Read on Twitter
After IAC'19 I went on holidays, now I just came back and WHAT?! Someone wrote an article about my presentation at IAC on http://space.com , waow! Thank you @howellspace
More about it & related stuff in this thread
https://www.space.com/mars-habitats-on-should-be-tested-on-moon.html
More about it & related stuff in this thread
https://www.space.com/mars-habitats-on-should-be-tested-on-moon.html
First things first, I wouldn't say I'm a"representative from the French space agency" as introduced in the article. I work there but my employer is @thalesgroup and in any case this work has been done during the
@SEEDS_XI master :P but I do use a @cnes.fr work mail.
@SEEDS_XI master :P but I do use a @cnes.fr work mail.
What was this talk about? Title is: "Bioregenerative Systems on Mars Why, Challenges, Roadmap." I started talking about how BLSS (bioregenerative life support systems) are often seen as the ultimate sustainable thing. Space SF always have trees etc in the spacecrafts/habitats.
This talk opened the Mars Exploration session of IAC, speaking just before rockstar @robertzubrin, so the room was full of people enthusiastic about the exploration of Mars. Couldn't wish for a better audience. https://twitter.com/eswak/status/1187564743776702467
I briefly introduced BLSS and explained when they are useful: for long duration missions (more recycling = more equipments = more lauch mass & development costs, that pay off only after quite some time). I don't think they'll be used short term because they're too big.
Then I explained why BLSS are good for tech transfer: they address similar topics than those faced on Earth today (e.g. in Europe, climate change is drying the mediterranean area, and we are getting more water-tight, like in space). Also circular economy for recycling etc...
I highlighted how the fully closed loop fantasy is also unnecessary: with ISRU, some materials come into the loop (like water, CO2), and some others leave it (methane, oxygen, plastic, ...). BLSS have good synergies with manufacturing needs: bacterias make H2 & CH4, plants O2...
We had a quick look at the requirements for living in space and the talk transitioned to the real challenge: how do we make all this pressurized space to grow plants and live and work?! The answer is ISRU & in-situ manufacturing.
As it turns out, there are a lot of similarities on these topics between the Moon and Mars. We'll get to it, but two small parentheses first:
1/ I attended most Moon related sessions of the IAC, and people there were big on presenting synergies on Moon missions to prepare for Mars. In the Mars sessions, almost nobody talked about the Moon. Why? Synergies work both ways.
2/ There is a neverending petty debate in the space community whether we should go to the Moon or Mars first. That we can't do both, etc. As @caseyhandmer puts it, there is a "surprising quantity of religious positions on this topic". https://twitter.com/CJHandmer/status/1195882805672079360
Never during my talk or paper did I introduce judgement about whether the Moon should be done *before* Mars, or after, or at the same time. I just highlighted synergies on technologies, because I think that's the way to go to be cost efficient - I'm an engineer.
Other people, more on the business & financial side (like @GregWAutry and @mmealling), think developing an infrastructure and focusing on customers is the way to go. All approaches work together and it's not an either-or. Anything that will get us to space must be done!
But the http://space.com headline being what it is, "Why Mars Base Tech Should Be Tested on the Moon First", of course people got triggered.
It is not "Mars mase tech" tested on the Moon "first", it is "space settlement tech", being tested in different environments, whatever the order, to collect more return on experience, reduce maintenance, improve efficiency, and reliability.
Starting with Team #Mars.
Robert is very knowledgeable, so he knows how to make an argument look ridiculous. Honestly, if I just read the article, and didn't attend the presentation, I could have reacted the same way. https://twitter.com/robert_zubrin/status/1190980877376880642
Robert is very knowledgeable, so he knows how to make an argument look ridiculous. Honestly, if I just read the article, and didn't attend the presentation, I could have reacted the same way. https://twitter.com/robert_zubrin/status/1190980877376880642
As he points out, the acquisition mechanisms to access water and other resources will be very different on the Moon and Mars, but once you have ice / CO2 / printing capability, the following processes are similar, and the operations face the same challenges at both locations.
You know how to 3D print, ok, but how do you assist the machine in your pressure suit to build the desired infrastructure, how to you make the assembly, perform maintenance, etc. What about the large scale water splitting infrastructures to make hydrogen? Solar panel maintenance?
My take on the similarities between Moon and Mars missions focused on some industrial, life support, and organisational needs, but there are hundreds of others.
What hundred others? Team #Moon counterattacks.
Phil highlights a lot of detailed processes and mechanisms that could benefit from being tested in different environments in this excellent thread. It is pretty detailed you should really check it out. https://twitter.com/DrPhiltill/status/1190992308084379649
Phil highlights a lot of detailed processes and mechanisms that could benefit from being tested in different environments in this excellent thread. It is pretty detailed you should really check it out. https://twitter.com/DrPhiltill/status/1190992308084379649
I especially like this quote, "We are smart enough to figure out the answers, but we are NOT smart enough to figure out the questions". Yes, ladies and gentlemen, this is why we test in different conditions :P https://twitter.com/DrPhiltill/status/1191000868633686017
@robertzubrin often say we can test a lot of things on Earth already, and he's right. I'm big on analog missions, too. I'm actually a member of the @oewf that conducts analog missions every 2 years. Analog testing is/should be baseline part of the development & validation process
In conclusion, there are a lot of similarities between the needs of Moon and Mars missions. Of course I acknowledge that the thermal environments are differents, that the regolith is different, etc.
But there are still a lot of equipments, technologies, and operations, that would benefit from gathering more return on experience in different planetary environments (starting with the Earth!), different mission scenarios, etc.
This quote by Clive really sums up my mindset in preparing this work: "If we focus only on the differences between Moon and Mars, we will go nowhere. If we focus on the synergies, progress will be made." https://twitter.com/Neal148409276/status/1191041062191685633
