Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

On the devastating effects of a year in space

brisbanetimes.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 135 posts

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#11

Post by kybernetikos »

ilamont wrote: post #3

Based on the experience of cosmonauts who spent long periods of time on various Mir missions in the 1980s and 1990s, what is the long-term impact of staying in zero-gravity space for so long? If they lost bone mass, the walls of their hearts became thinner, and they received the equivalent of 10 chest X-rays daily over hundreds of days in space, are they experiencing debilitating effects 20 or 30 years later?

I don't know the answer to your questions, but I did read in Chris Hadfields book that it takes basically the same amount of time you are in space to recover afterwards on the ground. If you're up for 6 months, you'll need about 6 months recovery.

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#12

Post by craftyguy »

larkeith wrote: post #8

It should be noted that, in Mars' reduced gravity, it can be presumed the symptoms would be lessened. Still a major concern, however.

I don't think the concern is about gravitational conditions once you're on Mars, but the long trip to and from Mars (18 months each way, best case with current technology).

Edit: I was wrongly thinking 18mo each way when it's closer to 18mo-ish round trip. Sorry internet armchair soldiers.

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#13

Post by thatswrong0 »

martyvis wrote: post #10
ilamont wrote: post #3

Based on the experience of cosmonauts who spent long periods of time on various Mir missions in the 1980s and 1990s, what is the long-term impact of staying in zero-gravity space for so long? If they lost bone mass, the walls of their hearts became thinner, and they received the equivalent of 10 chest X-rays daily over hundreds of days in space, are they experiencing debilitating effects 20 or 30 years later?

Given that lack of gravity seems to be a major risk factor for well-being I'm surprised a static structure like the ISS doesn't yet have a rotating centrifuge-like structure ala 2001: A Space Oddysey to at least ward off the effects during sleep and downtime

Well they do have those tied-down-with-a-spring treadmills, but that only covers you for the duration of your workout. I don’t know anything about constructing things for use in a space station, but I can’t imagine creating such a rotating structure would be easy, cheap, or safe.. a problem with a structure rotating quickly in space could quickly cause major safety issues for the ISS I’d imagine.

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#14

Post by chrishacken »

martyvis wrote: post #10
ilamont wrote: post #3

Based on the experience of cosmonauts who spent long periods of time on various Mir missions in the 1980s and 1990s, what is the long-term impact of staying in zero-gravity space for so long? If they lost bone mass, the walls of their hearts became thinner, and they received the equivalent of 10 chest X-rays daily over hundreds of days in space, are they experiencing debilitating effects 20 or 30 years later?

Given that lack of gravity seems to be a major risk factor for well-being I'm surprised a static structure like the ISS doesn't yet have a rotating centrifuge-like structure ala 2001: A Space Oddysey to at least ward off the effects during sleep and downtime

There actually was a proposal for one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nautilus-X

There's also this issue:

"Another problem is that we do know of adverse effects that arise at high rotational rates of speed. The Coriolis Effect has to do with rotating reference frames and it can seriously screw with the inner ear. The only way to maintain a strong centrifugal gravity while keeping rotational speed low is to lengthen the system as a whole — but the ISS isn’t nearly big enough."

Source: https://www.geek.com/news/geek-answers-why-doesnt-the-iss-ha...

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#15

Post by sitharus »

martyvis wrote: post #10
ilamont wrote: post #3

Based on the experience of cosmonauts who spent long periods of time on various Mir missions in the 1980s and 1990s, what is the long-term impact of staying in zero-gravity space for so long? If they lost bone mass, the walls of their hearts became thinner, and they received the equivalent of 10 chest X-rays daily over hundreds of days in space, are they experiencing debilitating effects 20 or 30 years later?

Given that lack of gravity seems to be a major risk factor for well-being I'm surprised a static structure like the ISS doesn't yet have a rotating centrifuge-like structure ala 2001: A Space Oddysey to at least ward off the effects during sleep and downtime

One was planned, but it was cancelled due to budget overruns: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifuge_Accommodations_Mo...

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#16

Post by theothermkn »

craftyguy wrote: post #12
larkeith wrote: post #8

It should be noted that, in Mars' reduced gravity, it can be presumed the symptoms would be lessened. Still a major concern, however.

I don't think the concern is about gravitational conditions once you're on Mars, but the long trip to and from Mars (18 months each way, best case with current technology). Edit: I was wrongly thinking 18mo each way when it's closer to 18mo-ish round trip. Sorry internet armchair soldiers.

It is most emphatically not 18 months each way. 8.5 months or so on a Hohmann transfer, the longest low-energy direct transfer.

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#17

Post by product50 »

craftyguy wrote: post #12
larkeith wrote: post #8

It should be noted that, in Mars' reduced gravity, it can be presumed the symptoms would be lessened. Still a major concern, however.

I don't think the concern is about gravitational conditions once you're on Mars, but the long trip to and from Mars (18 months each way, best case with current technology). Edit: I was wrongly thinking 18mo each way when it's closer to 18mo-ish round trip. Sorry internet armchair soldiers.

Where are you reading this? It is seven months each way as per the following: https://www.mars-one.com/faq/mission-to-mars/how-long-does-i...

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#18

Post by haeffin »

craftyguy wrote: post #12
larkeith wrote: post #8

It should be noted that, in Mars' reduced gravity, it can be presumed the symptoms would be lessened. Still a major concern, however.

I don't think the concern is about gravitational conditions once you're on Mars, but the long trip to and from Mars (18 months each way, best case with current technology). Edit: I was wrongly thinking 18mo each way when it's closer to 18mo-ish round trip. Sorry internet armchair soldiers.

> Curiosity was launched from Cape Canaveral on November 26, 2011, at 15:02 UTC aboard the MSL spacecraft and landed on Aeolis Palus in Gale Crater on Mars on August 6, 2012, 05:17 UTC.

You sure it's not 18 months total?

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#19

Post by craftyguy »

haeffin wrote: post #18
craftyguy wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the concern is about gravitational conditions once you're on Mars, but the long trip to and from Mars (18 months each way, best case with current technology). Edit: I was wrongly thinking 18mo each way when it's closer to 18mo-ish round trip. Sorry internet armchair soldiers.

> Curiosity was launched from Cape Canaveral on November 26, 2011, at 15:02 UTC aboard the MSL spacecraft and landed on Aeolis Palus in Gale Crater on Mars on August 6, 2012, 05:17 UTC. You sure it's not 18 months total?

Yes, you are right. I goofed up.

Re: On the devastating effects of a year in space

#20

Post by craftyguy »

theothermkn wrote: post #16
craftyguy wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the concern is about gravitational conditions once you're on Mars, but the long trip to and from Mars (18 months each way, best case with current technology). Edit: I was wrongly thinking 18mo each way when it's closer to 18mo-ish round trip. Sorry internet armchair soldiers.

It is most emphatically not 18 months each way. 8.5 months or so on a Hohmann transfer, the longest low-energy direct transfer.

Yes, you are right. I goofed up.
Post reply on HN