GarryB Thu Oct 09, 2014 9:09 am
[quote]It is a non-issue for the hundredth time, and using radiation-absorbing material is much more efficient, never mind more reliable... [quote]
On a long range manned mission they will need to take an enormous amount of water with them anyway... if they have to take it anyway, why not take it in a way that is more useful for other purposes, like reducing radiation, improving food storage, etc etc.
Taking hydrogen on its own is tricky because hydrogen atoms are small and will leak through most container types over time... binding the hydrogen with oxygen makes it rather easier to handle and control, yet both components are still readily accessible if needed for what ever purpose.
"in space, one must always assume the worst will occur".
Which would lead to robotic missions only and no one will ever leave Earth...
If micro meteoroid (A meteoroid is a rocky material big or small in space, a Meteor is rocky material in the earths atmosphere, a Meteorite is rocky material from space on the ground)... hits the chamber with the O3 then that shower of sparks will cause a flash fire that burns out the O3 chamber so the crew should be fine... in fact the space in the chamber and the effect of the super heating O3 should act like ERA and effectively stop the meteoroid and protect the crew... but then there will be oxidiser tanks and fuel tanks that could also easily be hit and destroy the entire space craft...