Re: Google/X-Prize Moon Contest

On Sep 18, 10:45 am, Len <l...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sep 18, 12:25 am, fairwa...@xxxxxxxxx (Derek Lyons) wrote:





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.

Such shielding, for the brief duration of a lunar flyby or brief
orbital/landing visit, is trivial to provide.

Remember, radiation is dangerous not just in proportion to the
strength - but the duration of exposure.

Although I would like to be unconcerned, I am concerned
about solar flares during the transit from LEO to the moon's
surface (and back). Currently, I suspect that about 30 cm of
water in a storm cellar would be necessary to protect tourists
from an unpredicted solar flare. I would like to be wrong;
perhaps I could use some enlightenment on this subject.

Henry has pointed out that it is better not to worry about
cosmic rays. Limited exposure time would see to be the
best answer to cosmic rays. But I am not so sure about
solar flares. The luck factor may have been sufficient for
Apollo, but may not be for space tourism.

Len





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

http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You'll need loads more than 30 cm worth of h2o, beer or whatever for
moderating on behalf of all that lunar gamma and hard-X-ray dosage,
not to mention whatever a given halo CME might have to offer.

A quick once around orbital mission, if our sun is in it's most
passive mode, should be doable. Although, I would't personally try 6
days worth of exposure outside of our magnetosphere and much less near
that naked anti-cathode moon without first establishing a cache of
banked bone marrow as my plan B.
- Brad Guth -

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Google/X-Prize Moon Contest
    ... Low Earth Orbit. ... flights to the moon to be more dangerous than flights to a LEO station. ... about solar flares during the transit from LEO to the moon's ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Google/X-Prize Moon Contest
    ... flights to the moon to be more dangerous than flights to a LEO station. ... about solar flares during the transit from LEO to the moon's ... water in a storm cellar would be necessary to protect tourists ... best answer to cosmic rays. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Google/X-Prize Moon Contest
    ... flights to the moon to be more dangerous than flights to a LEO station. ... Such shielding, for the brief duration of a lunar flyby or brief ... about solar flares during the transit from LEO to the moon's ... water in a storm cellar would be necessary to protect tourists ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Google/X-Prize Moon Contest
    ... flights to the moon to be more dangerous than flights to a LEO station. ... about solar flares during the transit from LEO to the moon's ... water in a storm cellar would be necessary to protect tourists ... best answer to cosmic rays. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Japans Moon Ambitions - Theyre KIDDING, Right ?
    ... >> there will be a great many flights at a fairly high rate. ... >a moon rocket. ... >wouldn't kick in until we were ready for colonization. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
Loading