NASA Backed Study Proposes That Crew-Stasis Can Cut Costs, Improve Crew Reliabity - Polidicks

[QUOTE]A NASA-backed study explores an innovative way to dramatically cut the cost of a human expedition to Mars -- put the crew in stasis. The deep sleep, called torpor, would reduce astronauts’ metabolic functions with existing medical procedures. Torpor also can occur naturally in cases of hypothermia. “Therapeutic torpor has been around in theory since the 1980s and really since 2003 has been a staple for critical care trauma patients in hospitals," aerospace engineer Mark Schaffer, with SpaceWorks Enterprises in Atlanta, said at the International Astronomical Congress in Toronto this week. "Protocols exist in most major medical centers for inducing therapeutic hypothermia on patients to essentially keep them alive until they can get the kind of treatment that they need.” Coupled with intravenous feeding, a crew could be put in hibernation for the transit time to Mars, which under the best-case scenario would take 180 days one-way. [...] Economically, the payoff looks impressive. Crews can live inside smaller ships with fewer amenities like galleys, exercise gear and of course water, food and clothing. One design includes a spinning habitat to provide a low-gravity environment to help offset bone and muscle loss. SpaceWorks’ study, which was funded by NASA, shows a five-fold reduction in the amount of pressurized volume need for a hibernating crew and a three-fold reduction in the total amount of mass required, including consumables like food and water. Overall, putting a crew in stasis cuts the baseline mission requirements from about 400 tons to about 220 tons.[/QUOTE] This could also cut down on crew psychological stress from confined spaces, which has be one of the prevailing questions for extended manned spaceflight. [URL="http://news.discovery.com/space/nasa-eyes-crew-deep-sleep-option-for-mission-to-mars-141003.htm"]Source[/URL]

What happens if something goes wrong, or if they can't go back into stasis, then the habitat savings suddenly become a curse [editline]4th October 2014[/editline] I think the technology is already being developed such as inflatable spacecraft to overcome the concerns this is trying to deal with. [editline]4th October 2014[/editline] I'd rather we focus on building ships that can get there and back quickly rather than muck about with stasis stuff

Doesn't torpor require replacing the blood with antifreeze temporarily? Or am I thinking of a different procedure

[QUOTE=Sableye;46146005]What happens if something goes wrong, or if they can't go back into stasis, then the habitat savings suddenly become a curse [editline]4th October 2014[/editline] I think the technology is already being developed such as inflatable spacecraft to overcome the concerns this is trying to deal with. [editline]4th October 2014[/editline] I'd rather we focus on building ships that can get there and back quickly rather than muck about with stasis stuff[/QUOTE] Agreed, but I'm more interested in how we can solve the radiation exposure for the crew. Perhaps like Tardigrades, if you slow down an organism's metabolism you can minimize lasting radiation damage. Its something interesting to consider until we have flight ready magnetic shielding or innovative grade-z shielding.

[QUOTE=Sableye;46146005]What happens if something goes wrong, or if they can't go back into stasis, then the habitat savings suddenly become a curse [editline]4th October 2014[/editline] I think the technology is already being developed such as inflatable spacecraft to overcome the concerns this is trying to deal with. [editline]4th October 2014[/editline] I'd rather we focus on building ships that can get there and back quickly rather than muck about with stasis stuff[/QUOTE] unless we somehow make a drydock in space, it costs assloads of money and efficiently to haul people from earth to mars, let alone food and water. Stasis takes care of almost every single problem and is the most logical till we can get space docks to build and travel.

True, we definitely need shipyards to make more solid ships, since you can't travel to Mars in a LEGO liferaft. It's like if the Spanish Navy strung their galleons together from wooden crates and barrels - it's good enough for a castaway, but if you're going to sail from La Coruna to Vinland to meet with the Jarl of Ettinsfjord, you need something that can sail across a vast and tumultuous ocean.

[QUOTE=Lick;46146035]Doesn't torpor require replacing the blood with antifreeze temporarily? Or am I thinking of a different procedure[/QUOTE] That's cryogenics. Quite different than from what's being talked about here.

[QUOTE=Amiga OS;46147027]As long as the ships AI doesn't shut down the hibernation pods...[/QUOTE] I'm sorry Dave, but- Actually I CAN do that. *shuts down hibernation pods*

This is awesome, this would actually make going to mars very feasible! It would result in much smaller radiation shielding, less consumables and less psychological stress. Without this you'd need gigantic radiation shields (with current technology), otherwise this would be your brain after 6 months of interplanetary radiation: [t]https://thesullinsfamily.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/dscn5241.jpg[/t]

[QUOTE=Sableye;46146005]I think the technology is already being developed such as inflatable spacecraft[/QUOTE] [img]http://cdn.dealsdirect.net/m/products/404/42404/8/product1_42404_600x600.jpg?file=Disney+Inflatable+Buzz+Lightyear+Spaceship+with+Balls[/img] ?

[QUOTE=codemaster85;46146079]unless we somehow make a drydock in space, it costs assloads of money and efficiently to haul people from earth to mars, let alone food and water. Stasis takes care of almost every single problem and is the most logical till we can get space docks to build and travel.[/QUOTE] Why would we need a spacedock, we know how to construct vehicles in orbit and I don't think anyone is seriously considering a monolythic rocket to mars, we only got away with it for the moon because the technology to launch smaller vehicles was actually less mature [editline]4th October 2014[/editline] Stasis just would extend the mission time since the vehicles would probably be designed in the event of stasis failure so the extra savings are still launched just they extend mission stays. One practical ramification though is that this is a way to fall asleep in space which up until now is still very difficult and is one of nasas top concerns about long duration stays

[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;46147168][img]http://cdn.dealsdirect.net/m/products/404/42404/8/product1_42404_600x600.jpg?file=Disney+Inflatable+Buzz+Lightyear+Spaceship+with+Balls[/img] ?[/QUOTE] We're not aiming for the moon.

[QUOTE=Sableye;46146005]What happens if something goes wrong, or if they can't go back into stasis, then the habitat savings suddenly become a curse [editline]4th October 2014[/editline] I think the technology is already being developed such as inflatable spacecraft to overcome the concerns this is trying to deal with. [editline]4th October 2014[/editline] I'd rather we focus on building ships that can get there and back quickly rather than muck about with stasis stuff[/QUOTE] Stasis can have other useful applications though, more than spaceships have imo.

The only thing that concerns me- will the astronauts' muscles and bones continue to stretch and degrade due to the absence of gravity? 180 days of absolutely no exercise, coupled with weightlessness, sounds like a recipe for people who can't lift themselves even in Mars' gravity, let alone returning to Earth.

[QUOTE=Kljunas;46148874]Stasis can have other useful applications though, more than spaceships have imo.[/QUOTE] It definitely buys more time for inflight surgeons/doctors. Doing surgery or treating rather invasive symptoms is a nightmare to do in micro-g.

Don't know if this sci-fi concept has been done already, But what if humanity started sending people to space in order to live on better colonies, but they were in fact just killing them in order to make room on planet earth.

[QUOTE=Kardia;46149105]Don't know if this sci-fi concept has been done already, But what if humanity started sending people to space in order to live on better colonies, but they were in fact just killing them in order to make room on planet earth.[/QUOTE] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjNUI1VRZio[/media] Sort of similar.

[QUOTE=Jamsponge;46148938]The only thing that concerns me- will the astronauts' muscles and bones continue to stretch and degrade due to the absence of gravity? 180 days of absolutely no exercise, coupled with weightlessness, sounds like a recipe for people who can't lift themselves even in Mars' gravity, let alone returning to Earth.[/QUOTE] Perhaps add artificial gravity to the stasis pods and introduce homeopathic amounts of anabolic steroids to counter the muscle deterioration?

[QUOTE=Jamsponge;46148938]The only thing that concerns me- will the astronauts' muscles and bones continue to stretch and degrade due to the absence of gravity? 180 days of absolutely no exercise, coupled with weightlessness, sounds like a recipe for people who can't lift themselves even in Mars' gravity, let alone returning to Earth.[/QUOTE] They address that, they're planning to occasionally, lightly pulse the muscles with electric current to prevent muscle atrophy. As for the bones, they could simply spin the craft to provide artificial gravity.

[QUOTE=Sableye;46146005]What happens if something goes wrong, or if they can't go back into stasis, then the habitat savings suddenly become a curse [/QUOTE] Just have them take one man shifts in and out of stasis, like in Pandorum [IMG]http://www.futuregamez.net/movies/pandorum/pandorum2.jpg[/IMG] Err nevermind

[QUOTE=Lick;46146035]Doesn't torpor require replacing the blood with antifreeze temporarily? Or am I thinking of a different procedure[/QUOTE] Dr. Forester already tried that with TV's Frank and it didn't go over so well.

[QUOTE=Sableye;46146005] I'd rather we focus on building ships that can get there and back quickly rather than muck about with stasis stuff[/QUOTE] Besides being useful to save money, stasis also solves the problem of psychological pressure during the flight, which is pretty important. You don't want to lose all the expedition just because of one dude going crazy.

[QUOTE=Mort Stroodle;46148846]We're not aiming for the moon.[/QUOTE] But we are aiming for infinity and beyond.

How about using it for specially dangerous prisoners? Leave them in stasis without muscular electrostimulation and only the necessary calorie intake for a few years. They feel it like mere seconds but then find themselves suddenly weak and frail, then the rehab could start.

[QUOTE=Sableye;46146005]What happens if something goes wrong, or if they can't go back into stasis, then the habitat savings suddenly become a curse [editline]4th October 2014[/editline] I think the technology is already being developed such as inflatable spacecraft to overcome the concerns this is trying to deal with. [editline]4th October 2014[/editline] I'd rather we focus on building ships that can get there and back quickly rather than muck about with stasis stuff[/QUOTE] Yeah, you know more about what to focus on than NASA engineers.

[QUOTE=ironman17;46146991]True, we definitely need shipyards to make more solid ships, since you can't travel to Mars in a LEGO liferaft. It's like if the Spanish Navy strung their galleons together from wooden crates and barrels - it's good enough for a castaway, but if you're going to sail from La Coruna to Vinland to meet with the Jarl of Ettinsfjord, you need something that can sail across a vast and tumultuous ocean.[/QUOTE] comparing an orbital transfer from earth to mars to an expedition from "La Coruna to Vinland" in terms of [I]engineering feasability[/I] is quite possibly the stupidest thing i've ever heard [editline]7th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Sableye;46146005]What happens if something goes wrong, or if they can't go back into stasis, then the habitat savings suddenly become a curse [editline]4th October 2014[/editline] I think the technology is already being developed such as inflatable spacecraft to overcome the concerns this is trying to deal with. [editline]4th October 2014[/editline] I'd rather we focus on building ships that can get there and back quickly rather than muck about with stasis stuff[/QUOTE] you don't have a clue what you're talking about high-speed spaceflight of large cargo requires incredibly high powers, which requires [I]mounting a nuclear reactor[/I] on the vehicle, which is a massive pain in the arse, especially with a human crew / the hopes and dreams of humanity riding on the mission

[QUOTE=Sableye;46146005]What happens if something goes wrong, or if they can't go back into stasis, then the habitat savings suddenly become a curse[/quote] Then this happens [video=youtube;sHPvewE4XUI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHPvewE4XUI[/video]