One-man Explorer Modules

Here's an idea for a possible private venture, sending up a one-man
vehicle on a far-future hypothetical shuttle mission. This modified
space station module would be designed to maintain life support for a
mission to Mars -- except it would be a one-way mission. To qualify
for the one-way Mars orbital flight, the passenger would have to have
an existing health condition giving him/her less time to live than the
flight's overall duration.

In other words, passengers could buy tickets allowing them to spend
their final months in Mars orbit. This would certainly not be all that
different from current trends toward space station tourism, and offers
a much more exciting venture over all.

Sounds like you might have some ethical problems with this one. Can you
imagine the nightmare of getting the payment? Would this be seen as helping
someone to die?

What if there was a mistake and the person lived longer than the life
support lasted?

Brian

--
Brian Gaff -
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
"K. M. Kirby" wrote in message
oups.com...
Here's an idea for a possible private venture, sending up a one-man
vehicle on a far-future hypothetical shuttle mission. This modified
space station module would be designed to maintain life support for a
mission to Mars -- except it would be a one-way mission. To qualify
for the one-way Mars orbital flight, the passenger would have to have
an existing health condition giving him/her less time to live than the
flight's overall duration.

In other words, passengers could buy tickets allowing them to spend
their final months in Mars orbit. This would certainly not be all that
different from current trends toward space station tourism, and offers
a much more exciting venture over all.

On Feb 16, 4:02�am, "Brian Gaff" wrote:
Sounds like you might have some ethical problems with this one. Can you
imagine the nightmare of getting the payment? Would this be seen as helping
someone to die?

What if there was a mistake and the person lived longer than the *life
support lasted?

Brian

--
Brian Gaff -
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
"K. M. Kirby" wrote in ooglegroups.com...



Here's an idea for a possible private venture, sending up a one-man
vehicle on a far-future hypothetical shuttle mission. This modified
space station module would be designed to maintain life support for a
mission to Mars -- except it would be a one-way mission. To qualify
for the one-way Mars orbital flight, the passenger would have to have
an existing health condition giving him/her less time to live than the
flight's overall duration.

In other words, passengers could buy tickets allowing them to spend
their final months in Mars orbit. This would certainly not be all that
different from current trends toward space station tourism, and offers
a much more exciting venture over all.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Its a sick idea, ill people need treatment and that requires others,
besides terminal patients are generally depressed, all you need is a
dying person depressed alone. most folks dont want to die alone.

The solution is building a nuclear or other booster to cut travel time
to a couple months each way.
minimizing lots of supplies etc. but cant send sick and dying!

Aside from the obvious legality issues, a screening process would have
to be in place -- to weed out any really sick or incapable
candidates.

The life support duration would also have to be taken care of in this
imaginary scenario. One can picture emergency resupply launches for
the guy whose health unexpectedly improves, while reentry is still out
of the equation.


wrote:
On Feb 16, 4:02?am, "Brian Gaff" wrote:
Sounds like you might have some ethical problems with this one. Can you
imagine the nightmare of getting the payment? Would this be seen as helping
someone to die?

What if there was a mistake and the person lived longer than the life
support lasted?

Brian

--
Brian Gaff -
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
"K. M. Kirby" wrote in ooglegroups.com...



Here's an idea for a possible private venture, sending up a one-man
vehicle on a far-future hypothetical shuttle mission. This modified
space station module would be designed to maintain life support for a
mission to Mars -- except it would be a one-way mission. To qualify
for the one-way Mars orbital flight, the passenger would have to have
an existing health condition giving him/her less time to live than the
flight's overall duration.

In other words, passengers could buy tickets allowing them to spend
their final months in Mars orbit. This would certainly not be all that
different from current trends toward space station tourism, and offers
a much more exciting venture over all.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Its a sick idea, ill people need treatment and that requires others,
besides terminal patients are generally depressed, all you need is a
dying person depressed alone. most folks dont want to die alone.

The solution is building a nuclear or other booster to cut travel time
to a couple months each way.
minimizing lots of supplies etc. but cant send sick and dying!

On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 09:02:21 GMT, "Brian Gaff"
wrote:

Sounds like you might have some ethical problems with this one. Can you
imagine the nightmare of getting the payment? Would this be seen as helping
someone to die?

What if there was a mistake and the person lived longer than the life
support lasted?



They wouldn't . . . obviously.

"K. M. Kirby" wrote in message
oups.com...
Here's an idea for a possible private venture, sending up a one-man
vehicle on a far-future hypothetical shuttle mission. This modified
space station module would be designed to maintain life support for a
mission to Mars -- except it would be a one-way mission. To qualify
for the one-way Mars orbital flight, the passenger would have to have
an existing health condition giving him/her less time to live than the
flight's overall duration.

In other words, passengers could buy tickets allowing them to spend
their final months in Mars orbit. This would certainly not be all that
different from current trends toward space station tourism, and offers
a much more exciting venture over all.

terminal patients usually don't have a year or more to live, they have a few
weeks or months. And just getting them to survive that long requires an
extensive support system to amke them comfortable, administer medicine, etc.
etc.

So you send them into space (the Gs from liftoff alone could kill them) and
they go into rapid decline. Which means they would most likely be dead
before the spacecraft reached Mars orbit. If they did last that long, they
wouldn't be in any condition to enjoy it, probably not even able to know
where they were any longer. So what's the point?



--
Terrell Miller


"One machine can do the work of fifty ordinary men. No machine can do the
work of one extraordinary man."
- Elbert Hubbard

"K. M. Kirby" wrote in message
oups.com...
Here's an idea for a possible private venture, sending up a one-man
vehicle on a far-future hypothetical shuttle mission. This modified
space station module would be designed to maintain life support for a
mission to Mars -- except it would be a one-way mission. To qualify
for the one-way Mars orbital flight, the passenger would have to have
an existing health condition giving him/her less time to live than the
flight's overall duration.

In other words, passengers could buy tickets allowing them to spend
their final months in Mars orbit. This would certainly not be all that
different from current trends toward space station tourism, and offers
a much more exciting venture over all.

The One-Way Mars idea has been kicked around a lot and does makes sense.

Sending the terminally-ill on a "suicide mission" doesn't seem like it'll
fly though.

How about:

- Two married couples, in the late 50's or early 60's, with backgrounds in
science and not many Earthly commitments.

- Power generation and supplies are key. Power generation would most
certaintly have to be nuclear. Before they go, pre-position a small nuke
plant at their landing site robotically. They'll still have to bring it up
online once they get there, but it will be waiting for them.

- Pre-position two "care packages" as well. Have a schedule for future
"care packages", but always aim to have two on site at any time. Given the
track record on Mars, one will eventually miss it's mark or burn in and
bounce.

- Multipurpose everything. I.e., the spacecraft bringing the "care
packages" may be able to double as living space if it were modular.

Timeline for something like this? No time soon. Maybe within 40 years.
(Yep, unfortunetly, 40 years.)

They would be true "colonists" and not just "going there to die". (How
many people who retire and move to Florida go there "so they can die"?)

- Two married couples, in the late 50's or early 60's, with backgrounds in
science and not many Earthly commitments.

sorry

Two married couples, in THEIR late 50's or early 60's, ....

On Feb 17, 7:33 pm, "Esaz" wrote:
- Two married couples, in the late 50's or early 60's, with backgrounds in
science and not many Earthly commitments.

sorry

Two married couples, in THEIR late 50's or early 60's, ....

"Beav, Ward and I are going to Mars"

Kidding. I got your meaning.

"Bang, ZOOM, Alice.. to the MARS!"

"Hey Ralph"

"NORTON YOU CAME TOO?"


40 years to get a Mars mission up? This is nuts, I have a feeling it
could be done quicker. They've talked about how to do it for years....
oh well

"David E. Powell" wrote in message
On Feb 17, 7:33 pm, "Esaz" wrote:
- Two married couples, in the late 50's or early 60's, with backgrounds
in
science and not many Earthly commitments.

sorry

Two married couples, in THEIR late 50's or early 60's, ....

"Beav, Ward and I are going to Mars"

Kidding. I got your meaning.

"Bang, ZOOM, Alice.. to the MARS!"

"Hey Ralph"

"NORTON YOU CAME TOO?"


40 years to get a Mars mission up? This is nuts, I have a feeling it
could be done quicker. They've talked about how to do it for years....
oh well

lol. How about the Brady Bunch since Mars was at least in color by then?
:-)

Yeah, 40 years is even conservative. A lot of work needs to get done on a
limited budget by then. You have to come up with a nuke generator (or
better, two nuke generators) small enough to fly, come up with new vehicles,
brainstorm on clever ideas to make things have multiple purposes, and pack
your luggage...

The "assembly line" for the "care package" vehicles needs to be in place.
Aim to always have two at the Mars site and one on Earth ready to go.
Modular vehicles that can "plug into" the vehicles already there and
increase living space. They may need a small forklift to be able to lift
and move the thing though.

Eventually, as the site becomes larger, other people can go. In about a
century, you can start thinking about how to make the site (nearly)
self-sustaining. By then, a greenhouse to grow plants should start to
become practical. It wouldn't be at first since you would be putting more
energy and resources into the greenhouse than what you get out of it...