New Mars Forums

List of Shadow Tolerant Vegetables
Arugula (likes cool temperatures)
Asparagus
Beets (taste better in cool climates)
Bok Choi
Broccoli
Brussel Sprouts
Cabbage
Carrots
Cauliflower
Celery (likes cooler climates)
Chard
Chinese Cabbage (will not tolerate hot temperatures)
Collards
Culinary herbs
Fiddlehead of the Ostrich Fern
Garlic (in low light conditions cloves are smaller, but just as flavourful)
Horseradish
Kale
Kohlrabi (likes cooler climates)
Leeks
Lettuce
Meslun
Mizuna (likes cooler climates)
Mustard Greens (low light makes it taste better)
Parsnip
Peas (especially snow or snap peas)
Potatoes (prefer cooler weather, less sun will result in smaller tubers)
Radish
Rhubarb
Rutabaga (also known as Canadian turnips)
Scallions
Spinach
Swiss chard
Stinging Nettles (harvest with care, but edible and highly nutritious).
Tatsoi (likes cooler climates)
Turnip (tastes best at cooler temperatures)

In the 1490s, European fishermen traveling to the abundant Grand Banks off Newfoundland primarily ate preserved, non-perishable foods carried from Europe, supplemented by the vast amounts of cod they caught. The primary components of their diet included hard tack (ship's biscuits), salted meat (beef and pork), and dried or salted fish.

Primary Provisions
Hard Tack/Ship's Biscuits: This was a staple on all long sea voyages, a durable biscuit made of grain and oats that lasted a long time if kept dry.

Salted Meat: Beef and pork were preserved in barrels of brine and consumed regularly. The meat had to be soaked in water before cooking to reduce the salt content.

Salted Fish: While fishermen rarely ate fish from the open ocean due to spoilage concerns and the logistics of cleaning them on the ship, they carried dried or salted fish, primarily cod, as part of their provisions. Once at the Grand Banks, the ease of catching fresh cod meant it was a plentiful, fresh food source while near Newfoundland.

Dried Legumes and Oatmeal: Peas, chickpeas, and beans (dried) were common additions, often made into a stew with the salted meats or fish. Oatmeal was also served.

Cheese and Butter: Hard cheese and butter were carried as they could last a long time.

Alcohol: Fresh water spoiled quickly in barrels, so beer and wine were common beverages as the alcohol helped preserve them. Sailors might be allotted a gallon of beer a day.

Life in Newfoundland
Upon arrival in Newfoundland, the Europeans developed a "dry" fishing method where they built temporary stages on shore to dry and salt the cod, turning it into a stable, long-lasting protein source for transport back to Europe. This land-based activity allowed for some supplementation of the ship's diet with fresh fish, small livestock (poultry), and foraged vegetables when possible, though the main goal was processing cod for expor

In the 1490s and early 1500s, Newfoundland fishermen, primarily English, French, Basque, and Portuguese, focused on catching and exporting cod, not growing crops; they used hooks, lines, and local bait (birds, herring, squid) to salt cod onboard ships for the European market, using existing trade routes for transport, making fish their main economic product, not agriculture.

What They Did:
Caught Cod: The Grand Banks offered incredibly rich cod stocks, making it the primary target.
Used Basic Gear: They fished daily from small boats using hook and line.
Used Local Bait: They used sea birds, herring, capelin, and squid for bait.
Salted at Sea: They processed their catch by salting it on the ships.
Exported to Europe: The salted cod was transported back to Europe for drying and sale, becoming a major export commodity.

What They Didn't Grow (or Focus On):
No Agricultural Focus: The emphasis was entirely on the sea and the lucrative cod trade, not on cultivating crops in Newfoundland.

Subsistence vs. Export: While First Nations people fished for subsistence, the European arrival transformed it into a major export industry.
Essentially, for these 1490s fishermen, Newfoundland was a massive fishing ground and processing station, not a place for farming

Yes, the concept of using a Starship cargo lander as a long-term habitat on Mars, sometimes called a "caretaker" or base camp, is central to {Link: NASA and SpaceX's Mars colonization vision, involving converting the massive lander into a livable base after its initial cargo delivery, with conceptual studies exploring how to offload and configure these huge structures, potentially using other Starships or specialized equipment for setup.

Key Concepts & Plans
Starship as Lander & Habitat: Starship's enormous payload capacity (up to 150+ metric tons) allows it to deliver not just supplies but also become a primary habitat on Mars after landing.

NASA's Common Habitat Architecture: NASA studies, like the "Common Habitat," envision using SLS core tanks or Starship-derived modules as large, long-duration habitats, leveraging the work on Starship landers for delivery and setup on the Moon and Mars.

Phased Deployment: Early cargo Starships land, offload equipment, and then potentially serve as initial shelters, with later, larger modules or converted Starships forming the core of a permanent base.

Deployment & Setup: A major challenge is getting the habitat off the lander and onto the surface, with studies exploring cranes, jib systems, or even other Starships to maneuver and position these massive structures.

Caretaker Role: The lander itself, or a dedicated Starship habitat, would provide immediate shelter, life support, and a base of operations, acting as a "caretaker" until larger, purpose-built habitats are established.

How it Works (Conceptual)
Launch & Transit: A modified Starship carries cargo and/or habitat components to Mars.
Landing: The Starship performs a powered landing on Mars.

Habitat Activation: The vehicle is configured (potentially by another Starship or robotic systems) to become a habitable zone, with internal decks, life support, and living quarters.

Expansion: Subsequent Starship deliveries bring more components to build out a larger, more permanent base around the initial lander habitat.
This approach leverages Starship's unique capabilities to drastically reduce the complexity and cost of establishing a long-term human presence on Mars

A dome constructed of 304L stainless steel with a 100-meter diameter and 20-meter height is theoretically possible but presents significant engineering challenges, primarily related to managing internal pressure and radiation shielding. The material properties of 304L stainless steel are suitable for the Martian environment, but building at this scale requires novel construction techniques and massive material transport from Earth or extensive in-situ resource utilization (ISRU).

Feasibility and Challenges

Pressure Management: The primary challenge is anchoring the dome against the internal air pressure required for a habitat. A 100m diameter dome would exert tremendous vertical force (around 78,000 tonnes of force), requiring extensive foundation engineering to prevent the dome from lifting off the ground.

Radiation Shielding: A bare metal dome would offer poor protection against high-energy cosmic rays. The structure would need to be covered with a thick layer of Martian regolith (soil) or ice for adequate shielding, potentially adding millions of tonnes of mass and significantly altering the design requirements.

Material Transport vs. ISRU: Transporting the vast amount of steel required from Earth is likely cost-prohibitive. While iron is abundant on Mars, developing the infrastructure to mine the ore, smelt it into iron, and then produce 304L stainless steel plates of sufficient quality and thickness on an industrial scale would be a massive undertaking.

Material Properties: 304L stainless steel performs well in the extreme cold of Mars and is resistant to radiation damage (it doesn't become brittle). However, it offers no radiation shielding for occupants.

Design & Scaling: Domes can be difficult to scale efficiently; as they get larger, the material thickness or strength needed increases disproportionately to handle the pressure, and interior space can be awkward to utilize. SpaceX uses 304L stainless steel for its Starship, which are pressure vessels, demonstrating the material's suitability for containing pressure, but these are smaller in diameter (9m) and use a cylindrical shape with domed ends, which is structurally more efficient for pressure containment than a large architectural dome.
Construction: On-site assembly would require advanced robotics and welding capabilities in a near-vacuum, extreme-cold environment.

Conclusion
While the material properties of 304L stainless steel are suitable for the Martian environment, the engineering challenges associated with building a 100-meter diameter, 20-meter tall habitat-grade dome are formidable. A more practical approach would likely involve a hybrid design using a much thicker layer of local regolith for shielding and using the steel for an internal pressure shell, or building the habitat primarily underground or within lava tubes to utilize the natural shielding of the planet's surface

For SpaceNut ....

It is difficult to take a positive attitude when there are so many problems ahead of humans headed to Mars.

You've shown once again that the negative and difficulty are all that come to your mind when you think about Mars.

RobertDyck opened a topic that is intended to be full of hope and optimism, and which is designed to show exactly how to do the many tasks needed to grow food on Mars.  Your first contribution is a list of problems to be overcome.

I'll quote the list and try to help you to understand how it comes across:

SpaceNut wrote:

Not trying to be negative

Mars short list
1. no insitu food which means all must be brought and minimal ability to grow within the ship you come in
2. no breathable atmosphere, must be brought or insitu made if you have extra power and equipment
3. has minimal water and nothing free to draw from that is fresh or insitu made if you have extra power and equipment
4. minimal solar energy and lots of radiation with ships not designed for long term stay
5. no ship going back or to mars currently just future planning but you need to solve other issues first
6. Lacks materials other than insitu processed to make shelters from if you have extra power and equipment
7. mars has natural geological and mineral assets if you have extra power and equipment to make use of insitu sources
8. financing presently via government and not private

Item #1: You may not have read RobertDyck's post.  He explicitly said that food must be grown  before humans arrive to stay.

How did you miss that?

Here is what RobertDyck said in the opening post:

To put this in terms of Mars, a successful settlement must start producing food with the fist expedition.

Here's the rest of that key paragraph, because it contains the essence of the mission of this topic:

In 1496, fishermen returned to England at the end of each fishing season. A house was built in 1497 for a single caretaker to overwinter, to care for the camp. It was some years before people lived year-round. For Mars, first expeditions must build the first permanent buildings including a pressurized greenhouse to grow food. But the first few expeditions must return to Earth. Only after the base has been proven safe, with reliable food production, can permanent settlement be considered. Food production with absolutely no resupply from Earth must be established before we permanently settle Mars.

The topic is not the place to worry about all the challenges facing those who will build the first food production facility.  We have plenty of other topics where you and others can worry about those issues.  The topic RobertDyck created is where we NewMars members will build up a repository of knowledge about how to do whatever is needed.  Your contribution is a list of challenges, but we already know about all the challenges. We don't need another list. We've had 20+ years (from 2001 I was reminded today) to think of all the challenges. 

The opportunity for NewMars members is to think of all the answers that are needed to achieve RobertDyck's vision.

You've had since July of 2004 to think of every possible problem that humans might face in settling Mars.

It is past time to start working on solutions.

You are free to provide answers for any or all of the problems you've cited.

It is up to RobertDyck to decide, but ** I ** would vote for you being required to find a solution for each and every problem you've listed.

It's time (past time) to get moving on building up the knowledge, skill and resources to achieve the many subgoals of the Mars project.

Let's get moving!

We don't need more hand wringing.  This forum has 24 years for hand wringing!  We are about to enter 2026.

Let 2026 be the year of NewMars finding solutions to all those stacked up problems.

(th)

Here are a few other vital tools and systems liable to face issues with the conditions on Mars, that require adequate testing for a year on the Red Planet:

Water filtration systems
EVA suits
Energy storage systems
Habitat structural materials
Mars-Earth communication devices

This bookmark is for the habitat or space vessel atmosphere that allows humans to go outside into vacuum without pre-breathing.

https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 72#p236572

The link above points to one of  many posts in the NewMars archive that make this point over and over again.

The simple rule of thumb for children growing up on Mars is 3 - 5 - 8.

Three parts Oxygen
5 parts Nitrogen or other neutral gas
8 pounds per square inch

3 - 5 - 8

There are humans who want higher precision.

The Universe has room for folks who want higher precision.

(th)

Use the long-known NASA criterion for no pre-breathe time.  The partial pressure in the habitat,  of the nitrogen,  may not exceed the total pressure of the pure oxygen fed to the suit,  by more than a factor of 1.2. 

If you satisfy that criterion,  there is no "pre-breathe" time associated with donning an oxygen suit and going outside immediately,  without risking the bends from the nitrogen. 

If you do more than about half an atmosphere of 21% O2/ 79% N2 mix in the habitat atmosphere,  at more than around 0.5 atm hab atmosphere pressure,  this is impossible to do. 

But half or a little less than half an atmosphere of oxygen-nitrogen mix in the habitat atmosphere,  meets that criterion for donning a pure O2 suit and just going outside with no pre-breathe.

GW

Mars suits need advanced mobility, durability (dust/temp), and life support for equipment work, moving beyond bulky gas-filled suits to designs like SpaceX's agile EVA suit or concepts like the tight BioSuit, focusing on enhanced joints, integrated HUDs, and specialized materials (Orthofabric) to allow astronauts to perform complex tasks efficiently in Mars' low gravity and harsh dust. NASA's Z-series prototypes, Axiom suits, and material tests (SHERLOC) are all pushing for lighter, more agile, and reliable suits for exploration and maintenance.
Key Design Features for Mars Work:
Enhanced Mobility: Improved joint designs (like those in SpaceX's suit) and lighter materials to counter Mars' lower gravity and allow complex arm/hand movements for tool use.
Dust Protection: Highly resistant materials (e.g., Teflon, Orthofabric) to block pervasive Martian dust, a major issue for equipment.
Integrated Technology: Heads-Up Displays (HUDs) in helmets (like SpaceX's) for real-time data and easier task management.
Adjustability & Fit: Sizing features (adjustable shoulders/waist) to fit diverse astronauts and improve comfort for long work periods.
Durability: Built for millions of wear cycles, far exceeding lunar needs, using advanced composites and materials tested on the Perseverance rover.
Examples of Suit Concepts:
SpaceX EVA Suit: Evolved from Dragon IVA, focusing on agility, 3D-printed helmets, advanced thermal layers for extreme temps, and scalability.
NASA Z-2/Z-series: Prototypes emphasizing wide motion, docking, and lightweight composites, tested in extreme environments.
BioSuit: A tight, stretchy suit applying pressure directly to the skin, offering more natural movement than gas-pressurized suits.
Axiom Suits: Next-gen designs for NASA, focusing on broad adjustability, comfort, and modern tech for complex tasks.
Challenges & Solutions:
Bulky vs. Agile: Moving from bulky gas-filled suits (like Apollo's) to designs that don't hinder simple tasks like tightening a bolt.
Life Support: Developing efficient systems for heat rejection (like Swimmie) and ensuring extended survival in case of minor punctures.
Material Science: Ongoing tests (SHERLOC experiment) on various materials to find the best protection against Mars' unique environment

Mars spacesuit risk management focuses on protecting astronauts from extreme hazards (radiation, dust, temps, vacuum) and operational challenges (injury, life support failure, CO2 buildup, decompression), using rigorous design (Injury Modes & Effects Analysis, radiation shielding, better seals), advanced training (pre-breathing), constant monitoring (SFIT tools), and comprehensive protocols to ensure long-duration mission safety, balancing performance needs with crew survival, says NASA's risk management process for human spaceflight and NASA's approach to EVA suits for lunar and Mars missions. Key risks include dust contamination, thermal extremes, radiation exposure, and physiological strain from frequent, demanding EVAs, requiring redundant life support and injury mitigation.
Key Risks & Mitigation Strategies
Radiation & Dust: Martian regolith (dust) is abrasive, adhesive, and can damage equipment/harm humans; radiation is intense.
Mitigation: Advanced suit materials, better seals, dust-resistant designs, habitat shielding.
Physiological Strain/Injury: More frequent & demanding EVAs on Mars (24 hrs/week) increase injury risk compared to ISS.
Mitigation: SFIT (Spacesuit Fit & Injury Technologies) to predict/monitor injury, improved suit ergonomics (e.g., Z-2.5 design), better fit.
Life Support/Environmental Control: Risks like CO2 buildup, oxygen depletion, humidity, fire, and decompression sickness are critical.
Mitigation: Redundant systems, CO2 scrubbers, pre-breathing protocols (pure O2 for nitrogen purge) to prevent decompression sickness (DCS).
Operational & Technical: Design complexity, maintenance, long-duration reliability, and emergency scenarios.
Mitigation: NASA's formal risk management process (Human System Risk Board), detailed Maintenance plans, vacuum chamber testing, and designs for quick emergency return.
NASA's Approach
Formal Risk Management: Uses detailed causal diagrams (directed acyclic graphs) to map hazards to mission outcomes, improving stakeholder communication.
Focus on Exploration EVAs: Recognizing ISS EVAs (slower pace, fewer per mission) differ greatly from Mars needs, developing suits for higher performance and safety.
Integrated Systems: Designing suits (like xEMU) to support multiple programs (Artemis, ISS, Gateway) while managing unique mission risks

For SpaceNut ... re https://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.ph … 44#p236544

The text you pasted about airlocks looks reasonable, but there are no references.

This forum needs to get in the habit of providing references for every post that might be assumed by a reader to be something other than an opinion.

I like the discussion about multiple stages of air locks.  That looks really tedious to me.

The worry about contaminating Mars is understandable for an initial expedition.

It has nothing to do with Calliban's dome airlock.  We aren't going to be worried about contamination of Mars.

You have already started discussion because you are (apparently) worried about CO in Mars atmosphere that might enter the habitat.

I have tried to encourage you to guide your AI to produce useful guidance on how to do that. The AI may have found some NASA documentation but I don't see that has much if anything to do with Calliban's dome.

You provided a problem to solve. Now please guide AI to find a solution.