Long manned trips on the surface of the Moon or Mars

[baktothemoon]

I think there's still enough ferrous metals in moon dust to make it magnetic, I remember hearing someplace on nasa.com that they discovered that moondust is attracted to a magnet.

 

[holmec]

Aren't spacesuits mostly cloth and aluminum, both non-ferrous? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[dragon04]

<font color="yellow">What I had in mind was closer to the submersibles used today.</font><br /><br />Ahhh... Gotcha. Still, other than the ability to traverse greater distances, pressurized rovers are limited in their scope and use compared to guys being able to climb halfway up a cliff and investigate that cave they just discovered.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">One area I have considered is cleaning the area between the hatches after docking, water or air would work, but both would be lost. That could be a considerable amount of either pretty quick. Expand that to a mud room and it quickly gets unreasonable.</font><br /><br />Not necessarily. If you have a storage vessel tied to the "mud room" with a filter, the air between the two can be exchanged in depressurization/repressurization cycles to mitigate air loss.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">Then why are they wasting so much time and money on finding life on Mars? I happen to agree with you, but there are a lot more problems then encountering lifeforms.</font><br /><br />I really should have qualified my statement to exposure to dust on the surface or to the penetration levels of cosmic rays and UV rays.<br /><br />But as you say, life is being sought on Mars, and therefore, at some point, potential chemical and/or biological contamination will definitely become an issue.<br /><br />But again, access to such locations might not allow for anything but a suited astronaut crawling 100 yards into a very tight hole not easily traversible by even a small automated device.<br /><br />It's not that the idea of a pressurized vehicle is a bad one, mind you. I'm just concerned about the increased mass, expense, and limitations that might make a Mars Mission's profile unattracted.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"2012.. Year of the Dragon!! Get on the Dragon Wagon!".</em> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

One possibility that I just thought of used the smaller rovers that would go into tight spaces and board the main rover when not needed. You modify them to accommodate a human operator in a pinch. Then I saw a post where someone was suggesting that we just use modified Segways. I realized that a few Segways would fit on the outside of the main rover. You could use them for short trips away from the main rover or emergencies. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Why not just modify some Segways and use that at first?<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />For what? Servicing as the title of this branch implies? Segways might make good emergency vehicles as well as vehicles for short trips. But for longer trips, you still need something that is not limited by the endurance of your suit. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[holmec]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>But for longer trips, you still need something that is not limited by the endurance of your suit. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Now this brings up an idea. How far can you go with a suit? Retorical question now. But why not try to augment the length of time you can be in a suit by adding equipment like a shelter. On Earth a hiker carries equipment with him to keep him comfortable and alive in rain, storms, nights. We may be able to find ways to do the same for the astronaut on the moon. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

At least some more protection than what the suits would provide would help. I don't think the crews would tolerate wearing the suits inside the rover for long -- even with the air systems turned set to ventilate only. (This came up in a newer thread.) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[rfoshaug]

Imagine a lander with wheels. Big all-terrain wheels or even tracks. These wheels are powered by solar arrays on the lander and able to drive at, say, 1 kilometer per hour.<br /><br />While the crew sleeps, the lander slowly crawls, and when they wake up, they're 8 kilometers from where they were before sleep, ready to explore a new scenery. Of course the lander could drive when astronauts are awake too, maybe even partially during EVA's, as they would set up experiments and do geology and other stuff along the path of the slowly moving rover/lander.<br /><br />During a 14-day stay on the surface, if the lander moves at 1 kph and for 16 hours each day, they would be 224 kilometers away from their original landing site!<br /><br />At the end of the mission, there's no need to drive back to the lander, since the lander and rover are the same and the ascent stage is already there.<br /><br />Of course they could also carry smaller unpressurized rovers with them for excursions away from where the lander is going to drive. Just remember to park them back on the lander's cargo compartment at the end of the EVA, or they will be quite far away the next day.<br /><br />Would that be possible? I don't know. It would certainly be cool. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff9900">----------------------------------</font></p><p><font color="#ff9900">My minds have many opinions</font></p> </div>

 

[dragon04]

I think a more simple, cost-effective and lower-mass solution is an unpressurized, non-enclosed rover with detatchable air tanks. <br /><br />Astronauts could just hook up to them via umbilical for the ride to their destination, detach and go on suit air while they're going about their business, and then go back on the bottle system for the ride back. Composite air tanks weigh next to nothing.<br /><br />It's by no means glamorous, but it would be effective. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"2012.. Year of the Dragon!! Get on the Dragon Wagon!".</em> </div>

 

[no_way]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>How far can you go with a suit?<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />Just so far as to get back into radiation shelter at the first notice of solar flare. Which isnt very far.

 

[holmec]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Just so far as to get back into radiation shelter at the first notice of solar flare. Which isnt very far.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Eight minutes, I believe. That should be enough time to pop up a tent like shelter. <br /><br />I wonder if anyone came up with a way to power a magnetic field by radiation. So that a radiation shield could be developed and act like a magnetic break, using the energy its countering. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[no_way]

i dont think any remotely feasible "tent like shelter" will protect anyones ass from serious proton storm like this<br /><br />you have to keep in mind that LEO is relatively shielded environment thanks to van Allen belts, thus ISS is relatively safe. <br />And in ye old times, when humans still went beyond van Allen belts, we simply got lucky. <br /><br />Read on the potential effects here:<br />http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/27jan_solarflares.htm<br />

 

[JonClarke]

Very nice article. Interesting to see how much shielding the basic structure of a spacecraft can supply. Assuming a Mars base would provide the same structural protection as the shuttle, 10 g/cm2, we can add another 6 from the atmosphere. A shelter area would need to add another 4 g/cm2 to bring it to the proposed 20 g/cm3. This would be provided by an internal airlock. Stratiegic placing of water tanks or even bladders could easly add another 10 g/cm2.<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[solarspot]

Regarding limits of 'space suits' and how much could be done using them, this article from just over a decade ago may or may not be of interest:<br />http://www.asi.org/adb/06/09/03/02/091/moon-rover.html<br /><br /><br />

 

[holmec]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>i dont think any remotely feasible "tent like shelter" will protect anyone<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />I got an idea.<br /><br />How about a seperate unpressurized solar storm shelter. Some structure that astronauts can walk into with space suits and way out the solar strom. Have extra oxygen and provisions so they don't die while they wait.<br /><br />Hopefully such a structure would not be too difficult to make or deploy to the lunar surface. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[j05h]

<i>> I think a more simple, cost-effective and lower-mass solution is an unpressurized, non-enclosed rover with detatchable air tanks.<br />It's by no means glamorous, but it would be effective.</i><br /><br />Plug-in air/power makes sense for any unpressurized rover, whether 1-seat "ATV" or multi-seat. A rover could function like a Jeep, carrying 4 crew or 2 and gear. It doesn't rule out much larger pressurized rovers. <br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[j05h]

<i>>Please use this thread to describe how you would design your rover. What all would be inside and on the exterior? </i><br /><br /><br />Ideally a pair of chassis designs could do all the "big rover" tasks. The rover would be a system of interchangable modules. I'm pondering two complementary chassis, but the application is mostly Martian (unless Lunar methane is possible). The system is able to accept common cargo and mission modules, changing for new tasks as needed. A complimentary set of smaller rovers, crew All Terrain Vehicles, rolling toolboxes, etc, would be built along the same principles, providing a set of craft for deployment from bases or big rovers. <br /><br />The system starts with a chassis that is either a bulldozer-like track or MER-style rocker-bogie wheeled suspension. The wheeled version is probably better for exploration, the tracked for "Dozer" base ops (including local crew/passenger exchange, harvesting, plowing, etc). The wheeled version would be easier to ship in pieces and assemble on-site than the track. The track can mass more and has much better stability & traction. Depending on attachments, fuel and regolith can be used to balance the chassis. The basic chassis should be smart enough to self-ferry.<br /><br />For discussion purposes, think of it as huge MER chassis without the box of it's rover, instead a Node is centered on the single axle. The node has 4 ports for attachments, pass-throughs for power and volatiles, plus whatever structural pins are needed. The node is 10-20 ft above ground level.<br /><br />The Track looks like the bottom of an excavator or Army tank. It has a 3-port node in a riser on it's top deck, power system in the main body and maybe a bottom-hatch for buried-base access. The chassis is either delivered whole or arrives in pieces (wheels separate from frame, etc). For pre-crew purposes, the system must self-deploy, further on assume some kind of crew help in assembly.<br /><br />This concept started as part o <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[docm]

This is beginning to sound like our "Lunar BobCat" discussion in the "How can we deal with Lunar fines?" thread of several months ago. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

The only problem I have with docking with a Martian buried base as you described would be how the fines would build up on the base's hatch after dust storms. Those would have to be cleared out as part of the docking process. Otherwise, what you described sounded interesting. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[dragon04]

I think a lot of this will depend on the philosophy of missions to Mars itself.<br /><br />If we really intend on a long term presence on Mars, then I could make a fair argument for the initial missions to be all about setting up infrastructure for future missions that include rovers of whatever design they might come up with.<br /><br />That philosophy might not appeal to the impatient, but if we intend to set up a permanent base there, it makes sense to do it that way.<br /><br />I just don't see manned missions to Mars being "there and back again" events like Apollo. If we're going to expend money and resources, I can't believe that it won't be without a permanent base on Mars in mind with our current propulsive technology.<br /><br />Certainly crews would rotate, but considering transit times and launch windows, tours of duty would seem likely to be long ones.<br /><br />So to me, it would make more sense to initially send up the most rudimentary Moon Buggy type vehicle we can and get fancy later on. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"2012.. Year of the Dragon!! Get on the Dragon Wagon!".</em> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

I agree for the most part. Some time ago I recommended that our first missions to Mars be such that the crew doesn't return until their replacements arrive. I also thought that one or two of the previous crew should stay as "experienced hands."<br /><br />Unfortunately, we will have to do some stuff besides simply setting stuff up for later missions. First, some scientists will probably be needed to ensure the safety of the mission and crew. Second, some science must be done (at least taking great 3D pictures) for the public to conclude that we are "making progress." <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[j05h]

<i>>The only problem I have with docking with a Martian buried base as you described would be how the fines would build up on the base's hatch after dust storms. Those would have to be cleared out as part of the docking process. Otherwise, what you described sounded interesting.</i><br /><br />The 'dock' for a buried base would include a Mars-crete pad around the hatch. The pad is poured to further protect the buried modules. The hatch would be at 2-6ft above the surface and could include a personnel hatch on the side. Compressed atmosphere would blow the whole area clear during mate-up, plus some kind of flush-cycle in the mechanism. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[solarspot]

Slightly related idea here... if there are a sufficient number of uses for compressed CO2 on the surface then perhaps the crew could bring a hand-held compressor... Plug it in for a couple hours to get some pressure in a CO2 container, then unplug and open a small valve when you want to wash dust off something (wheel bearings on the rover etc). Perhaps this could be useful for cleaning dust off solar panels, as those would only need to be cleaned every couple months... so a multipurpose system would seem more mass-efficient than something permanently pointing on one piece of equipment...<br /><br /><br />

 

[j05h]

<i>> if there are a sufficient number of uses for compressed CO2 on the surface then perhaps the crew could bring a hand-held compressor...</i><br /><br />I'm assuming that compressed "air" on Mars will be readily available. On a rover, it is needed for dusting off outside equipment and suits. At a base it is available because ISRU hardware will require lots of CO2 feedstock. Many tools on Earth are compressed-air powered and there is no reason to suspect different on Mars - it even saves some development effort on tooling. Crew might carry "pony bottles" of compressed CO2, have access to it from base/rover hoses and have permanently emplaced blowers for cleaning hatches etc where needed.<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[holmec]

You know what...if NASA was bold enough, it might be wise to land a fusion reactor and some type of lunar dust processor to extract the helium 3. And start making power. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>