Mars One mission whittled down to 1058 applicants.

Page 1 of 1 [ 9 posts ] 

thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

01 Jan 2014, 2:56 pm

Sort of jealous but the thought of no return to Earth, a diet of nothing but tinned rations and a regime of 3 hour exercise sessions a day to stave off muscle atrophy and being a centre of media sensationalism for the rest of my life takes the edge off it.

Then theres the question if this company has the werewithal and means to get these people there and keep them well.

http://rt.com/news/mars-one-applicants-selected-039/


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


The_Walrus
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,811
Location: London

01 Jan 2014, 3:00 pm

The comments on that article are gold.

I doubt that the astronauts will become celebrities until the final stages of selection. Good luck to them- I know I wouldn't want to leave Earth forever.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

01 Jan 2014, 3:50 pm

The_Walrus wrote:
The comments on that article are gold.

I doubt that the astronauts will become celebrities until the final stages of selection. Good luck to them- I know I wouldn't want to leave Earth forever.


How many of those one way kamikaze travelers will go insane living out their lives in what amount to trailers.

ruveyn



Woodpecker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2008
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,625
Location: Europe

01 Jan 2014, 3:59 pm

No thanks I would not want to go on a one way mission to Mars, my worrys include

1. The large cosmic ray radiation dose, I know in the manned moon missions then plan was to turn the space ship around to give the humans as much shielding as possible from the sun if it went into a nasty state, they could then get the humans back to earth within 6 days to reduce the exposure time. With the mars mission no easy abort option exists, you could end up with a nasty proton / heavy ion dose. Maybe if you are unlucky you could get a dose which would cause nasty acute effects such as bone marrow damage, I know that the medical management of a radiation overexposure case is complex and not the sort of thing which could be done in a space ship. For a person with moderate bone marrow damage you would needs loads of blood transfusions, antibiotics and exotic drugs.

Given the choice I would rather get a moderate exposure on earth doing something worthwhile, at least after a moderate dose I could go home and put my feet up in my own home. Also if I was at a place like Fukushima during the worst phase of the accident tooled up with the right tools I would be able to decide at what point I had reached the maximum dose which I was willing to get before packing up and going home.

2. I would never be able to visit any of the places I love on earth again

3. I would never be able to go for a walk in the park again

4. I would have to leave my wife and family behind

5. I would not be able to pursue my special interests while in space, if I went to the south pole on a scientific mission I would have to leave some of my special interests behind but I could take others, plus it would only be for a limited time.

6. I think I woud hate the bland diet of tinned food


_________________
Health is a state of physical, mental and social wellbeing and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity :alien: I am not a jigsaw, I am a free man !

Diagnosed under the DSM5 rules with autism spectrum disorder, under DSM4 psychologist said would have been AS (299.80) but I suspect that I am somewhere between 299.80 and 299.00 (Autism) under DSM4.


Fisplen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Oct 2013
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Posts: 589
Location: Trevor's Meth lab

01 Jan 2014, 7:21 pm

I'm sorry but I doubt this will ever go from a dream to reality, let me see them put satellites in Martian orbit then maybe I'll believe there plans for putting Humans on Mars privately.

But I can't say much, if I was old enough to apply I would probably consider it, hell there ain't nothing for me for the future here, no partners and the sad thing is, I'm the only male along with my cousin left in this family generation capable of carrying on the name, If he and I are gone thats it my Family disappear.



zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,613

01 Jan 2014, 9:27 pm

It stands to reason that it would be far, far wiser to launch a series of automated habitat modules that would land on Mars and be able to self deploy. Then, the crew could follow and already have some "living space" to move into.

If we couldn't get Phase 1 done, no point in moving to Phase 2.



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

02 Jan 2014, 2:25 pm

These people remind me of the ghouls from New Vegas, who travelled to outer space to find paradise—despite not knowing what could go wrong. With the present day technology, nobody can get to Mars quickly enough to not suffer any fatal damage. There's a reason why the deadline for manned missions get pushed 20 years back every 20 years.



zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,613

02 Jan 2014, 6:30 pm

Kurgan wrote:
These people remind me of the ghouls from New Vegas, who travelled to outer space to find paradise—despite not knowing what could go wrong. With the present day technology, nobody can get to Mars quickly enough to not suffer any fatal damage. There's a reason why the deadline for manned missions get pushed 20 years back every 20 years.


Good point.

It's all a question of shielding, but that adds weight. Any mission beyond our moon will require an orbital launch with a ship built in orbit. Then you just calculate the fuel load rather than wonder how to get it all off the ground in one shot.



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

02 Jan 2014, 7:01 pm

zer0netgain wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
These people remind me of the ghouls from New Vegas, who travelled to outer space to find paradise—despite not knowing what could go wrong. With the present day technology, nobody can get to Mars quickly enough to not suffer any fatal damage. There's a reason why the deadline for manned missions get pushed 20 years back every 20 years.


Good point.

It's all a question of shielding, but that adds weight. Any mission beyond our moon will require an orbital launch with a ship built in orbit. Then you just calculate the fuel load rather than wonder how to get it all off the ground in one shot.


To be fair, I don't think we'll ever set foot on Mars until we can produce anti-matter cheaply enough. 10 grams is sufficient to get to Mars and back in a month, but this would theoretically cost 250 billion dollars; we also need a functional anti-matter propelled rocket. Thankfully, the cost is rapdly falling, though.