Hey tjackso, great to see you! Folks, this guy hosted a great thread, one of the best in terms of space politics ever. I can't quite remember the name, something along the lines of 'American dominance in space in the new century'. Anyway, not to get off topic, but there's always time to welcome back an old-timer IMO.<br /><br />I like your mars ship architecture, it's a new one on me. Most would see the EVAs as costly and dangerous, but you stand that on its ear and use it as a positive. I like these kinds of strategies, where you establish the reliable use of a given technology, and then you USE it. You use it a lot, turning this hard-won technology into a key asset in your conquest of space. An area where entrepreneurial thinking could be grafted onto gummint programs.<br /><br />The trouble comes with Solar Particle Events, when the crew need a storm shelter from the radiation. All human transit to Mars vehicles need to account for a SPE event. Presumably, your crew would all come into the central hub, packed in for the duration of the event.<br /><br />Staying on topic, we can conclude that at any given time, a certain number of the crew would be in the central hub throughout the mission. It would be the central community room, a beneficial contrast to the privacy of being in your own trio's capsule. Very interesting architecture.<br /><br />***<br /><br />A lot of good points have been made here about why boredom will not be a major issue. The main point being that mission planners will take the issue seriously and methods applied will solve the problem.<br /><br />People are different. I tend to think that those who foresee this problem as huge are of the type that would themselves find it very challenging. The common threads are 'you can't get out - you're trapped with all these people - nowhere to go'. There are other types, and that's who will go, if the screening works.<br /><br />Which begs the question (if we're thinking in terms of Settlement, not pure science object <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
- Status
Hey tjackso, great to see you!<br /><br />Great to see you also, spacester! It's been 5 or 6 years. The thread you refer to was "U.S. Expansion." I'll restate its propositions someplace appropriate, before too long. <br /><br />We need to determine whether M2P2 (Mini Magnetosphere Plasma Propulsion) can provide adequate protection. I see no reason why, in theory, it shouldn't - but then I'm an amateur. It is, however, simply a portable magnetosphere, and it's our magnetosphere that protects us here...<br /><br />Ahead of the astronauts, at each of their various landing sites, we'll have already landed two helicopters and one big, intercontinental (in Earth terms) airplane. Each site will need to construct a runway capable of facilitating takeoffs and landings of these planes. So we'll be laving air bases behind us. Meanwhile, if someone at the Ice Cap breaks a leg, and the closest surgeon is at Mons Olympus...<br /><br />On the front end, the financial burden of such a mission would be easy to defray, simply because we're now talking about numerous smaller spacecraft. This structure creates natural opportunities for both government/business cooperation and (if we like) international cooperation. I'd love to get Japan involved in this. We'd be crazy not to involve the Russians - and remember, they're not as financially broken as they were during the early ISS years. I'd love to have at least one of the spacecraft rented out to the National Geographic Society or Science Channel.<br /><br />Etc.<br /> <br /><br />
The most important advantage to the sort of mission I've described is that you no longer have to hold your breath for two years that nothing, ever, goes wrong. Just six astronauts, and all of them in one ship? All the way to Mars and back? To me, that's too high a risk of mission failure. <br /><br />I don't want any astronaut hurt, but I definitely don't want an astronaut's getting hurt meaning that now the mission fails. And the same for any catasphrophe aboard "the" spacecraft. To be cold about it, a catastrophe isn't quite as catastrophic if the craft it's happening to isn't THE spacecraft.<br /><br />This is just too big a mission to allow for that great a risk of mission failure.<br />.
Maybe one crew, or two, have volunteered not to return to Earth with the others, but to remain on Mars. <br /><br />
"based on what data?"<br /><br />My source is "TOO FAR FROM HOME; A Story of Life and Death in Space" by Chris Jones. It is primarily about ISS Expedition Six, but has a lot of background information as well, going back to Mir.<br /><br />I have to find my copy to look up the exact reference.
<i>> You will need a source of gravity (or something that feels like gravity) for both plants and fish.</i><br /><br />Or you start freefall farming immediately, accepting lower yields until crops and techniques improve yields. Active crop-selection for freefall growth would be strongly indicated. Crops (inc. sm animal and fish/shellfish) and techniques (hydro, caged/freerange, free-space for lichen, poplar and bamboo.) will help expand human and other Life. Immediately useful would be a gravity-careless pollinating insect, a working fishfarm of some sort and Mars/asteroidal freespace lichen. <br /><br />All of this adds up to very active living anywhere in space.<br /><br />For early flights to Mars, spin-gravity is not needed. Smaller centrifuges can suffice, NASA tested a "bicycle" centrifuge recently, it just requires a large Hab. Any downtime would be spent studying, doing VR training or games or sleeping. Boredom won't be an issue, but as pointed out above, personality clashes could be. Survival in space is all about common cause and community.<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>
<i>> catastrophe isn't quite as catastrophic if the craft it's happening to isn't THE spacecraft.... This is just too big a mission to allow for that great a risk of mission failure. </i><br /><br />This points to "flotilla" operations. Several craft travel together, as water craft have always done. In my "Mars 9 tons at a time" thread, the discussion has centered around Dragon capsules and Sundancer cores being used to fly to Mars. If launched as direct-throw to TMI, the several craft would dock partway through the outbound journey, then undock for multi-pass aerobraking (capsules to the surface or orbit, everything else to orbit). Each element is launched on existing ELVs, specifically the Delta IV Heavy. The stack for 6 crew on the flight out would consist of perhaps 2 Dragons docked to 2 SunDancers, docked to a central 6-port node with 4 resource modules attached. The biggest issue is reliable surge-launch for that many payloads, but the architecture provides a lot of redundancy in space and on the surface. Check the thread out for more. On the boredom/personality issue, if there is a critical clash between crew members, the stack can be separated, which is much different than single-craft approaches such as Mars Direct.<br /><br />Operating as a network or flotilla makes a lot of sense, whatever the architecture. <br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>
"TOO FAR FROM HOME; A Story of Life and Death in Space"<br /><br />Decent book but still lacking much data, plus the Russians have not really provided much either.
<br />I dunno, I see the logic in the "multiple craft" notion, but at the same time multiple craft means greatly expanded complexity. Is spreading out resources to multiple spacecraft going to be seen as an acceptable strategy once the loss of one of those spacecraft is starkly illustrated with the pictures of the astronauts who perished in its failure?<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
So maybe boredom was the wrong word to use in the title because there are more issues than just that - feelings of being micro-managed and overworked could result in tension between the mission crew and mission control. <br /><br />There needs to be ways to mentally "check out" and recharge. Could you sit down and play a computer game knowing you're in the middle of space? <br /><br />I don't suppose there would be a launch window during football season so they could enjoy watching their favorite team with some space packets of beer!<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
<font color="yellow">space packets of beer! </font><br /><br />Now yer talkin'!<br /><br />My entire existence is centered around the possibility that I could be the first person to make beer in space. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> It's a long shot, but space flights are too short to drink bad beer! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
<i>> So maybe boredom was the wrong word to use in the title because there are more issues than just that - feelings of being micro-managed and overworked could result in tension between the mission crew and mission control.</i><br /><br />Exactly. The issue is stress from interpersonal and organizational/management conflict. One solution is for interplanetary craft to be managed as "ships" instead of "spacecraft". Part of Russian space success is a hands-off approach to station management, the crew has a task list but plans out their activity cycle. Orders are "do this by friday" instead of "spend 20.25 minutes doing this Wednesday at 0600." Ships set sail on the sea with a home office somewhere on land and occasional contact, but day-to-day operations are handled by the captain. <br /><br />For interpersonal issues, VR provides a complete "getaway" space for crew while offering interesting new ways of resolving issues with crewmates. Nothing relieves stress like fragging your coworkers in Unreal. VR could also help with counseling and other therapy, especially group and anonymous-in-group sessions. <br /><br />Besides standard computer games and productivity, VR offers users a way to enjoy 3d spaces created to mimic familiar places back home. During a long voyage, a crewmember could have their house, favorite parklands, maybe an amusement park? The SIMS meets Google Earth for astronauts? Positional VR would also nicely integrate next-generation ship maintenance systems. Literally you could overlay or see what is wrong nearby.<br /><br />Alcohol and relaxation drugs should be a communal (and doctor controlled?) activity. Again, Russian success has involved a certain amount of vodka and tobacco. Having access to other recreational chemistry could prove interesting and useful - witness ecstasy therapy for trauma and abuse victims. Nothing bonds a group together like a little E and some trance music. <img src="/images/icons/crazy.gif" /> This isn't NASA territory really, bu <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>
VR?<br /><br />That would use a whole lot of rad proof processing and non volatile data storage. I'd give'em a copy of Nethack, they don't even need a graphic terminal. 
<br /><br />But no, really, I think anything simple and creative will be better than something that draws them out of reality, as it's not quite good to associate rest time with virtual experience and work time with real experience. Composing music or writing would be a nice activity --imagine an astronaut playing the harmonica 'n singing on the way to Mars. <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><br /><br />Also learning about a non science related topic, or a topic which pertains to another specialist, and discussing it. That keeps the mind fresh and a non excesivelly narrow mindset when they face either engineering or self/group management issues. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
<br /><br />But no, really, I think anything simple and creative will be better than something that draws them out of reality, as it's not quite good to associate rest time with virtual experience and work time with real experience. Composing music or writing would be a nice activity --imagine an astronaut playing the harmonica 'n singing on the way to Mars. <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><br /><br />Also learning about a non science related topic, or a topic which pertains to another specialist, and discussing it. That keeps the mind fresh and a non excesivelly narrow mindset when they face either engineering or self/group management issues. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div><i>>> Oh come on, it's not like NASA astronauts are wearing diapers in order to drive across multiple states without stopping with intention to assault a rival lover.<br /> />What is the relevance of this to an actual mission? </i><br /><br />The point is that anyone can crack, often for non-obvious reasons.<br /><br />One thing to note is that people survived extremely long sea voyages under much more trying physical conditions than any Mars flight would encounter. Except being dead, but that applied to the Seas, too. Six months in a spacecraft with a few other people can't compare to Stearage class or being "shanghaied" by your nation's navy. The biggest challenges will be crew conflict, overwork and the split-second deadliness of space. <br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>
<i>>VR?<br />That would use a whole lot of rad proof processing and non volatile data storage. ... rest time with virtual experience and work time with real experience. ...topic which pertains to another specialist, and discussing it. That keeps the mind fresh and a non excesivelly narrow mindset when they face either engineering or self/group management issues.</i><br /><br />laptops, headsets/"videogoggles", iPhones. 2 of the 3 have already flown in space. For an ethernet-enabled station, you could plug into a shielded server, not a problem. <br /><br />I agree that crew cross-training is important and extends far beyond just the outbound trip. On Mars, building a verbal and community knowledge of the local environment and practice of living will be critical. Depending on project or mission, I had assumed that crew cross-training would largely start on the ground. Dialog among crew will always be important. <br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>
I read that every member of a submarine crew learns all the jobs on board, in case somebody becomes incapacitated on a long journey. At least this was true in WW2.
<br />I would think a lot of lessons could be learned from submarines, of course even the cramped conditions of a submarine will probably be somewhat spacious compared to a Mars expedition. Also the larger number of people on a submarine means you're less likely to sick of a single person.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
I doubt most people could learn that many jobs. However, I do remember hearing there was some cross training (and probably still is). <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>
I suppose you could send the HAL 9000 along. For those of you aspiring astronauts that play chess, I understand he plays a real mean game. <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>
Some of the basics:<br /><br />1.<br />Make sure to pick individuals who can overcome boredom and then provide training on how to deal with boredom.<br /><br />2.<br />In the GN, the mothership is propelled by a VASIMR based propulsion system which shortened transit times to three months or so. About half the minimum time required by NTR.<br /><br />3.<br />As someone in this thread already mentioned, there would be VR systems on board in addition to the digital media already generally available.<br /><br />Despite this, boredom may still present a problem but I doubt it would be an insurmountable one. It would be minimized by careful crew selection and training.<br /><br />To touch upon another area I looked at, what kind of pilot do you put on the landing vehicle? Fighter pilots or transport pilots?<br /><br />I do have some scenes that address boredom on the surface but I don't want to give too much away. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>
<br />In terms of a pilot, I would imagine the landing will be largely computer controlled. In terms of a human pilot, I don't what sort of pilot would be best for a vertically landed rocket ship. Conventional pilot training may not be particularly helpful even in terms of experience.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
I would bring along two things, a PS4 (because they'll have one by then) with a stack of games, and i'd learn how to play guitar. With that, I'd be set for 6 months.
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>In terms of a human pilot, I don't what sort of pilot would be best for a vertically landed rocket ship. Conventional pilot training may not be particularly helpful even in terms of experience.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />Apollo lander training was based on helicopter experience. Trainees were taught how to fly that before a lander. <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>
You can't what? Play chess? Don't worry. I can't either. Anyone could beat me at that game. Now Othello (AKA Reversi) and Pente, those I can handle. <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>
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
Basic Error: The accelerating Universe conclusion - reason- Started by Gibsense
- Replies: 188
-
-
Definition of Universe requires clarification, to enable discussion
- Started by Catastrophe
- Replies: 36
-
-
Just a couple of questions please about just how far back we can model.- Started by Starstruck
- Replies: 12
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram