You are not logged in.
Bit of a poke in the eye for Nasa 2 x Billion dollar space probes and they are designed as geologists. They can not detect ammonia or what causes it.
This would not be the case if a man Had found the ammonia
Is it not that the moon is actually breaking away from the earth and will in about 2 billion years break free.
If we are going to worry about something it should not be cancer we have studied how to reduce the risks and exposures and have developed plans to reduce risks.
But i dont think we have studied in depth the health costs that mars will be. Mars is an Arid Dusty planet and therein lies the problem.
Martian dust or fines could well become at best a problem, at worst a serious medical concern. These small particles will find ways to get anywhere they can they cause hazard to the vehicles and machinery of any expedition sent to Mars. But, what health damage can they do, probably a lot. We may send our explorers to Mars and get them back with severe respiratory problems.
We can reduce contamination of the Habs etc but it will prove to be hard as the main source of removing contaminant has always been the use of showers. Which needless to say is a heavy water user. Should we get caught by a martian dust storm this will complicate measures as the air will be saturated by the worst type of dust the small sharp probably charged particles. Interesting thing here is the Moon has the same problem so if someone can design a good fix it might become standard equipment on all space flights
Yes welcome to the lions den, quite a few of us are not from the USA so when you are posting we are in bed or working.
But we will get back to you.
It has been suggested that you place a reasonable sized ship/assembly between the sun and Mars it will be just a massive magnetic Field generator so providing the missing field.
Problems galore though
1) It will have power generation costs that really only can be solved by Fusion
2) Inversely by repelling the solar wind the assembly will actually attract some particles posing a very high radiation exposure to the assembly.
3) The technology to make this device will be a long time coming
Quote Rxke July12, 04:59
From bits and pieces on the net, I've gotten the impression that the aurora plans are being "downgraded"
It does seem that Esa plans to create a manned launcher on there own are being downgraded but i think i know why.
If you read Mars news you will see an article where Russia and Esa are stating alliance with creating the new russian manned vehicle the clipper. Why should europe develop its own manned launcher if it can use Russian ones especially if they are launched from the Esa spaceport. This makes fiscal and political sense.
P.s. I believe that Esa just had its budget increased by contributions from the European parliament
We will start to terraform mars for two reasons.
1) If we are to make it a home for mankind we must reduce the radiation that a colonist recieves. Who wants to live in a bunker there whole life not martian colonists. People will want to wander and explore they will want to make mars there own. If the background radiation remains as it is this will be severely limited.
2) Because we can.
As to deorbiting deimos im pretty sure by the time we are ready to start public opinion and that is Martian public opinion will be against destroying what is one of mars great sites the twin moons.
Interesting point to add to this. If you have read the article in Marsnews.com it wont be seperately the Russians, Esa and the Chinese but an alliance of all three.
The Russians already have proposed an alliance with Esa mainly looking to create the clipper. But they are actively looking to have China join in the space plans.
Im sorry to say it kind of looks like NASA is out in the cold.
Think what we can do using ROV (remote operated vehicles) in use under the sea. It is when the operation that is needed becomes complex ie wiring etc then the distance and lack of senses of the operator become difficult.
Advances in virtual reality may prove the way to sort this but they are not here yet. Still the experiences we have with teleoperation at the moment mean that we can use them now if the distance is kept reasonable.
Still people will be needed
Deimos has more uses as a space port and observation platform than as a temporary way to change the atmosphere.
Deimos can also be used as a center for teleOperated robots on mars, This would allow mars to have a better industrial base a lot sooner, and improve mars as a colonisation site. And it would allow mars to be terraformed easier in the future if this industrial capacity is in place.
We wont be going to mars to terraform it immediately not till we have done a real exploration of mars. Even then as we get better experience we will find it easier to move asteroids about. Then we can use them as a means to terraform.
Why not instead of dropping Deimos redirect a couple of Carbaceous Carbonate asteroids instead?
Certainly plenty of heat and the rocks vapourisation would provide gases. If we could add a couple of snowballs it would be even better.
Never underestimate the Russian capacity to develop new ideas and to think "out of the box"
We must remember who was the first nation to get into space and to have the first man in space. The Rusians used to come up with some really novel approaches to technology and ideas.
here is some examples.
The Caspian Sea Monster
This was a gigantic military landing ship/plane that used area effect to rise over the waves and allowed something the size of a 737 to speed across the sea. It truly was a monster and its tank carrying capacity would have posed a real threat to any sea facing area. It was a truly unique and interesting idea.
Speed of sound torpedoes
The russians were testing these interesting devices which allowed rocket propelled torpedoes to go faster than the speed of sound under the water. They formed a bubble of gas around themselves to stop water drag. These devices are now being tested and developed by the USA and Britain.
Another point to note is that Russia when it came to tanks instead of building them as the west would do to fit everyone who would crew them. They instead made sure that the crews where short people who could fit the tanks. This is thinking creatively. I also think it should be noted that the Demonstration modules dont say when they where built and just how far along the program really is.
lots of things to think about.
Being tested by i believe Robert Gordon university is a machine you stand on and it vibrates your leg muscles causing them to stretch and unstretch rapidly.
This seems to help reduce muscle wasting due to low g it is currently at the stage of a prototype being tested on ESA's "Vomit comet" over bordeaux.
Though it could also lob to space in one go most of a really big space hotel.
It just comes down to how much would it cost to Develop and make this BRAND new class of launchers.
Remember that all the people who had worked on them before are now either Dead,retired or close to retirement. There will be no experience to call upon to make them.
If a shuttle C only requires a Billion or so to design the actual shuttle c as you do not need to change the configuration what would the development be for something the size of a SeaDragon.
Though i would love to see the SeaDragon idea come to fruitition i dont think any pressure group or political body will swing it. It simply is much bigger than any planned use for it other than space Power Satelites.
Reading the BIS Spaceflight magazine there was an article that attracts attention.
ESA re-thinking cooperation strategy
It is an interview with the Director-General Jean-Jacques Dordain. Its states he and ESA are seriously rethinking any future cooperation with other Space agencies after the delays they have had etc. This seems to be aimed at NASA as later in the article he is hoping for closer links with Russia and the possible future membership of Russia in ESA.
So what does this mean, certainly it looks like a combined Mars Mission with ESA and NASA is not as good bet as it had been. But with an Esa/Russian partnership that does change the equation. Also found on an ESA site there plans for a mars Hab, I could not get the web page to save but it does look very similar to the Zubrin Mars direct type Hab but with the addition of inflatable architecture.
If we dont arque with the cost effectiveness view of things it will stop or seriously reduce manned space flight. People will start bringing up market forces etc and soon will come the cancellations. The best arquement to defend manned space flight is Versatility in people that robots lack.
We have to expect that there is a chance that we will have someone die
It is the risk that must be taken, The chances of cancer are about the same as of a total mission failure, with the loss of all crew. Saying that we can decrease the risk by using proper foods containg roughage and proper vitamins, Medication can be used to reduce risks but if someone gets inoperable cancer we cant help.
The British goverment has research to design a robot that can do operations it will be linked to a real surgeon and he can do operations at a distance, one of these will be sent so that injuries can be treated. We are more likely to have base injuries like broken bones than cancer but we can be prepared just in case
Maybe I should make myself clearer, Im not AntiRobot its the Robot only attitude that I find wrong.
There is a strong minority who state there is no need to send man to space as a robot can do better. I find this inheritantly wrong. Robots are there to aid people not replace them. It is the financial disasters that are the ISS and Shuttle that give credence to the arquement to stop all manned flight.
I like robots they will provide our workforce to build the first base on the Moon and Mars, They Will have human oversight and drivers from earth certainly for the moon but they will do the hard work and they will evolve as we get experience about what works. But if i want an opinion im not asking them a thing.
The problem with conservation is it requires a lot of time and money to set up. The new industrialised countries do not have the interest to set it up. Also you must have a base load of materials to recycle with the growth these countries have they will be net importers of material for a long time and as we know materials are getting harder and more expensive to access each year. Soon i fear the Antartic will become a major mining source, why. Frankly the new industrialised countries do not have the same opinion of green issues as we do, why should they we did not when we where at there stage and preaching at them will only get you ignored.
RobertDyck Quote July10, 15:00
We may not have superconducting electronics
We do have superconducters but they rely on extreme cold enviroments, If I remember we have one that is reasonable at about -80 to -100 degrees centigrade. It was proposed to use this medium to be the powerlines of the Moon and a possible ultimate power storage battery.
We could use the Moon to mass driver stores to these asteroids ie Food Oxygen etc in the containers these get shot back to the earth we now have triangular trade. If power is easy to get on the Moon it will be cheap to make these boxes and to launch them to the asteroids.
People are flexible robots are not.
When we go to space robots will do dumb repetitive labour but if you want something to think send a man we will take a long time before any robot will be as able as Man.
Would using a heat shield made of Lunar titanium Oxide be of sufficient resistance with a feather design allow cargo to be dropped to Earth.
Also would the cargo delivered be of enough financial gain this way to make it worth the cost.
These Heat shielded designs to save cost could be shot at the Earth by Mass driver. Or placed in a Lunar lagrange point by Mass driver for return to earth orbit, then dropped down to earth.
GCNRevenger wont like it he seems to believe that all resources that mankind needs can be found on earth:).
But opinion does seem to be going the other way now, We do seem to be heading towards more human space flight as long as the robots can do everything crowd dont derail it. Not that im not in favour of robots just they should make things easier for Humans, not replace them. As to the authors opinion on world security im not sure he is wrong, actually im scared he could be right.
Dont forget the tribbles
Make them sleep inside a space suit, Its good training you know.