Radiation and manned flight.

Hi folks, thought I'd introduce... or attempt to, some more sane discussion
here for a change.

Seems to me, that although from the transport point of view, we can get
humans to the moon and to Mars, and probably back again, the difficult
question of radiation appears to be, if not swept under the carpet, at
least filed for later.

It will have to be tackled if we are going to set up shop on the moon, and I
can see that this may well be possible in a built environment, but who
shields the builders, and what about the journey. The Apollo flights were
pretty lucky or well timed, depending on who you read, because there was
little protection available there, other than as far as I could tell,
orienting the craft so more of it was in the way! Not much you could do on
the surface of course.

So, shielding is heavy, and presumably, some kind of magnetic deflection is
either impracticable, or just won't work of high energy particles spewed by
the sun.

I just wonder if we are, in effect going to be imprisoned on our little
planet by this problem. After all, if someone could crack the radiation
problem, there would be no more worries about nuclear power on Earth.

So, are there any experts here who would know if this problem is a show
stopper outside of our magnetic field?

Brian

--

Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________

In article ,
"Brian Gaff" wrote:

Hi folks, thought I'd introduce... or attempt to, some more sane discussion
here for a change.

Seems to me, that although from the transport point of view, we can get
humans to the moon and to Mars, and probably back again, the difficult
question of radiation appears to be, if not swept under the carpet, at
least filed for later.

It will have to be tackled if we are going to set up shop on the moon, and I
can see that this may well be possible in a built environment, but who
shields the builders, and what about the journey. The Apollo flights were
pretty lucky or well timed, depending on who you read, because there was
little protection available there, other than as far as I could tell,
orienting the craft so more of it was in the way! Not much you could do on
the surface of course.

So, shielding is heavy, and presumably, some kind of magnetic deflection is
either impracticable, or just won't work of high energy particles spewed by
the sun.

I just wonder if we are, in effect going to be imprisoned on our little
planet by this problem. After all, if someone could crack the radiation
problem, there would be no more worries about nuclear power on Earth.

So, are there any experts here who would know if this problem is a show
stopper outside of our magnetic field?

Brian

It is a real problem, and it has been calculated that astronauts who go
to mars & return will suffer some brain damage. The solution is to
plant a permanent colony so you can breed undamaged people, and the dose
is a lot less for a one-way trip.

There are also some theoretical considerations that suggest we are in a
minimum of cosmic ray activity and when a supernova's radiation in our
galaxy reaches earth we may have to suspend manned space activity for a
century.

--
Free men own guns, slaves don't
www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/

It occurred to me some years ago that the main reason for mutations and the
sexual methods used on our planet are probably due to radiation pressure
anyway.

I'd have thought that rather than brain damage, damage to the genes and
sexual problems, even cancers might be a consequence of space travel
outside of the magnetic field of our planet.

As neither Mars nor the Moon seem to have a real magnetic field, other than
a remnant set in the rocks from some earlier time, I cannot see how we could
be safe in either place.


Brian

--

Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________

Brian Gaff wrote:

It occurred to me some years ago that the main reason for mutations and the
sexual methods used on our planet are probably due to radiation pressure
anyway.

I'd have thought that rather than brain damage, damage to the genes and
sexual problems, even cancers might be a consequence of space travel
outside of the magnetic field of our planet.

As neither Mars nor the Moon seem to have a real magnetic field, other than
a remnant set in the rocks from some earlier time, I cannot see how we could
be safe in either place.


Shielding is easy enough if you have easy access to mass
and cheap ways to move it. On Mars or the Moon a bulldozer
can excavate a pit, line the pit with locally made concrete
as well as a roof support system, then backfill the roof
with a few meters of rock and soil. Shielding mass on a
spacecraft is much more complicated because of the cost of
moving mass. Given the current administration's history of
cheapness on things that really count I'd be guessing that
the astronauts on a voyage to Mars would have to share
one space suit between them.

JazzMan
--
************************************************** ********
Please reply to jsavage"at"airmail.net.
Curse those darned bulk e-mailers!
************************************************** ********
"Rats and roaches live by competition under the laws of
supply and demand. It is the privilege of human beings to
live under the laws of justice and mercy." - Wendell Berry
************************************************** ********

There's an easy fix for this. Limit crews for long-duration spaceflight to
people in their late 40s. The radiation-induced cancers generally take
decades to become lethal.

This is an old idea. My boss at McDonnell Douglas, the late Pete Conrad
(Apollo 12), mentioned this work-around in several of our discussions. Pete,
of course, believed (correctly) that he would have been a prime candidate
for the first manned Mars mission that would have taken place sometime in
the 1980s, if the recommendations of the 1969 Space Task Group had been
accepted in the post-Apollo period. Pete would have been in his 50s by then.

Later
Ray Schmitt






"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
. uk...
Hi folks, thought I'd introduce... or attempt to, some more sane
discussion here for a change.

Seems to me, that although from the transport point of view, we can get
humans to the moon and to Mars, and probably back again, the difficult
question of radiation appears to be, if not swept under the carpet, at
least filed for later.

It will have to be tackled if we are going to set up shop on the moon, and
I can see that this may well be possible in a built environment, but who
shields the builders, and what about the journey. The Apollo flights were
pretty lucky or well timed, depending on who you read, because there was
little protection available there, other than as far as I could tell,
orienting the craft so more of it was in the way! Not much you could do
on the surface of course.

So, shielding is heavy, and presumably, some kind of magnetic deflection
is either impracticable, or just won't work of high energy particles
spewed by the sun.

I just wonder if we are, in effect going to be imprisoned on our little
planet by this problem. After all, if someone could crack the radiation
problem, there would be no more worries about nuclear power on Earth.

So, are there any experts here who would know if this problem is a show
stopper outside of our magnetic field?

Brian

--

Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________

JazzMan wrote in :

Shielding is easy enough if you have easy access to mass
and cheap ways to move it. On Mars or the Moon a bulldozer
can excavate a pit, line the pit with locally made concrete
as well as a roof support system, then backfill the roof
with a few meters of rock and soil.

Why not just drill down and excavate underground. Then you'd have a nearly
air-tight volume....and you don't need to get anything to the moon except
some drills.

Tom

Tom Kent wrote:

JazzMan wrote in :

Shielding is easy enough if you have easy access to mass
and cheap ways to move it. On Mars or the Moon a bulldozer
can excavate a pit, line the pit with locally made concrete
as well as a roof support system, then backfill the roof
with a few meters of rock and soil.

Why not just drill down and excavate underground. Then you'd have a nearly
air-tight volume....and you don't need to get anything to the moon except
some drills.

Tom


Tunneling machines are much more complex and difficult to transport
than a 'dozer type device, and tunnelling is much more complex and
difficult than cut and cover. Ultimately a tunneling machine setup
would be the way to go, but a 'dozer seems best for a beginning.

JazzMan
--
************************************************** ********
Please reply to jsavage"at"airmail.net.
Curse those darned bulk e-mailers!
************************************************** ********
"Rats and roaches live by competition under the laws of
supply and demand. It is the privilege of human beings to
live under the laws of justice and mercy." - Wendell Berry
************************************************** ********

"JazzMan" wrote in message
...
Tom Kent wrote:

JazzMan wrote in :

Shielding is easy enough if you have easy access to mass
and cheap ways to move it. On Mars or the Moon a bulldozer
can excavate a pit, line the pit with locally made concrete
as well as a roof support system, then backfill the roof
with a few meters of rock and soil.

Why not just drill down and excavate underground. Then you'd have a
nearly
air-tight volume....and you don't need to get anything to the moon
except
some drills.

Tom


Tunneling machines are much more complex and difficult to transport
than a 'dozer type device, and tunnelling is much more complex and
difficult than cut and cover. Ultimately a tunneling machine setup
would be the way to go, but a 'dozer seems best for a beginning.

One alternative some have proposed, but I suspect needs more work to qualify
is the use of lava tubes.

Find one, drop into it.. inflate your shelter... instant radiation and
meteorite protection.


JazzMan
--
************************************************** ********
Please reply to jsavage"at"airmail.net.
Curse those darned bulk e-mailers!
************************************************** ********
"Rats and roaches live by competition under the laws of
supply and demand. It is the privilege of human beings to
live under the laws of justice and mercy." - Wendell Berry
************************************************** ********

Sometimes we can't see the forest for the trees. Doesn't anybody remember
the Nevada nuke tests of the '50s and '60s? You make a small vertical hole
in the ground, insert an atomic suppository and instantly, you have a 100
foot diameter spherical evacuatio

Ahh what about the minor detail of residual radiation from the blast
..
..
End the dangerous wasteful shuttle now before it kills any more astronauts....

small vertical hole
in the ground, insert an atomic suppository and instantly, you have a 100
foot diameter spherical evacuation. That's where your astronauts will
live, work, and multiply, shielded 100% from cosmic radiation.

Except that it will collapse from above, just like those craters from the
nuclear testing.