Author Topic: Astronaut Scott Kelly on the devastating effects of a year in space  (Read 4626 times)

Offline mike robel

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2084
  • 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."

Offline vapour_nudge

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 436
  • Australia
  • Liked: 175
  • Likes Given: 291
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.
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...

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 ...

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: 1715
  • California
  • Liked: 1286
  • Likes Given: 1895
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