Also, modern submarines have been known to stay submerged for > 100 days. A nuclear submarine is limited only by its food supply and psychological needs of its crew.
In both of these cases, you're in there with hundreds of others. You can decide you're mad at dozens of them, and still find new people to talk to. When it's for a crew of six, you're pretty much dependent on staying on good terms with everybody.
Some Artic expeditions in the 19th century were stuck in the ice for years at a time when trying to find the North West Passage. One of the expeditions led by John Ross was stuck for four years:
The point of the experiment isn't to determine whether or not it's possible. We know it's possible.
"The factors under study encompass physiological functions, immunity, fitness, and plasma cortisol levels to evaluate stress and adaptation; group structure, dynamics, communications and psychological resilience; monitoring of microbial ecology in the hermetic, confined quarters; the effect of dietary supplements on performance and mood, and many more."
I'm sure they'll learn a thing or two about how to make the journey more comfortable for when it eventually happens.
Agreed, one of the biggest problems is likely to be cabin fever. They're going to be locked in an unchanging environment for 500 days with no way out.
I'm sure this experiment is to find adequate methods to stave off cabin fever. Simple things like altering the lighting is known to reduce problems by causing changes in shadows, etc.
Having an international crew for an expedition like this is likely to be helpful (if you're not hiring xenophobes) as it allows a greater variety of discussion. I'm British and living in Canada, and you wouldn't believe how much you have to talk about with complete strangers compared with someone of your own nationality. Add people in with differing skill sets and different language skills and you give people a vast amount to discuss before topics run out.
I would say that one of the biggest challenges is going to be maintaining a healthy body in a zero gravity environment. Not sure how long the longest stay at the Space Station has been, but does it even come close to 500 days?
What's required to maintain a healthy body in zero gravity is still contradictory. One of the biggest problems is due to decreased immune system, which likely isn't caused by space itself but that 1/2 of all astronauts get less than 2 hours sleep in a 24 hour period while taking sleeping pills, which sleeping pills themselves are known to have detrimental effects on health in the long term. Apparently the other 1/2 don't get that much more than 2 hours, certainly nowhere near the 6 hour minimum for 'average' sleep.
IMO solving the sleep issue will solve a lot of the health problems. However, what's required for solving the sleep issue will likely also solve the remainder of the health problems, and I'd be willing to put money on it being simulating gravity for at least the persons sleep cycle.
I've wondered for a while if something as simple as a centrifuge-like hammock would work.
Don't see why they'd need it. It's not like they're doing space walks during this time, and the real goal here is to gauge survival / mental change. You're also possibly better off testing someone who hasn't had prior training, so you can better measure how new training will effect them during the trial. It would probably also make developing a measurement for finding which people shouldn't go on a trip like this before they actually do so a bit easier, as it'd be similarly less tainted.
> I'm a little surprised to see that none of their crew have actual space experience.
Maybe it'd be better. If we want to send large numbers of people to Mars for mining or colonization eventually, picking a more random group of people might be preferable. I dunno.
Under the rules of the experiment, a participant who wishes to, or for any reason must, leave the extended experimental isolation can do so, however, he must be deemed as dead during the mission.
I wonder if this is really a good idea. Clearly it won't be an option on the real mission.
Yeah. Knowing you have the option of getting out - and that earth is just a few metres away - must have a huge impact on the state of mind of the participants. It cannot compare to the feeling of isolation knowing that you are in a tiny tin can separated from home by 50 million miles of howling void and many months or even years of travel time. I'd be very interested to know how they controlled for this in their studies, if at all.
A better simulation would be to dump them on some remote artic ice sheet where they actually can't get back. Or on the moon :)
Edit: in terms of psychological data, I'd imagine that the long flights of some cosmonauts on Mir were a better case study.
Yes, but, at the same time, you know you're not /really/ going to be on freaking Mars in a few months! This gives you far less motivation to endure the hardships, I think.
