Inside the 3D-Printed Box In Texas Where Humans Will Prepare For Mars (theguardian.com) 28
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: Red sand shifts under the boots of the crew members. In the distance, it appears that a rocky mountain range is rising out of the Martian horizon. A thin layer of red dust coats the solar panels and equipment necessary for the year-long mission. This landscape isn't actually 145m miles away. We are in a corner of the Nasa Johnson Space Center in Houston, in a large white warehouse right next to the disc golf course and on the tram route for tourists and school groups. But starting this June, four volunteer test subjects will spend a year locked inside, pretending to live on Mars. Nasa researchers say they're doing everything they can to make it as realistic as possible so they can learn the impact that a year in isolation with limited resources has on human health. "As we move from low Earth orbit, from moon to Mars, we're going to have a lot more resource restrictions than we have on the International Space Station and we're going to be a lot further from Earth or any help from Earth," said Dr Grace Douglas, the principal investigator for the Crew Health Performance Exploration Analog, or Chapea for short.
The four crew members will live in a small housing unit that was constructed using a huge 3D printer to simulate how Nasa may create structures on the Martian surface with Martian soil. They'll conduct experiments, grow food and exercise -- and be tested regularly so scientists can learn what a year on Mars could do to the body and mind. "This is really an extreme circumstance," said Dr Suzanne Bell, who leads the Behavioral Health and Performance Laboratory at the Nasa Johnson Space Center. "You're asking for individuals to live and work together for over a one-year period. Not only will they have to get along well, but they'll also have to perform well together."
Watching four people spend a year in a 3D-printed box is Nasa's next small step toward landing humans on the surface of Mars. Nasa says it hopes to send humans to the red planet as early as the 2030s. The first mission could be a nine-month trip one-way, and could leave the astronauts on the surface for two and a half years before starting the long trip back home. Preparations for that trek are already well under way with the agency's Artemis program. Artemis is sending astronauts back to the Moon for the first time since 1972, including the first person of color and woman to walk on another celestial body. As part of the Artemis missions, Nasa is also launching Gateway, a space station that will orbit the Moon and serve as a pit stop for Mars-bound missions. Getting to the Moon means getting to Mars, and getting to Mars means testing the physical and behavioral health of a crew in isolation. That's where Chapea comes in.
The four crew members will live in a small housing unit that was constructed using a huge 3D printer to simulate how Nasa may create structures on the Martian surface with Martian soil. They'll conduct experiments, grow food and exercise -- and be tested regularly so scientists can learn what a year on Mars could do to the body and mind. "This is really an extreme circumstance," said Dr Suzanne Bell, who leads the Behavioral Health and Performance Laboratory at the Nasa Johnson Space Center. "You're asking for individuals to live and work together for over a one-year period. Not only will they have to get along well, but they'll also have to perform well together."
Watching four people spend a year in a 3D-printed box is Nasa's next small step toward landing humans on the surface of Mars. Nasa says it hopes to send humans to the red planet as early as the 2030s. The first mission could be a nine-month trip one-way, and could leave the astronauts on the surface for two and a half years before starting the long trip back home. Preparations for that trek are already well under way with the agency's Artemis program. Artemis is sending astronauts back to the Moon for the first time since 1972, including the first person of color and woman to walk on another celestial body. As part of the Artemis missions, Nasa is also launching Gateway, a space station that will orbit the Moon and serve as a pit stop for Mars-bound missions. Getting to the Moon means getting to Mars, and getting to Mars means testing the physical and behavioral health of a crew in isolation. That's where Chapea comes in.
How is this different than HI-SEAS? (Score:2)
It's not on top of an active volcano (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
We've seen long runs of isolation in other ways besides this. I believe American submarines have been submerged as long as six months straight. And of course, Antarctica has research stations where people are mostly isolated in freezing cold weather for very long stretches of time. I suspect that if, after the first expedition leaves earth, we send regular resupply missions every 3-6 months, it shouldn't be much of an issue, particularly if those rockets are capable of both landing and returning.
No resupply more frequently than 2+ years (Score:4, Informative)
No yu cannot send every 3-6 months because you can launch every two years, when Earth's and Mars' orbit are closely aligned, shortening the distance. Otherwise Mars is too far away and the journey takes too long. Consider in the extreme case where Mars is on one side of the sun and Earth on the other. How long do you think it will take the supplies to reach their location?
Re: (Score:1)
Your point is probably valid.
I guess NASA could send many supply rockets at the same time as the astronauts.
Or even start sending the supplies a decade earlier.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm quite certain we can launch supplies from Earth to Mars at any time. What happens every two years or so is an alignment of the planets for a launch that takes a minimum of time and/or fuel. If we launch something at the absolute worst time and then launch again at the absolute best time then it is possible that with all else equal the two launches would arrive on Mars at about the same time. Or at least that is what I recall. We tend to launch in that window because we gain nothing by launching earl
Re: (Score:2)
IIRC, they also did a slingshot around Earth since they were on the return trip. That speed boost helped compensate for the sub-optimal positioning.
Re: No resupply more frequently than 2+ years (Score:2)
No yu cannot send every 3-6 months because you can launch every two years, when Earth's and Mars' orbit are closely aligned, shortening the distance. Otherwise Mars is too far away and the journey takes too long. Consider in the extreme case where Mars is on one side of the sun and Earth on the other. How long do you think it will take the supplies to reach their location?
Yeah...that's exactly why I said every 3-6 months. Ideally you time it so that resupplies arrive at regular intervals, even if they aren't sent at regular intervals.
Re:How is this different than HI-SEAS? (Score:4)
We've seen long runs of isolation in other ways besides this. I believe American submarines have been submerged as long as six months straight. And of course, Antarctica has research stations where people are mostly isolated in freezing cold weather for very long stretches of time. I suspect that if, after the first expedition leaves earth, we send regular resupply missions every 3-6 months, it shouldn't be much of an issue, particularly if those rockets are capable of both landing and returning.
Interesting comparison. That got me to thinking, and a submariner type training program would go a long way to culling people who might not be psychologically suited for such a trip.
The entire process of long duration trips and stays on Mars will require those people to share some traits with Submariners. Intensely bonded, very team and goal oriented, and very mentally stable. Oh yeah, and no claustrophobia at all.
Because all nifty and popular 3-D animations and art aside, going to Mars and living there a couple years, then returning is going to be living in a small box.
Re: (Score:2)
How is this different?
Didn't you see all the buzzwords? This time, it's 3D printed! Just wait until we get the Blockchain ChatGPT space outpost simulation!
a year locked inside (Score:2)
Maybe they have already tried this on a smaller timeframe, but if not it seems to me that they should go for a month or two first. Surely there will be unforeseen kinks in the setup or the experiment that they could fix before they do the whole enchilada.
Pauly shore tried it too! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The similar HI-SEAS V mission in Hawai'i ran for 8 months in 2017. HI-SEAS [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I suppose they will have to grow potatoes.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think they're going to those lengths: nothing in the PR about an isolated, self-sufficient environment.
Humans are AMAZING! (Score:3)
I don't want to go to Mars, but some people do!
and Justin Bieber (Score:1)
> The first mission could be a nine-month trip one-way...
Uh uh uh, I have a list of celebrities and politicians to send.
> could leave the astronauts on the surface for two and a half years before starting the long trip back home
Let's suppose something went wrong while sending that ship.
Idiocy (Score:2, Troll)
Next, SpaceX won't launch one rocket to Mars, rather it will launch one rocket a month. There will be multiple rockets enroute to Mars at a given time.
A meaningful research project would be to consider the cargo payload volume of a BFR and then simulate one landing per month.
The first simulated landings will deploy robotically assembled habitats as well as robotic vertical agric
Re: (Score:2)
It seems that every 26 months you get a period of less than 3 weeks during which there are launch windows lasting up to 30 minutes (piecing together information from https://mars.nasa.gov/mars2020... [nasa.gov] and https://www.nsta.org/science-s... [nsta.org] ), so launching every month may not be quite so simple.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, even if you buy into Musk's self-promoting propaganda, I thought the latest plan was developing a large fleet of Starships, and having them all go at once. Wave one sent with automated systems to prepare buildings, start refining fuel for return trips, getting oxygen production running, water extraction, etc. 26 months later, wave two takes the first people, with hopes and prayers the automated systems aren't falsely reporting their success.
When even Musk has a little more of a grip on the reality of
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You should watch a lot less Musk promo videos. Or maybe instead, you should watch them better. Musk claimed there would be 4 mars rockets in 2022, but right now, they haven't even gotten a single Starship HLS mission into space, let alone to the moon, let alone four of them to mars last year. Right now, there should be massive doubt if SpaceX can meet their Artemis program promises to get to the moon, not wild-ass plans for mars missions. HLS is already delayed till 2024, and Artemis is scheduled to land on the moon in 2025, and SpaceX has done zero out of it's three required demonstration flights.
The whole Musk Mars project is just another grift. Engine grouping like the Russians did with their ill fated N1 rocket, and supposed 1,000,000 people living their best lives on Mars in 37 years with no habitat seen other than in 3-D renderings, and batshit crazy ideas that completely ignore orbital mechanics.
Just that X number of launches a month is reveling. That isn't how this space thingy works, no matter how much the fans lap it up. Disclaimer - yes, we can launch a rocket to Mars any time we want,
Re: (Score:2)
But Musk is just a middleman for conveying this stuff - I suggest you go to his source and read some Dan Dare comic strips.
Re: (Score:1)
Sure... let's continue to throw rare resources at a dead, radioactive and inhospitable ball of frozen sand because "reasons". Makes perfect sense.
Arguing profit at this point is a clear indicator of an enormous knowledge gap
gravity (Score:2)
I don't see any mention of simulating Mars gravity. In a long-duration human experience, it surely matters that the force of gravity on the surface of Mars is 1/3 that of Earth.
Not simulating gravity reminds me of the mission to rescue Solar Max [nasa.gov] in which the astronauts trained to capture the satellite under water, but discovered when in orbit that without the inertia of the water, touching the satellite causes it to bounce away. They finally captured it by surrounding it so it couldn't escape.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see any mention of simulating Mars gravity. In a long-duration human experience, it surely matters that the force of gravity on the surface of Mars is 1/3 that of Earth.
Not simulating gravity reminds me of the mission to rescue Solar Max [nasa.gov] in which the astronauts trained to capture the satellite under water, but discovered when in orbit that without the inertia of the water, touching the satellite causes it to bounce away. They finally captured it by surrounding it so it couldn't escape.
I wonder, are they going to irradiate the people as well? That's something that will happen to them too.
Dusting off solar panels? (Score:2)
If they are simulating the astronauts dusting off solar panels for a manned mission to Mars then they are not doing well on simulating anything. No human is going to Mars without redundant nuclear power plants. Mars gets something like half the sunlight of Earth because of the greater distance from the sun. Then is the issue of the sun shining for about 12 hours and then disappearing for another 12 hours. I'm sure that with batteries this can be mitigated, and that is much easier to solve than a fortnig