A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Space Station
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

NASA Studying Russian 12-month Plan



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old April 23rd 04, 01:51 AM
dave schneider
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NASA Studying Russian 12-month Plan

jeff findley wrote:
(bob haller) writes:

Ahh its one thing to go somewhere on a long flight thats useful, like mars,
thats justifable.

Its altogether different to spend a year orbiting earth endlessely, away from
family and friends, possibly causing long term health troubles, definetely
damaging your hearing from the poorly designed too noisey station. ALL so
russia can make a few bucks...


NASA's first experience with long term (greater than one year) space
flight ought not to be on the first mission to Mars. That is a
recipe for failure. It would be far better to gain this experience in
LEO, where evacuation to Earth is less than a day away, than on a trip
to Mars where such an abort simply won't be possible.


On the other hand, the Mars team will have signed on for that
duration. If the astronauts picked for ISS didn't sign on for longer
than 6 months, and there is genuine concern that a 1 year mission
would have adverse effects on their health, then it seems reasonable
to look for a crew that is prepared for that issue.

A pertinent data point would be long term effects on those cosmonauts
who have been on missions greater than 6 months (especially the 14
month mission). Has there been an increase in post flight problems
such as permanently reduced bone density?

I can see a younger astronaut saying, "I have too many years on earth
after the mission to spend them all with brittle bones; I want to be
healthy enough to raise a family."

/dps
  #32  
Old April 23rd 04, 05:09 AM
Revision
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NASA Studying Russian 12-month Plan

"Dave Fowler" Actually, I think there's a legal problem, too. Russian
law prohibits Russian
spacecraft being commanded by non-Russians, IIRC.


Uh probably so.


  #34  
Old April 23rd 04, 09:28 AM
Anthony Frost
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NASA Studying Russian 12-month Plan

In message
"Revision" wrote:

"Dave Fowler"
Actually, I think there's a legal problem, too. Russian
law prohibits Russian
spacecraft being commanded by non-Russians, IIRC.


Uh probably so.


Hmmm, so with Foale being born in England, and Kalieri in one of the
Baltic states, which one's the Russian? :-)

There is another solution of course. "Hello, we'd like to buy a Soyuz.
Please train this person to be its commander and this one as the
flight engineer. Here's some money." Not a Russian craft then...

Anthony

--
| Weather prediction will never be accurate until we |
| kill all the butterflies |
  #35  
Old April 23rd 04, 12:56 PM
bob haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NASA Studying Russian 12-month Plan


I can see the manager in charge of the astronauts saying, "fine,
security will escort you while you clean out your desk and turn in
your badge".

If you aren't willing to do the job, don't join the Corps.

D.


Oh that would look AWESOME on the evening news Today NASA fired 23 astronauts

(video clip of astronauts carrying out boxes of stuff from their desks looking
unhappy)

When interviewed there representive said one year stays would lead to all sorts
of permanent health troubles including permanent hearing loss.

O Keefe has been called to congress for hearings on the agency and the future
if any of manned space.

YEAH GREAT JUST FORCE THE ASTRONAUTS TO DO ONE YEAR MIISSIONS!
:
:
:
My opinion is right
  #36  
Old April 23rd 04, 02:13 PM
jeff findley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NASA Studying Russian 12-month Plan

(bob haller) writes:

NASA's first experience with long term (greater than one year) space
flight ought not to be on the first mission to Mars. That is a
recipe for failure. It would be far better to gain this experience in
LEO, where evacuation to Earth is less than a day away, than on a trip
to Mars where such an abort simply won't be possible.


Hey we AGREE on this one! I think a all up spiraling flight to a
asteroid or a long duration run in the mars transit vehicle while
still in earth orbit,


No, no, no! Again, if there are real microgravity related medical
issues that would prevent a Mars flight, you've got to make changes to
your "mars transit vehicle" design to accommodate this. One thing
that could be done is to spin the craft (manned part on one end
attached to the transfer stage by very long cables).

The issue here is how much "gravity" is necessary? Can you get by
with 1/6 G (moon), or do you need more? Do you need 1/2 G? If you
need to provide a full 1 G, this makes the mass of the structure,
cables and the fuel needed to spin and de-spin the craft higher. We
really *need* to find out what the *real* medical effects are for Mars
duration flights and we need to know a.s.a.p. These effects will
directly drive the design of your "mars transit vehicle".

If NASA is serious about going to Mars, they really need to get moving
and start investigating these issues now, not after Mars hardware is
designed and built. If they "discover" these issues after the hardware
is built, a Mars mission may not be possible without throwing out the
hardware and starting the design process over.

They could automatuically add in a audio time delay and have no windows looking
at earth.


You can do this with isolation simulations on the ground. NASA already
has some data on this. You don't need microgravity to simulate these
effects. It would be pretty cheap to recruit people to spend a couple of
years in a double wide trailer without windows. Set them up with
computers and communications with the appropriate time delay. Give
them the same exercise equipment and the same food you plan to use on
your Mars mission, all to examine the *psychological* effects.

Unfortunately, the physiological effects can only be studied in microgravity.

Whatever the vehicle it shouldnt be so loud to do permanent hearing damage


As far as noise goes, blame NASA and Russia for the current ISS
design. As I recall, JimO and separately NASA Watch both covered the
noise issue early on in the ISS program. The noise kept exceeding the
requirements, and NASA kept writing waivers (it's that "can do"
attitude to write waivers that we all know and love). If you do a web
search, I'm sure you'll find the articles. Try looking for for Zarya
and noise.

Jeff
--
Remove "no" and "spam" from email address to reply.
If it says "This is not spam!", it's surely a lie.
  #37  
Old April 23rd 04, 02:18 PM
jeff findley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NASA Studying Russian 12-month Plan

(dave schneider) writes:

On the other hand, the Mars team will have signed on for that
duration. If the astronauts picked for ISS didn't sign on for longer
than 6 months, and there is genuine concern that a 1 year mission
would have adverse effects on their health, then it seems reasonable
to look for a crew that is prepared for that issue.

A pertinent data point would be long term effects on those cosmonauts
who have been on missions greater than 6 months (especially the 14
month mission). Has there been an increase in post flight problems
such as permanently reduced bone density?

I can see a younger astronaut saying, "I have too many years on earth
after the mission to spend them all with brittle bones; I want to be
healthy enough to raise a family."


I agree. I don't doubt that these astronauts have valid reasons for
not going. I've turned down job assignments on similar grounds
myself. It's hard to be away for a long time, especially if you've
got a wife and young children.

However, there are plenty of other astronauts, and countless astronaut
candidates, that don't have these sorts of commitments.

It's time to clean house and find astronauts who are willing
to take these assignments. If we don't, how do we expect to get to
Mars? A Mars mission will be such a long flight, so far away from
Earth that if astronauts are already balking at one year ISS flights,
do we really think these same astronauts will sign up for a much
longer Mars trip?

Jeff
--
Remove "no" and "spam" from email address to reply.
If it says "This is not spam!", it's surely a lie.
  #39  
Old April 23rd 04, 02:27 PM
jeff findley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NASA Studying Russian 12-month Plan

(bob haller) writes:

Oh that would look AWESOME on the evening news Today NASA fired 23 astronauts

(video clip of astronauts carrying out boxes of stuff from their desks looking
unhappy)

When interviewed there representive said one year stays would lead to all sorts
of permanent health troubles including permanent hearing loss.

O Keefe has been called to congress for hearings on the agency and the future
if any of manned space.

YEAH GREAT JUST FORCE THE ASTRONAUTS TO DO ONE YEAR MIISSIONS!


You're such a twit. Who cares what the press thinks! Tell them the
truth. NASA is preparing for the missions that will be available and
the astronauts who were let go simply refuse to go on those missions
because they thought they were signing up for two week long shuttle
missions. Point out that the shuttle will be retired and the missions
will be getting orders of magnitue longer in the very near future.

The new space initiative will require a new breed of astronaut, one
that's willing to fly longer than the typical two week shuttle mission
or the currently typical six month ISS mission. Make it clear that
repeatedly refusing assignments on these grounds amounts to handing in
your resignation. Everyone can have temporary life situations that
may pop up from time to time, and that can be excused. However, I'd
make a rule that if you refuse three separate assignments in a time
span of three separate years for "personal reasons", you're OUT!.

Jeff
--
Remove "no" and "spam" from email address to reply.
If it says "This is not spam!", it's surely a lie.
  #40  
Old April 23rd 04, 02:49 PM
bob haller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NASA Studying Russian 12-month Plan


Damn straight!

There are far, far too many applicants that NASA turns away each time
it recruits a new class to use this as an excuse not to fly. The
answer is simple, get rid of anyone not willing to take the
assignements that will be coming and replace them with candidates who
will!

Jeff


Look astronauts are intelligent people, accepting risk with reward. Like flying
on a shuttle/ I doubt many would accept flying the saturn 5 at JSC even it were
refurbished, as it would be too risky.

Sure you can get a volunteer to do anything, no doubt someone would volunteer
to be the first guy executed on a live tv broadcast with enough money for his
family/

but thats not what a astronaut would do.


:
:
:
My opinion is right
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide Steven S. Pietrobon Space Shuttle 0 April 2nd 04 12:01 AM
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide Steven S. Pietrobon Space Shuttle 0 February 2nd 04 04:33 AM
Selected Restricted NASA Videotapes Michael Ravnitzky Space Station 5 January 16th 04 05:28 PM
NASA's year of sorrow, recovery, progress and success Jacques van Oene Space Shuttle 0 December 31st 03 08:28 PM
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide Steven S. Pietrobon Space Shuttle 0 September 12th 03 01:37 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.