[Interstellar flight] Crew requirements

[Wishbone]

At first wanted to add this post to Artlav's Hius thread but reconsidered.

There were a few reports at NTRS, but this stuff is not necessarily aligned with them.

If we're talking about 40 years' worth of flight (mentally hearing Armstrong sing "Pharoah! Let my people go"), the crew should consist of couples, and provide for newborn crew members. It doesn't mean that they will be denied human society or decent education, they will simply have to undergo acclimatisation and re-socialization upon return.

There are three parts of crew skills that should be present: exploration, engineering, and medical. Multi-roling and cross-training can help but will not replace in-depth specialized knowledge.

With this in mind, I wonder what exact skill sets should there be and how many? At least two surgeons/obstetricians, biochemist, radiologist, a dentist are my initial guess. There are strong gender requirements so that pregnancy and maternity leave of one or even two members of the medical team would not disrupt the normal workflow.

For the exploration team, skills of high-energy physicist, geologist, meteorologist, chemist, biologist are of much importance. Even a linguistics/crypto expert could be part of the team - just in case of THE Contact.

It is simpler with engineering/maintenance - reactor, lighting, HVAC, software, communications, plumbing, materials science are usually mentioned...

 

[Grover]

well, you'd be talking about a big crew, maybe as large as 100 to cover all areas, and allow education of the newborns.
but think of this:

the astronauts will be away from home for 40 YEARS minimum, and with that in mind, they may never see their families again. AND ON TOP OF THAT they only have the small crew (compared to the amount of people we usually interact with throughout a day) to keep them company.

since humans are social creatures, you would have to take an even larger crew to keep them socially (and subconsciously) happy

or make sure that you only take extreme introverts, to the extent where "reproduction" may pose a problem

 

[Urwumpe]

For such a long term mission, you would of course have skill based crew training instead of task based training: The astronauts don't train specific tasks anymore, like docking, etc, but instead practice skills to adapt to such special tasks quickly if needed. Like using the docking software, how to locate malfunctions, etc.

Instead of having for example an EVA trained so often that astronauts can do it in their sleep, astronauts learn to don their space suit, how to operate the tools, what to remember when dealing with ORUs, etc. and get their special training for a EVA on-board with a video briefing and a crew member/ground control assisting.

It will be not different to being on a space station.

 

[Grover]

only this space station isnt in stable orbit, but interstellar trajectory, and their aint no way out

 

[Wishbone]

Taking their spouses is the only natural solution. A crew of 100 may be too many or too few, mostly depending on the workload in maintenance. Medical team size doesn't scale much, at least until the crew goes over 200

Let's be honest, the primary workload of the ISS crew so far has been maintenance-related, and it will be the same on any manned interstellar ship.

Think most crew members will have to write scientific papers/reports all along the way and relay them home, though.

Crew selection may be a bit problematic (on the one hand, young couples with almost no engineering or medical or piloting experience, on the other hand, mature specialists that may be unable to get back to Earth and will always be aware of that). On top of that, everybody should fit everybody else (or be disciplined enough not to show displeasure). Large crews may be prone to factions and mutiny...

 

[Artlav]

If a flight would last 40 freakkin years, it's got to be one way, or not worth it at all.
Возвращение со звезд by Stanislav Lem shows just what would it be like to spend 120 years flying there and back again, 20 of them in proper time. You'll return to a totally different world, after spending decades essentially in prison.

First flights to the closest star would take 10-15 years two-way, which is somewhat acceptable, for the benefit it gives. But farther than that it's stay or stay home.

So, we'll need a colony ship, carrying much more people, enough to sustain a population at destination. Including accidents and idiots, that's about a 1000. Big ship, crowded ship, or some sort of hibernation technology.

 

[Wishbone]

Hehe, imagine a space ship launched by the USSR in early 1980s coming back now. We have passed through that, but we were not travelling through great perils...

 

[T.Neo]

So, we'll need a colony ship, carrying much more people, enough to sustain a population at destination. Including accidents and idiots, that's about a 1000. Big ship, crowded ship, or some sort of hibernation technology.

1000? I've heard 10 000 as a figure for a colony size, not sure if 1000 is still large enough. Maybe it's a lower bound.

Hius is already a pretty big ship, but I don't know about it being big enough to carry 1000 people. Maybe some sort of volumetric population density is needed... for example, one of the centrifuge module observation decks is already comparable in size to the ISS based on it's basic dimensions (not even it's volume, which is far, far, far higher).

Hibernation technology would be best though, obviously attended by a waking crew, who would presumably work in shifts. That way you can save a lot of mass, space and supplies (or life support architecture). And people don't get as bored or as inclined to go crazy and try to open a window...

This page has interesting graphics work for the interior of the ISV in Avatar, and it contains a lot of interesting aspects pertaining to spacecraft interiors (like the grid flooring, which is very reminiscent of Skylab). A real spacecraft would try to generate a feeling of "up" and "down" though (whereas the visuals in the movie are intended to be disorientating), as well as attempt to achieve a more efficient use of space.

 

[Wishbone]

The potential for waking crew member to do much harm to the sleeping ones has been alas! explored to near exhaustion in sci-fi movies. A ship with an active crew has more chances to withstand emergencies. ONLY if the technology is mature and reliable and not in need of everlasting repair you have the safety margin and can put people to sleep. Mind you, without some strong motivation most people will sleep a lot.

 

[PeterRoss]

Talking about women on board...
Taking astronauts' spouses with them may look logical, but there are some conditions required. First and foremost is that spouses must be astronauts as well. So these families must be artificially planned and in fact will be somewhat less of the family than we're used to in our earth life. I mean, in real life male astronaut isn't obliged to marry female astronaut and is free to choose. And I'm afraid not many spouses will be ready physically and mentally for astronaut training let alone leaving Earth for good. So these astronaut families would be rather like sexual partners/crew breeders. Don't know if such relations will be stable anough to maintain society.
On the other hand, what do we know about the influence of open space on human sexual behavior. I've been thinking about possible future martian colony with all that harsh environment and unpleasant conditions and I wonder if people will not lose the reproduction ability/interest at all.
What is known about such a matter in reality? There are men and women on the regular basis in the ISS, aren't any reports or researches or any kind of info about it? I mean, of course there is nothing like that there in orbit, you know, but what about interest and stuff? The orbital living conditions have a great influence on human well-being as far as I've heard and read.

I'd like to point also that the crew of 10000 in hybernation is something from exoplanetary colonization novels and we're talking about crew needed just to keep the ship running, so no hybernation (frozen people are not very socially active, you know) and no more than 1000, I guess.

 

[Urwumpe]

All that stuff about generation ships or completely families is way beyond what I can even imagine things, so I won't comment on it. Nomadic humans do exist, but never in such a way. There is likely a lot to be changed in the human culture before that can happen.

 

[SiberianTiger]

Hehe, imagine a space ship launched by the USSR in early 1980s coming back now. We have passed through that, but we were not travelling through great perils...

Well, to my belief, in 1980 that joke about "Now the political news: shooting subsided between conflicting sides at Sino-Finnish border" already existed.

 

[T.Neo]

Mind you, without some strong motivation most people will sleep a lot.

But also need to eat a lot, breathe a lot, and think a lot...

Sleep is different from whatever hibernation or stasis you’d be looking at for such a mission.

First and foremost is that spouses must be astronauts as well. So these families must be artificially planned and in fact will be somewhat less of the family than we're used to in our earth life. I mean, in real life male astronaut isn't obliged to marry female astronaut and is free to choose. And I'm afraid not many spouses will be ready physically and mentally for astronaut training let alone leaving Earth for good. So these astronaut families would be rather like sexual partners/crew breeders. Don't know if such relations will be stable anough to maintain society.

You can't plan the relationships, and you needn't plan the relationships. With years of training in a social environment there would be ample time for relationships to form, thus both partners are fully qualified and willing, any planned relationship will just fall apart- usually. And when it does so it could be quite bad, especially in a stressful situation aboard a spacecraft.

I somehow doubt that there is interest aboard the ISS. These people are working hard, closely monitored by mission control, and view their colleagues as, well... colleagues. But that doesn't mean that on long term missions, for example, partnerships won't form, and people won't need to have their emotional or sexual needs met.

I wonder if people will not lose the reproduction ability/interest at all.

For some reason I can't quite pin down, I highly doubt it...

 

[Wishbone]

to T.Neo: and also spam a lot. (sorry could not resist a MPHG ref)
Agree with you on training, which will have to include teambuilding on Earth (mountain-climbing, cross-ocean sailing) and on the Moon or in orbit (whichever is cheaper). The number of candidates should be very large to let the law of large numbers do its work, even with relationship breakups and asocial behaviour detected from time to time.

to Urwumpe: definitely agree on the improbability of colony ships, since there are no terraforming skills. Complete families aboard - why not? If one-G environment and good medical care are guaranteed, this is not more sci-fi than landing on the Moon.

to SiberianTiger: there are loads of stuff we did not know then. There were jokes and jokes, if you get my drift. One of my emigre acquaintances boasted (after 1992 of course) how his dad smuggled books into the USSR, on the CIA payroll. Some of the political jokes did originate from there, it seems.

on crew skill sets: agricultural skills are a no-brainer, and think the messiest jobs should be equally shared by all crew members. The more I look at it, the more I think this smacks of communism, and we know things tend to break down if the commune grows large. One more argument against large crews.

 

[T.Neo]

Agree with you on training, which will have to include teambuilding on Earth (mountain-climbing, cross-ocean sailing) and on the Moon or in orbit (whichever is cheaper). The number of candidates should be very large to let the law of large numbers do its work, even with relationship breakups and asocial behaviour detected from time to time.

Pretty much. These people would definitely have previous spaceflight experience, as well as previous interplanetary spaceflight experience.

to Urwumpe: definitely agree on the improbability of colony ships, since there are no terraforming skills. Complete families aboard - why not? If one-G environment and good medical care are guaranteed, this is not more sci-fi than landing on the Moon.

No terraforming skills... yet. There isn't any reason to think that terraforming is impossible, especially if you have a interstellar fusion ramjet spacecraft. But it is still very difficult.

Of course there is always the option of an already habitable planet, but these will be by no means common, and there are... natives to worry about. Not the ones that might shoot or stab you, or even the ones that might maul, charge or gore you... but the ones environmentalists might shout at you about (no, not alien pathogens either, disease causing organisms have trouble crossing species, let alone planets).

For terraforming, presumably a body would be picked out that would be classed as "easily terraformable", i.e. more easily than Mars, requiring the resources and equipment of at most a few starships to terraform. The planet would be studied intensely from Earth and by probes beforehand; automated machinery or that operated by a minimal crew would oversee terraforming, with the colony ship arriving later.

It is remote, yes. But it's one of two options for interstellar colonisation, the worse of two, and the better of two, for various different reasons.

on crew skill sets: agricultural skills are a no-brainer, and think the messiest jobs should be equally shared by all crew members. The more I look at it, the more I think this smacks of communism, and we know things tend to break down if the commune grows large. One more argument against large crews.

Arigculture will likely follow a hydroponic or aeroponic route... mostly. There's still space for traditional farming somewhere, even if it has higher mass requirements, etc.

To engineer a command and social structure aboard the vehicle, one might look to maritime examples. Modern aircraft carriers can accomodate more than 5000 people.

The more I think about it though, the more I think that putting the passengers in some sort of stasis for a ~10 year journey would be more humane, and safer and less demanding on the mission architecture. Some sort of artificially induced hibernation is more realistic, but complete cessation of biological activity (i.e. through cryonics) would be preferable as the subjects no longer need food or air, and could be kept in such a state for the duration of the flight, radiation damage permitting. If hibernation can be sustained for relatively long periods (half a year or more), then repeated long periods of hibernation interspersed with shorter periods of activity might be the answer, provided that the process is safe enough.

I would also not discredit any worth of a return mission, if a round trip to Tau Ceti, with a yearlong stay at the destination, returned a the time of posting, it would have departed in 1976. A trip to Alpha Centauri at the same speed would have departed in only 1998.

While there have been many changes in the interleading time, our world still exists. I for one would prefer to return home after 35 years in space, rather than die alone in the uncharted void, even if it is 34 years later...

Most of the more dramatic changes- for example, the fall of the Soviet Union, or the end of Apartheid, would also not be typical of a world where politics and geopolitics are stable enough to allow the construction and operation of such monumental vehicles.

 

[jedidia]

on crew skill sets: agricultural skills are a no-brainer

Considering my infamous not-so-green thumb, I wouldn't dare to make that statement... :huh:

 

[Adelanthal]

As posited in "Slow Train to Arcturus", why bother with planets? Every star will have a habitable zone, and every Population I star has sufficient material to create more spacehabs of, given technological limitations, essentially unlimited size. No having to worry about atmospheres, alien microbes, or LGMs.

 

[T.Neo]

Why bother going to another star then? There are plenty of resources to do that in our own system, they're nothing special.

On the other hand, planets are. It doesn't really make sense to invest such a huge amount of effort doing something far away what you can do right at home, but it does make sense to invest a huge amount of effort on something special...

 

[Wishbone]

What is the maximum bandwidth one can achieve in the uplink to the ISV from the Earth (I suppose the major source of background noise besides the ship's own interference - engines and equipment - would be the Sun, right?)

 

[fsci123]

One has to remember relativity... A pretty good guess for .7c taking 40y to us will only take ~20-30 years on the ship...
The ship itself will be large consisting mostly of colonization, communication, RD, and smaller support vessels like Com sats and reconisance sats. The mission will probably depend on the crew being in stasis for 1 year rotations and as soon as they arrive at the planet the onboard vessels scout for suitable places to put a base. The colonization ship will build a colony while the people are still in stasis.