[ RadSafe ] Mission to Mars - Long story short

[Alston, Chris]

Folks

The value i remember, from an NCRP report, is 100 rem to an astronaut for the two-year round-trip to Mars.  What that value might be (or if that assumes) at maximum solar activity, I do not know.

I think that it would be irresponsible beyond belief to send humans there, before sending robots.  Regardless, we are basically broke, and there are much higher priorities to which our monies should be allocated.

Happily, I await the slings and arrows.

Cheers
cja


________________________________________
From: Alan Stahler [stahler at kvmr.org]
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 9:55 AM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Mission to Mars - Long story short

Cosmic radiation is particulate radiation; it includes nuclei Z>1, energies >
nuclear
Material shielding would be (prohibitively?) massive
Equipment to provide electromagnetic shielding would be (prohibitively?) massive
Radioprotectants (eg, chelators) are not relevant
Most "realistic" solution might be GM astronauts
-Al Stahler
"Soundings" - KVMR-FM


________________________________
From: Maury <maurysis at peoplepc.com>
To: Mike Brennan <Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV>
Cc: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
Sent: Thu, June 30, 2011 12:38:06 AM
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Mission to Mars

Would one of you correct my impression that radiation levels in or
beyond the Van Allen Belts make 'farther out' manned missions
prohibitive thus far ....?
Thanks,
Maury&Dog [MaurySiskel maurysis at peopelpc.com]
===========================================

On 6/29/2011 5:33 PM, Brennan, Mike (DOH) wrote:
> The best first step towards a manned mission to Mars would be the
> development of a space elevator, which is probably a decade of so from
> having all the pieces necessary.
>
> Right now the cost per kilo of getting things out of the gravity well is
> too high to allow for anything but a barest bones trip; more PR than
> science.  Until the price comes down a lot getting the propulsion plant,
> fuel/reaction mass, supplies, and shielding is prohibitive.
>
> Personally, I would like to see a lot more robotic missions, to Mars,
> the Moon, and Jupiter.  I think we have reached a point where the
> capabilities of unmanned craft are so high that space travel will have
> to be almost free before the trade-off is in favor of manned missions.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of
> JPreisig at aol.com
> Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 2:25 PM
> To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Mission to Mars
>
> Hello Again,
>
----------------------------------snipped----------------------------
_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
http://health.phys.iit.edu
CONFIDENTIAL: The information contained in this communication,
including its attachments may contain confidential information and
is intended only for the individual (s) or entity (ies) to whom it
is addressed . The information contained in this communication may
also be protected by legal privilege , federal law or other
applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient of this
communication , you are hereby notified that any distribution,
dissemination or duplication of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please
immediately delete and destroy all copies of this message and
please immediately notify us of the error by separate communication
. Thank you.