martian trip animal test

[no_way]

Well, why hasnt this been done yet ? We know that the radiation environment is the hard problem to tackle for long-duration spaceflight, and there are many unknowns left. We have so little data on how radiation environment beyond van allen belts will affect living organisms, and it would be prudent to send animals before humans.<br />Say, a little lab rat or two taken along on next mars-bound orbiter ( obviously too late for MRO though ) , how much in payload would such an experiment cost, including sufficient food and medical equipment for necessary health monitoring ?<br />For this thought excercise, lets forget the fear of contaminating mars with earthly life forms, we are just talking about seven-month interplanetary cruise experiment that could even be jettisoned before reaching mars.

 

[najab]

><i>how much in payload would such an experiment cost, including sufficient food and medical equipment for necessary health monitoring ? </i><p>Quite a bit, I'd suspect. Rats eat about 20g and drink about 30g per day. We'll assume that we're not going to go to all the bother (and mass) of recycling just for some rats, so that's 50g/day/rat - 100g/day for a pair.<p>The trip to Mars is about 6 months - 180 days - so that's about 18kg just for the food and water. There's still oxygen to consider (about 8kg), not to mention waste disposal. All told, by the time you add the pressure vessel and equipment, you're going to have to add at least 50kg to the launch mass. That's quite a big hit if you're trying to get your Mars mission to fit an 'affordable' launcher, such as a Delta-2.</p></p>

 

[CalliArcale]

That's the thing -- at this point it's still too expensive to send animals, let alone humans. And frankly, the added cost of humans instead of animals is going to be minimal. Instrumentation on unmanned spacecraft (including those that have already gone) really tells us what we need to know about the radiation environment. I don't think there will be much value in sending animals to Mars, except perhaps as food, though I suspect plants would be easier to bring.<br /><br />When we're ready, we should send people, which while costing only a bit more than animals, will return immensely more information. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[earth_bound_misfit]

Nice Idea.<br />NajaB has always has the science to back up his opinions.(waste disposal = a lot of&%$#@!)<br />Would this rat being coming backing to earth for a check up afterwards? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p><p>----------------------------------------------------------------- </p><p>Wanna see this site looking like the old SDC uplink?</p><p>Go here to see how: <strong>SDC Eye saver </strong>  </p> </div>

 

[CalliArcale]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Little funny space suits for rats alone will be pain to develop<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />But imagine how adorable they'll look!<br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[lunatic133]

The world of today is different from the early 60s when we sent animals into space. Sending animals on a "suicide mission" to Mars would cause outcry from groups such as PETA and would ultimately turn public opinion against NASA in general, so we'd have to forget about ever sending human missions.

 

[no_way]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>you're going to have to add at least 50kg to the launch mass<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />Thanks for doing the math for us I suspect it would be even higher, especially if you wanna test different proposed shielding options, like solar flare sheltering with water etc.<br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Instrumentation on unmanned spacecraft (including those that have already gone) really tells us what we need to know about the radiation environment. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />How do you know that we are measuring and monitoring for all possible types of effects that could affect living organisms ?<br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>When we're ready, we should send people, which while costing only a bit more than animals, will return immensely more information<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />I dont think so. First, you cant probably send people on one-way trip. Immensely more information would be returned only if they'd land on mars. I wasnt proposing a lander, and landing _and_ returing from mars is definitely a whole order of magnitude tougher than just doing an orbiter.<br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p> Any trajectory that is cheaper to launch to and at suitable distance from Earth or other major bodies will be enough <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />Delta-V wise, traditional martian transit trajectories are already quite cheap, and you really would want to get into interplanetary space to have the authentic environment. Even more, if you already have marsbound orbiter, it would probably cheaper to piggyback such an experiment on it, than to launch an entirely separate experiment.<br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Sending animals on a "suicide mission" to Mars would cause outcry from groups such as PETA and would ultimately turn public opinion against NASA in general <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />Umm

 

[soyuztma]

Check out this webpage:<br />http://www.marsgravity.org/main/<br />But the project looks rather dead: no update since May.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[scottb50]

Actually I though this was what the ISS was supposed to be for. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[CalliArcale]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Sending animals on a "suicide mission" to Mars would cause outcry from groups such as PETA and would ultimately turn public opinion against NASA in general<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Umm .. i dont think so. A couple of lab mice will really not upset anybody, after all they are bred for this.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Don't underestimate PETA. They'd complain bitterly about it. Actually, they complain about the breeding of lab mice anyway, so it's pretty much moot.<br /><br />Frankly, I'm surprised they don't complain about how rocket launches hurt the ears of wild animals at the Cape. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

Hear! Hear! Almost every mission that has gone out from earth orbit has carried some sort of radiation detector. As a result the radiation environment is extremely well understood and recent missions like MARIE have shown how well the models match reality. The only gap is Mars surface data, than has been well modelled so a single MARIE type instrument on the surface would be sufficient for validate Mars surface radiation models.<br /><br />But a rat in a suit would look good. I have a koala ina suit which looks cuter though <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />Cheers<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>

 

[no_way]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>As a result the radiation environment is extremely well understood<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />My claim is: biological effects of different types of radiation in interplanetary space are not well understood. <br />Apollo data is all we have on this, and thats very old.<br /><br />Yes i _know_ that every single deep space craft has had different instruments for measuring and analysing all types of radiation. That doesnt mean we can accurately translate those measurements and readings into effects that such environment would have on biology.

 

[nexium]

My guess is we already suspect that half the astronauts that do a round trip to Mars will die of cancer or something else within ten years. We would not want to confirm this with animal experiments. My guess is we won't go to Mars, unless we find a way to beef up the shielding and/or shorten the trip. Neil

 

[summoner]

To really study the effects on a mouse, you'd have to send it back to Earth anyway. Shipping them out and leaving them wouldn't tell you much more as to what goes on biologically . We'd need to watch them for years to get a true picture of long term exposures to deep space. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> <br /><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:271px;background-color:#FFF;border:1pxsolid#999"><tr><td colspan="2"><div style="height:35px"><img src="http://banners.wunderground.com/weathersticker/htmlSticker1/language/www/US/MT/Three_Forks.gif" alt="" height="35" width="271" style="border:0px" /></div>

 

[spacester]

<font color="yellow">. . . . translate those measurements and readings into effects that such environment would have on biology. </font><br /><br />See, that's the reason why I like your idea. Biological data, not radiation data.<br /><br />To me, the primary issues in space development that intersect with biology are reproduction and CELSS (Closed Environment Life Support Systems).<br /><br />I'd like to see an early attempt at breeding mammals in four space environments: microgravity, spin-gravity matrixed with cis-luna and Mars trajectories. You could get a read in the difference in biological response for those two slightly different radiation environments. And you might show that meat can be produced (I'm thinking lagomorphs) in the spin-g craft.<br /><br />These craft would have biological CELSS systems in parallel with the "hi-tech" approach and would be valuable technlogy if successful.<br /><br />Grow a couple generations, harvest and store them by deep freeze as you go, return the specimens to ISS or Earth or lunar facilities or ?<br /><br />I'm thinking you could adapt Bigelow's modules to do these missions.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>