Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

RobS · 2004-01-14 00:21:01

Some day there will be settlers on Mars, as opposed to visitors for two years. The transition may be gradual and recognized in retrospect. Two crew might agree to stay a second cycle, either before departure from Earth or after arrival on Mars. Since Mars Direct type flight plans mean the first crew leaves nine months before the second crew arrives, having someone stay over a second cycle means the base doesn't have to be mothballed. Then maybe they agree to stay a third cycle. By then they like the place and the idea of people staying longer term has been accepted.

If crews to Mars involve only four people, it will be hard for anyone to stay, because mission control will not want to leave anyone alone, and it will be hard to split a crew in half unless they were recruited with the goal of two staying. But as the number being flown each opposition grows, it'll be easier to find people willing to stay, and more necessary, because the surface infrastructure will get more complex and more in need of someone to handle emergencies on the spot. I hope whatever flight architecture is developed will be one that is expandable.

-- RobS

Hazer · 2004-01-14 00:50:01

Just because you are killed in a scientific and professional manner doesn't make it any better.

How do you think the American public would felt if our Astronauts were to die at the end of their mission?
It would drive a stake through the heart of NASA and bury it at a crossroads.

realmacaw · 2004-01-14 04:35:52

Everyone is making very good points!

If we were in a race to get man on Mars as soon as possible, a one way suicide mission would be the way to go. But we aren't in that race so there probably is no reason for this. I like the idea more of people going one way or staying long term with enough supplies to last. However, if they survive after a few years the day will eventually come that they think it is a prison sentence and they want to return home. It will be like a mutiny. They will become very unhappy. In that case they should then be brought back. If they know their term has a definite end date and that they will return back they might feel much better.

What none of us have discussed is whether we send them on a one way suicide trip or not, there is a HIGH chance it will be a one way suicide trip because the dangers will be extreme. Two out of 3 space vehicles that we send there don't make it, and they have no fragile living humans on board. The astonauts that go on this mission will be real gutsy and all will be heros! It will not be a safe trip with high chance of return. Our technology is still too primitive. It is going to be highly risky.

Brian.

realmacaw · 2004-01-14 04:48:34

I want to explain why I suggested discussing this one-way suicide mission. The reason is I know spirits don't end after they die. For people who believe they do, then a one way suicide mission would be a terrible thing and immoral.

Why I KNOW (versus just believe) there is life after death is I'm one of the rare people who occasionally sees spirits. It runs in my family on my mother's side and I have it more than anyone else in my family. Other people have been with me and they've seen them too, or seen what they are doing. I know at least some of them are people that lived and died because I have seen their pictures in our geneology. When I was 4.5 years old my grandpa died. Right after he died he came back and talked to me all night. The dog knew he was there and barked all night long. I once was somewhere and watched an elderly woman fall to the ground having a heart attack. I watched as paramedics worked on her. I could see her spirit had left her body, it was in the corner of the room looking down at her body. Perhaps she could have went back into her body but I felt she would not. Sure enough, I checked and she was pronounced dead on arrival at the hospital. This is NOT a fun gift to have. I'm 39 and am still single because most girls are scared of it. They don't want to be with me and have a spirit show up one night. A real tough guy who had been a gang member once stayed a night at my place. He saw a spirit and it frightened him so badly it reduced him to tears. After that he never spent a night at my place again. It's not that it is that scary, it is just people don't expect it and DON'T want to see it and when it happens it scares people. Many movies have tried to portray this. They show the "little boy who sees spirits." I go to most of them and almost all of them get it wrong and are total fiction and Hollywood. "Ghost" was more accurate than most.

Whether you believe me or not doesn't matter. You will all die and you will all find out that there is a life after death. The reason I'm telling you this is so you understand why I would suggest a one way suicide mission. The reason is I KNOW without any doubt there is life after death. So I don't see it as a big deal. I don't want to get into discussions about life after death. That would be another subject.

Brian.

RobS · 2004-01-14 08:30:25

I believe in life after death as well, and I applaud you for being courageous enough to talk about this experience of yours. But I also don't believe in suicide, and certainly not in government policy leading intentionally to death of human beings. Indeed, the majority of people who believe in life after death--religious people--are also the people most concerned about suicide and such.

But as I noted earlier, it is not necessary. I don't think bringing people back from Mars is that difficult if we use in-situ resource utilization. Even more important, people will be willing to stay on Mars if the possibility of leaving and then returning exists. Perhaps colonists should have the right to fly back and forth once every ten oppositions or so (22 years). After they arrive, they can fly back to Earth any time after four years, but without the ability to return. Once they have stayed half the period (11 years) they could fly back to Earth with the right to fly back to Mars, but then they wouldn't have another round trip right for 22 years. An arrangement like this would mean that kids born on Mars could go back to Earth for college, stay a few years, and still have the ability to return home. And if they meet a potential spouse, perhaps one of the person's parents could transfer their right to return home to the spouse, so that he or she could come to Mars. It would mean that the round trip passenger capacity would have to be equal to ten percent of the total Mars population if there were one round trip flight every 26 months (2.2 years). Even then, the exercise of this employee benefit would be dependent on availability of space.

-- RobS

Palomar · 2004-01-14 08:53:38

*Since the topic has swerved a bit, I'm going to chime in: Rob and realmacaw believe in life after death...and likely other folks here as well.

Fine, to each their own.

I used to believe it, because of childhood religious conditioning. In my 20s I favored the concept of reincarnation, then later realized that was simply a (subconscious, but well intended) "changing of hands."

I've not seen ghosts, although I've had a few experiences in life which might be considered "paranormal." When I was a child, I could tell people what was in wrapped packages (gifts, etc.) when they were placed into my hands. What was that? I have no idea.

IMO "believe" is a strong word; it implies total acceptance. So I can't say I believe in life after death. It's possible...but I've not yet found a basis for such a belief (personally speaking).

I'm living my life as though this is the one and only -- as full and rich and filled with wonderment and discovery as possible. Because I know for sure I have *this* life, and I've seen no guarantees of any extensions.

Back to our regular programming...

--Cindy

Byron · 2004-01-14 09:14:22

I'm living my life as though this is the one and only -- as full and rich and filled with wonderment and discovery as possible. Because I know for sure I have *this* life, and I've seen no guarantees of any extensions.

Kudos to that! Now if only everyone else would think this way...

B

Adrian · 2004-01-14 09:18:02

I don't believe in life after death either... but this is straying from the point. I wonder if it's worth starting up a thread in Free Chat about the 'afterlife' since people seem to be interested in the subject?

clark · 2004-01-14 10:09:58

I vote to cut and paste the offending comments to Free Chat. This is a democracry, right

A democracy in that you can vote, but it dosen't neccessarily mean anything. :laugh:

Life after death comments moved here: [http://www.newmars.com/cgi-bin/ikonboar … f=13;t=345]Life after Death -> Free Chat

Adrian · 2004-01-14 10:20:27

You got it in one, buddy

Unfortunately I can't move individual comments to a new thread - if I could, I would seriously consider doing it in this case. Now, this digression has gone on for a bit too long and realmacaw has already said he doesn't want to get into discussion about life after death here. People are of course free to talk about the subject in a new thread I've made in Free Chat, but no longer in this thread.

Bill White · 2004-01-14 12:23:31

You got it in one, buddy
Unfortunately I can't move individual comments to a new thread - if I could, I would seriously consider doing it in this case. Now, this digression has gone on for a bit too long and realmacaw has already said he doesn't want to get into discussion about life after death here. People are of course free to talk about the subject in a new thread I've made in Free Chat, but no longer in this thread.

My other comment was copied and posted at that other place then deleted.

This comment will self-delete in less than 24 hours.

To Adrian - Dude - you gotta get yourself some better super-powers. And here I was hoping that Josh could "put words" into some clark's posts. . .

clark · 2004-01-14 12:29:30

Josh dosen't need to, the voices in my head are doing fine on their own. :laugh:

atitarev · 2004-01-14 16:35:52

Sorry for butting in, are we talking about one way mission to Mars here? ???

DannyITR · 2004-01-15 00:28:55

Strange opinion you just voiced, DannyITR.

No, BGD, it is you who are strange. To the average reader, your post indicated everything I mentioned. Include a legend if you want people to decipher your mindless babble.

Spider-Man · 2004-01-15 00:47:45

*Since the topic has swerved a bit, I'm going to chime in: Rob and realmacaw believe in life after death...and likely other folks here as well.
Fine, to each their own.
I used to believe it, because of childhood religious conditioning. In my 20s I favored the concept of reincarnation, then later realized that was simply a (subconscious, but well intended) "changing of hands."
I've not seen ghosts, although I've had a few experiences in life which might be considered "paranormal." When I was a child, I could tell people what was in wrapped packages (gifts, etc.) when they were placed into my hands. What was that? I have no idea.
IMO "believe" is a strong word; it implies total acceptance. So I can't say I believe in life after death. It's possible...but I've not yet found a basis for such a belief (personally speaking).
I'm living my life as though this is the one and only -- as full and rich and filled with wonderment and discovery as possible. Because I know for sure I have *this* life, and I've seen no guarantees of any extensions.
Back to our regular programming...
--Cindy

Well said, Cindy.

Granjo · 2004-01-15 01:09:46

It would not necessarily be one way. There are enough people with pioneering spirits out there who would compete for the chance to be the first explorers on Mars - especially among healthy seniors who have retired from working and child rearing. It might be a surprise to some to see how many people would load up and cross space as eagerly as their ancesters crossed the oceons and the mountains, and who would be just as willing to be buried near a space craft as their forbears were buried near a covered wagon path if it became necessary.

Charbax · 2004-01-15 02:10:32

I don't believe there is anything after Death. Though I believe there still are humans after death and all humans combined form one bigger network of brains which I believe we all live for.

I believe though Robert Zubrin should use a combination of suicide mission into his Mars Direct plan.

For the simple reason of saving 2 years, I think the crews should be sent to Mars at the same time as the cargo (ERV: Earth Return Vehicle) and possibly more Nuclear Power PLant, Laboratories and more provisions like Food, extra Water, extra hydrogen, equipment and so on..

So I believe it is WRONG to spend 2 years just to make sure the Earth Return Vehicle on the surface of Mars works in that it successfully is making propellant mixing Hydrogen and Methane from the Marssian athmosphere.

Astronauts should be sent to Mars as soon as we are able to lift the kind of heavy-lifts like the ERV and Cargo. And they will just have to trust that they will be able to make all this ERV work, that they will land on Mars successfully and close enough to the Cargo and ERVs, that if they don't make the ERV work they will know that they will have to wait for new fixed ERV and new Rescue Team (like in Brian De Palma's "Mission To Mars") which won't arrive before 2 years and 4 months after they arrived, and that they would know they probably would have to stay on Mars even 2 more years together with the new crew.

So I definately think we should add some risks to the Mars Direct plan. Simply because we are allready investing so much when we do decide to send the ERV and Cargo to Mars that it won't be much more of a risk for Humanity also to send the Crews at that same time.

2 years, everytime we wait for a Earth-to-Mars opportunity, is ALOT of time for all 6 billions of Humans to wait before we understand more about the Universe.

Charbax · 2004-01-15 02:22:29

Definately the first crew to Mars should be warned that there is a Good chance they will have to stay on Mars for 4 years. For the simple reason that we cannot be certain the ERV will work.

So the big Adventure for them might be traveling on Mars for long distances to find the ERV which might not successfully land close enough to the Mars Ascent Vehicle and Laboratory.

Like they might have a pressurized Rover on Mars, but it might not be able to travel all the way between Lander Module, LAboratories, Cargo with extra Food, Water, Spare Parts, and Earth Return Vehicle..

I believe we should send several crews at the same time, specially the first time.

I wonder though if on the travel between Earth and Mars if it is easy for the spaceships to dock to eatch other.. I mean in case one craft has a problem if one other craft easilly will be able to maneuver to dock to another craft so the crews can eigther change craft or just for the sake of having extra company during the 6 months travel between Earth and Mars...

Also the crews might run into problems traveling on Mars to go visit the other crews, or if one team has a problem how the other crews will be able to help..

This would possibly be one big part of the Adventure.

I guess we will be able to learn alot from the Spirit Rover, as the scientist now have a plan to make it travel a distance of over 3 kilometers on Mars!! Even though it was designed to travel only 600 meters during its 3 months long expected working time.

realmacaw · 2004-01-17 03:55:16

Does anyone think we are assuming too much to think the astronauts will lift off safely, travel to Mars safely, land safely, survive on the surface safely for an exended time, lift off safely, travel back safely, and land on Earth safely?

Two out of three Mars missions that are much simpler because they don't carry human life don't make it. I'm not saying we shouldn't go there, we should. But there are bound to be many deaths, this is not a walk in the park. Our technology is still too primitive. If our technology was good, 2/3 of all Mars missions wouldn't be unsuccessful. Perhaps in 200 years our technology will be good enough for this to almost be routine. But until then this is going to be very difficult and we must expect a lot of deaths.

I would guess a lot can go wrong on the surface of Mars if it is an extended stay. I don't know if that is the most dangerous part of the mission. I would guess it is. Does anyone know what the most dangerous part of the mission is, and if there have been scientific estimates on the probability of success (success meaning the astronauts return back to Earth alive)? Would it be more dangerous for them to stay forever on Mars or risk he return back?

Brian.

Martinkh · 2004-01-17 21:48:54

funny, how people who study "ethics" are the least ethical among us. Dr. Singer (Princeton) comes to mind, as well as the "ethicists" who support human cloning,and mixing human and animal genes. The field of ethics is a coverup for folks with no ethics, other than themselves, IMO.

Sending men to face danger is one thing, but if you break the bond of men, the willingness to sacrifice yourself for others, standing back saying "you sacrifice for me", then you deserve to be the lab rat yourself. A real man could not so that, but sadly, we seem to breed few of them these days.

RobS · 2004-01-18 01:34:46

I've never seen anyone try to calculate probabilities. It is still too difficult because we don't know what equipment will be used. My guess is getting to low Earth orbit will be the most dangerous part of the trip. We've lost 2/3 of the missions to Mars because computers were primitive, the time delay did not allow ground control to control the vehicles, and there were no pilots on board. I will bet we will do much better over the next decade because computers are better.

Six Apollos landed safely on the moon, but one had to be aborted. Maybe that gives us a measure of the odds of a Mars mission.

-- RobS

Charbax · 2004-01-18 03:14:00

Anyways, I think we should take maximum risks.

Send crew at the same time as the first Earth Return Vehicle will be sent.

Cause even if the Earth Return Vehicle turns out not to work (unlikely), then the next crew would be sent to Mars at the same time as the new Earth Return Vehicle.

So all Astronauts are risking is staying on Mars for 4 years instead of only 2 years.

So again, what I think is wrong in Zubrin's Mars Direct is that the Earth Return Vehicle needs to be sent 2 years before the crew. I say, as soon as we have the equipment to send an Earth Return Vehicle, we should also be able to send the first crew!

Martinkh · 2004-01-18 11:01:40

So all Astronauts are risking is staying on Mars for 4 years instead of only 2 years.

"All"? That could be enough to condemn these men to never stepping foot on earth again, or of being cripples with short lives if they do. That long on such low gravity, plus the long stretches of zero gravety (assuming the trip will not have the power to maintain constant accelleration) would weaken them badly. I would imagine that they would be crazy as loons too, unless you sent 200-300 at once. 20 people or less is not enough company for such a long time. We should have lots of goodies parked in Martian orbit first, and should first send a crew to assemble what is parked. Quite possibly they should have a healthy orbiting space station.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2004-01-14 00:21:01

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#27 2004-01-14 00:50:01

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#28 2004-01-14 04:35:52

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#29 2004-01-14 04:48:34

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#30 2004-01-14 08:30:25

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#31 2004-01-14 08:53:38

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#32 2004-01-14 09:14:22

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#33 2004-01-14 09:18:02

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#34 2004-01-14 10:09:58

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#35 2004-01-14 10:20:27

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#36 2004-01-14 12:23:31

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#37 2004-01-14 12:29:30

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#38 2004-01-14 16:35:52

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#39 2004-01-15 00:28:55

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#40 2004-01-15 00:47:45

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#41 2004-01-15 01:09:46

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#42 2004-01-15 02:10:32

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#43 2004-01-15 02:22:29

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#44 2004-01-17 03:55:16

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#45 2004-01-17 21:48:54

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#46 2004-01-18 01:34:46

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#47 2004-01-18 03:14:00

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

#48 2004-01-18 11:01:40

Re: Send Astronauts One Way - A Planned Suicide Mission

Board footer