It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The instructions per second on orion are something like 6000 times more than Apollo, which sounds like a lot, but I expected it to be even more, like 100,000 times greater. The faster modern electronics are more sensitive partly because they are faster and partly because the transistors are smaller.
originally posted by: eriktheawful
Orion is not "somewhat" more advanced. It is MUCH MUCH more advanced than any of the Apollo craft were!
That is a big concern for longer trips. The trip to the moon was so short it wasn't much of a worry but a trip to Mars would take many times longer. Unfortunately, most shielding against the worst form of cosmic rays is relatively ineffective and actually increases the particle count because of the "shower" effect.
originally posted by: Bedlam
In interplanetary space, there's a good bit of radiation over a much longer period of time. I'd be more worried about that, frankly, than a single exposure gotten from the VAB as you dive through it as fast as you can manage.
I tend to agree with Turner that the travel time needs to be reduced to reduce radiation risk, but exactly how we're going to do that isn't clear at this time.
A thicker hull can help block lower-energy cosmic rays, but any high-powered rays can easily pass through, Turner notes. Plus, doubling the nominal thickness of a spaceship hull only reduces the threat to astronauts by about 10 percent, a number that depends on the nature of both the rays and the shielding. That extra shielding also adds weight to a spacecraft, limiting what can be devoted to supplies for science and survival.
Turner says the best way to mitigate the danger from cosmic rays won't come from shielding. Instead, he thinks the solution will come from reducing the time astronauts spend traveling to and from other worlds.
But one of the big risks going to the moon was a solar flare. NASA's solution to that problem was to roll the dice and make the trip short enough to lower the odds of the astronauts getting exposed to solar flare radiation.
Yes, they did have somewhere to "hide" in the command module which had the most shielding, for most of the mission, but the problem was the lunar module wasn't much of a hiding place so once that separated from the command module, the astronauts no longer had much protection from particle events.
originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
This is true, but they did at least go to great lengths to monitor 'space weather' so that they could warn the crews to take whatever action they could to reduce their exposure, which frankly amounted to 'hide'.
originally posted by: odzeandennz
Thanks again both for clarification.
But im still none the wiser, if we know already how to safely pass the region, why not use the same , or modified tech used back then.
Why not simply shield modular and advanced technology we have today in layers upon layers of lead then activate after we get through the belts.
Im unsure why its taking this long to try to find a solution we already have.