Crew of 520-day mock Mars mission nears mock landing

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


After nearly eight months' journey in a small, enclosed craft, the crew of the Mars500 mission is nearing the turning point of its voyage—arrival and disembarking at the Red Planet. They will spend 10 days there, exploring the surface in a series of excursions, before returning to their craft and beginning the lengthy trip home.

At no point in any of this exploration, however, will the six-member Mars500 crew actually leave the surface of Earth. The entire mission is a simulation, housed in a series of capsules at Russia's Institute for Biomedical Problems in association with the European Space Agency. But the isolation and cramped confinement of the mission are real, even if the journey itself is not.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The Mars500 program is a test meant to simulate some of the mental and physiological effects that a real Mars crew would have to endure on a long journey in close quarters. (Other physical hazards, such as dangerous levels of radiation and the atrophying effects of weightlessness, would also be in play in a real Mars mission.) The six men—three from Russia and one each from China, Italy and France—entered the 550-cubic-meter facility in June 2010, and the plan is to keep them there until the end of the simulated Mars round-trip in November 2011.

On February 12 three of the crew will "arrive" at Mars in their landing module while the other three remain in the main spacecraft. On February 14 they will begin to explore the simulated Martian surface [brown enclosure in diagram above], a 1,200-cubic-meter chamber in which the crew will wear spacesuits. For added realism all communications with mission control will endure an artificial 20-minute delay to mimic the light-travel time between Mars and Earth.

Mars500 is not, of course, the first experiment to lock a number of human participants inside a closed facility. The mission builds on a 105-day pilot project that wrapped up at the Institute for Biomedical Problems in 2009. And, back in the 1990s, there was Biosphere 2 in Arizona. Intended to be a self-contained ecological system, Biosphere 2 was beset first by low oxygen levels and pest infestation and then by managerial infighting. The science never outpaced the project's bad press, and the building is now a research station of the University of Arizona.

Diagram of the Mars500 enclosure: IBMP

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe