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 NASA describes the project as "no longer active," though adding that manned missions to the atmosphere of Venus are possible "with advances in technology and further refinement of the concept."
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."
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.
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.
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?!
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.
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
Automated Submarine/balloon would make sense for doing a mission.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
She seems qualified enough by her first name and could help reaching diversity goals at NASA.
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
" 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
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
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
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
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.
The melting point of lead is 327,5 C.
-- Cheers!
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
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
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.
Shiiiit!
What?
I dropped the keys!
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I thought the same. This isn't real scientific research, if it doesn't use international, metric standards.
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!"
Waiting for AC to call you creimer.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
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.
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/
We haven't messed enough of the universe yet. There's no reason earth should be our only trash can! :D
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)
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?
Gawd I'm old.
Ya, but yu cnt spel gud.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
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"