate the planet, spinning the core to create a magnetic field to protect Immigrants from Earth.

    Step 3: Hit it with slower moving asteroids built up of various frozen gasses and water, until there are global oceans.

    Step 4: Wait for it to cool off a bit, after the Re-engineering step.
    Profit!

    This is what we should be planning; deorbiting things to the inner solar system is easy if you don't need to slow down at the end. :)

    I wonder if I can get funding...

    --
    Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
    1. Re:Terraform Venus! by Zumbs · · Score: 1

      That ... is a seriously long term endeavor!

      --
      The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
    2. Re:Terraform Venus! by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      It's a terraforming effort. Of course it's long term. Tens to hundreds of millennia, on the low side. And that's probably optimistic.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    3. Re:Terraform Venus! by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      Step 1 - that's going to be pretty tricky. Judging from the work that has been done w.r.t Earth, you're looking at an impactor around the size of Mars.

      Now, don't get me wrong - I don't have any intrinsic objection to using Mars to terraform Venus. But some of the people left on Earth might be a little concerned about you manoeuvring such a lump of rock past their windows. Maybe move them out somewhere else while you're doing the "heavy lifting".

      Step 2Hmm, you're going to have to move around 80% of the mass of the planet temporarily into orbit while you're spinning up your core. (Actually, for a geodynamo, you probably need differential rotation between two solids, separated by a conducting fluid. Slightly different to your scenario. Tricky. Might it not be easier to just call up Slartibartfast and get a quote from the Magratheians?

      Steps 3 and 4 need to be inverted.

      It's a plan. Version 0.1 ; let's rework to 0.2 before going for an ICO?

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  21. Re:But unplanned missions to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, Chris, everyone could see the Moon in 1961, that's why it was so hard to commit the nation to sending a man on the Moon.

    You pelican-chinned mongoloid.

    PS: "Everyone have seen Venus". You've just given up at this point, right?

  22. Hmmm by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

    you could go for a walk on a platform outside the airship, carrying only your air supply and wearing a chemical hazard suit.

    Shiiiit!

    What?

    I dropped the keys!

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    1. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If you ever drop your keys into the abyss of Venus' atmosphere, let 'em go, because man, they're gone."
      -Venusian Jack Handey

    2. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for demonstrating a 3rd grade republican sense of humor. golf clap.

  23. Re:Yes, seriously (The Sultan of the Clouds) by Ranger · · Score: 1

    I recently listened to a decent reading of your story "The Sultan of the Clouds" over at StarShipSofa. I enjoyed it. It does have a pulp era feel to it. And for those of you who want to give it a listen, they broke it up into three parts and is only a segment in each episode: "The Sultan of the Clouds" Part 1 (23:50), Part 2 (10:00), Part 3 (1:17:10).

    Spoiler question below
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    The only question I have concerning the story is what would this diamond structure the villain wants to build look like? The description seemed a little vague (though maybe intentionally so). Would they be super strong tall platforms made out of a lattice of diamond struts? Would it cover all of Venus' surface or just a good portion of it?

    Of course the way the villain in the story could have dealt with all that excess oxygen is to add some hydrogen scooped from the atmosphere of a gas giant.

    --
    "You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
  24. Re:But unplanned missions to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, Chris, everyone could see the Moon in 1961

    The moon is not a planet, it's technically a dwarf planet. If the moon had a moon, it would be called a moonmoon.

    that's why it was so hard to commit the nation to sending a man on the Moon.

    I guess you didn't see my First Man review.

    You've just given up at this point, right?

    Video #83 came out yesterday. Video #84 comes out tomorrow. So, no.

  25. Not probably. See project Orion. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Attach a large steel plate with a small hole to the back of your ship. Grab a large amount of tiny nukes, and throw them through the hole, to explode, and push the plate. One by one. Add shock absorbers if you need bags of mostly water to survive.
    Gets you to 10% of the speed of light. 2-5% for water bag transporters.

    And hadn't it been for those pussy politicians, we'd already have an outpost in another solar system.

    I bet China will do it, as soon as they can. Hopefully before they have been p.c.-gentrified.
    And hopefully the plate will be shaped like a giant pussy, with the USA flag painted onto it, and the nukes will be tiny Chinese penises banging it all the way to the stars. Literally.

    No offense(TM)

  26. Re:But unplanned missions to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have you seen a doctor for that growth on your neck?

  27. Re:But unplanned missions to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have you seen a proctologist for your anal fixation that gone untreated for two years?

  28. Re:But unplanned missions to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "that gone untreated"

    I know you have no teeth, but your comments need more bite, Chris.

  29. Re:But unplanned missions to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "it's technically a dwarf planet "

    Which coincidentally is also your pant size!

  30. Venus Labs by EricBoyd · · Score: 1

    I started Venus Labs http://venuslabs.org/ to research and promote exactly this idea! Join us and we can live in stratospheric penthouses on Venus, rather than basement tunnels on Mars...

    --
    augment your senses: http://sensebridge.net/
    1. Re:Venus Labs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is there a difference? In both scenarios, no real ocean line. You'd need screens for that.

  31. Evaluating Tilt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But what is Winter Sunlight?

  32. and will promptly shelve it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but not without providing corporate welfare to the usual recipients first.

  33. stupid idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nasa will kill another astronaut crew.

  34. Sure by MerlinTheWizard · · Score: 2

    We haven't messed enough of the universe yet. There's no reason earth should be our only trash can! :D

    1. Re:Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The universe is humongous. We are a tiny and insignificant speck in both size and duration in comparison. No mess we can create is of any cosmic significance.

  35. Some mystery as to why Venus has a thick atmospher by shoor · · Score: 1

    Venus has a weak magnetic field compared to earth. Current scientific opinion seems to be that earth's magnetic field is what kept earth from losing its atmosphere the way Mars did.
    https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/10189/why-did-venus-not-lose-its-atmosphere-without-magnetic-field

    --
    In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they're different. (Yogi Berra & A. Einstein)
  36. Metric system by stud9920 · · Score: 1

    Let's not got to Venus. Do we really need to add a fourth country to the list of those who can't switch to bloody medieval measurement units?

  37. Re: But unplanned missions to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    War of the aspies

  38. Re: But unplanned missions to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it really a war if one side already declared that they lost?

  39. I hope it's a Night Flight to Venus by Lynchenstein · · Score: 3, Funny

    Gawd I'm old.

  40. Re: But unplanned missions to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Indeed. WWII was not a war, because Germany surrendered.

  41. Re:Some mystery as to why Venus has a thick atmosp by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    More ikely the issue with Mars is that it's only about 1/10 the mass of Earth (0.1075 from my notebook) so it's just a lot easier for the atmosphere to get ablated. Yes, the lack of magnetic field is a component of Mars' atmospheric loss, but not the main one.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  42. Re: But unplanned missions to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey you obese dumpling-shaped failure, YOU LOST!

  43. Re: But unplanned missions to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I missed Anonymous Cashews too."

    Missed, Chris? You shooting at random people again? Especially a 30 year old girl from NYC! Sad.

  44. Re: But unplanned missions to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Random people whom you accused of being Chris: Anonymous Cashews, Joe_dragon, Datavirue, APK, CaptainDork, and The Original CDR. Did I miss anyone?

  45. Re: But unplanned missions to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I accuse you of being a massive failure, Chris! So much for "reinventing" yourself. BTW, when's "Unemployable" coming out? 2019? 2020? 2032?

  46. Re: But unplanned missions to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Speaking of massive failure, how long will you continue to troll creimer by yourself? 2019? 2020? 2032?

  47. Re: But unplanned missions to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even if you get 960 more subscribers (which won't happen), you won't get press passes to Worldcon or whatever the fuck. Just pay $60 like a normal person.

  48. Re: But unplanned missions to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing Chris does is normal. Completely Hilarious Ridiculous Internet Scourge!