Public Outreach: Garnering Support for Future Human Space Exploration

Feasibility Study for a Commercial Space Station in Low Earth Orbit

Space is a uniquely remote and hazardous environment. For humans to live and work effectively in low Earth orbit (LEO) and beyond, significant technological support must be provided to overcome the physical and psychological challenges of space flight. This operational environment places great demands on a crew, particularly during emergency situations, where the life of a crewmember may rest in the hands of a crew medical officer (CMO) who is also a colleague. In over five decades of human space flight and exploration, our knowledge, activities, and capabilities have grown tremendously, resulting in the International Space Station (ISS) and a permanent human presence in LEO. The need for an evacuation capability from a LEO space station derives from basic principles underlying escape and egress systems of the earliest manned spacecraft.

During the summer of 2009, a flexible path scenario for human and robotic space exploration was developed that enables frequent, measured, and publicly notable human exploration of space beyond low-Earth orbit (LEO). The formulation of this scenario was in support of the Exploration Beyond LEO subcommittee of the Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee that was commissioned by President Obama. Exploration mission sequences that allow humans to visit a wide number of inner solar system destinations were investigated. The scope of destinations included the Earth-Moon and Earth-Sun Lagrange points, near-Earth objects (NEOs), the Moon, and Mars and its moons. The missions examined assumed the use of Constellation Program elements along with existing launch vehicles and proposed augmentations. Additionally, robotic missions were envisioned as complements to human exploration through precursor missions, as crew emplaced scientific investigations, and as sample gathering assistants to the human crews. The focus of the flexible path approach was to gain ever-increasing operational experience through human exploration missions ranging from a few weeks to several years in duration, beginning in deep space beyond LEO and evolving to landings on the Moon and eventually Mars.

Long duration missions present numerous risks to crew health and performance. The international space community is actively studying these effects and possible mitigation techniques, but much work remains to be done. As such the space community and space agencies are increasingly cooperating to enable timely answers in support of exploration mission needs. Crew health and performance are critical to successful human exploration. Long-duration missions bring numerous risks that must be understood and mitigated in order to keep astronauts healthy, rather than treat a diagnosed health disorder. Crewed missions venturing beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) will require technology solutions for crew health care to address physiological, psychological, performance, and other needs in-situ, e.g., self-sufficiency, as an emergency or quick-return option will not be feasible. Therefore, onboard capabilities that would allow for early self-diagnosis of impending health issues, and autonomous identification of proper responses on negative trends to keep astronauts healthy are critical. With the absence of real-time medical ground support, personal health-tracking tools for health monitoring, health risk assessment and management are required for any crew member to predict her/his future health condition if no preventive measures are taken. This paper suggests a concept employing technologies from Prognostics and Health Management (PHM), namely real-time health monitoring and condition-based health maintenance in terms of predictive diagnostics. The International Space Station (ISS) is an excellent platform and currently the only "test bed" on which to prepare for future manned exploration missions. Examples of present, i.e., currently deployed, and planned/envisioned future health management & maintenance technologies on the ISS are presented. However, the exploration beyond low-Earth orbit will require a new generation of capabilities and systems, which build on existing capabilities and incorporate technologies yet to be developed.

Protecting Lunar Colonies From Space Radiation

During the 2000 presidential election, in that time before the September 11th terrorist attacks, the stump speeches of George W. Bush and his Democratic opponent, Al Gore, focused on protecting Social Security, saving American education, expanding Medicare, raising or lowering taxes, and readying the military. If science was mentioned at all, it was usually in the context of missile defense, global warming, or Gore’s role in creating the internet. With the exception of the debate over stem-cell research, science remains a background topic in the current campaign. Democratic candidate John Kerry has occasionally highlighted US science policy and used it against President Bush, charging that the administration has put politics and ideology ahead of science. “Let scientists do science again,” a headline on the Kerry election website says.Bush has responded, primarily through his science adviser, John Marburger, by pointing to the 44% increase in federal R&D since fiscal year 2001 and the record $132 billion in the administration’s FY 2005 R&D budget. “Kerry ignores President Bush’s record science investments,” reads a headline on the Bush reelection website.Kerry answers by noting that most of the R&D money is going for weapons systems and defense spending related to the war in Iraq, not basic science programs. Marburger and other administration officials point to several R&D initiatives, including new nanotechnology centers, the Moon/Mars space initiative, and the program to develop hydrogen fuel technology. In an effort to get the candidates to specifically address questions of interest to the science community, Physics Today has continued a tradition begun in 1976; it asked Bush and Kerry nine questions covering a range of science topics. Their answers, sometimes direct and sometimes vague, show fundamental differences on several key issues.On missile defense, Bush says his request of $10 billion in FY 2005 for development and deployment of such a system fulfills a pledge he made to the American people. Kerry says we should not be “falsely comforted by an untested and unproven defense system.”On global warming, Kerry talks of both near- and long-term programs to deal with the problem. Bush promotes his “comprehensive climate change strategy.” The candidates also address a host of other issues ranging from space exploration to energy policy. During the 2000 presidential election, in that time before the September 11th terrorist attacks, the stump speeches of George W. Bush and his Democratic opponent, Al Gore, focused on protecting Social Security, saving American education, expanding Medicare, raising or lowering taxes, and readying the military. If science was mentioned at all, it was usually in the context of missile defense, global warming, or Gore’s role in creating the internet. With the exception of the debate over stem-cell research, science remains a background topic in the current campaign. Democratic candidate John Kerry has occasionally highlighted US science policy and used it against President Bush, charging that the administration has put politics and ideology ahead of science. “Let scientists do science again,” a headline on the Kerry election website says.Bush has responded, primarily through his science adviser, John Marburger, by pointing to the 44% increase in federal R&D since fiscal year 2001 and the record $132 billion in the administration’s FY 2005 R&D budget. “Kerry ignores President Bush’s record science investments,” reads a headline on the Bush reelection website.Kerry answers by noting that most of the R&D money is going for weapons systems and defense spending related to the war in Iraq, not basic science programs. Marburger and other administration officials point to several R&D initiatives, including new nanotechnology centers, the Moon/Mars space initiative, and the program to develop hydrogen fuel technology. In an effort to get the candidates to specifically address questions of interest to the science community, Physics Today has continued a tradition begun in 1976; it asked Bush and Kerry nine questions covering a range of science topics. Their answers, sometimes direct and sometimes vague, show fundamental differences on several key issues.On missile defense, Bush says his request of $10 billion in FY 2005 for development and deployment of such a system fulfills a pledge he made to the American people. Kerry says we should not be “falsely comforted by an untested and unproven defense system.”On global warming, Kerry talks of both near- and long-term programs to deal with the problem. Bush promotes his “comprehensive climate change strategy.” The candidates also address a host of other issues ranging from space exploration to energy policy. 1Section:ChooseTop of page1 <<BushKerry2BushKerry3BushKerry4BushKerry5BushKerry6BushKerry7BushKerry8BushKerry9BushKerry Missile defense: The present administration is requesting more than $10 billion this year for development and deployment of a missile defense system. Many scientists say the system, given current and foreseeable technology, cannot be effective. What proof of effectiveness should be required before the system is fully deployed? Given the low-tech nature of terrorist attacks and the limited missile capabilities of North Korea and other hostile nations, does missile defense continue to be a wise investment? BushSection:ChooseTop of page1Bush <<Kerry2BushKerry3BushKerry4BushKerry5BushKerry6BushKerry7BushKerry8BushKerry9BushKerryOur policy is to develop and deploy, at the earliest possible date, a weapons system that would defend the United States homeland against nuclear attack, including ballistic missile defenses drawing on the best technologies available. Early in my administration, I called for the examination of the full range of available technologies and basing modes for missile defenses that could protect the United States, our deployed forces, and our friends and allies.The FY 2005 Defense Appropriations Act provides $10 billion that I requested for systems to defend against the threat from ballistic missiles. Later this year, the first components of America’s missile defense system will become operational, and we are on schedule for the next stages of the project. My administration will develop and deploy the technologies necessary to protect our people, fulfilling a pledge I made to the American people more than four years ago.KerrySection:ChooseTop of page1BushKerry <<2BushKerry3BushKerry4BushKerry5BushKerry6BushKerry7BushKerry8BushKerry9BushKerryA missile defense that works is a wise investment, but one that pours money into defenses at the expense of other immediate national security needs is not. And that’s what this administration has done. Missile defense should be one element of a comprehensive national security strategy. But a single-minded focus on this technology and the threat it is designed to meet ignores the very real danger of terrorism and our greatest danger—terrorists with weapons of mass destruction.John Edwards and I will be committed to developing a missile defense system that works, is fully tested, and geared to the threats we face. But I will refocus our efforts on preventing the spread of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons and dramatically accelerating the security of nuclear weapons and material in Russia and around the world. We will not sit by, falsely comforted by an untested and unproven defense system, while these threats continue to fester.2Section:ChooseTop of page1BushKerry2 <<BushKerry3BushKerry4BushKerry5BushKerry6BushKerry7BushKerry8BushKerry9BushKerry Climate change: Virtually all reputable research in recent years has reinforced the scientific conclusion that global warming is a real and growing crisis caused, at least in part, by the burning of fossil fuels. Do you accept that scientific consensus? Under what circumstances would you regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions? BushSection:ChooseTop of page1BushKerry2Bush <<Kerry3BushKerry4BushKerry5BushKerry6BushKerry7BushKerry8BushKerry9BushKerryGlobal climate change is a serious long-term issue. In 2001, I asked the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to provide the most up-to-date information about the science of climate change. The academy found that considerable uncertainty remains about the effect of natural fluctuations on climate and the future effects climate change will have on our environment.My administration is now well along in implementing a comprehensive climate change strategy to advance the science, expand the use of transformational energy and carbon sequestration technologies, and mitigate the growth of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States and in partnership with other nations. I created the new US Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) to refocus the federal government’s climate research programs, for which my 2005 budget seeks nearly $2 billion to fund research across the federal government. The NAS endorsed the CCSP strategic plan, noting that it “articulates a guiding vision, is appropriately ambitious, and is broad in scope.”I also committed the nation to a goal of reducing American greenhouse gas intensity by 18% over the next 10 years, which would prevent more than 500 million tons of carbon emissions through 2012. To help achieve this goal, I created the Climate Vision program in 2003 to reduce the growth of greenhouse gas emissions by energy-intensive industrial sectors. Participants in the Climate Vision program account for between 40 and 45% of US greenhouse gas emissions. I have strongly supported over $4 billion in tax incentives for renewable and energy-efficient technologies, including wind and solar energy and hybrid and fuel-cell vehicles. Also, in April 2003, my administration raised the fuel economy standards for light trucks and SUVs [sport utility vehicles] for the first time since 1996, saving 3.6 billion gallons of gasoline. And in my 2003 State of the Union [address], I announced a $1.7 billion hydrogen fuel initiative to accelerate research that could lead to hydrogen-powered, no-emission vehicles within a generation.Additionally, my administration is participating in robust international partnerships to promote clean, renewable, commercially available fusion energy and to construct the $1 billion FutureGen project, which will test the latest technologies to generate electricity, produce hydrogen, and sequester greenhouse gas emissions from coal. KerrySection:ChooseTop of page1BushKerry2BushKerry <<3BushKerry4BushKerry5BushKerry6BushKerry7BushKerry8BushKerry9BushKerryI recognize the risk of climate change, and I have outlined a balanced set of programs that will have impact both in the near term and over the long term. My plan will also provide balanced support for technology that can increase the efficiency and cut greenhouse emissions in transportation systems, buildings, and industry that are attractive to consumers and US producers. Our programs will encourage the use of renewable fuels such as ethanol and renewable electric generation that produce little or no net greenhouse gases. I will expand the production tax credit for wind and biomass energy to cover the full array of renewable energy sources and increase Department of Energy (DOE) research into renewable energy sources and their applications. And I will propose an aggressive program of research, standards, and incentives to accelerate electric generation from renewable energy. Clean coal technology can play a critical role, given technology to cut carbon dioxide emissions.My plan would encourage energy efficiency with programs such as updated fuel efficiency standards, new tax incentives for automakers to build the new, more efficient automobiles of the future, and tax incentives for families to purchase more energy-efficient cars, trucks, and SUVs.3Section:ChooseTop of page1BushKerry2BushKerry3 <<BushKerry4BushKerry5BushKerry6BushKerry7BushKerry8BushKerry9BushKerry Science investment: There is concern in the science and economic communities that the US is losing its world leadership in the sciences, which they say bodes ill for future economic growth and global competitive-ness. To address that concern, should the US increase funding for basic science, and should the administration fully fund the 2001 bill, signed by the president, to double NSF’s budget? How would you reinvigorate science education for US-born students? What is the role of foreign scientists and students in the US scientific enterprise? BushSection:ChooseTop of page1BushKerry2BushKerry3Bush <<Kerry4BushKerry5BushKerry6BushKerry7BushKerry8BushKerry9BushKerryIncluding my FY 2005 budget request, total federal R&D investment during the first term will have increased 44% to a record $132 billion in 2005. My FY 2005 budget request commits 13.5% of total discretionary outlays to R&D, the highest level in 37 years. In the context of the overall economy, federal R&D spending in the FY 2005 budget is the greatest share of GDP [gross domestic product] in over 10 years. Funding for basic research, the fuel for future technology development, is at an all-time high of $26.8 billion in FY 2005, a 26% increase over FY 2001. Funding for NSF during the four years of my administration has increased 30% over FY 2001 to $5.7 billion in FY 2005. NSF’s broad support for basic research, particularly at US academic institutions, provides not only a central source for discovery in many fields but also encourages and supports development of the next generation of scientists and engineers. Moreover, in fulfilling its mission, NSF has used its funding efficiently and effectively.As for the American scientific enterprise, it is important in this information and technological age that our students receive a first-rate science education, just as they receive quality instruction in reading, writing, and math. The federal government has no control over local curricula, and it is not my job to tell states and local boards of education what they should teach in the classroom. Nevertheless, the No Child Left Behind Act, one of my proudest legislative achievements this term, is improving our schools and, consequently, the teaching of science. NCLB requires, for the first time, assessments in science to give us better information about how our students are performing and how to improve instruction in science. I have also proposed creating the Presidential Math and Science Scholars Fund to provide $100 million in grants to low-income students who study math or science. This will ensure that America’s graduates have the training they need to compete for the best jobs of the 21st century.I also value the contributions that foreign scientists and students make to our nation’s scientific enterprise, while recognizing the importance of safeguarding our security. We will continue to welcome international students and scientists while implementing balanced measures to end abuses of the student visa system. My administration has already achieved several notable successes in reducing delays now being experienced by some visa seekers. We have increased security while speeding up the clearance process; approximately 1000 back-logged applications have already been cleared out.KerrySection:ChooseTop of page1BushKerry2BushKerry3BushKerry <<4BushKerry5BushKerry6BushKerry7BushKerry8BushKerry9BushKerryFor three years, the Bush administration has squandered America’s leadership in the world, putting politics before science and doing nothing to create jobs while our workers fall further behind. The administration has proposed cuts for scientific research and grossly distorted and politicized science on issues from mercury pollution to stem-cell research. This approach not only limits the research that our scientists are doing today, it undermines important discoveries of tomorrow and threatens America’s critical edge in innovation. I will reverse this course by restoring America’s scientific leadership, helping find new cures, moderating healthcare costs, and developing new technologies that will create good jobs. I will boost support for the physical sciences and engineering by increasing research investments in agencies such as NSF, the National Institutes of Health, DOE, NIST, and NASA. This funding will help with the broad areas of science and technology that will provide the foundations for economic growth and prosperity in the 21st century.4Section:ChooseTop of page1BushKerry2BushKerry3BushKerry4 <<BushKerry5BushKerry6BushKerry7BushKerry8BushKerry9BushKerry Nuclear weapons: Does the US need to develop a new class of nuclear weapons to deal with the changing threats of the 21st century? Is there any circumstance in which you would support the resumption of nuclear testing? BushSection:ChooseTop of page1BushKerry2BushKerry3BushKerry4Bush <<Kerry5BushKerry6BushKerry7BushKerry8BushKerry9BushKerryThe Nuclear Posture Review, released by my administration in January 2002, noted that the nation’s nuclear infrastructure had atrophied since the end of the cold war and that the evolving security environment requires a flexible and responsive weapons complex infrastructure. To that end, my FY 2005 budget reflects an increase over the 2004 enacted level in the weapons activities account, which encompasses the stockpile stewardship programs. There is no current need for testing due to the sophistication of computer modeling and other new technologies, but we must maintain the capability to test in case such testing becomes necessary in the future to ensure the safety and reliability of our defensive arsenal. We have not identified any need for developing new nuclear weapons. KerrySection:ChooseTop of page1BushKerry2BushKerry3BushKerry4BushKerry <<5BushKerry6BushKerry7BushKerry8BushKerry9BushKerryNo, and a Kerry–Edwards administration will stop this administration’s program to develop a new class of nuclear weapons. This is a weapon we don’t need, and it undermines our ability to persuade other nations to forego development of these weapons.5Section:ChooseTop of page1BushKerry2BushKerry3BushKerry4BushKerry5 Nuclear There is serious concern many that could or a nuclear in a US Do you the US is doing to and control of nuclear weapons and material both in the US and BushSection:ChooseTop of administration in has more to and control nuclear weapons and material than US weapons and are and both the Department of Defense and are to make more My administration has increased funding to weapons and material in the Union and has by years the schedule the administration for security in We are with Russia to end the production of and to weapons for of weapons. the my administration the to or and material We have already weapons material from several our in its for nuclear weapons. To against we the international in a global effort to account and of sources that could be used in such We activities in over 40 on this as well as with international the Energy the the and the of Defense we have dramatically our ability to that could be a threat to us and to our friends and my administration the billion initiative to support and nuclear safety in the This of the international is to a more of nation’s highest must be preventing from to nuclear weapons and the material to make We must in a global partnership with other nations to prevent the spread of these weapons. the Bush administration’s have in the have the we need to advance our security. September they have not nearly to and on the while the nuclear from and North Korea have Our security requires an immediate change of I have proposed a comprehensive strategy to of weapons and including an of programs to all nuclear weapons and within the and at research in the within four production of new material for nuclear weapons by a global on production of new of nuclear weapons and by development of the new generation of nuclear accelerating in US and nuclear and reducing of in nuclear weapons programs in hostile including by with North Korea to ensure the and of its nuclear weapons program and a global effort to prevent from the necessary to build nuclear weapons. international efforts to by and and as well as improving the security a presidential to prevent nuclear terrorism who will focus on a effort to all nuclear weapons and around the world and prevent a nuclear terrorist of Energy than of and have not in a comprehensive US energy policy. years into the future, what do you the US energy should How would you the US in that BushSection:ChooseTop of and energy is critical to America’s and homeland security. We will be more and more we are on foreign sources of energy. The of a comprehensive and balanced national energy policy has been one of my During my first in I proposed a national energy policy that would our energy production and systems, reduce our on foreign promote efficiency and increase domestic production from all of energy including renewable energy and continue to our economy and create new jobs. We will continue to with on the energy to the administration has nearly all of the more than in the comprehensive national energy policy that not as increasing reliability R&D to help prevent and the to its of million to provide energy security in case of of have proposed an program of research, and standards that would increase the efficiency of energy use and use of new energy sources that can ensure a and while reducing the risk of climate change. The program would be supported in by a billion energy security and from federal and gas the in by I have to around the and a of that can meet US needs both in the term and for in the Given the long time required to over energy investments such as of and trucks, industrial and we must a broad set of new technologies as as possible we have any of US energy use in the near term, many of the most control systems, and other technologies to improve the energy of buildings, and industrial that the US to reduce its on from the and I will set for fuels such as I will support research and incentives that will dramatically increase use of from wind and other renewable And I will encourage development of technology and nuclear generation with high standards for stewardship and of Nuclear recent by that nuclear is the best energy source to meet the US while protecting the renewable energy can be deployed on a Do you increasing the use of nuclear If what would you do with the BushSection:ChooseTop of support the further development of nuclear technologies as a clean, and to meet this nation’s future energy Nuclear for of our This which no pollution or greenhouse gas can play an expanding role in our energy future while the we with energy national energy policy several to encourage increased use of nuclear and to the that through the Nuclear my administration is with industry to the for an of a new US nuclear within the next years. through the the United States is with around the to develop a next generation of more and more nuclear that can also produce hydrogen and my administration has made a to the nuclear and the of a long-term at We are ahead with the of a to the Nuclear at the end of this administration is also committed to and in new technologies that will change the we generate I committed the United States to the international fusion energy as in is a important to test the of nuclear fusion as a source of and the of a nearly source of energy the that long-term of Nuclear can play an role in energy while reducing the risk of climate key such as nuclear nuclear and security must be John Edwards and I will ensure safety and science We George Bush’s plan to over the of a Kerry–Edwards administration will on science. John Edwards and I do not support as a nuclear and will that nuclear and transportation only on the of science and that to and the John Edwards and I will George Bush and to from a for an NAS study to is the as to long-term and or some other technology. an international to scientific for nuclear and nuclear from terrorist John Edwards and I will improve and security at nuclear In we will nuclear to to improve including measures to reduce to the an of National National Nuclear the national weapons continue to be with security spending and What would you to improve at the Does the current plan of the to the risk of the in the of the war on BushSection:ChooseTop of national are doing to deal with the threats of the 21st are a in our efforts to improve homeland are the source of technological and are helping the war on With their at the highest level in years, National National and National are also on the edge of defense research, protecting the nation’s infrastructure from terrorist attacks, and developing a that the of a nuclear This is we billion on weapons research and production in FY 2004 and I for billion for We must and security My administration has made effort to improve the the weapons do and one of efforts is that in all areas of central to the war on we can use our more and focus on his or of national play a critical role in our nuclear weapons stockpile and that our nation’s nuclear weapons are and The national also have an important role in preventing the spread of weapons of mass and in science for our nation’s have a of our nation’s but this record has been by and security at the has been John Edwards and I are committed to and and restoring the at these critical national of is being to the long-term of to the and Many scientists the will money from science How do you the importance of science exploration What is the funding between the BushSection:ChooseTop of I announced my for the future of America’s space exploration this will the of both and science will as to the and other vehicles continue to their and of to we have systems on and around a system and one on its to the for cannot be by the most or the most We need to and and for And only are of to the by space we our on the we are developing a new exploration to our This will be by and its first no than will to the as as and no than and use it as a for the We will with to the and for future will with the goal of and there for of Edwards and I will continue America’s long tradition of leadership in and space exploration as of a program to broad for this will not to programs such as the Bush administration’s Program that from in the with no or will in new programs to set by scientific in and other Our administration will on the of the scientific to the most for research and the most for these the of or are most to the 2004 American of

This chapter describes the establishment process, purpose of establishment, mission, exploration plan, activities of the European Space Agency (ESA) and International Space Station (ISS), and an explanation of the contents of the treaty that is legal basis for its establishment. The European Space Agency (ESA) is an intergovernmental organization of 22 member states dedicated to the exploration of space. Established in 1975 and headquartered in Paris, France, ESA has a worldwide staff of about 2,200 in 2018 and an annual budget of about € 6.68 billion (US $ 7.43 billion) in 2020. ESA also works closely with space organizations outside Europe. ESA has missions planned for Jupiter (JUICE, 2022) and others that will seek dark matter (Euclid, 2020) and observe the energetic universe (Athena, 2028). The International Space Station (ISS) is a space station (habitable artificial satellite) in low Earth orbit. The ISS programme is a joint project between five participating space agencies: NASA (United States), Roscomos (Russia), JAXA (Japan), ESA (Europe), and CSA (Canada).

&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;In recent years, space agencies such as ESA, NASA, the Chinese space agency and even private sectors have been planning human deep space exploration programs to the Moon and Mars. This requires a very timely and thorough investigation to better understand the space weather conditions and effects for such deep space activities in order to further develop mitigation strategies against the associated radiation risks on humans in space.&amp;lt;/p&amp;gt; &amp;lt;p&amp;gt;Radiation damage in deep space comes mainly from two sources, Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCRs) and Solar Energetic Particles (SEPs). As an omnipresent background, radiation induced by GCRs, which are modulated by solar activities, may increase the chance of long-term health consequences, such as onset of cancer, cardiovascular diseases, skin atrophy, eye cataract, leukemia, anemia, leucopenia and malfunctions of the central nervous system. On the other hand, intense solar energetic particles (SEPs) can be considered as mightily related to deterministic radiation effects which are of great concern for space exploration. Acute radiation syndrome (ARS) or sickness or poisoning or toxicity is induced after a whole-body exposure to high doses of radiation between at the Gy [J/kg] level. Such events, despite of being rather infrequent, could result in severe damage to humans and equipment and lead to potential failure of the entire mission and therefore should be detected and mitigated as immediately as possible.&amp;lt;/p&amp;gt; &amp;lt;p&amp;gt;Under different shielding environment, the intensity and composition of the GCRs/SEPs may vary due to the interactions of primary particles (of different energies and charges) with the surrounding material and the generation of secondaries. Therefore, a precise quantification of the change of particle spectra under different shielding environment (e.g., within a spacecraft in deep space or at Martian surface or even subsurface which might be used for future habitat shielding) using a synergistic combination of measurements and particle-transport models is essential for assessing and predicting the radiation environment therein as well as its changes during different solar activities.&amp;lt;/p&amp;gt; &amp;lt;p&amp;gt;Another major challenge in predicting the radiation risks for humans in space is the sudden and sporadic radiation induced by SEPs which can be very intense, dynamic and may vary drastically in time and location. Specifically speaking, the radiation and particle enhancement measured at (or predicted for) Earth&amp;amp;#8217;s vicinity may be completely different from of that detected elsewhere in the heliosphere as for a Mars mission, due to the different magnetic connection and distance of Mars (or the cruise spacecraft) from the acceleration and release region of SEPs near the Sun. We highlight the utmost importance of utilizing multi-spacecraft in-situ and remote sensing observations of the Sun and the heliosphere to better understand such dynamic events and their dynamic effects across the heliosphere in particular at locations where human explorations may take place.&amp;lt;/p&amp;gt;

&lt;div class="htmlview paragraph"&gt;In the frame of the multi-disciplinary programme MoMa-COUNT [&lt;span class="xref"&gt;2&lt;/span&gt;], multi-functional protections for human space exploration are being investigated, paying particular attention to flexible materials, selected also for their single excellent structural, thermal and other environmental performances.&lt;/div&gt; &lt;div class="htmlview paragraph"&gt;These flexible materials in general have poorly known space radiation properties, whose lack of characterisation propagates the uncertainty about the shielding efficiency against the radiation environment on the whole spacecraft protection means. The consequent evaluation of their shielding efficiency, as well as of that of the overall shields, is based on flight experiments performed in Low Earth Orbit (LEO), onboard the International Space Station (ISS) and the re-entry capsule Foton. In parallel, supporting dedicated ground experiments in accelerators, as well as Monte Carlo simulations, are performed.&lt;/div&gt; &lt;div class="htmlview paragraph"&gt;This paper aims at presenting the more recent activities and results in this field, on the background of the past flight and ground experiments already reported in [&lt;span class="xref"&gt;1&lt;/span&gt;].&lt;/div&gt;

Human Exploration using Real-Time Robotic Operations (HERRO): A space exploration strategy for the 21st century

From outer space to Earth—The social significance of isolated and confined environment research in human space exploration

The development of a large rocket plays a significant role in Japan’s policy of space development and utilization. Therefore when the H-II rocket, developed using indigenous technology and launched successfully on its first five flights, failed on the next two consecutive flights the entire space program was seriously impacted. When the accidents occurred, rocket development was about to shift from the H-II series to the H-IIA, which sought a considerable improvement in reliability and a reduction in costs based upon the experience of the H-II, and was expected to lead to Japan’s participation in the international launch business. The failures thus raised a fundamental question about the government’s space development system.The government decided to integrate three space-related organizations — the National Space Development Agency, the Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, and the National Aerospace Laboratory — in 2003 to strengthen the national space development system. As a result, the necessary environment for a reusable spacecraft with the ultimate technological reliability was created. While the government discussed the integration, the H-IIA was successfully launched on its inaugural and second flights.Japan has been accumulating human spaceflight experience aboard the US Space Shuttle. Furthermore, Japan’s participation in the International Space Station (ISS) is significantly broadening the opportunity through the construction of the Japanese Experimental Module, KIBO, and its operation. Japan is also gaining experience through the HTV transport system, which provides an essential step toward building the technological foundation for a future manned spacecraft.KeywordsInternational Space StationSpace ShuttleSpace DevelopmentSuccessful LaunchNational Aerospace LaboratoryThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

As an emerging interdiscipline, space life science, generated and developed with human space, especially manned space exploration,, covering very wide research fields. In the past more than half a century, many significant findings and achievements have been achieved in this field, which not only supports the missions of manned space exploration, but also provides service for the life on the earth. With the continuous development of Chinese manned space and deep space exploration activities, especially the startup of Chinese manned space station project, the next two decades will be the prime time for the development of Chinese space life science. To conduct space life science, obtain new knowledge and innovative technology and provide further service for human space exploration, national economic and social development basing on Chinese manned space station and return type scientific satellite experiment platform, which need us to study and thinking systematically from the strategic perspective of subject development. By reviewing the historical and current development of space life science at home and abroad, this essay analyzes and prospects the strategic needs, key scientific problems and development direction of Chinese space life science, in order to provide inspiration and reference for its development.

Space medicine innovation and telehealth concept implementation for medical care during exploration-class missions

Jumping at a chance to control cerebral blood flow in astronauts.