Health, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Space, Technology and Society

The Dangers Of Mars

16 Comments

The movie understates them. I vehemently disagree with this, though:

Martian gravity is roughly one-third the gravity on Earth. Experiments on the International Space Station show that plants, animals and humans all suffer in weightlessness, but no one knows how living creatures will fare in reduced gravity.

“Maybe plants will be happy, maybe animals will be happy, maybe humans will be happy,” McKay says. “Or maybe not.” The effect of reduced gravity isn’t easily tested ahead of time and though probably not a huge problem, it could be a “showstopper,” McKay says.

It is easily tested ahead of time. Stop wasting money on a giant rocket and build a gravity lab. The fact that we’re not is one of the strongest indicators that neither NASA or Congress are serious about Mars.

[Update a few minutes later]

Barriers to colonizing Mars. I don’t buy this number for a minute, though:

NASA’s current Mars mission concept would set us back about $50 billion over the course of a decade, or about twice as much as the moon program cost between 1962 and 1972.

First, in current-year dollars, we spent more like a hundred billion on Apollo (the $25B is in sixties dollars). But they’re probably going to spend that much just on SLS/Orion, without any actual Mars hardware.

[Late-morning update]

Don’t worry, Matt Damon won’t get stranded on Mars, because NASA can’t get him there.

16 thoughts on “The Dangers Of Mars”

  1. For those unaware, NASA does have a gravity lab (an ISS module) that has the capability to test long term results of various G, ranging from .01G to 2G. The module has dual 8.2 foot centrifuges, so it’s probably too small for human tests long term, but it’s ideal for plants and small animals.

    This ISS module is built and paid for, and is owned by NASA. The only little problem is that it’s on display in Japan, not attached to ISS. NASA paid for it, but never launched it.

    It’s called the Centrifuge Accommodations Module, and it’s on outdoor(!) display at Japan’s Tsukuba space center. I wonder if it could be made flightworthy… but the outdoor display gives me grave doubts.

    If NASA had any actual intent on going to Mars, this module would not be sitting out in the weather in Japan, it’d be attached to ISS, or at least in a safe building, not out in the rain.

      1. @ Darkstar;

        NASA traded a launch for it. A Shuttle launch, of the Kibo module.

        So, how much did it cost US taxpayers? That depends on how much a shuttle launch costs, which is a much-debated figure. Maybe 450 million? Or, it’d be the amount NASA would have charged the Japanese Space Agency for the launch, so probably a bit less.

        Had they not put it outside, it could probably be launched by a Falcon 9.1. (the payload fairing is big enough, as is the LEO capability). Getting it docked to ISS would be problematic, but perhaps a Dragon could have been modified to act as a tug to get it within the ISS arm grappling range. It would not be an easy job, but it probably could have been done. However, it’s now useless, due to being stored out in the weather. Thanks, NASA.

        But, look at the bright side; for a few hundred million US taxpayer dollars, a Japanese space center parking lot has a rather interesting outdoor exhibit.

    2. I’ve seen it stated elsewhere, not here, that one of the reasons the centrifuge module was never flown was that under operation, it would have added too much vibration to the station which would have interfered with other experiments. Can anyone here comment to the truth of that? Also heard that because of that there is a proposal to do another gravity lab as a free flyer in a close co-orbit with the ISS such that crew should shuttle between them by EVA. Commentary?

      2. @ David Spain

        I too have seen it stated elsewhere that vibration was an issue.

        I have nothing definitive either way, only a line of reasoning; if the engineering was even slightly competent, the vibration levels the module would impart to ISS would be known long in advance of construction.

        Therefor, if vibration was such a major issue and it wasn’t discovered until well after construction was complete, it’s a display of engineering incompetence on a magnificent scale by NASA.

        Or, alternatively, NASA forgot to spec vibration when it ordered the module from the Japanese?

        At this point, I find the above scenarios disgustingly plausible.

      3. I think it was a combination of vibration and run time. What I remember most was that it became another gyro and conflicted with the CMGs.

        The ISS was intended to be a microgravity lab. One goal to that objective was to have near zero acceleration forces acting on the vessel for days at a time. I think they wanted 90+, but visiting vehicle traffic and such would make 30 days a more realistic limit.

        When you kicked on the CAM, it would both cause vibration messing with microG experiments and saturate the CMGs further messing microG and attitude stability. Once CMGs became saturated, the Russian RCS would kick, and now you definitely had a loss of microG.

        So it became, you can either have microG or CAM, not both. Add in Columbia and a limited number of remaining shuttle flights, and CAM gets cancelled.

        That’s my recollection, but I’m usually corrected.

  2. A NASA-connected ‘to Mars!’ show a couple years back with NASA people discussing the problems with finding and making seven-year shelf-stable Salisbury Steak for Mars is really all you have to know. I don’t have the citation, it was some NOVA-like show, but the entire thing had be stunned and unable to move.

    A full hour of “Things we’re doing that actually had better not be relevant in the slightest in an -actual- Mars mission.”

    1. Hey, the astronauts need a hot meal that’ll last longer than their mission, right?

      Actually, if NASA is interested, I could provide dehydrated food (nutritionally balanced, with good flavor and variety) with a 25 year shelf life, for a million $ per astronaut per mission. It being dehydrated lowers the mass by a lot, too.

      If NASA did decided to but this from me, I could have it to them inside of 10 days after receiving the $$$. I’d just go go to Costco’s website and order it, with Kennedy as the delivery address. (a 1 person-year supply, 6200 servings, costs $1000).

      Perhaps NASA needs to send out a few exploration missions closer to home in order to get ready for a Mars mission? I’d suggest the initial exploration missions be to Costco or Sam’s club, plus a few sporting goods stores for dehydrated camping food (such as Mountain House).

      1. “Perhaps NASA needs to send out a few exploration missions closer to home in order to get ready for a Mars mission?”

        Heh

      2. Yes, 50# bags of rice and beans should actually meet the stated criteria. And lemons/limes.

        But that wasn’t my main concern. There was no mention whatsoever of even thinking about recycling waste into new food. If you’ve got a seven year mission, you’ve got both a seven-year pile of needed food -and- an expected seven-year pile of wastes. What can we do? Clearly we should throw the waste out the lock and make sure we deep freeze-dry that food pile.

        Waste-in-a-bag grows fungi rather easily on the ground. Does it work in space? Which species? Algae? Earthworms? I find the grub of the Black Soldier Fly as pretty amazing crud-to-composters here on Earth. Zillions of questions for orbit, thrust, and cruise.

        And yet they’re clearly expecting the ares-o-nauts to live on prepackaged the entire time.

  4. Only tangentially related, seen on Facebook today

    “Saving Private Ryan
    Interstellar
    The Martian

    America has spent a boatload of money rescuing Matt Damon.”

Comments are closed.