 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsSpace ScienceAstronomyAmateur AstronomySpace FlightSpace StationShuttleSpace HistorySpace PolicySETI SpaceKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Space Forum / Shuttle / February 2007One-man Explorer Modules
Here's an idea for a possible private venture, sending up a one-man vehicle on a far-future hypothetical shuttle mission. This modified space station module would be designed to maintain life support for a mission to Mars -- except it would be a one-way mission. To qualify for the one-way Mars orbital flight, the passenger would have to have an existing health condition giving him/her less time to live than the flight's overall duration. In other words, passengers could buy tickets allowing them to spend their final months in Mars orbit. This would certainly not be all that different from current trends toward space station tourism, and offers a much more exciting venture over all. Sounds like you might have some ethical problems with this one. Can you imagine the nightmare of getting the payment? Would this be seen as helping someone to die? What if there was a mistake and the person lived longer than the life support lasted? Brian  SignatureBrian Gaff - briang1@blueyonder.co.uk Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff' in the display name may be lost. > Here's an idea for a possible private venture, sending up a one-man > vehicle on a far-future hypothetical shuttle mission. This modified [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > different from current trends toward space station tourism, and offers > a much more exciting venture over all. > Sounds like you might have some ethical problems with this one. Can you > imagine the nightmare of getting the payment? Would this be seen as helping [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Its a sick idea, ill people need treatment and that requires others, besides terminal patients are generally depressed, all you need is a dying person depressed alone. most folks dont want to die alone. The solution is building a nuclear or other booster to cut travel time to a couple months each way. minimizing lots of supplies etc. but cant send sick and dying! Aside from the obvious legality issues, a screening process would have to be in place -- to weed out any really sick or incapable candidates. The life support duration would also have to be taken care of in this imaginary scenario. One can picture emergency resupply launches for the guy whose health unexpectedly improves, while reentry is still out of the equation. > > Sounds like you might have some ethical problems with this one. Can you > > imagine the nightmare of getting the payment? Would this be seen as helping [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > to a couple months each way. > minimizing lots of supplies etc. but cant send sick and dying! >Sounds like you might have some ethical problems with this one. Can you >imagine the nightmare of getting the payment? Would this be seen as helping >someone to die? > >What if there was a mistake and the person lived longer than the life >support lasted? They wouldn't . . . obviously. > Here's an idea for a possible private venture, sending up a one-man > vehicle on a far-future hypothetical shuttle mission. This modified [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > different from current trends toward space station tourism, and offers > a much more exciting venture over all. terminal patients usually don't have a year or more to live, they have a few weeks or months. And just getting them to survive that long requires an extensive support system to amke them comfortable, administer medicine, etc. etc. So you send them into space (the Gs from liftoff alone could kill them) and they go into rapid decline. Which means they would most likely be dead before the spacecraft reached Mars orbit. If they did last that long, they wouldn't be in any condition to enjoy it, probably not even able to know where they were any longer. So what's the point? SignatureTerrell Miller millerto@bellsouth.net "One machine can do the work of fifty ordinary men. No machine can do the work of one extraordinary man." - Elbert Hubbard > Here's an idea for a possible private venture, sending up a one-man > vehicle on a far-future hypothetical shuttle mission. This modified [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > different from current trends toward space station tourism, and offers > a much more exciting venture over all. The One-Way Mars idea has been kicked around a lot and does makes sense. Sending the terminally-ill on a "suicide mission" doesn't seem like it'll fly though. How about: - Two married couples, in the late 50's or early 60's, with backgrounds in science and not many Earthly commitments. - Power generation and supplies are key. Power generation would most certaintly have to be nuclear. Before they go, pre-position a small nuke plant at their landing site robotically. They'll still have to bring it up online once they get there, but it will be waiting for them. - Pre-position two "care packages" as well. Have a schedule for future "care packages", but always aim to have two on site at any time. Given the track record on Mars, one will eventually miss it's mark or burn in and bounce. - Multipurpose everything. I.e., the spacecraft bringing the "care packages" may be able to double as living space if it were modular. Timeline for something like this? No time soon. Maybe within 40 years. (Yep, unfortunetly, 40 years.) They would be true "colonists" and not just "going there to die". (How many people who retire and move to Florida go there "so they can die"?) > - Two married couples, in the late 50's or early 60's, with backgrounds in > science and not many Earthly commitments. <sorry> Two married couples, in THEIR late 50's or early 60's, .... > > - Two married couples, in the late 50's or early 60's, with backgrounds in > > science and not many Earthly commitments. > > <sorry> > > Two married couples, in THEIR late 50's or early 60's, .... "Beav, Ward and I are going to Mars" Kidding. I got your meaning. "Bang, ZOOM, Alice.. to the MARS!" "Hey Ralph" "NORTON YOU CAME TOO?" 40 years to get a Mars mission up? This is nuts, I have a feeling it could be done quicker. They've talked about how to do it for years.... oh well :( "David E. Powell" wrote in message >> > - Two married couples, in the late 50's or early 60's, with backgrounds >> > in [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > could be done quicker. They've talked about how to do it for years.... > oh well :( lol. How about the Brady Bunch since Mars was at least in color by then? :-) Yeah, 40 years is even conservative. A lot of work needs to get done on a limited budget by then. You have to come up with a nuke generator (or better, two nuke generators) small enough to fly, come up with new vehicles, brainstorm on clever ideas to make things have multiple purposes, and pack your luggage... The "assembly line" for the "care package" vehicles needs to be in place. Aim to always have two at the Mars site and one on Earth ready to go. Modular vehicles that can "plug into" the vehicles already there and increase living space. They may need a small forklift to be able to lift and move the thing though. Eventually, as the site becomes larger, other people can go. In about a century, you can start thinking about how to make the site (nearly) self-sustaining. By then, a greenhouse to grow plants should start to become practical. It wouldn't be at first since you would be putting more energy and resources into the greenhouse than what you get out of it... > Here's an idea for a possible private venture, sending up a one-man > vehicle on a far-future hypothetical shuttle mission. This modified [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > different from current trends toward space station tourism, and offers > a much more exciting venture over all. And NASA thought I was crazy :-) Danny Deger >> Here's an idea for a possible private venture, sending up a one-man >> vehicle on a far-future hypothetical shuttle mission. This modified [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >Danny Deger I'm an RN and know for a fact that terminally ill people often liver for up to 5 years. Mr Kirby's idea is kind of out there sure. But not implausible. A modification to his idea may be to send two or three such people. These people can keep each other company, be taught to administer each other's meds etc. Semi permanent IV lines (porta caths or so called long lines which are really PICC (peripherally inserted central catheters) can be put in before launch. Again its way out there, but not by any means impossible or even difficult. SignatureJim in Houston NoSpAmjgoodrun@houston.rr.comNosPAm Nurse's creed: Fill what's empty, empty what's full, and scratch where it itches!! RN does NOT mean Real Nerd! |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.