Re: Google/X-Prize Moon Contest
- From: BradGuth <bradguth@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 01:25:04 -0000
On Sep 17, 4:57 pm, Alan Anderson <arand...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Jeff Findley" <jeff.find...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> replied to "Jim Relsh"
<jrel...@xxxxxxxxx>:
Are you saying tourist flights to the Moon would be far to dangerous? If
so, what makes them more dangerous than the existing Soyuz tourist flights?
The cislunar environment is subject to more radiation than one finds in
Low Earth Orbit. I'd call that a legitimate reason for considering
flights to the moon to be more dangerous than flights to a LEO station.
Of course, a reasonable design for a lunar tourism vehicle would take
that into consideration and provide enough shielding to address the
problem.
The fully solar illuninated moon is at times only better than 8 to 12
fold worse off than within our Van Allen belts that can deliver 2e3 Sv/
year while shielded by 5/16" aluminum. Our moon when at 12 fold worse
off is only 274 rem or rads per hour while shielded by the very same
5/16" aluminum, and obviously it gets worse yet if your DNA is limited
to the protection as provived by a moonsuit.
Orbiting at 100 km from the moon is capable of being just as bad off
if not worse than being right down on that physically dark and salty
deck.
- Brad Guth -
.
- References:
- Google/X-Prize Moon Contest
- From: Joe Strout
- Re: Google/X-Prize Moon Contest
- From: Einar
- Re: Google/X-Prize Moon Contest
- From: Jim Relsh
- Re: Google/X-Prize Moon Contest
- From: Jeff Findley
- Re: Google/X-Prize Moon Contest
- From: Alan Anderson
- Google/X-Prize Moon Contest
- Prev by Date: Re: Google/X-Prize Moon Contest
- Next by Date: Re: Solar powered lasers in space
- Previous by thread: Re: Google/X-Prize Moon Contest
- Next by thread: Re: Google/X-Prize Moon Contest
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|