NASA has published a report (PDF) on last month's Centennial Challenges Workshop (thanks to Neil Halelamien over at sci.space.policy for the pointer).

I haven't read the whole thing, but I did go look to see what they did with my glove idea.

I regret that I wasn't there--they made some decisions that I would have argued about. I think that the glove should be 8 psi, not 4.3--a large part of the idea was to eliminate the need for prebreathing and avoid risk of the bends. I like the idea of providing plans for gloveboxes to the contestants, and think that worrying about someone injuring themselves is silly, not because it's not a danger, but because it's a danger we have to accept if we want to progress. I still like my task idea of tearing down and rebuilding an auto, or motorcycle engine. I proposed a million, and they came up with a quarter million (though they recognize that the amount may be too low--it's driven by legal constraints which will hopefully be removed in the future).

Anyway, it looks like a promising start, and Brant Sponberg should be congratulated. Let's hope he can keep the ball rolling.

I'm just really happy they liked the glove idea at all. The glove is great because it's a difficult problem, it's tractable on a garage scale (assuming modest external funding), and it keeps human presence in space at the forefront of the competition. I like the robotic competitions much less because they deemphasize physical human presence.

I'm a little disappointed that they didn't choose the TPS challenge for further study, since I have some ideas I'd like to try out, and a prize might make it possible to raise a little money to work on them. Perhaps it's better this way, since I wouldn't be able to build hardware for at least a year anyway.

Rand and Andrew,

Please know that we hear (and read) your comments. I'm pushing the TPS and ECLSS ideas, among others. Please feel free to discuss some more and send your ideas to ccideas@hq.nasa.gov.

Ken Davidian
Centennial Challenges
NASA HQ

Slashdot has posted a story about the Centennial Challenges workshop report. Hopefully, it'll bring in more ideas.
http://science.slashdot.org/science/04/07/16/1738258.shtml?tid=14&tid=160&tid=98

I also like the ECLSS idea.
"Build and run a closed-loop life support system that supports two people for a set time. At the end of time, the system must be in the same state as the beginning ('steady state'). When the first life support challenge is won, the next challenges will be progressively more difficult (support more people over a longer time) with larger prizes."

I think that maintaining human in a completely closed system is too big a jump right now. I'd be happy to see a prize that can keep mice alive (and reproducing).

Thanks, Ken--glad to hear you're reading. We'll keep that in mind for future posts and ideas.

Mouse life support is a good stepping stone to human life support.

This project is doing it already:
The Caves of Mars: Controlled Ecological Mouse Support System
http://www.highmars.org/niac/niac03.html

It would be a good competition for students: the life support equivalent of model rocketry.