Yes, I would assume "deep space" is missions of months or years. However, your article says the craft is for missions up to 21 days (which I would regard as "shallow space" or orbital missions.) In either case, it sounds uncomfortable (and non-metric from the firm that crashed the Mars Climate Orbiter).
________________________________ From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> To: [email protected]; U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]> Sent: Wed, May 25, 2011 1:03:15 PM Subject: Re: [USMA:50503] Re: Fwd: NASA Announces Key Decision For Next Deep Space Transportation System And John, this new design is intended for "deep space" human travel lasting for months. if not for years, not merely for 21 days. The design work is said to be under existing funding. The authorization and appropriation of funds for implementation of this human flight into *deep space* is very doubtful under present and projected economic conditions, even for a fully global effort under pure SI designs. Gene. ---- Original message ---- >Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 09:00:08 -0700 (PDT) >From: "John M. Steele" <[email protected]> >Subject: [USMA:50503] Re: Fwd: NASA Announces Key Decision For Next Deep Space >Transportation System > >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> > > I certainly hope the habitable volume of 316 ft³ > (8.95 m³) for a crew of 4 is a conversion error. > The Space Shuttle Orbiter was 71.5 m³ for a max > crew of 8. If the figure is correct, it would make > for a miserable 21 days. :) > > ------------------------------------------------ > > From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]> > Sent: Wed, May 25, 2011 10:55:48 AM > Subject: [USMA:50499] Fwd: NASA Announces Key > Decision For Next Deep Space Transportation System > Here goes NASA off the track to SI once again for > manned space exploration in a > four-man capsule designed by a metric-hostile > industrial giant.
