Remember, earlier versions of BFS were suppose to carry 100 people. Maybe that's down to a lower number, say 70. A crew of 12 will still leave room for cargo. There's also 2 cargo Starships landing the previous synod, 2 more cargo Starships, and the two crew Starships. There will be plenty of cargo for 12 to 24 crew to work with.
Quote from: RonM on 01/01/2019 01:06 amRemember, earlier versions of BFS were suppose to carry 100 people. Maybe that's down to a lower number, say 70. A crew of 12 will still leave room for cargo. There's also 2 cargo Starships landing the previous synod, 2 more cargo Starships, and the two crew Starships. There will be plenty of cargo for 12 to 24 crew to work with.keep in mind, thats 100 people with 4 months of supplies for a fast transit and places waiting for them on the other side. Thats different than a transit+synod+saftey margin in supplies, and basic "get out the door" exploration options. (more advanced exploration tools can be in a presupply rocket.
Daily requirements for a person are 0.84 kg oxygen, 1.77 kg dried food, and about 4 kg water. Water recovery on ISS is 70% efficient, so that drops the new daily water down to 1.2 kg. so, we're looking at 3.81 kg per person. Let's round that up to 4 kg per day per person to cover items such as CO2 scrubbers.At 4 kg per person, 1000 kg (metric tonne) can support a person for 250 days. A Earth-Mars synod is 26 months and let's say the flight to Mars is 4 months and the flight back is 6 months. That's 36 months or 1080 days. So, for the entire trip, each person will require 4.32 tonnes of supplies. Throw in the mass of the person and some personal baggage and we get 5 tonnes.Crewperson, baggage, and life support supplies at 5 tonnes for the whole trip. So, a 12 person crew will take 60 tonnes on a ship that can carry over 100 tonnes.
Primary Expertise Backup1 MD 2 Electronics Systems Engr Mech Sys 3 Mech Systems Engr ECLSS 4 Geologist Mining Engr 5 Geologist Mining Engr #2 6 ECLSS Specialist EMT 7 Roboticist/Mechanic Mech Sys 8 Chemist Soils & In Situ propellant 9 Roboticist/Mechanic #2 10 Chemist Soils & In Situ #2 11 Electronics Systems Engr #2 12 Mech Systems Engr #2 Need to support the people (MD & EMT), the ship, the equipment, and mine water for propellant manufacturing
Quote from: rakaydos on 01/01/2019 10:07 amQuote from: RonM on 01/01/2019 01:06 amRemember, earlier versions of BFS were suppose to carry 100 people. Maybe that's down to a lower number, say 70. A crew of 12 will still leave room for cargo. There's also 2 cargo Starships landing the previous synod, 2 more cargo Starships, and the two crew Starships. There will be plenty of cargo for 12 to 24 crew to work with.keep in mind, thats 100 people with 4 months of supplies for a fast transit and places waiting for them on the other side. Thats different than a transit+synod+saftey margin in supplies, and basic "get out the door" exploration options. (more advanced exploration tools can be in a presupply rocket.Daily requirements for a person are 0.84 kg oxygen, 1.77 kg dried food, and about 4 kg water. Water recovery on ISS is 70% efficient, so that drops the new daily water down to 1.2 kg. so, we're looking at 3.81 kg per person. Let's round that up to 4 kg per day per person to cover items such as CO2 scrubbers.At 4 kg per person, 1000 kg (metric tonne) can support a person for 250 days. A Earth-Mars synod is 26 months and let's say the flight to Mars is 4 months and the flight back is 6 months. That's 36 months or 1080 days. So, for the entire trip, each person will require 4.32 tonnes of supplies. Throw in the mass of the person and some personal baggage and we get 5 tonnes.Crewperson, baggage, and life support supplies at 5 tonnes for the whole trip. So, a 12 person crew will take 60 tonnes on a ship that can carry over 100 tonnes.
Crewperson, baggage, and life support supplies at 5 tonnes for the whole trip. So, a 12 person crew will take 60 tonnes on a ship that can carry over 100 tonnes.
Quote from: RonM on 01/01/2019 03:35 pmCrewperson, baggage, and life support supplies at 5 tonnes for the whole trip. So, a 12 person crew will take 60 tonnes on a ship that can carry over 100 tonnes.A couple points. This discounts pre-positioned tonnage from the previous synod's uncrewed landings. And it doesn't address the capacity of the sortie that is landing. Although certainly there's an element of you want to know you have enough to make it for unexpected contingencies, I suspect there will be some tradeoffs. And you'll know some things about what you can depend on at Mars.I'm not sure if the Mission Profile by synod changed in 2018 but recall 2017's.I don't think 12 is as limiting as the 60 of 100 tonnes number implies.
Quote from: philw1776 on 01/01/2019 03:48 pm Primary Expertise Backup1 MD 2 Electronics Systems Engr Mech Sys 3 Mech Systems Engr ECLSS 4 Geologist Mining Engr 5 Geologist Mining Engr #2 6 ECLSS Specialist EMT 7 Roboticist/Mechanic Mech Sys 8 Chemist Soils & In Situ propellant 9 Roboticist/Mechanic #2 10 Chemist Soils & In Situ #2 11 Electronics Systems Engr #2 12 Mech Systems Engr #2 Need to support the people (MD & EMT), the ship, the equipment, and mine water for propellant manufacturingThat leaves 4 unused secondary or backup slots available. One of those slots would presumably be for Captain. I would recommend at least one more medical backup slot as well. The other two slots? Perhaps one secondary slot would be for a journalist or historian position, to document the expedition? There would be video or other records regardless, but somebody on board who knows what records would be most useful to future historians would be invaluable. The final secondary slot? I don't know, maybe a chef (or an artist, a la DearMoon)?
Every time I see one of these lists I notice that there's generally an MD included as a primary slot, usually (although not always) with no secondary slot listed for that position. This always strikes me as unnecessary, even a little silly; I've given a fair bit of thought to the medical needs of this kind of mission and frankly there's not going to be a lot of benefit to a physician over, say, a couple of paramedics (if there's only one, that will be the one person who gets sick or injured!). There are very few things (I can't actually think of any offhand) where having a doc is going to make a difference compared to a paramedic, given that there will be radio consultation with medical support back on the ground with ~1hr of lag time and most paramedics I know are perfectly capable of the first hour of treatment for any illness or injury that's going to be survivable at all given the circumstances - after all, there's no operating room to try to get an unstable trauma into within the golden hour! I'd argue that the medical support should consist of every member of the crew having fairly advanced first aid training, and at least two having something along the line of paramedic or PA level of training...but that this should be their *secondary* slot and have something more mission critical as their primary slot - or at least if their primary role is medical support, having a strong secondary role (ECLSS support would fit well here).Having said that, you could almost certainly find a physician who could play the tune of ECLSS (or other) engineer as well - I certainly would not have any objection to that being the case, my objection is more to dedicating a slot exclusively to medical support and also specifying that the medical support slot must be specifically a physician rather than more generically "medical support" to give a bit more flexibility. If I were on the crew, I'd rather have a really capable ECLSS engineer who also happens to be a reasonably competent paramedic rather than a really capable physician who also happens to be reasonably competent at ECLSS engineering!Background: I used to be a paramedic before med school, now have been a practicing emergency physician (which is arguably the specialty you'd want if you took a doc along on this kind of mission) for the last eight years. Which means that I'm all too aware of how few serious injuries can be adequately treated by one or two people, as most things that are going to need more than something like a fracture reduction and casting will require the services of a large team of trained people well beyond the resources of an early Mars mission. Minor orthopedic injuries (by "minor" I mean "does not require open surgery"), laceration repairs, etc could all be dealt with quite easily by a paramedic or PA especially since they could get coaching over the radio from Earth; most things beyond that are going to have to be dealt with by patching up as best as possible and hoping that they heal regardless of who is in the medical support role. Sorry about the rant - this is an assumption (that an MD is needed) that's been bugging me for years! [grin]
Any chronic issues can be advised on from Earth, any acute issues must be dealt with there and then by the crew.
As far as crew lists are concerned, I also feel there is a secondary role that is left off.NASA can mandate no sex in space, but at some point, it's going to happen, and if birth control isn't up to date, there will be a new volunteer for a variable gravity pediatric study.How's that for a threat to keep it in your pants for about 3 years?
Quote from: rakaydos on 01/03/2019 03:40 pmAs far as crew lists are concerned, I also feel there is a secondary role that is left off.NASA can mandate no sex in space, but at some point, it's going to happen, and if birth control isn't up to date, there will be a new volunteer for a variable gravity pediatric study.How's that for a threat to keep it in your pants for about 3 years?That won't be a problem as NASA won't be in charge Mr Musk will be.Gasp! x - no wait – it’s a big problem. Would assume Elon will ensure the necessary contingency supplies will be included. No doubt the press will have a field day.
This is far too dangerous an issue for both mother and child medically, as well as for the whole mission in terms of public opinion, let alone of questionable morality.
Quote from: marcon on 01/03/2019 09:56 pmThis is far too dangerous an issue for both mother and child medically, as well as for the whole mission in terms of public opinion, let alone of questionable morality. Any such statement gets me boiling mad. Who do you think you are that you can make such a judgement? Here on earth everybody can have children regardless of any considerations. Why should this be different during a space expedition?Not that I think this should happen on the first expedition and without animal tests. I hope such tests will be made on Starship test flights that evaluate ECLSS, NASA failing to do them on the ISS.
Any such statement gets me boiling mad. Who do you think you are that you can make such a judgement?
What crew would SpaceX send on the first manned mission?My guess: About 10 people* Commander/Pilot/Comms* Pilot/BFS Engineer/Comms* Doctor/Biologist/Cook* Vehicle Engineer/Driver* Chemist/ISRU Engineer* Geologist/Scout/Driver* Geologist/Scout/Driver* Hab Engineer/Builder/Driver* Biologist/Gardener/Cook* ??