NASA Study Proposes Airships, Cloud Cities for Venus Explora

Tom Kalbfus

Mongoose
NASA Study Proposes Airships, Cloud Cities for Venus Exploration
Should crewed exploration of Venus come before we try to go to Mars?
By Evan Ackerman
Posted 16 Dec 2014 | 16:00 GMT
12WVenusHavocf1r-1418395800912.jpg

Image: NASA Langley Research Center
It has been accepted for decades that Mars is the next logical place for humans to explore.
Mars certainly seems to offer the most Earth-like environment of any other place in the solar system, and it’s closer to Earth than just about anyplace else, except Venus. But exploration of Venus has always been an enormous challenge: Venus’s surface is hellish, with 92 atmospheres of pressure and temperatures of nearly 500 °C.

The surface of Venus isn’t going to work for humans, but what if we ignore the surface and stick to the clouds? Dale Arney and Chris Jones, from the Space Mission Analysis Branch of NASA’s Systems Analysis and Concepts Directorate at Langley Research Center, in Virginia, have been exploring that idea. Perhaps humans could ride through the upper atmosphere of Venus in a solar-powered airship. Arney and Jones propose that it may make sense to go to Venus before we ever send humans to Mars.

To put NASA’s High Altitude Venus Operational Concept (HAVOC) mission in context, it helps to start thinking about exploring the atmosphere of Venus instead of exploring the surface. “The vast majority of people, when they hear the idea of going to Venus and exploring, think of the surface, where it’s hot enough to melt lead and the pressure is the same as if you were almost a mile underneath the ocean,” Jones says. “I think that not many people have gone and looked at the relatively much more hospitable atmosphere and how you might tackle operating there for a while.”

12OLVenusf2alt-1418395929413.jpg

Image: ESA/MPS/DLR/IDA
Winds around the equator of Venus would carry an airship around the planet in 110 hours.

At 50 kilometers above its surface, Venus OFFERS one atmosphere of pressure and only slightly lower gravity than Earth. Mars, in comparison, has a “sea level” atmospheric pressure of less than a hundredth of Earth’s, and gravity just over a third Earth normal. The temperature at 50 km on Venus is around 75 °C, which is a mere 17 DEGREES hotter than the highest temperature recorded on Earth. It averages -63 °C on Mars, and while neither extreme would be pleasant for an unprotected human, both are manageable.

What’s more important, especially relative to Mars, is the amount of solar power available on Venus and the amount of PROTECTION that Venus has from radiation. The amount of radiation an astronaut would be exposed to in Venus’s atmosphere would be “about the same as if you were in Canada,” says Arney. On Mars, unshielded astronauts would be exposed to about 0.67 millisieverts per day, which is 40 times as much as on Earth, and they’d likely need to bury their habitats several meters beneath the surface to minimize exposure. As for solar power, proximity to the sun gets Venus 40 percent more than we get here on Earth, and 240 percent more than we’d see on Mars. Put all of these numbers together and as long as you don’t worry about having something under your feet, Jones points out, the upper atmosphere of Venus is “probably the most Earth-like environment that’s out there.”

It’s also important to note that Venus is often significantly closer to Earth than Mars is. Because of how the orbits of Venus and Earth align over time, a crewed mission to Venus would take a total of 440 days using existing or very near-term propulsion technology: 110 days out, a 30-day stay, and then 300 days back—with the option to abort and begin the trip back to Earth immediately after arrival. That sounds like a long time to spend in space, and it absolutely is. But getting to Mars and back using the same propulsive technology would involve more than 500 days in space at a minimum. A more realistic Mars mission would probably last anywhere from 650 to 900 days (or longer) due to the need to wait for a favorable orbital alignment for the return journey, which means that there’s no option to abort the mission and come home earlier: If anything went wrong, astronauts would have to just wait around on Mars until their return WINDOW opened.

HAVOC comprises a series of missions that would begin by sending a robot into the atmosphere of Venus to CHECK things out. That would be followed up by a crewed mission to Venus orbit with a stay of 30 days, and then a mission that includes a 30-day atmospheric stay. Later missions would have a crew of two spend a year in the atmosphere, and eventually there would be a permanent human presence there in a floating cloud city.

Venus Colony in 5 Steps
12wVenusHavocPhase1-1418398430794.jpg

Phase 1: Robotic exploration.
12wVenusHavocPhase2-1418398462777.jpg

Phase 2: Crewed mission to orbit for 30 days.
12wVenusHavocPhase3-1418398487806.jpg

Phase 3: Crewed mission to atmosphere for 30 days.
12wVenusHavocPhase4-1418398871784.jpg

Phase 4: Crewed mission to atmosphere for 1 year.
12wVenusHavocPhase5-1418398906785.jpg

Phase 5: PERMANENT human presence.
Images: NASA Langley Research Center
The defining feature of these missions is the VEHICLE that will be doing the atmospheric exploring: a helium-filled, solar-powered airship. The robotic version would be 31 meters long (about half the size of the Goodyear blimp), while the crewed version would be nearly 130 meters long, or twice the size of a Boeing 747. The top of the airship would be covered with more than 1,000 square meters of solar panels, with a gondola slung underneath for instruments and, in the crewed version, a small habitat and the ASCENT vehicle that the astronauts would use to return to Venus’s orbit, and home.

Getting an airship to Venus is not a trivial task, and getting an airship to Venus with humans inside it is even more difficult. The crewed mission would involve a Venus orbit rendezvous, where the airship itself (folded up inside a spacecraft) would be sent to Venus ahead of time. Humans would follow in a transit vehicle (based on NASA’s Deep Space Habitat), linking up with the airship in Venus orbit.

Since there’s no surface to land on, the “landing” would be extreme, to say the least. “Traditionally, say if you’re going to Mars, you talk about ‘entry, descent, and landing,’ or EDL,” explains Arney. “Obviously, in our case, ‘landing’ would represent a significant failure of the mission, so instead we have ‘entry, descent, and inflation,’ or EDI.” The airship would ENTER the Venusian atmosphere inside an aeroshell at 7,200 meters per second. Over the next seven minutes, the aeroshell would decelerate to 450 m/s, and it would deploy a parachute to slow itself down further. At this point, things get crazy. The aeroshell would drop away, and the airship would begin to unfurl and inflate itself, while still dropping through the atmosphere at 100 m/s. As the airship got larger, its lift and drag would both increase to the point where the parachute became redundant. The parachute would be jettisoned, the airship would fully inflate, and (if everything had gone as it’s supposed to), it would gently float to a stop at 50 km above Venus’s surface.

Airship Concept – Human Mission
12OLVenusf4-nohed2-1418403309445.jpg

Image: NASA Langley Research Center

Near the equator of Venus (where the atmosphere is most stable), winds move at about 100 meters per second, circling the planet in just 110 hours. Venus itself barely rotates, and one Venusian day takes longer than a Venusian year does. The SLOW day doesn’t really matter, however, because for all practical purposes the 110-hour wind circumnavigation becomes the length of one day/night cycle. The winds also veer north, so to stay on course, the airship would push south during the day, when solar energy is plentiful, and drift north when it needs to conserve power at night.

Meanwhile, the humans would be busy doing science from inside a small (21-cubic-meter) habitat, based on NASA’s EXISTING Space Exploration Vehicle concept. There’s not much reason to perform extravehicular ACTIVITIES, so that won’t even be an option, potentially making things much simpler and safer (if a bit less exciting) than a trip to Mars.

12OLVenusf5-620px-1418403726625.jpg

Image: NASA Langley Research Center
It will take multiple launches and descents to get there and back again.

The airship has a payload capacity of 70,000 kilograms. Of that, nearly 60,000 kg will be taken up by the ASCENT vehicle, a winged two-stage rocket slung below the airship. (If this looks familiar, it’s because it’s based on the much smaller Pegasus rocket, which is used to launch satellites into Earth orbit from beneath a carrier aircraft.) When it’s time to head home, the astronauts would get into a tiny capsule on the front of the rocket, drop from the airship, and then blast back into orbit. There, they’ll meet up with their transit vehicle and take it back to Earth orbit. The final stage is to rendezvous in Earth orbit with one final capsule (likely Orion), which the crew will use to make the return to Earth’s surface.

The HAVOC team believes that its concept offers a realistic target for crewed exploration in the near future, pending moderate technological advancements and support from NASA. Little about HAVOC is dependent on technology that isn’t near-term. The primary restriction that a crewed version of HAVOC would face is that in its current incarnation it depends on the massive Block IIB configuration of the Space Launch System, which may not be ready to fly until the late 2020s. Several proof-of-concept studies have already been completed. These include testing Teflon coating that can PROTECT solar cells (and other materials) from the droplets of concentrated sulfuric acid that are found throughout Venus’s atmosphere and verifying that an airship with solar panels can be packed into an aeroshell and successfully inflated out of it, at least at 1/50 scale.

Many of the reasons that we’d want to go to Venus are IDENTICAL to the reasons that we’d want to go to Mars, or anywhere else in the solar system, beginning with the desire to learn and explore. With the notable exception of the European Space Agency’s Venus Express orbiter, the second planet from the sun has been largely ignored since the 1980s, despite its proximity and potential for scientific discovery. HAVOC, Jones says, “would be characterizing the environment not only for eventual human missions but also to understand the planet and how it’s evolved and the runaway greenhouse effect and everything else that makes Venus so interesting.” If the airships bring small robotic landers with them, HAVOC would complete many if not most of the science objectives that NASA’s own Venus Exploration Analysis Group has been promoting for the past two decades.

12OLVenusf6-620px-1418409477963.jpg

Image: NASA Langley Research Center
The airship will begin its plummet into the atmosphere at 7200 meters per second.

“Venus has value as a destination in and of itself for exploration and colonization,” says Jones. “But it’s also complementary to current Mars plans.…There are things that you would need to do for a Mars mission, but we see a little easier path through Venus.” For example, in order to get to Mars, or anywhere else outside of the Earth-moon system, we’ll need experience with long-duration habitats, aerobraking and aerocapture, and carbon dioxide processing, among many other things. Arney CONTINUES: “If you did Venus first, you could get a leg up on advancing those technologies and those capabilities ahead of doing a human-scale Mars mission. It’s a chance to do a practice run, if you will, of going to Mars.”

It would take a substantial policy shift at NASA to put a crewed mission to Venus ahead of one to Mars, no matter how much sense it might make to take a serious look at HAVOC. But that in no way invalidates the overall concept for the mission, the importance of a crewed mission to Venus, or the vision of an eventual long-term human presence there in cities in THE CLOUDS. “If one does see humanity’s future as expanding beyond just Earth, in all likelihood, Venus is probably no worse than the second planet you might go to behind Mars,” says Arney. “Given that Venus’s upper atmosphere is a fairly hospitable destination, we think it can play a role in humanity’s future in space.”
 
Think about how this could be made relevant to a Traveller Adventure set in the near future. the time is between 2020 and 2030 AD. There is a crew of two, sitting in a cockpit with a bunk in back so they can work alternating 12-hour shifts operating remote probes on the Surface and lower in the atmosphere. Ho hum right? Well what if there was a Venusian equivalent to the Bermuda Triangle leading to a much more interesting parallel version of Venus. From the Earth it looks like the blimp hit a bad storm and was lost.
 
I'd seriously like to know what's at Venus for such a project, atmosphere mining? This concept for a manned base at a world is for intensive detailed survey. Is that necessary to study Venus atmosphere?

Get your ass to Mars! Get your ass to Mars!....
 
Too many possibilities for something going wrong and no safety net.

Limited colonization by intrepid pioneers and researchers; if it's not terraformed, space stations with solar panels by Second Imperium.
 
Reynard said:
I'd seriously like to know what's at Venus for such a project, atmosphere mining? This concept for a manned base at a world is for intensive detailed survey. Is that necessary to study Venus atmosphere?

Get your ass to Mars! Get your ass to Mars!....
If you don't have AI, then you need humans there for real time manipulations of the rovers on the surface and the probes in the lower atmosphere. Venus also provides near Earth level gravity, which is important for maintaining one's bone and muscular fitness, the only way that can be duplicated in orbit is by rotating a large structure about 100 meters in radius, In Venus' atmosphere you don't need that rotation, and in a floating structure you have 0.91 gs through out rather than just at the extreme ends that are rotating. Smaller structures can rotate too, but they'd be rotating so fast as to induce nausea within the occupants of the structure and produce differences in weight as felt from the head to the feet. Venus' atmosphere also provides radiation shielding from both solar flares and cosmic rays, whereas you would need to devote dead weight in an orbital structure to produce that same shielding effect. An astronaut within the atmosphere of Venus would get less radiation that one in orbit above, the stay time is assumed to be one year between launch windows. as for what's on Venus, its a potential real estate. Venus also has more precious metals than Mars.
 
I'd settle for anywhere beyond LEO (as a species) and even tourists to a LEO inflatable hotel would be a step in the right direction.
FYI, Moon before Mars or Venus ... fraction of the time, fraction of the cost, fraction of the distance ... if there is nothing for people to see/do on the moon, then Mars is just a 'Flags and Footprints' and Venus is even less than that (can't set make a footprint and the flag will melt). I think that Von Braun's outline was basically correct ... we need to stop throwing buckets of money at 'skiping a step' and adopt a spiral development approach.

But airships are great for Sci-Fi ... Venus airships doubly so.
 
atpollard said:
I'd settle for anywhere beyond LEO (as a species) and even tourists to a LEO inflatable hotel would be a step in the right direction.
FYI, Moon before Mars or Venus ... fraction of the time, fraction of the cost, fraction of the distance ... if there is nothing for people to see/do on the moon, then Mars is just a 'Flags and Footprints' and Venus is even less than that (can't set make a footprint and the flag will melt). I think that Von Braun's outline was basically correct ... we need to stop throwing buckets of money at 'skiping a step' and adopt a spiral development approach.

But airships are great for Sci-Fi ... Venus airships doubly so.
Venus is bigger though, unlike Mars, it is geologically active, it recycles its crust just like the Earth does. the gravity on Venus is 0.91 g while on Mars its 0.38 g. Venus has better radiation protectiong than Mars, the amount of time in transit to Venus is shorter than the amount of time to get to Mars, also on Venus, one is exposed to 0.91 g instead of 0.38 g on Mars, One can stay fit for the voyage back to Earth, put on a virtual reality suit, and you can operate robots on Venus, the experience could be just like walking on the surface and collecting rocks as you would on Mars, Also Virtual Reality would help the crew escape the cramped confines of the airship cockpit. One can surround oneself with virtual reality worlds with force feedback VR suits, gloves, and goggles.
 
Condottiere said:
Too many possibilities for something going wrong and no safety net.
That pretty much applies to any base further than LEO. On Luna or Mars, vacuum waits just outside every exterior wall and the temperatures regularly go well outside of the range of human survival. Sure, dying on Venus would be different from dying on Mars, but I don't see the risks as any greater.

It's also worth noting that at 55 km altitude, the average temperature on Venus is a comfy 27C and the air pressure is 51% earth, which is perfectly habitable is the aerostat uses a somewhat oxygen enriched atmosphere (the 1970s space station Skylab used and air pressure that was about half that). From that PoV, a Venusian aerostat seems considerably safer than a Martian buried colony.

What I don't know is which world has more potential for any sort of economic utility, because that will determine which one gets settled first and which one attracts colonists.
 
heron61 said:
Condottiere said:
Too many possibilities for something going wrong and no safety net.
That pretty much applies to any base further than LEO. On Luna or Mars, vacuum waits just outside every exterior wall and the temperatures regularly go well outside of the range of human survival. Sure, dying on Venus would be different from dying on Mars, but I don't see the risks as any greater.

It's also worth noting that at 55 km altitude, the average temperature on Venus is a comfy 27C and the air pressure is 51% earth, which is perfectly habitable is the aerostat uses a somewhat oxygen enriched atmosphere (the 1970s space station Skylab used and air pressure that was about half that). From that PoV, a Venusian aerostat seems considerably safer than a Martian buried colony.

What I don't know is which world has more potential for any sort of economic utility, because that will determine which one gets settled first and which one attracts colonists.
Also the article mentioned a helium filled airship, if you want to maximize lift, why go for second best, hydrogen provides twice as much lift as helium, and it doesn't burn in Venus' atmosphere, there is no reason not to use hydrogen, also hydrogen can be replenished from Venus', specifically the Sulfuric acid clouds, helium by contrast is much harder to obtain on Venus. Oxygen and nitrogen are also lifting gases on Venus, but you will need a much greater volume of those gases to provide lift.

There is very little current economic incentive to go to either Mars or Venus, the places you go to where their is economic incentive would be either the asteroids or the Moon. The Moon because its the closest body to Earth, and you can set up mining operations their to build solar power satellites or perhaps even build those solar power collectors directly on the Moon's surface and beam the energy directly to Earth, also probably every asteroid containing precious metals that ever hit the moon is still there under the surface of each crater. Asteroids are easier to mine because of low gravity.

Mars is a curiosity because it has a rotation rate and axial tilt similar to Earth, Venus is of interest in that it is the planet with bulk quantities similar to Earth, that is mass and geology. Mars if geologically inactive, Venus has a surface that has been continuously remade by vulcanism. Venus is also the one inner planet with complex weather patterns similar to Earth. A windstorm on Mars has very little force, an astronaut in a space suit can ignore it, Winds of Venus have real force.
 
Back
Top