[ RadSafe ] Mission to Mars - Long story short

Fri Jul 1 22:25:59 CDT 2011

Taking humans very far off the planet is problematic on so many levels. It
requires a disproportionate amount of resources to ensure the relative
safety of the astronauts as compared to what might be called primary
missions objectives otherwise.

The current physical logistics centered around the use of chemical
propellants are so stone ax as compared to travel velocities that are needed
to really get anywhere in real time are vast. 

We, as a nation, are doing a very poor job of simple upkeep of existing
infrastructure much less appropriating $$$ for advancement of basic research
and science much less space travel.

It is phenomenal what my grandfather saw in the way of advancement of
science and technology during his lifetime 1895 - 1988, but there are too
many obstacles in our way to give me any faith that we will make any
significant strides in manned space travel in the next couple of decades or
more.  Yes we may get to stand on the surface of Mars, but what real good
would come of it.

Unmanned inquiry is most probably a better bet on most counts.  We have done
some pretty phenomenal things in the last 20 years - unmanned platforms that
have lasted years past their expected length of "profitable" performance
sending back immense loads of information that have given us insight that
would not have been achievable if manned.  Like landing on asteroids?

Add to the technological variables the potential instability and volatility
of the human mind over long periods of close confinement and the equations
get way more complicated. 

Having said this, I would put on a space suit and blast off to the moon with
little provocation. I ride a very fast Ducati motorcycles daily too.

The cultural base expands at an ever increasing rate, but I don't have high
hopes of us getting very far off our little planet anytime soon.
If we had the power to accelerate for long periods of time at just 9.8
meters per second and get to relativistic speeds, maybe. But the time to
really get anywhere vs. our ability to retain our sanity and to stay focused
to get there, I'm not optimistic about.

LA, RSO
Clemson U.

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Alston, Chris
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2011 7:43 PM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Mission to Mars - Long story short

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. 
_______________________________________________
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