[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: starship-design: crew

when i wrote that list, i was trying to think of things that wouldn't
come from the "Submarine/Aircraft Carrier model", especially the bit about
redundancy and mental health.  also, i don't think the naval crew-model
is really very appropriate to large-scale, long term starflight; although
it provides some useful pointers.  

On Tue, 30 Jun 1998, Jonathan J Jay wrote:

> I was looking through some old e-mails, and I thought this might be worth
> talking about. 
> On Sun, 22 Mar 1998 21:17:03 Lindberg  writes:
> >I was thinking about crew distribution on a decades long interstellar
> >exploratory voyage for which the crew would not hibernate.  Medical 
> >and
> >mental health services would obviously need to be totally
> >self-contained.  Combatting boredom would be a major challenge during
> >the entire voyage except the exploration of the destination starsystem. 
> >maintaining excellent health would be imperative during the entire
> >voyage, especially before arrival. 
> >	with that in mind, i worked up a crew distribution chart for a 
> >
> >hypothetical crew with 1000 crewmen who are science, engineering,
> >command, maintenance, and other "mission related" types. the following
> >are the "auxiliary" crew.  
> >8 surgeons, 15 nurses, 3 anesthetists
> >1 oncologist (cancer may be a greater risk in spaceflight due to
> >radiation, closed air systems, chemical exposure, etc.)
> If you believe cancer could be a problem, I advise you take at least 2.
> If there were 
> any catastrophic damages, or otherwise, life threatening happenings on
> the ship
> and one was lost, you need another.
	Actually, one oncologist should be sufficient because the other
doctors and medical personnel will have extensive sufficient training  to
handle the problem. however, a study of the special risks should be
made, and dealt with, 
> >2 internists
> >2 dentists, 2 dental assistants
> >1 veterinarian (because of the benefits to morale, physical health, 
> >and mental health, i favor having pets on board...comments anyone?)
> I would favor pets, also, but for storages sake, I believe we shouldn't
> take
> what we personally would not need, e.g. dog or cat food.
	If i may open another thread of discussion here, i have an idea (pet
theory?) that large future colonies (not exploratory starships, 
which should be much neater) which grow their own grain & other foodstuffs
will have vermin problems and will therefore _depend_ on cats, terriers,
ferrets, and other small predators for their immediate survival. just an
idea, tell me what you think. 
> >20 psychologists/psychiatrists > >5 exercise coaches
> >4 recreation specialists (this and the two above may be combined)
> >3 nutritionists/chefs, 3 sous chefs, 15 commies (frequent social 
> >dining alternated with meals in quarters will boost morale)
> >3 barbers, 2 security guards, clergy as necessary. = total 1092
> >	The above list has errors, omissions, excesses, and big flaws. 
> >
> >However, it is interesting to note that the "auxiliary staff" increased 
> >crew size by 9%.  Accounting for the positions i forgot may add 
> >another few %.  Reducing the number of auxiliary staff seems a
> > worthwhile activity, but on the other hand, certain positions (such 
> >as the doctors and nurses) must be redundant because the cost 
> >of losing them is so high.  One solution is to have the existing crew 
> >train others for their position during the voyage.  this has the
> advantage 
> >of increasing redundancy as well as relieving boredom a little. Perhaps
> >other solutions exist as well.
> It is agreeable that others should be trained during the voyage, but as
> you
> wrote earlier in the message, this is decades long. Taking others on the 
> voyage would not be appropriate because, again, you would take more
> food than needed. If you think they should stay out of hibernation during
> this, most likely, many others will be born during the trip. A generation
> ship
> is more plausible because you could train the children when they become
> of age. If they didn't want to work on the ship, well, it may help the
> parents
> with moral,or maybe not. It's a matter of opinion.
	As i wrote in the beginning of the original message, assume no
hibernation.  As for generation ships, I find the idea of using
them for exploration extremely implausible.  Colonization possibly (has
this ever been discussed?)
> >Nels Lindberg
> Jonathan Jay
Nels Lindberg