>>The Russians had guys up in MIR for durations longer than roundtrip Mars missions. It's a done deal, we know from MIR that human beings can tolerate a Mars mission. <<
The MIR contributions to life-in-space studies are grossly overstated. The data was never documented extensively, and I've read that some was not documented at all.
To think that MIR answered all questions regarding the hazards of living in space is simplistic avoidance. You want to go to Mars and you want to eliminate stumbling blocks to that urge.
>>To make matters worse, the "fig leaf" concerning science on ISS dropped away when they limited the crew size to 3 people<<
It would be foolish to believe that crew size will be limited to three, just because Shrub says so. Politics and international partners seldom leave any decision in stasis.
The crew *will* expand, science *will* get done, and eventually humans will decide it's worth the cost to go to other worlds. You might even be alive to see it.
>>Imagine you've got a scientific lab on a Boeing 747 freighter. How many guys does it take to fly a Boeing 747 freigher? Answer: At least 3, viz. pilot, co-pilot and the cargo master/flight engineer. How many guys would that leave to do science on our hypothetical Boeing 747 scientific station: Answer = 0. <<
So, this hypothetical 747 lab wouldn't have the ability to support a research team? Or did you just omit them to simplify your argument?
-Kim-
Space/Science » in reply to ISS
Re: ISS