NASA Studying Russian 12-month Plan

rk writes:

jeff findley wrote:
We're talking about extending the duration of ISS missions to gather
more and better medical data on the effects of zero gravity. We've
done six month missions. Next, extend it to a year. Keep extending
the interval slowly until you either start to see irreversable
effects, or you reach the duration necessary for a Mars mission.

Or develop and test countermeasures. I believe there's potentially more to
this problem than characterization.

I'm not saying that NASA shouldn't do this. However, any such
countermeasures have to be developed and tested during long duration
LEO missions. This does not negate my point that you ought to test
this in LEO for the duration of a Mars mission.

Longer and longer missions ought to be the goal. How we get there is
up to the doctors (and engineers).

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

On 21 Apr 2004 09:57:14 -0400, jeff findley wrote:
(EAC) writes:
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.

Actually, the navy uses two crews for subs. So the rotation is
a 3 month patrol followed by 3 months shore duty, then another
3 month patrol, etc.

Gary

jeff findley wrote:
I'm not saying that NASA shouldn't do this. However, any such
countermeasures have to be developed and tested during long duration
LEO missions. This does not negate my point that you ought to test
this in LEO for the duration of a Mars mission.

Longer and longer missions ought to be the goal. How we get there is
up to the doctors (and engineers).

Agreed. I'm consistently amazed by the folks who propose a multi-year
mission and assume it can be carried off when we can barely do
multi-week missions.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

Gary Coffman writes:

Actually, the navy uses two crews for subs. So the rotation is
a 3 month patrol followed by 3 months shore duty, then another
3 month patrol, etc.

Historically, has this rotation been maintained during times of war?
Recent times likely haven't had a lot of action during war, but I'm
thinking of the Gulf War where the surface ships were very active and
was wondering if the subs saw deployments longer than 3 months during
those times.

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

Longer and longer missions ought to be the goal. How we get there is
up to the doctors (and engineers).

Jeff
--

Yeah and it shouldnt be at the drop of a hat for russian profit. safe small
incremental changes, after all we already went from 4 month to 6 month missions
HAVE A GREAT DAY!

I personally don't think you can justify paying for all that overhead
for someone who knows they won't be flying after the shuttle program
ends.

Ahh create a second class astronaut, with a new program and all if they
ACTUALLY occur, theres going to be a need for lots of backup management
support. Move those not interested in a year in space to a management support
position.
HAVE A GREAT DAY!

(bob haller) writes:
Longer and longer missions ought to be the goal. How we get there is
up to the doctors (and engineers).

Yeah and it shouldnt be at the drop of a hat for russian profit. safe small
incremental changes, after all we already went from 4 month to 6 month missions

Funny that the Russians have to drag the Americans, kicking and
screaming, in order to perform missions that they've done repeatedly
on their stations. Maybe the Russians still have the "right stuff"
that the Americans have lost over the years.

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

Gary Coffman wrote:

On 21 Apr 2004 09:57:14 -0400, jeff findley wrote:
(EAC) writes:

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.

Actually, the navy uses two crews for subs. So the rotation is
a 3 month patrol followed by 3 months shore duty, then another
3 month patrol, etc.

Actually the Navy (USN) only uses that system for SSBN's (missile
subs). They *don't* do it because of the length of the deployment,
but increase the availability of the hull. SSN's are single crew and
routinely deploy for 4-9 months.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

jeff findley wrote:

Gary Coffman writes:

Actually, the navy uses two crews for subs. So the rotation is
a 3 month patrol followed by 3 months shore duty, then another
3 month patrol, etc.

Historically, has this rotation been maintained during times of war?

As I point out in another message, that rotation applies to SSBN's,
not to SSN's.

Recent times likely haven't had a lot of action during war, but I'm
thinking of the Gulf War where the surface ships were very active and
was wondering if the subs saw deployments longer than 3 months during
those times.

Yes, they did. And they did before that, and they did after that and
currently.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

In article , derekl1963
@nospamyahoo.com says...
jeff findley wrote:
I'm not saying that NASA shouldn't do this. However, any such
countermeasures have to be developed and tested during long duration
LEO missions. This does not negate my point that you ought to test
this in LEO for the duration of a Mars mission.

Longer and longer missions ought to be the goal. How we get there is
up to the doctors (and engineers).

Agreed. I'm consistently amazed by the folks who propose a multi-year
mission and assume it can be carried off when we can barely do
multi-week missions.

Yep -- just as a lot of people were seriously amazed when folks were not
only proposing but planning and designing multi-week lunar landing
missions when we could barely put a chimp into orbit.

Doug