As long as we are all brainstorming - what about a double (leg) amputee as one of the crew? Reduces the need for consumables and space while maintaining the intellectual and human aspects. Would engage a whole segment of the population that might otherwise not take much notice.Bob_D
1-As long as we are all brainstorming 2-what about a double (leg) amputee as one of the crew? Reduces the need for consumables and space while maintaining the intellectual and human aspects. Would engage a whole segment of the population that might otherwise not take much notice.
Quote from: Dalhousie on 02/23/2013 10:35 amQuote from: rklaehn on 02/23/2013 09:39 am And of course it is a pretty high risk mission.People keep saying this, but why? There is a risk of a life support system breakdown. Then, as you have pointed out, there is the risk of the crew developing psychological problems and doing something stupid. And then of course there is the risk of launch and reentry, and the risk of being hit by a solar flare.
Quote from: rklaehn on 02/23/2013 09:39 am And of course it is a pretty high risk mission.People keep saying this, but why?
And of course it is a pretty high risk mission.
Still safer than many other extreme adventure activities like wingsuit flying though.
Quote from: Dalhousie on 02/23/2013 10:47 amQuote from: DLR on 02/23/2013 10:35 am A one-man mission should be feasible though. Technically, yes, from from a human point of view that would be very challenging. 500 days is much longer than even non-stop solo circumnavigations (typically 10 months or less) or the longest solo stints in the polar regions (none I know of more than 12 months).But a solo circumnavigation is much more stressful. You have to navigate through storms, perform exhausting physical activities, cope with sleep deprivation in time of bad weather etc.In this mission you just have to stay alive, read your emails, and watch over the life support system.
Quote from: DLR on 02/23/2013 10:35 am A one-man mission should be feasible though. Technically, yes, from from a human point of view that would be very challenging. 500 days is much longer than even non-stop solo circumnavigations (typically 10 months or less) or the longest solo stints in the polar regions (none I know of more than 12 months).
A one-man mission should be feasible though.
Because ignoring basic requirments for volume is like ignoring requirements for consumables.
Besides, there is a wide variety of medications available that can help with claustrophobia and other stresses. If you take medication against bone loss, why shouldn't you also take medication against claustrophobia? NASA would probably never allow mood-altering drugs for their astronauts. But why shoudn't a private mission do it if it increases the odds of success?
About the Crew. I may prefer to go alone than with another man. The Bigelow Module would give enough space though for some privacy. The idea of a woman seems appealing. But it should not be a life partner. Few partnerships could survive that challenge.I don't believe a testrun on earth would give good clues for a single person or a two person team. Under the pressure of necessity during the flight the dynamics are totally different.
Quote from: Dalhousie on 02/23/2013 08:22 amQuote from: Zed_Noir on 02/23/2013 03:54 amNot taking into consideration the time & cost to have EVA suit rated for BEO uses. I don't think the ISS EVA suits are rated for BEO.In what aspects does BEO vs LEO matter WRT a space suit?The temperature environment is different with half the sky filled by warm earth in LEO. And the radiation environment in LEO is much more benign than in deep space because you are inside the earth magnetic field. (Not that you can do anything about it with a space suit, anyway)I think current LEO spacesuits would work just fine for short excursions BEO. But for this mission I think there simply is no mass budget for a spacesuit, an airlock and all the assorted hardware associated with EVAs.
Quote from: Zed_Noir on 02/23/2013 03:54 amNot taking into consideration the time & cost to have EVA suit rated for BEO uses. I don't think the ISS EVA suits are rated for BEO.In what aspects does BEO vs LEO matter WRT a space suit?
Not taking into consideration the time & cost to have EVA suit rated for BEO uses. I don't think the ISS EVA suits are rated for BEO.
Quote from: rklaehn on 02/23/2013 08:36 amQuote from: Dalhousie on 02/23/2013 08:22 amQuote from: Zed_Noir on 02/23/2013 03:54 amNot taking into consideration the time & cost to have EVA suit rated for BEO uses. I don't think the ISS EVA suits are rated for BEO.In what aspects does BEO vs LEO matter WRT a space suit?The temperature environment is different with half the sky filled by warm earth in LEO. And the radiation environment in LEO is much more benign than in deep space because you are inside the earth magnetic field. (Not that you can do anything about it with a space suit, anyway)I think current LEO spacesuits would work just fine for short excursions BEO. But for this mission I think there simply is no mass budget for a spacesuit, an airlock and all the assorted hardware associated with EVAs.Just a reminder, but deep-space EVAs similar to the kind we're talking about here have been done before, on at least one of the Apollo missions. It doesn't sound like a good idea to rely on this for consumables, though. Better to extract a small pressurized volume and dock with it ala Apollo, and store your consumables int there.
Oh, I agree it could be done, just doesn't seem as practical to do a dozen or so EVAs when you could just dock with a small module with consumables, something the size of BEAM.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 02/24/2013 05:35 amOh, I agree it could be done, just doesn't seem as practical to do a dozen or so EVAs when you could just dock with a small module with consumables, something the size of BEAM.The BEAM doesn't seem that big and is only a test article anyway. Could Bigelow get a fully man-rated version ready in time for the mission? Seems that a BA-330 would be a much better size, but that's not ready yet either.
Quote from: MATTBLAK on 02/24/2013 06:19 amQuote from: Robotbeat on 02/24/2013 05:35 amOh, I agree it could be done, just doesn't seem as practical to do a dozen or so EVAs when you could just dock with a small module with consumables, something the size of BEAM.The BEAM doesn't seem that big and is only a test article anyway. Could Bigelow get a fully man-rated version ready in time for the mission? Seems that a BA-330 would be a much better size, but that's not ready yet either.I just checked. It is really not very big with 11,5 m³. But that stiil would double the available volume. It would provide some small space for one person to find privacy even fully packed with consumables. And it would clear the space inside Dragon except for the ECLSS equipment. You could also chose something just a little bit bigger, depending on the mass budget.What would be involved in making it manrated? For the scope of this mission basically providing airflow and maintaining the temperature. That the skin is airtight and provides protection against micrometeorites and radiation protection against solar flares, especially when you consider the shielding provided by the consumables is given.Of course something like the BA-330 would be great. But it is out of the scope of this mission.
where is it quoted from?
Er... ...how do we know they're talking about a manned mission? Perhaps it's a demo flight by living creatures there and back again. Ideally, you'd kill off a sample and freeze it every now and then (75 soup-can containers containing shrimp, water, lights... ...freeze 'em hard and fast, one can a week, and do the science after splashdown). Or, just send seeds (animal sperm or plants) and distribute them a la the Moon Trees, one Mars Mouse and a Mars Tree to every school in the US...
Also pretty clear that they need extensive NASA support for the ECLSS system. Dunno how they are going to spin up NASA to do this fast in the midst of a budget crisis. I'd also point out that politically this would be risky for NASA to do, because if NASA provides extensive support, then people are going to start to consider this a NASA mission and if it fails (especially if the life support fails) then NASA will get the blame.