1. Is it possible within the timeframe of Mars One to create a spacecraft and a habitat with proper shielding?
I can imagine some kind of active magnetic generator on the base shielding the settlers for work just outside their doors. If they are not shielded for radiation while they work on the base, expansion or even outside activity becomes impossible. They cannot simply rely on the shielding of their suits.
2. What will the settlers do if or when they develop cancer? Death will not be painless. Will there be any form of cancer medication on board? Pain relief?
Quote from: michaelwy on 05/28/2013 01:57 am1. Is it possible within the timeframe of Mars One to create a spacecraft and a habitat with proper shielding?Depends what you mean by "proper". These problems will be solved (by Paragon) for the Inspiration Mars mission. I expect they'll have a column of water for shielding during solar storms. There's just about nothing you can do about galactic cosmic radiation.The radiation exposure on Mars isn't that bad, and most time will be spent indoors, shielded by a layer of dirt.Yes. When they die will not be as important to them as where, otherwise they wouldn't go.
NASA calculates the amount of radiation an astronaut is allowed to experience while on the space station. Isn't it possible to calculate how much radiation a trip to Mars will entail?
Then you could calculate the shielding needed, and balance that against the length of time before cancer develops.
Also, i do not see why robots can't simply build a finished base on mars before any astronauts arrive. Is there any need for any astronaut BEFORE the settlement is ready. That way the quality of life of the settlers will be better.
Because robots can't do what they do in the movies.
Actually, i can not see why. If they can build something like Curiosity, then they can surely build a less advanced construction machine to level out a site or even dig out an underground tunnel for the base?
The modules could land in an excavated area and the machine place the soil on top, and then you have an undergound base.
Personally, i don't see Mars One even getting off the ground. The cost is simply too high, even if the market it as perverse reality show based on a suicide mission.
Please fix your quotes.Quote from: michaelwy on 05/28/2013 02:46 amActually, i can not see why. If they can build something like Curiosity, then they can surely build a less advanced construction machine to level out a site or even dig out an underground tunnel for the base?Curiosity is not comparable to those tasks, requires a large ground team of PhDs to run, and takes months to do anything.QuoteThe modules could land in an excavated area and the machine place the soil on top, and then you have an undergound base.Oh, you're not aware that they're planning to have rovers which prepare the site and put all the modules in place, etc.QuotePersonally, i don't see Mars One even getting off the ground. The cost is simply too high, even if the market it as perverse reality show based on a suicide mission. I'm more interested in people who are trying to make the future than predict it.
Do you have any idea about what one hopes to achieve with Mars One? What sort of progress is it to have ten or twenty people die horrible deaths on live television?
The Mars One team should postpone the mission until the technical issues have been solved. Instead, they should collect money to have them solved.
Clearly they could use parts of NASAs SLS.
The rest they could spend a few decades trying to solve. Instead they want to rush off within a decade.
I am not sure if there is anything interesting to do on Mars? Perhaps it would be better to create a new, movable rotating space station. Then to follow Bush's plan to settle on the moon.
Quote from: michaelwy on 05/28/2013 03:07 amDo you have any idea about what one hopes to achieve with Mars One? What sort of progress is it to have ten or twenty people die horrible deaths on live television? What do you think they're doing?QuoteClearly they could use parts of NASAs SLS. How?QuoteThe rest they could spend a few decades trying to solve. Instead they want to rush off within a decade. The companies they're contracting (and planning to contract) say they can go in a decade. If they can't the schedule will slip, which won't be uncommon.QuoteI am not sure if there is anything interesting to do on Mars? Perhaps it would be better to create a new, movable rotating space station. Then to follow Bush's plan to settle on the moon. Why don't you start your own foundation to do that and go raise money?
They could use the SLS rocket to ship stuff to mars. They could perhaps use the Orion spacecraft connected to some new living quarters for the trip to mars.
I am no authority on space missions. I don't think anyone would listen to me if i were to start a foundation
However, i cannot see what humans on mars achieve that we cannot achieve with robots.
A few years back, NASA's Technology Assessments Team created a model of The Nautilus spacecraft with a centrifuge for artificial gravity and large Bigelow modules for storage of goods. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nautilus-X) It also featured a Canada arm. If this ship was built, explorer missions could be carried out to other regions of the solar system. It could take men to Mars and back again (no death), but also perhaps to asteroids or to the outer moons of Jupiter. In the latter event shielding would really have to strong. To develop shielded gravity simulation in space should be the first priority NASA.
Quote from: michaelwy on 05/28/2013 03:29 amThey could use the SLS rocket to ship stuff to mars. They could perhaps use the Orion spacecraft connected to some new living quarters for the trip to mars. QuoteA few years back, NASA's Technology Assessments Team created a model of The Nautilus spacecraft with a centrifuge for artificial gravity and large Bigelow modules for storage of goods. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nautilus-X) It also featured a Canada arm. If this ship was built, explorer missions could be carried out to other regions of the solar system. It could take men to Mars and back again (no death), but also perhaps to asteroids or to the outer moons of Jupiter. In the latter event shielding would really have to strong. To develop shielded gravity simulation in space should be the first priority NASA. Great, when NASA does that, let us know. Until then, it's totally irrelevant to what others are actually doing.
A few years back, NASA's Technology Assessments Team created a model of The Nautilus spacecraft with a centrifuge for artificial gravity and large Bigelow modules for storage of goods. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nautilus-X) It also featured a Canada arm. If this ship was built, explorer missions could be carried out to other regions of the solar system. It could take men to Mars and back again (no death), but also perhaps to asteroids or to the outer moons of Jupiter. In the latter event shielding would really have to strong. To develop shielded gravity simulation in space should be the first priority NASA. Great, when NASA does that, let us know. Until then, it's totally irrelevant to what others are actually doing.
Just one final question. I think we have had an interesting discussion.
Do you know if the Mars One group is actually doing anything? Do they actually have money? If so, how much? Are there scientists building stuff on the order of this group?
Unless the group has a billion dollars right now, they cannot hope to develop any of the hardware they need.
Zubrin stated recently (forgot which Youtube video conference I was watching) that statistically the dosage received on a typical Mars trek would cause less risk of cancer than smoking. (!) Would love to hear an official rebuttal to that. Or proof on either side. Certainly makes the space radiation threat seem trivial.
Quote from: CriX on 05/28/2013 04:36 amZubrin stated recently (forgot which Youtube video conference I was watching) that statistically the dosage received on a typical Mars trek would cause less risk of cancer than smoking. (!) Would love to hear an official rebuttal to that. Or proof on either side. Certainly makes the space radiation threat seem trivial.You should read this thread on the topic.http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=30480.0My opinion is that the radiation risk is wildly overestimated based on old assumptions that are not supported by recent research. But those old assumptions are still the official state of things and so are used by NASA and Zubrin.
Though I think the microgravity affects are more serious problem with long trip times to Mars.
Quote from: gbaikie on 05/28/2013 07:07 amThough I think the microgravity affects are more serious problem with long trip times to Mars. Robotbeat convinced me of this one.. the drugs and exercise regime are sufficient for the trip to Mars.
The chances that humans will have long term effects from living in Mars gravity are pretty high, but if you want to colonize Mars, that's something you're going to have to l live with anyway.
Polypropylene and Polyethylene materials can be used to make lightweight radiation shielding that is effective even against cosmic radiation. Also a radiation shielded habitat for the colonists could be launched and land on Mars prior to their arrival. TransHab has a very good design for a lightweight inflatable space habitat. Throw some Martian soil over it keep it from blowing away and provide additional radiation protection and I think your astronauts would be alright as long as they don't stay out on the surface to long. Mars has a magnetic field and atmosphere albeit tenuous and is further away from the Sun so I think solar flares won't be a problem once there, cosmic radiation is even a problem here on Earth so you will probably want to send radiation detectors.
