Space......the Final Frontier....

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Mon May 26, 2008 4:59 pm

I always pay attention to these sort of things, since the sheer adventure and unknown nature of space travel interests me.
Phoenix Spacecraft makes Successful Soft Landing on Mars

seskis281 · Post by **seskis281** » Mon May 26, 2008 5:16 pm

My wife and I watched it live last night.

I remember in 97 when Pathfinder landed - I was living in Ca and working in Pasadena, and my best friend and I went up to the JPL, got out and walked around right outside the mission control. It's weird, but it really made us feel like a part of it, just being there (and weirdly quiet at the time - just two news-feed trucks including CNN).. heck, we climbed over and into the mock-up mars landscape they used to test the rover tech.

Yeah, it is cool. And to those who groan and go "what a waste of tax dollars," I say who we are as a Nation, as a people, HAS to be more than just about making money -- the inherent betterment of mankind, the discovery of the unknown, these are things which make us a country worth fighting for just as much as freedom, and so I think it's all the more fitting that this is happening on this Memorial Day.
_________________
John "Sir Seskis" Wright

Ilshara: Lands of Exile:
http://johnwright281.tripod.com/

High Squire of the C&C Society
www.cncsociety.org

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Mon May 26, 2008 7:28 pm

Yep, we have an astronomy nut in the family, so we have been following this closely.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Mon May 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Yes! Makes me smile that I may see human feet on Mars in my lifetime. Oh man, if only the focus of mankind was on space travel rather then war, politics and terrible fast food. Space though is not the final frontier. Just the most accessible at this point in time.

-O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Mon May 26, 2008 11:12 pm

I'll have no choice but to repsect any man who willingly volunteers for a mission to mars. Think about it, being shot millions of miles into space and if something went wrong, no real course of action for a rescue.

Dude would have to have stones.

Great big stones.

Space exploration rocks.

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Mon May 26, 2008 11:22 pm

I know plenty of people who would volunteer to do it. One of them is my 12 year old kid.

I would do my best to talk him out of it, but if he was selected to go I doubt anyone would stop him. I knew plenty of others like him. So NASA won't have a shortage of volunteers. They might be short on QUALIFIED volunteers. I doubt that will be an issue either.

If I was physically capable and qualified, I would go. Only because my kids are so close to being grown up, though, and would be out and on their own by the time such a mission would be ready.

If this was 10/20/25 years ago I wouldn't go. Now I am ready, just not physical or trained.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Mon May 26, 2008 11:52 pm

Yeah, there's still enough of the spirit of exploration in humanity that I have no doubt that they'd find volunteers. Heck, I'd volunteer and pack a shotgun so I could subjugate alien life forms as well!
Interplanetary conquest is a dream of mine.

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Tue May 27, 2008 12:04 am

I'd rather the bizarre mysteries of this world are explored before we go and find more on some other world.

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Tue May 27, 2008 12:08 am

Yeah, but that usually requires too many permits, and almost always ends for me with some old guys shouting, 'Get out of my yard!"

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Tue May 27, 2008 3:05 am

serleran wrote:
I'd rather the bizarre mysteries of this world are explored before we go and find more on some other world.

I can only say to this one point specifically that ocean exploration/research and space exploration are very nearly the same now. They both scrat each other's back.

As for that pyramind buried beneath Memphis TN, well that's a mystery that shall loom for a long time.

-O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

gideon_thorne · Post by **gideon_thorne** » Tue May 27, 2008 3:31 am

DangerDwarf wrote:
I'll have no choice but to repsect any man who willingly volunteers for a mission to mars. Think about it, being shot millions of miles into space and if something went wrong, no real course of action for a rescue.

Dude would have to have stones.

Great big stones.

Space exploration rocks.

I'd do it in a heart beat.

Chance of death, high.

Going down in history as a bit splatter across the solar system and becoming immortal, worth it.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

TheNewGuy · Post by **TheNewGuy** » Tue May 27, 2008 4:53 am

I agree. Awesome stuff.

Those people mentioned who complain about "wasted tax dollars" haven't been paying attention -- the seeds of many commonplace modern tech devices and developments (miniaturization, microwave ovens, computers which don't take up entire rooms, and on, and on, and on) were all planted because of the needs of the original Apollo program.

Basically, the folks said "we need to solve problem X" before this will happen, and the things they developed or adapted to solve the problem, pushed our general level of tech forward.

And if you start tracking the subtler, less obvious tech and manufacturing advances and offshoots brought about by the needs of the space program, the list becomes dizzyingly enormous. Everyday products and devices you would never even think had their roots in the space program, do -- like the polymer-derivatives in certain types of nail polish.

So, yeah -- hooray space program, hooray Mars. Anybody who says this is all a waste of money isn't paying close enough attention.

TheNewGuy
_________________

_________________

_________________
________

"But if your hand touches metal, I swear by my pretty floral bonnet, I will end you"

rabindranath72 · Post by **rabindranath72** » Tue May 27, 2008 10:27 am

I once answered to an ad of the European Space Agency; they were searching for scientists to train as astronauts, at the time I was working on an astrophysics project ( http://www.ego-gw.it ), and things seemed good. But then I left the project, and they were not really interested into sending mathematicians into orbit...

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Tue May 27, 2008 10:48 am

rabindranath72 wrote:
But then I left the project, and they were not really interested into sending mathematicians into orbit...

I've been banking on the fact that they are not opposed to sending monkeys into space. Still no calls though.

rabindranath72 · Post by **rabindranath72** » Tue May 27, 2008 11:08 am

DangerDwarf wrote:
I've been banking on the fact that they are not opposed to sending monkeys into space. Still no calls though.

Really, nowadays they are interested into physical sciences and related subjects. If you are a medical doctor, physicist, biologist etc. there are good chances you can go into orbit.

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Tue May 27, 2008 11:14 am

I guess now I just need to hope for the day they build a penal colony on the moon. My skills would be in demand then.

rabindranath72 · Post by **rabindranath72** » Tue May 27, 2008 11:28 am

DangerDwarf wrote:
I guess now I just need to hope for the day they build a penal colony on the moon. My skills would be in demand then.

do you need a mathematician in a penal colony?

Catweazle · Post by **Catweazle** » Tue May 27, 2008 8:14 pm

Phoenix has done incredibly well; the NASA boys and girls should feel rightly proud.

Still, I think I'd prefer to see manned exploration of the Moon first. There are a number of advantages. For a start, a robust space-access system would enable rescue if a lunar base or expedition got into trouble, communications are much closer to real-time, plus the added advantage that once we've mastered the Moon, Mars will be a lot less scary.

If you can live on the Moon for two years, you can fly to Mars and back.

After all, we've barely scratched the surface of our nearest neighbour. With a surface area the size of Africa, our few pitiful little remnants there deserve some bigger neighbours.
_________________
History teaches us that men behave wisely once they've exhausted all other alternatives.

Mike Frank · Post by **Mike Frank** » Wed May 28, 2008 12:53 pm

Anybody see "Mars Rising" last night on the Sci-fi channel?

Pretty interesting show. They are putting the probability for catastrophic failure between 1 in 10 to 1 in 5. One of the biggest concerns is the psychological aspect of six people isolated in a very small space for a very long time. I think it's a two year round trip ticket.

Jerry Linenger, who wrote "Off the Planet" describing his 6 month stay on MIR, was quite concerned -- he saw people going off the cliff in just that time.

And then there's the loss of bone mass and muscle...

rabindranath72 · Post by **rabindranath72** » Wed May 28, 2008 1:38 pm

Mike Frank wrote:
Anybody see "Mars Rising" last night on the Sci-fi channel?

Pretty interesting show. They are putting the probability for catastrophic failure between 1 in 10 to 1 in 5. One of the biggest concerns is the psychological aspect of six people isolated in a very small space for a very long time. I think it's a two year round trip ticket.

Jerry Linenger, who wrote "Off the Planet" describing his 6 month stay on MIR, was quite concerned -- he saw people going off the cliff in just that time.

And then there's the loss of bone mass and muscle...

Having worked in the field, I know that with those probabilities there is no way that a mission is founded. To attempt something, the estimate of risk must be less than 1%, with a very narrow "confidence" interval on that probability.

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Wed May 28, 2008 3:27 pm

It's a tough mission that should only be attempted after a few more successful trips to the moon. Oh, and a larger budget to NASA wouldn't hurt either.

-O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

Mike Frank · Post by **Mike Frank** » Wed May 28, 2008 5:56 pm

rabindranath72 wrote:
Having worked in the field, I know that with those probabilities there is no way that a mission is founded. To attempt something, the estimate of risk must be less than 1%, with a very narrow "confidence" interval on that probability.

I think the solid rocket missions to the moon had a failure rate of 1 in 10.

The space shuttle has a wide estimate of failure rates: management will claim 1 in 100,000. The engineers doing the work will say its more like 1 in 100. I've seen 1 in 55 too.

Anyway, those failure rates came right out of the mouth of the chief scientist at NASA. And they are still working on going.

rabindranath72 · Post by **rabindranath72** » Wed May 28, 2008 6:34 pm

Mike Frank wrote:
I think the solid rocket missions to the moon had a failure rate of 1 in 10.

The space shuttle has a wide estimate of failure rates: management will claim 1 in 100,000. The engineers doing the work will say its more like 1 in 100. I've seen 1 in 55 too.

Anyway, those failure rates came right out of the mouth of the chief scientist at NASA. And they are still working on going.

Security requirements have changed with time, and also the statistical techniques for estimating said probabilities. 1/100 is quite realistic as a moderately conservative estimate; 1/100000 perhaps is wishful thinking, as the different accidents have shown. The problem is, all these estimates are theoretical, not based on observations of failures (like it is done when testing domestic appliances). It is a quite hard statistical problem, since you are trying to make inference without (luckily!) observing failures.

Mike Frank · Post by **Mike Frank** » Wed May 28, 2008 6:59 pm

rabindranath72 wrote:
Security requirements have changed with time, and also the statistical techniques for estimating said probabilities. 1/100 is quite realistic as a moderately conservative estimate; 1/100000 perhaps is wishful thinking, as the different accidents have shown. The problem is, all these estimates are theoretical, not based on observations of failures (like it is done when testing domestic appliances). It is a quite hard statistical problem, since you are trying to make inference without (luckily!) observing failures.

One of the last classes I took while getting my Master's degree was failure analysis. I know how hard it is to analyze even a simple system containing only a handful of valves and a few computers. Much of failure analysis is based on individual component lifetime performance. So, while the component may not be a part of the system in question (a system that has yet to be built), we do know how those components are integrated and how to address their affect on the system's reliability. In terms of observation, we have seen the space shuttle in both modes and have plenty of data. The same is true with rockets (though, the majority of those were unmanned).

Mike Frank · Post by **Mike Frank** » Wed May 28, 2008 7:18 pm

gideon_thorne wrote:
I'd do it in a heart beat.

Chance of death, high.

Going down in history as a bit splatter across the solar system and becoming immortal, worth it.

You're in luck! You're guaranteed both of those things eventually. No need to attempt a Martian flight.

rabindranath72 · Post by **rabindranath72** » Wed May 28, 2008 7:37 pm

Mike Frank wrote:
One of the last classes I took while getting my Master's degree was failure analysis. I know how hard it is to analyze even a simple system containing only a handful of valves and a few computers. Much of failure analysis is based on individual component lifetime performance. So, while the component may not be a part of the system in question (a system that has yet to be built), we do know how those components are integrated and how to address their affect on the system's reliability. In terms of observation, we have seen the space shuttle in both modes and have plenty of data. The same is true with rockets (though, the majority of those were unmanned).

True, but usually such complex systems behave more than the sum of the single parts.

Furthermore, whereas there is plenty of observations for the good operation of the shuttle, the observations for the failures are quite few in comparison. The ratio of censored/uncensored observations is critical in getting good estimates of the survival probability. Hopefully we won't get more failure data

Mike Frank · Post by **Mike Frank** » Wed May 28, 2008 8:32 pm

rabindranath72 wrote:
True, but usually such complex systems behave more than the sum of the single parts.

Furthermore, whereas there is plenty of observations for the good operation of the shuttle, the observations for the failures are quite few in comparison. The ratio of censored/uncensored observations is critical in getting good estimates of the survival probability. Hopefully we won't get more failure data

Well, I certainly don't want to see any more failures either.

System complexity increases exponentially with added components. That kind of what I was getting at with the small system being difficult to analyze. And it doesn't stop there. When you get past the mechanical side of things you've got to start in with the software as part of the system.

Actually, I don't even know where this is going anymore. I just know that they said the predicted failure rate was between 1 in 10 and 1 in 5 and I thought, what kind of person would be willing to take that risk? Of course that was before I read Peter's post earlier in this thread. Now I know.

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Thu May 29, 2008 1:31 am

This is the question I would ask of any government official-to-be:

Would you be a crewmember on a manned mission to Mars, if you were able, and required?

The answer to that reveals a lot about a person's character, especially pertaining to what government abilities might be possessed...

Hmm.

rabindranath72 · Post by **rabindranath72** » Thu May 29, 2008 7:21 am

serleran wrote:
This is the question I would ask of any government official-to-be:

Would you be a crewmember on a manned mission to Mars, if you were able, and required?

The answer to that reveals a lot about a person's character, especially pertaining to what government abilities might be possessed...

Hmm.

]

Oh yes, like asking your average President if he would lead his men into war (considering that he is the head of the army), like Napoleon did, always first during charges. I guess we all know the answer