Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Volunteer to Simulate a Mars Mission for the ESA

Posted by CmdrTaco on Wed Jun 20, 2007 08:40 AM
from the 17-months-seems-fair-to-me dept.
Space Science
number6x writes "The European Space Agency (ESA) is looking for volunteers for a simulated trip to Mars. The simulation will put a crew of six in isolation for 17 months. The crew will be made up of 4 Russians and 2 Europeans. In all the ESA will need 12 volunteers for back up purposes. Seventeen months was chosen to simulate the time needed for the journey to Mars and back, as well as a 30 day period spent doing experiments on the red planet."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] First Details of Manned Mars Mission From NASA 329 comments
OriginalArlen writes "The BBC has a first look at NASA's initial concepts for a manned Mars mission, currently penciled in for 2031. The main vehicle would be assembled on orbit over three or four launches of the planned Ares V heavy lift rocket. New abilities to repair, replace, and even produce replacement parts will be needed to provide enough self-sufficiency for a 30 months mission, including 16 months on the surface. The presentation was apparently delivered at a meeting of the Lunar Exploration Management Group, although there's nothing on their site yet."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Volunteer to Simulate a Mars Mission for the ESA 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Will they be allowed to have sex? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 20 2007, @08:41AM (#19578725)
    Simple question. Will they be allowed to have sex?

  • Oh the humanity! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 20 2007, @08:43AM (#19578763)
    Four Russians and two Europeans cooped up for 17 months in a confined space? Do you have any idea how bad that's going to smell? It's going to be like feet wrapped in leathery, burnt bacon. Ewwww!

  • Do they intend to simulate (Score:4, Funny)

    by RealGene (1025017) on Wednesday June 20 2007, @08:44AM (#19578771)
    ...bone loss, extended radiation exposure, and catastrophic micrometeorite punctures?
    That would be a reality show worth watching...
    --Gene
        • I caught a few bits of the show, but it didn't really catch my interest until the finale. The final episode, where they convinced them that they were actually in space was absolutely superb. I'm not sure it's fair to call them retards; most people are open to suggestion to some degree, and it did seem to be well done. It's the kind of thing that makes you wonder whether you'd fall for it. I'd like to think I wouldn't, but I can't be completely sure...
  • <Aahnold>

    Get your ass to simulated Mars!

    </Aahnold>

  • Strong recommendation (Score:5, Funny)

    by edwardpickman (965122) on Wednesday June 20 2007, @08:45AM (#19578787)
    The entire crew should be made up of nerds and geeks. They can do 17 months without sex standing on their heads.

  • Bah, the Dutch did this years ago.... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Jedi Alec (258881) on Wednesday June 20 2007, @08:46AM (#19578807)
    Only we called it "Big Brother", and it was the end of tv as we knew it.
    • Wrong - Pauly Shore did it first, Budddddddddy. Biodome ftw.
    • *blink*

      You just gave me a billion dollar idea. Round up all those BB losers and fire them off to Mars. After all, they already proved that they can survive 17 years sitting on top of each other.

      Yeah, every week someone gets kicked out the airlock, but then again, I mean, who'd miss 'em?

  • Interesting ... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 20 2007, @08:48AM (#19578847)

    "Communications with the simulated mission control and loved-ones will take up to 40 minutes"
    They're running Vista?

  • Simulating the wrong mission (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anthonares (466582) <kendal30.yahoo@com> on Wednesday June 20 2007, @08:48AM (#19578853) Homepage
    Virtually all modern plans for Mars missions follow the same basic timeline: 6 months travel to Mars, 2 years on the planet, and 8 months back. The idea of a 30-day stay on the planet was abandoned long ago by NASA.

    This simulation takes away the huge reward of the long travel time, and replaces it with a brief 30 day stint of freedom.

    They'll surely get interesting results, they just won't be worth anything when it comes time to actually plan a real manned Mars mission.
    • The hard part will be getting there and back; they need to know the levels of cabin fever that are going to occur and they need to be able to test that in a simulated environment.

      Locking people in a tank for 17 months and watching how they deal with each other is a valuable experiment. Spending 2 years running around the desert in a spacesuit to simulate martian experiments...Now that would be worthless.

      • Re:Simulating the wrong mission (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Cthefuture (665326) on Wednesday June 20 2007, @10:25AM (#19580539)
        Yeah but I could deal with the confinement at lot better knowing the reward is being on Mars eventually. That and knowing I'm hurling through space at a brazillion miles an hour very far from Earth.

        Doing this experiment would drive me insane because there is no payoff for the suffering other than research data.
    • Well that not entirely fair. for the simulation how would the simulate time on mars? You mention the promise of freedom, but what freedom would you have in a simulation like this. Even when you on the planet (simulated) your still going to be trapped because it will still be the simulation? This makes more sense in my head than it does on screen but do you see what I'm trying to get at?

  • What they fail to mention in the summary (Score:4, Informative)

    by Zarhan (415465) on Wednesday June 20 2007, @08:53AM (#19578921)
    You get paid 120 EUR / day. And if I understood correctly, it's counted as "allowance", meaning it's tax-free..

    • Re:What they fail to mention in the summary (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Opportunist (166417) on Wednesday June 20 2007, @08:59AM (#19579047)
      Sounds like a fair lot 'til you realize that this is for 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and that your hourly wage is about 5 bucks. Whether you're awake or sleeping, granted, but then again, I do value my privacy somewhat.

      But hey, here's an idea. How about stuffing all those "if you got nothing to hide..." people in there? I'm pretty sure it might make them reevaluate that stance.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by daivzhavue (176962)
          120Eur / 24hours in a day = 5Eur/hour

          You're underestimating how to use a calculator by over 80%.
    • That would be great--if there were duty-free shops on Mars.

      - RG>

  • They could fund the mission by doin a reality show (Score:3, Interesting)

    by master_p (608214) on Wednesday June 20 2007, @08:53AM (#19578925)
    Since they would put the 6 people in isolation, they could sell that as a reality show and fund the mission.
  • Please correct me if I am wrong: From what I understand, the major danger from trips to Mars is poor shielding from cosmic rays and other forms of radiation during the trip. Any progress on that?

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Troed (102527)
      Yes. The location for this experiment is going to be close to the LHC - which will finish in this timescale and provide the participants with the needed cosmic rays.

    • Re:Simulated radiation trauma? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Von Helmet (727753) on Wednesday June 20 2007, @09:09AM (#19579197)

      Interestingly, I read about a bunch of tiny worms on their way back from space. They've been up there long enough to produce 25 generations and scientists are going to examine their DNA to see if it's changed along the way due to aforementioned radiation.

      Links at Google News [google.co.uk].

  • Just think... (Score:5, Funny)

    by spungo (729241) on Wednesday June 20 2007, @08:59AM (#19579041)
    Every single day, the same routine, the same faces, the same surroundings, the same conversations... or I could leave IT and sign up for this!

  • /. is falling behind (Score:5, Funny)

    by phrostie (121428) on Wednesday June 20 2007, @09:00AM (#19579061)
    /. is falling behind. this is old news.

    my wife was trying to volunteer me for this yesterday.

    wait,,,

  • I'm got dibs on being the alien lifeform (Score:4, Funny)

    by Timesprout (579035) on Wednesday June 20 2007, @09:00AM (#19579067)
    you know, the one that slaughters the crew.

  • 30 days?! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by carpe_noctem (457178) on Wednesday June 20 2007, @09:06AM (#19579157) Homepage Journal
    A 30 day trip to mars after 8 months of travel would be like a family driving the kids to Disneyland, riding on one ride, and then everybody back in the car for the ride home!

    I understand that this experiment is probably limited by funds, not a realistic simulation, etc.... but really, 30 days?
    • The alternative is 2 years, as I understand it. The problem is that Mars and Earth are only close to each other every second year or so. You have to go there as they are moving closer, and leave before they part too far again, or you have to stay there for another cycle.

      Now, 30 days is a bit short, but 2 years is too long. 17 months, with 30 days on the planet, vs 40 months with 24 months on the planet.

  • social, not ecological isolation (Score:3, Interesting)

    by peter303 (12292) on Wednesday June 20 2007, @09:12AM (#19579259)
    The space station has quasi-ecological isolation. Although they get re-supplied almost every month and have the option of immediate escape.

    Ecological isolation didnt quite work in Biosphere II (soon to become condos). It was hard to keep the atmosphere in balance and grow enough food. Most participants lost 1/4 to 1/3 of weight.

    • Re:social, not ecological isolation (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Ihlosi (895663) on Wednesday June 20 2007, @09:30AM (#19579549)
      Most participants lost 1/4 to 1/3 of weight.



      They should have made it a diet center instead of using the space for condos, then.


      That aside, IMHA Biosphere II used the wrong approach - too many things at once (several different ecosystems, lots of species, etc). A better approach could be to find the minimum number of species that is necessary (which means that there'll be a lot of algae and fungi, and not all that many vertebrates and insects), and determine what type of inputs and outputs are necessary (even on the most barren planet, there'll be some local resources to use).

  • The definition of Russian sounds weird to me.
  • There's a hell of a lot more to going to Mars that we need to understand and this experiment fills in some of the picture. Not that the radiation danger isn't important, but other experiments can deal with that problem. This requires an unprecedented combination of restriction and isolation. I think that we're going to find that the psychological impact on "astronauts" will change how we're going to need to design these missions. So, no Mars Direct-style flights in small cramped spacecraft. I suspect t
  • They should use the old Apollo sets they used when they faked the moon landings. ;)

  • Backup? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Plutonite (999141) on Wednesday June 20 2007, @09:24AM (#19579455)

    In all the ESA will need 12 volunteers for back up purposes.
    Me != Hard disk drive, thank you very much. Europeans..

  • Been there, done that... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dargaud (518470) <(ten.duagradg) (ta) (todhsals)> on Wednesday June 20 2007, @09:35AM (#19579675) Homepage
    Seriously ! I spent a year with 12 other people in the middle of Antarctica in 2005 [gdargaud.net] and we were being followed by shrinks of the ESA. There's a big difference between a winterover and the proposed experiment: the first has a purpose while the second has not. I mean the only purpose here is to stay in a can. At least when you go to Mars or to Antarctica you have a job to perform and important things to do (science and ensuring your survival because there's no way out). Here you'll have people crack down after a few weeks from a sense of uselessness. I would sign up for another winterover or a Mars mission no questions asked. I wouldn't get canned like this for a heap of gold and an all you can download porn access.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Deep Penguin (73203)
      Guillaume, having wintered at the South Pole in 2004 and 2006 (overlapping the start and finish of your Winter), I can entirely agree with the importance of a having fulfilling job to ward off Winter boredom; and I, too, would jump at the chance to go to Mars for real (I've already signed up for the 2008 Winter at Pole); but, I guess we differ in that I've already considered sitting in a tin can for months with these guys. I visited the IBMP in 1999 as a potential candidate for a 240-day "mission", but the

  • Toughen up (Score:3, Interesting)

    by sinktank (871915) on Wednesday June 20 2007, @01:28PM (#19584039)

    Motivated people throughout history have endured considerably more privation than being confined to 92 m2/person for 17 months. We know that from a psychological standpoint, people can and will make a trip of this nature. The key word here is motivation.

    But if the participants know that the whole thing is a simulation, it robs the experiment of any useful insight into many aspects of psychological stress because this motivational factor is missing; the difference between a simulated airlock and a real one will not be lost on participants. The project would thus seem to be a way to validate the astronaut selection process itself, and not just a study on long-term isolation - in other words, "we know people can handle it, but we still don't have a reliable way of knowing which ones". The recent diapers-and-knives episode amply illustrates that astronaut selection is something of an inexact science.

    Of course, this still leaves lots of room for interesting experiments on group dynamics, but we already know quite a lot on this subject: for example, years of experimentation with Skylab, Mir etc. suggested that if there was some tension in the group, ground control would usually create an obviously impossible schedule of work for the team, creating a them-versus-us mentality which tended to bring the team closer; tensions within the group were eased by colluding to grumble about ground control.

    This sort of thing has been studied exhaustively by many military and civilian organisations for a long time, so what are the objectives here?

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.