Author Topic: Astronaut Scott Kelly on the devastating effects of a year in space  (Read 4619 times)

Offline blasphemer

  • Member
  • Posts: 90
  • Slovakia
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 129
Quote
NASA astronaut Scott Kelly spent a year in space. His recollections of this unprecedented test of human endurance, and the physical toll it took, raise questions about the likelihood of future travel to Mars.

http://www.theage.com.au/good-weekend/astronaut-scott-kelly-on-the-devastating-effects-of-a-year-in-space-20170922-gyn9iw.html

Edited extract from Endurance: A Year in Space, A Lifetime of Discovery by Scott Kelly (Doubleday, $35), published on October 19.




Article paints a pretty bad picture about the effects of long term microgravity on people. May not be a showstopper for short Mars missions but I am growing increasingly convinced that a true colonization will simply require natural gravity. Actual colonies with people living on them located on rotating space stations, Moon/Mars/asteroids for industry/science only. Thoughts?
« Last Edit: 10/07/2017 07:05 PM by blasphemer »

Online SweetWater

  • Member
  • Posts: 47
  • Wisconsin, USA
  • Liked: 28
  • Likes Given: 9
Thanks to research like that done by Scott Kelly and other astronauts, we have a pretty good idea of the effects of microgravity on the human body. We also have a pretty good idea of the kind of exercise and drug regimen needed to mitigate the effects of microgravity on bone density and muscle mass in humans. That's not to say those problems have been solved, or that there aren't other issues we are still working through (immune system issues, radiation exposure, vision issues, etc.), but we have a good idea of the challenges faced and are working on ways to resolve them.

One thing that we don't really know - and which, as far as I know, we are just starting to seriously research - is the effects of fractional gravity on humans and other animals. We don't know if the 1/6 gravity of the moon is enough to limit negative effects on the human body, if it is basically the same as being in microgravity, or if  the effects are somewhere between staying in 1g and being in microgravity. Ditto for the 1/3 gravity of Mars.

Dr. Thomas Lang, who works for the University of California, San Francisco, has spent a lot of time studying microgravity and radiation effects on humans and other animals. He was interviewed on the Main Engine Cut Off back in June, and presented a lot of interesting information on this topic. You can find the episode linked here  https://mainenginecutoff.com/podcast/49 , and it is well worth a listen.

Offline eric z

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 254
  • Liked: 124
  • Likes Given: 341
 IIRC, Wasn't a JAXA-provided centrifuge part of the plan for ISS? Think of how handy that would be for these kind of studies. I never understood why you spend $100 billion, and don't run this thing 2 or 3 shifts? Don't add the extra stuff that brings in more science... I know, Money, resources, blah-blah woof-woof... Now that we have commercial cargo coming and going, and hopefully soon crew, extend to 2028 and add a inflatable living module and wring all we can out of this thing. I love ISS, but the term "Penny-Wise and Pound-Foolish" comes to mind. ::)
 PS: My wife just asked me why didn't they keep the capability to run around the inside of the hull like they did in "2001"; I mumbled something about...
« Last Edit: 10/07/2017 06:53 PM by eric z »

Offline TakeOff

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 361
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 97
JAXA developed and built that centrifuge module for the ISS. But it is in a museum in Japan now. The ISS is supposed to be a micro gravity lab, they don't want anything that shakes it. So I wonder why they developed this unused centrifuge. Just wasting money for nothing, as is so very common in space programs. Most of it is just meaningless waste for nothing. Pure corruption, with a lot of incompetence and lack of leadership added. I do understand why the tax paying public in general is very skeptic against space flight. it just wastes money and never gets anywhere.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifuge_Accommodations_Module
« Last Edit: 10/07/2017 10:21 PM by Chris Bergin »

Offline eric z

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 254
  • Liked: 124
  • Likes Given: 341
 I'm sure Jim or some of the "Freedom" program vets could go into this in detail but I'm pretty sure a separate "free-flyer" module for the superduperdelicate micro gravity experiments was part of the original plan/ideas being proposed back in that endless, endless decade of the 80s [ the one where I fell asleep and woke up to a world of expensive coffee, tattooed-people, Dick-Tracy Phones and disappearing record stores].

Offline john smith 19

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6401
  • Everyplaceelse
  • Liked: 870
  • Likes Given: 5496
Fora  perspective on this here is Dr James Logan of NASA pointing out some of the hazards of life on Mars

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40464.msg1546539#new

Gravity is an issue. And some of the changes (despite exercise regimes) are irreparable.

Note that a trip to Mars should be in the 90-180 day range.  However if a viable arrangement comes up every 26 months unless everyone spends most of that time on the ground (perhaps with a watch rotating back to orbit?) they will face these issues.

Unless of course 1/3g is not enough to reset the bodies systems back to normal.  :(

[EDIT incidentally the 2016 presentation said Mars entry would be in the 6-8g range, while Earth return reentry more like 2-3g.

Without any kind of on ship artificial gravity this suggests everyone will need to spend a fair amount of time in the gym, as I'm presuming everyone will spend some time on Mars.  ]
« Last Edit: 10/09/2017 05:35 PM by john smith 19 »
"Solids are a branch of fireworks, not rocketry. :-) :-) ", Henry Spencer 1/28/11  Averse to bold? You must be in marketing."It's all in the sequencing" K. Mattingly.  STS-Keeping most of the stakeholders happy most of the time.
So you're going to Mars to seek a better life. What does that mean to you? Always spot a fanbois by how they react to their idols failures.

Offline catdlr

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4801
  • Marina del Rey, California, USA
  • Liked: 1549
  • Likes Given: 1009
Beyond A Year in Space: Official Trailer

US PBS Stations:

Airing: 11/15/2017 | 0:00:30 | Promotion
Beyond A Year in Space picks up where A Year in Space left off: Scott Kelly’s last day in space and return to Earth. The special also introduces viewers to the next generation of astronauts training to leave Earth’s orbit and travel into deep space. Part 2 will premiere November 2017. Join the conversation #BeyondYearinSpacePBS

WATCH A YEAR IN SPACE
Wed, Nov 15 @ 8:00 PM | Year In Space
Thu, Nov 16 @ 2:30 AM | Year In Space
Sun, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM | Year In Space

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugl8q8btMAs?t=001

Tony De La Rosa

Offline Hog

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1123
  • Woodstock
  • Liked: 270
  • Likes Given: 598
Beyond A Year in Space: Official Trailer

US PBS Stations:

Airing: 11/15/2017 | 0:00:30 | Promotion
Beyond A Year in Space picks up where A Year in Space left off: Scott Kelly’s last day in space and return to Earth. The special also introduces viewers to the next generation of astronauts training to leave Earth’s orbit and travel into deep space. Part 2 will premiere November 2017. Join the conversation #BeyondYearinSpacePBS

WATCH A YEAR IN SPACE
Wed, Nov 15 @ 8:00 PM | Year In Space
Thu, Nov 16 @ 2:30 AM | Year In Space
Sun, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM | Year In Space

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugl8q8btMAs?t=001



"A Year in Space" is playing right now(0400hrs EST), to be followed at 0500hrs EST by, Beyond a Year in Space on Canadian PBS stations.
Paul

Offline tyrred

  • Member
  • Posts: 94
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 53
  • Likes Given: 237
I haven't had the pleasure of reading the book yet. Just wondering if the thread title is justified, as Scott does not seem to be devastated at this point.

Perhaps debilitating would be better description?
« Last Edit: 11/16/2017 08:45 AM by tyrred »

Offline Ronpur50

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1954
  • Brandon, FL
  • Liked: 775
  • Likes Given: 1537
It may take a few years to find out if it is "devastating"...as in cancer or how bad his eyes are damaged. 

Offline muomega0

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 858
  • Liked: 64
  • Likes Given: 1
It may take a few years to find out if it is "devastating"...as in cancer or how bad his eyes are damaged.
As pointed out in "Astronaut Scott Kelly on the devastating effects of a year in space", a normal mission to ISS lasts five to six months, so scientists have a good deal of data about what happens to the human body in space for that length of time.  Continue R&D to extend the duration of course.

The 'solution' to begin beyond Earth/Lunar orbits is trip times of ~3 months 'to Mars' then either artificial gravity if one is to avoid gravity wells to save costs initially or the perhaps the 1/3 rd gravity of Mars-no 1/6th is not adequate.

The logical path forward is to preposition supplies to lighten the mass on the crew transfer stage (F=ma), which suggests that HSF requires two types of tugs:  1) fast and 2) efficient, likely chemical and electric propulsion, which need demonstrated reliability (Aldrin cycler), with the entire architecture based on 'reuse' as stated in the 2004 VSE without its 3, no 4 flaws introduced by politics.  An electric tug from Earth to lunar is not essential.

A variable gravity facility can be tested and demonstrated at L2 along with the Gateway 'Voyager' along with the GCR protection (L2 provide the proper environment and allows much of the delta V to be recaptured on the journey beyond lunar).   Once demonstrated, it can be transferred (or upgraded) 'to Mars' to allow Exploration of Mars and beyond, acting as a safe haven to surface operations or asteroid ISRU, etc, the exact opposite of a 'Death Star', but with many of the same functions.

The Gateway Voyager can be used as lunar safe haven but its not its real purpose, and  requires three things:
 1- a thorough asteroid survey to find thousands of nearby bodies suitable for astronauts to visit;
 2- extending flight duration and distance capability to ever-increasing ranges out to Mars;
 3- developing better robotic vehicles and tools to enable astronauts to explore an asteroid
     regardless of its size, shape or spin.

NASA has known this economical concept for a long time, but simply cannot shed the wrong architecture to make it happen, as 'mooning' is 'dictated'.

Having multiple LVs including IPs provides redundancy and long term sustainability and launching dirt cheap propellant with common configurations allows for future enhancements to not get stuck with basically the same LVs for decades because of certification.  It lowers launch costs and shifts $ to very challenging work we do not know how to do yet or fit within the budget distribution, although risks can be taken to achieve flags n footprints.

Find Asteriods to get to Mars  8)

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11053
  • Liked: 2505
  • Likes Given: 1
NASA has known this economical concept for a long time

Yeah, yeah, they're wrong and you're right. It's simple and easy and all they have to do is design a giant spinning spacecraft, but they're too dumb to recognize that.





Offline ncb1397

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 759
  • Liked: 326
  • Likes Given: 3
Scott Kelly is fine. For Mars durations, send people in their 20s or 30s, not 50s.

Online MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3890
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 802
  • Likes Given: 1508
If manned missions beyond Mars occur in future, I imagine that some sort of artificial gravity should become truly necessary.
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline ras391

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 196
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 6
Do we know if NASA and Russia are planning a new long duration mission?

Offline Blackstar

  • Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11053
  • Liked: 2505
  • Likes Given: 1
Scott Kelly is fine. For Mars durations, send people in their 20s or 30s, not 50s.

20s is too young, not enough training or experience or maturity. 30s is borderline. 40s is the right age.

However, the radiation standards actually work in the opposite direction due to statistics--older people have fewer years to live, which lowers their statistical likelihood of getting cancer.

Offline zubenelgenubi

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1263
  • Arc to Arcturus, then Spike to Spica
  • Commonwealth of Virginia
  • Liked: 280
  • Likes Given: 806
Do we know if NASA and Russia are planning a new long duration mission?

How is Peggy Whitson faring after her return from ISS last September?  Her long-duration mission was over 9 months long.
Support your local planetarium!

Offline Jorge

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6179
  • Liked: 27
  • Likes Given: 0
<delurk>
1) Scott Kelly's spaceflight is tied for fifth place for longest duration, with his crewmate Mikhail Kornienko. Four Russians have previously made longer spaceflights, between 1987 and 1998. They are all still alive. However "devastating" the effects of a year-long LEO spaceflight are, they apparently aren't bad enough to kill you within 20-30 years. Beyond-LEO radiation may be another story, but that's not what this article was about.
2) ISS centrifuge was designed for small mammals at most, not humans. Would have been only of indirect use to the human research program, and would have been expensive to get it to work without excessive vibration loads on the rest of ISS. Cancellation was the right call, IMO.
<lurk>
« Last Edit: 11/20/2017 11:34 PM by Jorge »
JRF

Online MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3890
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 802
  • Likes Given: 1508
Peggy Whitson should be called 'The Iron Lady' now that Maggie Thatcher has been gone a few years ;)  With probably a bit more reason, too. She already has the nickname 'Astronaut Ninja'.
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5155
  • Liked: 975
  • Likes Given: 345
2) ISS centrifuge was designed for small mammals at most, not humans. Would have been only of indirect use to the human research program, and would have been expensive to get it to work without excessive vibration loads on the rest of ISS. Cancellation was the right call, IMO.
<lurk>

I still don't get why there aren't ISS co-orbiting experiments. There is enough logistical capacity to support such.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline mike robel

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2082
  • Merritt Island, FL
  • Liked: 169
  • Likes Given: 35
Possibly the real reason:  Money.

A conspiratorial reason:  The Zero-G scientists don't want to research artificial gravity because it will put them all out of jobs.  :)

Offline Jorge

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6179
  • Liked: 27
  • Likes Given: 0
Possibly the real reason:  Money.

It's always about the money, even when it's "not about the money." Especially when it's "not about the money."
JRF

Offline vapour_nudge

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 436
  • Australia
  • Liked: 175
  • Likes Given: 291
<delurk>
1) Scott Kelly's spaceflight is tied for fifth place for longest duration, with his crewmate Mikhail Kornienko. Four Russians have previously made longer spaceflights, between 1987 and 1998. They are all still alive. However "devastating" the effects of a year-long LEO spaceflight are, they apparently aren't bad enough to kill you within 20-30 years. Beyond-LEO radiation may be another story, but that's not what this article was about.
2) ISS centrifuge was designed for small mammals at most, not humans. Would have been only of indirect use to the human research program, and would have been expensive to get it to work without excessive vibration loads on the rest of ISS. Cancellation was the right call, IMO.
<lurk>
Should the thread title be modified to "'Astronaut Scott Kelly on the devastating effects of 11 months & 3 days in space" ? 😉
« Last Edit: 11/21/2017 06:37 AM by vapour_nudge »

Offline ncb1397

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 759
  • Liked: 326
  • Likes Given: 3
Do we know if NASA and Russia are planning a new long duration mission?

Not until Commercial Crew vehicles show up...

Quote
HOUSTON—There is a strong desire within NASA’s human research community to launch more U.S. astronauts on “one-year” International Space Station missions. But more of the potentially record-setting flights—intended to reveal physical and psychological challenges associated with the agency’s human deep space exploration aspirations—are not planned until commercial crew operations are ...
http://aviationweek.com/space/more-yearlong-iss-missions-await-nasa-commercial-crew-ops

Article doesn't go into much detail about why this is the case. But you can guess that NASA doesn't want long duration crew members return to earth to be delayed in an uncontrolled manner by glitches with brand new vehicles.
« Last Edit: 12/12/2017 09:23 PM by ncb1397 »

Online deruch

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1714
  • California
  • Liked: 1286
  • Likes Given: 1883
With Cygnus' recent use for experiments post-ISS (Saffire) and the recent testing with Tangolab while berthed to station, it might be possible to send a Cygnus up fitted out with an experimental centrifuge apparatus inside.  It could berth to the station, have the astronauts prepare the experiment, then be unberthed and run the centrifuge as a free flying lab for a week or more.  Then, it could reberth to the station for experiment resets and maintenance.  Some shortish periods of microgravity while attached to station could possibly be a benefit as it would likely be a better model for any actual expected use of artificial gravity for humans.  But the capability to berth/unberth/reberth would be a major advantage as it would ensure adjustments and modifications were possible.  If the centrifuge was either small enough to fit through the Cygnus's hatch or able to be disassembled, then the whole contraption could be off loaded onto the station for storage between experiment runs on different Cygnus vehicles.  Cygnus could still be useful as a cargo delivery system (though maybe less lifting capability to allow enough propellant for multiple free flyer runs) with the apparatus being onloaded only once it was empty, etc.  The only thing the station would lose in that case would be the trash storage space of an empty Cygnus.
Shouldn't reality posts be in "Advanced concepts"?  --Nomadd

Tags: