Re: An outfit suitable for Mars
- From: Cardman <do-not@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 01:46:53 GMT
On 16 Aug 2005 23:58:58 GMT, Andrew Gray <andrew.gray@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>They're already equipped with EVA suits for the surface - it's not like
>we're talking having to cart that much new stuff. I wonder how much an
>"orbital oversuit" for a Mars-surface suit would mass? You'd need to
>rig a cooling system, I suppose, but things like pressurisation are
>already dealt with...
My view would be that any Mars suit would not be very suitable for
space use. The required temperature differences are vast, which would
certainly create problems.
>> Also there should not be such a catastrophic failure that should
>> require an outside repair, when just about everything should be kept
>> inside. I would also have thought that in some modular CEV design they
>> could simply cast off any leaking section.
>
>Casting off, as a method of problem avoidance, is... drastic. And very
>good at removing any and all safety margins you may have.
Should this be planned in the initial design, then this could even be
done quite efficiently under computer control. In any case they have
been doing docking events for years.
And should one of your modules have a leak, then just like on MIR the
best option could be to simply ditch it. Not the best option on a long
Mars trip, but removing the bad module could solve the problem.
>
>My point is that in the current reference mission, the craft they're
>flying in is the *same one* that will be on Mars. So there'll be an
>airlock - albeit not one perfectly designed for the task - on-board
>already.
Yes, there should be a suitable airlock, even if you may stress your
biological and dust cleaning system.
>> Ah, but then NASA would not expect them to die. Or at least any death
>> plans would be more unofficial.
>
>And going to the effort of shipping body-bags is a "more unofficial"
>plan?
They can stick a couple in amongst the towels or something. Also there
is the option of using their Mars suit.
>>>If cause of death is known, and not thought to be a result of the flight
>>>conditions,
>>
>> Well it does seem a little difficult for just one astronaut to end up
>> dead within the safe confines of the Mars Craft. Or at least I would
>> hope that astronauts are beyond murder.
>
>Yeah, but accidents do happen. Remember all those "accidents happen at
>home" posters; it's not likely for an astronaut to end up dead, but if
>one does it's not at all implausible that it was a tragic accident when
>he forgets that penknives behave weirdly in freefall, and slips cutting
>a roll of tape.
Sounds like a long shot to me.
Maybe an unexpected liquid spill over a control panel could work to
kill them. Electronics shorts. Large explosion. And the number 8
keyboard character goes through the eye and penetrates the brain.
Since I trust that they have planned for most accidents, then I am
sure that it is very difficult to kill an astronaut here.
Oh, I have a good one. Airlock malfunction as astronaut disposes of
dead astronaut's corpse. And you would not even need to worry about
having to do a second corpse disposal. :-]
>> The most likely cause of a single astronaut death seems to be failure
>> of the life support systems, when the death of one astronaut
>> stabilizes the system for all the rest.
>
>I'm not sure I see this as plausible. How would their death "stabilise
>the system"?
Things like food and oxygen. Should they use the grow option.
>Given the choice of decomposing two feet away from my colleagues for six
>months and then being buried on Mars vs. being "buried" in deep space, I
>can tell you which one I'd be putting in the will.
Yes, this could be an astronaut choice, should they bother to ask
them.
>...so? It's a big, big solar system out there. One more 200kg "rock"
>isn't going to cause anyone any more trouble.
The point is that all methods of corpse disposal to date involve the
safe destruction of that corpse. Burial to the ground. Cremation to
ashes. Sea burial to feed the sea creatures.
The only exception is cryogenics, where they plan to bring those
people back.
You dispose of them this way and you would have a frozen astronaut
floating about the solar system for like eternity.
Hell you could even start up ghost stories of frozen astronaut, angry
about being dumped forever in space, attacking and damaging other
space craft. Family screams in terror. And soon enough it would be a
front page headline.
It is also true to say that with the colonization of the solar system,
then sure enough he would soon turn back up drifting across some space
freeway.
And you know what will really happen. As sure enough, in a few
thousand years from now, he would end up in some science study, where
he will then go on display in the British Museum.
>> I believe that the best option is to simply seal them up and to stick
>> them in the airlock (aka morgue), when then they would be nicely out
>> of sight, where they can then have their hero's burial.
>
>I still fail to see the benefits of this versus just shoving them *out*
>of the airlock to start with. Kick them out, check they're free, go back
>inside - even an unmodified Mars-surface suit should be okay for a
>"stand in the doorway for a couple of minutes and shove" EVA - fire your
>RCS for a second or two, then correct your trajectory back the next
>morning. Minimal expenditure of reserve consumables, and no danger of
>encountering the body (and the attendant psychological issues) again.
All well and nice, should you want stories concern space craft attacks
by a dead astronaut. Long claws. Flames from eyes. Enough to turn this
into folklore.
On Mars it is not that much effort to dig a shallow grave and to bury
them. Still, I guess even this is not an ideal disposal method, when
they would still be deep frozen.
Still, since I doubt that a cremation would work too well on Mars,
then being buried seems like the best option.
>You're going to a lot of trouble just to allow for a nice burial,
>otherwise.
Dumping them in the airlock for a few months, followed by burying them
on Mars, does not seem like that much effort. And since he has died,
then it is not exactly respectful to moan about digging a hole to put
him in.
>Just to summarise what I'm driving at, here - I strongly suspect any
>near-term Mars craft will have the ability to do some form of in-transit
>EVA;
I doubt that the suits will be suitable.
>it may be one of limited scope, or only an emergency plan, but the
>capacity will be there.
Yes. Kind of like jumping out and hoping for the best.
>Not automatically because they want to include
>the ability for the crew to do trans-Earth EVAs (they were necessary on
>Apollo but won't be now), but simply because either the method of
>construction or the flight plan will require there be an airlock and
>some form of suits on board.
There would certainly be an airlock, but this craft would be all
assembled and loaded before the crew arrive. Also the construction
could well happen by direct docking in the future.
>Once you *have* an airlock, and if you're willing to use it, it becomes
>a hell of a lot more sensible to dispose of the body, after an autopsy
>if one is felt necessary, at the earliest safe opportunity.
That could certainly be done. The question is more one of it you want
to. This seems more like the choice of the astronauts in question.
NASA could possibly run with the public mood and give them a hero's
exit, which means that an airlock disposal is not the best option.
>Come to think of it, I suspect that if the airlock is well-accessible,
>it may become part of the plan to discard garbage through it; dumping a
>sack of crud a month would probably do wonders for the habitability of
>the crew module.
That could well be possible, but they should lose a little air each
time that they use it.
>Certainly your Mars flight bears a strong resemblance
>to stations more than "normal" spacecraft, and they've historically done
>regular discards - Mir/ISS on Progress, Skylab into the empty tank. But
>this is unrelated, and I wouldn't expect it to be the driving factor for
>the spacecraft design.
They will be wanting a good airlock for Mars. They do not even yet
know what hazards are out there. So not only would they want all the
Martian atmosphere removed, but these suits would have to be scrubbed
clean.
So it seems like a design requirement. And sure enough they would plan
in space use.
>Mmm. I'm not sure how much research has been done on "mechanical"
>medicine in freefall - broken bones, cuts, minor surgery, &c - but it'd
>turn out to be an interesting field of study.
NASA wishes to do human related science. I am not sure what they would
plan along the lines if dissection, surgery, blood transfusion,
illness and injury detection and good old anatomy.
In fact it poses quite an interesting question of what they would
actually do if they caught a Martian bug infection, as rare as this
event would be.
>(Have any of the biological experiments involved mammals with broken
>bones, to study healing? It'd be interesting, but I can see ethical and
>political reasons it'd not happen...)
Broken bones is certainly interesting, but finding a victim is the
problem. I do not see that a broken bone on Mars would be a serious
event, when it is not much different to home.
>Yeah, but most "domestic accidents" - the aforementioned knife-slip, or
>a sudden nasty bout of choking - are fairly obvious in terms of causes.
Then waking up one morning and finding that one of your follow
astronauts died in the night is not. Autopsies are almost always done
when the cause of death has any doubt.
I am not even sure if NASA has any plans to handle an autopsy in
zero-G, when open them up and they would leak all over the place. And
dice and slice time on their organs is not exactly problem free
either.
Having a centrifuge would be useful here.
>> Perhaps. It certainly helps to deal with the reality of death, but
>> even surgeons can get spooked.
>
>Reality of death is one thing; I would be amazed if the average
>forty-something intelligent well-balanced professional flying a Mars
>mission was not comfortable with the reality of death.
Medical students tend to be shown death quite early on. Like a friend
of mind worked in a hospital morgue. And later on they tend to see a
lot of people dropping dead.
>Sleeping beside a corpse is... another thing entirely.
I think that I could handle that one. There is nothing to fear but
fear itself. And do you think that your astronaut friend would come
back and attack you? "How?" and "why?" would be two good questions.
Still, under such a stressful mission, where such a death could
highlight their own future, then it would be best to avoid freaking
them out further.
Cardman.
.
- References:
- An outfit suitable for Mars
- From: clvspamblock
- Re: An outfit suitable for Mars
- From: Brad Guth
- Re: An outfit suitable for Mars
- From: Cardman
- Re: An outfit suitable for Mars
- From: Andrew Gray
- Re: An outfit suitable for Mars
- From: Cardman
- Re: An outfit suitable for Mars
- From: Andrew Gray
- An outfit suitable for Mars
- Prev by Date: Re: Busy Launch Week
- Next by Date: Re: An outfit suitable for Mars
- Previous by thread: Re: An outfit suitable for Mars
- Next by thread: Re: An outfit suitable for Mars
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
