Posted on 05/02/2016 11:27:29 AM PDT by BenLurkin
The plan begins with a Dragon capsule, similar to one of the cargo ships now parked at the International Space Station, blasting off for Mars aboard a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket as early as 2018.
The Falcon Heavy, which will have 27 first-stage engines, compared to the nine aboard SpaceX’s current Falcon rocket, is scheduled for its first flight before the end of this year. Falcon Heavy will be the most powerful U.S. rocket to fly since NASA’s Saturn 5 moon rockets of the 1970s.
...
SpaceX, which has multibillion-dollar contracts with NASA to fly cargo and crew to the space station, won’t be getting financial support from NASA for its debut Mars mission, known as Red Dragon.
The prospect of SpaceX’s self-financed journey to Mars, one which Musk clearly intends to develop to the point of landing people, casts new light on NASA’s own Mars program. The project costs NASA about $4 billion per year and does not yet include development of a habitat for deep-space travel or a vehicle to land and then take off again from the surface.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.discovery.com ...
Don’t forget the potatoes.
Bingo.
The most dangerous radiation any interplanetary astronaut will face is gamma radiation, which is not affected by magnetic fields.
Here's a hard number with Ginger Rogers, but you're welcome to do a Google search or look around Wikipedia.
Calculated Risks: How Radiation Rules Manned Mars Exploration
Uh...no.
Nobody’s going.
Cost/Benefit.
What makes you so sure? DMA connection to God?
Nope. Radiation isn't that strong in space. The capsule will do the job just fine.
Whatever you do, don't do a Google or Wikipedia search, you'll get your bubble burst.
Whatever you do, don’t read the NASA documentation.
Yeah. Sure. What you said.
It is all about shielding and exposure times. The shielding is based upon the mass of material that separates the person from exposure to space. The atmosphere provides about 10 tons per square meter of shielding for "earth normal" exposure. The magnetic field is also very helpful.
Don't get me wrong--I'd love to see us explore our solar system. I'm a huge fan of scifi. I also see our economy, our will to put people in danger for the sake of knowledge (non-existent) and other things going on.
It's just not going to be.
The benefits that came from the space program are numerous and profound. The economy was as its very best when the space program was going full bore. People were engaged in many things, and those endeavors were all meaningful. The days of leading up to and through Apollo were wonderful times. Too bad you missed them.
As for endangering people, astronauts are volunteers. Image where we would be right now if your stance was taken as we began to settle the Wild West.
Maned trips into the solar system will happen. Sit back and enjoy the spectacle.
I didn't--that's my point. Compare our national will to go to the moon in the 60s with today's aversion to risk.
We're not sending anyone up there past the ISS.
Ok, the ONLY number given was 30mSv (30Rem) for the trip to Mars. Big whoop. My lifetime exposure is 32mSv (32Rem). Another 30 Rem over the space of a year or so? Big deal.
These are NOT Acute exposures, but Chronic. The only, and I mean ONLY effect is an increase in the risk of cancer.
My lifetime exposure has raised my chance of cancer from 25% to about 28%. Big Deal.
Google search yourself before you spout nonsense. My adult lifetime has been spent working with and in radiation. So, answer the dang questions or be quiet, cuz you are showing your ignorance.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.