Long post, typed up as I read through the thread. Not in it for post count, so everyone gets the same one.
reply to post by crazyewok
I like the idea too. Anything that furthers our reaches into space is a good thing in my book!
I've also been a big fan of using centrifuges to provide some gravity. I'm in favor of a tandem system of contra-rotating centrifuges. One could lead
to changes in trajectory that would have to be corrected or accounted for, which could lead to more use of fuel. At the same time, it would take more
fuel to power a second one. Catch 22, I suppose.
I do like the strategy of it being used as a stopover for other locations. That should be a key component for making headway into the cosmos. Using
other craft to ferry people, supplies, and parts back and forth instead of using this as the main craft of transportation would surely help keep costs
down. The modular and compartmentalization aspects of the design is also great, as it will allow for newer technology and parts to be easily
replaced.
Sadly, I do think it's a pipe dream. People won't get on board for the cost. They'll say that the US$3.6B price tag is too much when it can be spent
elsewhere. People will clamor for social projects, and the leaders of our country will say that is where the money will go, but we all know it will
ultimately end up going into the military, corporations, or right into the pockets of our leaders.
reply to post by Indigent
Where is the data to back this up? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, etc...
reply to post by Indigent
Where do you get this idea from as well? The reality show idea is crazy and probably won't get off the ground, but if it gets people talking about
space exploration and brings the topic to the mainstream I'm good with it. If it does happen, I do suppose you are right that it would be landing
corpses on Mars. It is billed as a one-way trip, after all.
As far as missions planned by governments and more level-headed people go, I believe they all account for return trips. Yes, there is a lot of danger
involved, but the science, prestige, and future economic potential of it surely makes things worth it in the long run.
reply to post by JadeStar
Using this as an Aldrin Cycler (or any other form of Earth-Mars cycler) is a fantastic idea! Having two at opposite ends would make for a very
convenient and timely manner of getting people there and back easily. Plus, the fuel could be replenished on each trip past Earth. No need to send
large supply and personnel capsules back and forth when the craft is on an orbit that does most of the work for us!
The downside is that it would leave those on Mars without anywhere to go in case of an emergency that would require evacuation off planet. A large CME
or planet-wide dust storm isn't something I would want to be planet bound for in the early stages of exploration and colonization. Those are just the
first, easy examples that come to mind.
reply to post by Indigent
While radiation similar to cleaning Fukushima isn't all that great, it isn't too bad either. Also, it would not be as bad as the Fukushima clean up.
You're exaggerating.
You also have to take into account the duration and strength of the exposures. Most of the workers cleaning Fukushima have experience acute exposure,
which is a high dosage in a short amount of time. This is opposite to what would generally be experienced in space travel, which would be categorized
as chronic, meaning a low dosage over a long period.
Most of the workers for Fukushima, when it first happened, did not receive more than 180 mSv of radiation. Now that things are slightly under better
control, I think it is a fair assumption that the radiation exposure for clean up workers is even less. (The recommended maximum dosage limit for
people working in these situations is 250 mSv.)
The average dose people receive yearly is about 4 mSv. Most of this comes from natural sources, though it can be higher from medical scans, where they
live, and what their career is.
The lowest single dosage of radiation that is clearly linked to an increase in cancer rates is 100 mSv.
Single doses of 400 mSv are where radiation sickness typically begins. At this point, it is still highly treatable and should not cause death.
Exposure to a single dose of 1000 mSv (1 Sv) will show an increased risk of about 5% in having cancer at some point in your life.
At a single dose of 2000 mSv (2 Sv) is where severe radiation sickness sets in. It is still treatable, but death due to the poisoning is more
likely.
A single dose of 4000 mSv (4 Sv) is almost going to be fatal, though with prompt treatment there is still a chance of surviving, albeit a slim one.
A round-trip to Mars, not accounting for exposure to a CME, is going to result in exposure to roughly 600-700 mSv over the course of the entire trip.
That is not accounting for any stay on the planet.
Of course, this would be over time and not all at once.
My numbers are from memory, so I apologize if they are incorrect.
reply to post by Indigent
Water is actually incredibly great at shielding radiation. Alpha particles can be stopped by a sheet of paper. Beta particles by aluminum and other
foils layered with plastic, glass, or water to mitigate the generation of x-rays.The water, as well as other compounds rich in hydrogen, do an
excellent job of stopping neutrons. This is why water is used as the moderator in most nuclear reactor designs.
reply to post by JadeStar
Very well stated.
reply to post by IAMTAT
This is a general response to your posts (the second one was deleted, but it was quoted in another person's post)... Sarcasm? I'm not a regular on
the boards enough to know anyone's sense of humor around here. If so, it made me chuckle. The deletion of the second post makes me think it was
otherwise though.
reply to post by Indigent
I may have missed that. Where did anyone say that this craft would allow for shorter trips? Not being pedantic, I even went back and skimmed the
thread and didn't see anything of the sort.
reply to post by Indigent
I'm sure the costs have been calculated much in the way costs for anything are calculated. Lots of accountants and contractors. All costs are made up
until the bills are to be paid. Ever had a contractor work on your home? Lol!
edit on 1/5/2014 by cmdrkeenkid because: (no reason
given)