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 NASA describes the project as "no longer active," though adding that manned missions to the atmosphere of Venus are possible "with advances in technology and further refinement of the concept."

Comments

Waste of resources...

[sarren1901]

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.

Seriously?

[CaptainDork]

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.

Fahrenheit on Venus?

[zmooc]

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.

Venus colonies

[XXongo]

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

Yes, seriously

[Geoffrey.landis]

" 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!

Re:Yes, seriously

[Rei]

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.

Re:Not TV friendly

[Rei]

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).

I hope it's a Night Flight to Venus

[Lynchenstein]

Gawd I'm old.