(EAC) writes:

jeff findley wrote in message ...
I find some of the comments (in your article) by NASA astronauts very
disturbing. They make it sound like they wouldn't consider taking
that long of a mission. If that's the case, perhaps NASA needs to
"clean house" very soon. If we aren't flying astronauts now that are
willing to perform long duration missions, how do we ever expect to
get to Mars?

Correct. Though the question that one need to ask is... is it right to
send those people out there that long?

It certainly is the right thing to do, unless we want to deny the
overriding human desire to explore. Note that throughout history,
exporers on (and off) ocean going vessels had to endure similar
psychological conditions, yet this never seemed to stop these
missions.

You'll find no shortage of volunteers. The fact that some of NASA's
current astronauts, originally selected to fly shuttle and LEO space
station missions, don't want to fly longer than six months isn't too
surprising. Typical shuttle missions are on the order of one to two
weeks, which is the duration of mission that many of the current
astronauts thought they would fly.

All that really needs to be done is make it clear to the current set
of astronauts that missions *will* get longer and if they aren't
comfortable with that, maybe it's time for them to hang up the space
helmet and look for other work.

Further astronaut selection, if it's really necessary, should focus on
finding people who are psychologically fit for this type of separation
from "home". There are *many* professions where this is necessary.

I find it amazing that none of the Human Rights organizations object
to long term space missions, but then again, HR organizations are made
to pressure organizations and countries, and not made to help humans.
Of course, I'm sure that if their boss told them to pressure/harass
NASA or any other space organization because cruel treatment to
astronauts/cosmonauts/taikonauts/and so on, they will do so.

I can't believe this pansy opinion. Again, there are many jobs where
separation from "home" for extended periods of time is expected, yet
the Human Rights organizations don't seem to be going after operations
at the South Pole base because of this.

For good examples of how to deal with the psychological issues of long
term separation from "home", go talk to the Navy. They've been doing
this sort of thing for as long as they've existed.

By the way, the longest record for long stay hold by Mir is 437 days,
done by Valeri Polyakov, and he was quite all right when he got back
despite his stay in orbit and his quite moderate age (52 years old).

http://www.airspacemag.com/asm/mag/supp/jj96/supp1.html

However it should be noted that Valeri gets constant supplies, regular
and almost instaneous communication, within short distance of Earth
and capable of going back to Earth at almost anytime, and have a big
view of Earth ("Your infatuation with this planet is irrational.").

Again, talk to the Navy. When you're deployed on a nuclear sub
(e.g. one with missiles), you're similarly cut off from the earth.
You don't even have windows on a sub.

So... While a long stay on a space station orbiting on has been done
without a quite unhealthy effect, a trip to Mars might be different.
It also should be noted that long stay breaking records till now are
only done aboard Mir, and not aboard the ISS. Maybe someone wanted to
set a new record aboard the ISS too?

Certainly there is a difference. It means NASA has to be careful
about the type of astronauts they pick for long term missions. It's
clear from the comments of some of the current astronauts that there
are some in the astronaut office that lack "the right stuff" for
extended missions.

Anyway. If one want to have astronauts up there for quite a long time
and they don't want to, there's one way to do so.

Trick them.

Just send them up there, tell them that it's only for a few months,
then later on after a few months, ask them to stay up there for a few
more months, and again, and again, so on till the desire amount of
time needed is fulfilled or they threaten to mutiny or about to gone
insane.

This is absolutely stupid. Just make it clear to them that they're
not getting future assignments because the missions are longer.
Perhaps there will still be some shorter duration missions to assemble
lunar and Mars craft in LEO, but those won't get them any glory.

If there really are medical issues with flights this long, wouldn't it
be prudent to find out about them a.s.a.p.?

If there are medical issues with flight this long, shouldn't it be no
one is allowed to do so?

Again, this is a pansy attitude. Take a look at the profession of
deep sea divers. There is a great risk to their health, yet there are
always people willing to do the job for the right pay.

If this does turn out to
be the case, the solution could be an engineering one. You split your
ship into two parts, separated by a long cable, and spin the thing for
the trip to and from Mars.

I don't know if this way is preferable, since that it will require the
spacecraft to spin around while traveling.

Since most of the trip to and from Mars would otherwise be spent in
micro-gravity, what's the problem? You do your burn to set up your
transfer orbit, then spin the vehicle. If you have to do a mid-course
correction, stop the spin, do the correction, then spin it up again.

Then there's the fact that
people tend to forget, that spacecrafts are travelling at a high speed
and that space is NOT empty, where's the deflector dish?

Exactly how is this risk different for a spinning versus a
non-spinning craft?

And also the physical illness of long term stay in space are not also
due the lack of gravity influences or lack of gravity-like influences.

And exactly what would that be? Other than the radiation dosage,
which can be managed with a proper spacecraft design, what other
issues are there?

Of course, physical problems isn't the only thing, since there're also
mental and social problems with people being separated from their
community so long.

Again, talk to the Navy. I'm sure the submariners would be happy to
know that you think their jobs put them in so much psychological
peril and are implying that they can't handle it. If this were really
the problem you think it is, the Navy wouldn't be able to staff their
boats.

Jeff
--
Remove "no" and "spam" from email address to reply.
If it says "This is not spam!", it's surely a lie.