And in two years!

Said to be one of the biggest of NASA's announcements in it's history.

 

 

Edited March 25Mar 25 by martin-w

NASA's '1st nuclear powered interplanetary spacecraft' will send Skyfall helicopters to Mars in 2028 

https://share.google/FXwVJ47nPRTq1Auwy

 

Quote

"Today (March 24), NASA announced that it will develop Skyfall for a 2028 launch, and that the mission will journey to the Red Planet on a spacecraft that uses nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) — what NASA is referring to as "the first nuclear powered interplanetary spacecraft."

 

 

Edited March 25Mar 25 by martin-w

Nuclear electric?  Fan/propeller powered?  I remember a long time ago, someone came up
with the idea of using atomic bombs and a heavy blast shield to provide propulsion.

Big Bada-boom!

Oh, please...

There's more pressing issues to contend with before NASA even tries to take a shot at a Mars mission... like how are they going to keep a Crew healthy and safe from GCR's?

2 hours ago, charliearon said:

Nuclear electric?  Fan/propeller powered?

 

🤣 Think Ion drive but with more power.

 

1 hour ago, ViperPilot said:

how are they going to keep a Crew healthy and safe from GCR's?

 

Hydrogen rich materials. Water, polyethylene, liquid hydrogen etc. Hydrogenated graphite nano-fibers, active EM shields. 

One idea was to store the crews water supply in the walls.

Thing is, though, this mission is more of a concept demonstrator for the propulsion technology, so wont generate a huge amount of power, thus, a 12 month trip. Advanced NEP systems though (maybe paired with plasma engines) can be as fast as 45 days to Mars. Thus substantially less GCR exposure.  

I have my own built-in impulse engines!  Strike a match and I beat 'em to Mars!  Where's Zefram Cochrane
when ya need him?

35 minutes ago, martin-w said:

 

🤣 Think Ion drive but with more power.

 

 

Hydrogen rich materials. Water, polyethylene, liquid hydrogen etc. Hydrogenated graphite nano-fibers, active EM shields. 

One idea was to store the crews water supply in the walls.

Thing is, though, this mission is more of a concept demonstrator for the propulsion technology, so wont generate a huge amount of power, thus, a 12 month trip. Advanced NEP systems though (maybe paired with plasma engines) can be as fast as 45 days to Mars. Thus substantially less GCR exposure.  

To be brutally honest, I will believe it when I see a practical GCR buffer/shielding system put into practice or at least thoroughly tested at distances above 400K nautical miles. Whether it's NASA, ESA, JAXA, Roscosmos... it's all theoretical at this point. 

16 hours ago, charliearon said:

I have my own built-in impulse engines!  Strike a match and I beat 'em to Mars!  Where's Zefram Cochrane
when ya need him?

Do you really want to go zipping past them, straight out of our solar system, and hurtle towards an unknown universe? 🤣

1 hour ago, stans said:

Do you really want to go zipping past them, straight out of our solar system, and hurtle towards an unknown universe? 🤣

Heck Yeah!  Wanna catch up to V'ger who left our solar system!

19 hours ago, ViperPilot said:

To be brutally honest, I will believe it when I see a practical GCR buffer/shielding system put into practice or at least thoroughly tested at distances above 400K nautical miles. Whether it's NASA, ESA, JAXA, Roscosmos... it's all theoretical at this point. 

 Radiation exposure is related to not just intensity but duration, too. A trip to Mars at current speeds would subject astronauts ti 60% of their astronaut career recommended exposure. So yes, significant. But as I mention, a trip of only 45 days, a lot less. But yes, shielding is required.

 

Shielding isn't an unsolvable issue. They wouldn't be planning the trip to Mars if it was, neither would other nations.

 

Shielding: 

 

 

Quote

 

While the journey is challenging, mission planners use the solar cycle as a natural shield, and engineers are developing hybrid shielding to keep astronauts within safe limits. 

 

The Solar Maximum Paradox

Counterintuitively, the best time to travel to Mars is during solar maximum—when the sun is most active. 

 

• GCR Deflection: Increased solar activity creates a "boisterous" solar wind that sweeps away more dangerous, high-energy Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCRs) from deep space.
• Dose Reduction: Launching during solar maximum can reduce total GCR exposure by up to 50% compared to a solar minimum launch.
• Trade-off: While solar maximum increases the risk of Solar Particle Events (SPEs), these are mostly low-energy protons that are much easier to block with standard spacecraft materials than GCRs. 
   
• Shielding Technologies 

 

To combat the remaining radiation, a "layered defense" strategy is used: 

 

Technology Type	How it Works	Pros/Cons
Passive Shielding	Uses physical mass (water, plastic, or boron nitride nanotubes) to absorb particles.	Pros: Reliable. Cons: Very heavy; can create "secondary radiation" if hit by high-energy ions.
Active Shielding	Uses magnetic or electrostatic fields to deflect charged particles, mimicking Earth's magnetosphere.	Pros: Mass-efficient. Cons: Requires massive power and superconducting cooling systems not yet fully developed.
Hybrid Systems	Combines a light active field with a layer of hydrogen-rich material like polyethylene.	Pros: Optimal balance of weight and protection; can reduce organ dose significantly.

 

Practical Measures on the Journey

• Storm Shelters: Spacecraft will likely feature a central, heavily shielded area (often surrounded by the ship's water and food supplies) where crew can retreat during a solar flare.
• Wearable Shields: NASA and partners (like StemRad) have tested the AstroRad vest, which protects vital organs while allowing astronauts to move around the cabin. 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 26Mar 26 by martin-w

 

Quote

 

To protect astronauts on the surface of Mars, scientists are turning to the planet's own resources and advanced medical therapies. 

 

Building with Martian Regolith (Soil)

Martian regolith—the loose dust and rock on the surface—is a primary candidate for radiation shielding because it is abundant and free to use. 

 

• Radiation Reduction: A layer of regolith just 1 meter thick can reduce primary radiation exposure by approximately 41%. For full protection, some studies suggest a layer of at least 2 meters (about 6.5 feet) may be necessary to block cosmic rays effectively.
• 3D Printing Habitats: NASA and companies like ICON are developing robotic systems to 3D print habitats using local regolith. These systems melt or bind the soil to create durable, ceramic-like structures that protect against radiation, extreme cold, and dust storms.
• The "Secondary Radiation" Challenge: When high-energy particles hit regolith, they can create "secondary radiation" (like neutrons). To counter this, engineers are testing hybrid materials that mix regolith with hydrogen-rich plastics, which are much better at stopping these secondary particles. 

 

Edited March 26Mar 26 by martin-w

4 hours ago, martin-w said:

 

All valid points; all I'm saying is that all of the 'technologies' and Mission Planning are for the most part hypothetical because we haven't sent Humans out to those regions to get baseline Data, nor have the Technologies been tested in actual, 'real time' Flight environments.

Building with indigenous materials are all well and good, but if the folks who are testing the viability of building with those materials can't even survive the trip out to the site in the first place...

Not trying to start an argument here, not by a long shot. I'm just voicing what I believe are the hurdles that need to be overcome in order to even make an exploratory Flight a reality. 🙂

Solved!  Antiradiation skivvies!