News Elon Musk wants to put millions of people on Mars.

[Hlynkacg]

Yes, because it competes with the other space program. You know, the one that put people on the Moon and flew 120-tons spaceplanes.

That space program no longer exists. The people who built Apollo and the Shuttle have long since retired and the institution they left behind has done little beyond twiddle it's thumbs for close to 30 years. Thorsten correctly observes that NASA hasn't made space flight a priority a because the US population hasn't made it a priority.

As a such, being a US taxpayer who's enthusiastic about spaceflight, I'd much rather see my tax dollars go to ULA, SpaceX, Boeing, Sierra Nevada, or anyone else who looks like they might spend that money on genuine spaceflight rather than thumb twiddling.

---------- Post added at 08:42 ---------- Previous post was at 08:38 ----------

I see 100 passengers as a liability, during transit and after landing. What are they going to do, when they get there? How are they going to be screened ? A few bad apples could be disastrous.

No more so than similarly sized crews of maritime vessels or submarines. Worst comes to worst, having 100 bodies (vice 3) means you can afford to loose a few to "accidents" without endangering the overall mission. :leaving:

 

[Artlav]

Screening and crew selection does sound like a problem.
There is no return tickets, right?
-How would we deal with someone who suddenly realizes this wasn't what they signed up for?
-How would we ensure no tourists/freeloaders get in?
-How would we ensure the religion stays quarantined to a single planet?
-How would we ensure there won't be people who would get depressed and suicide by killing everyone?
-How would we deal with PR issues with minorities?

And then, there is a whole genre of sci-fi about how space colonies like that go wrong...

There will be some interesting times ahead.

 

[Urwumpe]

As a such, being a US taxpayer who's enthusiastic about spaceflight, I'd much rather see my tax dollars go to ULA, SpaceX, Boeing, Sierra Nevada, or anyone else who looks like they might spend that money on genuine spaceflight rather than thumb twiddling.

To quote something from software development:

Pig and a Chicken are walking down the road.
The Chicken says: "Hey Pig, I was thinking we should open a restaurant!"
Pig replies: "Hm, maybe, what would we call it?"
The Chicken responds: "How about 'ham-n-eggs'?"
The Pig thinks for a moment and says: "No thanks. I'd be committed, but you'd only be involved."

At NASA, too many people are involved, but too few are committed.

---------- Post added at 06:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:45 PM ----------

Screening and crew selection does sound like a problem.
There is no return tickets, right?

Technically, there should be return flights with the ITS. This is not Mars One.

 

[Fabri91]

Regarding the cult of Musk, I agree that things tend to become cult-ish from time to time, but while delays and setbacks happened, there are very few entities (space agencies, firms, governments) that in recent years actually tried to push the envelope and actually developed and flew new hardware.

It's all fine to go "agency xyz made a study/some tests with a certain new engine", but unless hardware is built and flown it may as well never have happened.

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Technically, there should be return flights with the ITS. This is not Mars One.

The big question then becomes, Is the vehicle capable of carrying people back, or are they relying on there being as few people as possible on the way back to save mass on life support, supplies, etc?

 

[Thunder Chicken]

I see 100 passengers as a liability, during transit and after landing. What are they going to do, when they get there? How are they going to be screened ? A few bad apples could be disastrous.

Much less disastrous than a few bad apples in a small group of 3-6 astronauts. Also, the more people, the more diverse the experience base (doctors, engineers, etc..) so if things go wrong, you are more likely to have someone who knows what needs to be done.

For this, they can't just send a crew, they need to send a community. What would be the smallest population of a town that was truly self-supporting?

 

[Urwumpe]

The big question then becomes, Is the vehicle capable of carrying people back, or are they relying on there being as few people as possible on the way back to save mass on life support, supplies, etc?

Well, the original plan is to launch initially with a minimal crew to Mars, like 10 astronauts. In this case, even without fuel production on Mars, it could be able to fly back to Earth. Not much payload back though. Instead of 400 tons to Mars, maybe its just 20-40 tons then.

 

[jangofett287]

Much less disastrous than a few bad apples in a small group of 3-6 astronauts. Also, the more people, the more diverse the experience base (doctors, engineers, etc..) so if things go wrong, you are more likely to have someone who knows what needs to be done.

For this, they can't just send a crew, they need to send a community. What would be the smallest population of a town that was truly self-supporting?

For breeding/genetic viability, Wikipedia has this to say: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_colonization#Population_size

As for having a broad enough range of skills and a sufficient labour force I'm not sure. Probably depends how automated things like ISRU and hydroponics end up being.

 

[C3PO]

Just don't bring Matt Damon along. We've already spent enough effort on saving his a¤# !!! :lol:

 

[N_Molson]

I see 100 passengers as a liability, during transit and after landing.

That would be an enormous spacecraft, given current technology. I doubt anything would be able to haul it to orbit. :blink:

To begin with, 100 passengers mean 7 tons of biomass if I take 70kg as an average. That's a lot.

Really, it's much more complicated than flying a 737 !

 

[Donamy]

... And what about the politics ? What freedoms will be allowed ? Who's going to run things ?

 

[N_Molson]

Yes, only 200 MW in the 39 day scenario.

Seriously, if you guys are afraid of 200MW, I wonder how the millions-people colony on Mars are going to get heating and lighting (to mention only 2 power-consuming "systems").

Unless a genius discovers nuclear fusion in the forecoming years, a big colony anywhere is going to need nuclear fission power. What else can do it on Mars ? Solar panels ? I doubt you can supply millions of people with steady power that way, especially given the dust storms. Geothermal sources ? There are no hard proofs of such spots on Mars. Burning methane ? There is no hard proof that there are large reserves of methane underground...

Also don't spit too much on NASA, they are doing all the robotic exploration job on Mars, if you didn't notice... I even heard they sent a probe to Pluto not so far ago... Yes, Pluto !

 

[Urwumpe]

Seriously, if you guys are afraid of 200MW

On Earth, you can calculate with just six times as much thermal power as electrical power. So, for making 200 MWe, you need 1200 MWt

Now, in space, with the best technology we have, its still four times as much thermal power as electrical power. So, for producing 200 MWe for the engine, you need to reject 800 MW thermal power. You do know how much radiator surface you can expect then and at which temperatures you would need to run it, to have it halfway efficient without requiring too complex geometries?

 

[Deleted Orbinaut]

That space program no longer exists. The people who built Apollo and the Shuttle have long since retired and the institution they left behind has done little beyond twiddle it's thumbs for close to 30 years. Thorsten correctly observes that NASA hasn't made space flight a priority a because the US population hasn't made it a priority.

As a such, being a US taxpayer who's enthusiastic about spaceflight, I'd much rather see my tax dollars go to ULA, SpaceX, Boeing, Sierra Nevada, or anyone else who looks like they might spend that money on genuine spaceflight rather than thumb twiddling.

Good thing! Your tax dollars are going to ULA, SpaceX and Orbital ATK. (Boeing is part of ULA.) Those rocket launch companies get at least half of their funding (and I expect significantly more for ULA) from government contracts. Commercial Crew is a NASA initiative. I guarantee you that none of the LSPs (including SpaceX) would be developing crew carrying capability without NASA's contracts.

During NASA's 30 years of thumb twiddling, it somehow managed to launch and maintain a space telescope which has provided and continues to provide crucial insights about our solar system, galaxy, and universe. Oh, and launch a 400 ton space station the size of a football field into orbit, continuously occupied by humans now for nearly 16 years. Oh, and drop a VW-sized robot onto Mars that is still trundling around exploring after 4 1/2 years on the surface. Plus long-term robotic exploration missions to orbit Jupiter, Saturn, Mercury, Mars, Vesta and Ceres. We put a lander on the surface of Titan. We flew a spacecraft 12,500km above the surface of Pluto.

Considering NASA's size and the political and administrative pressures it operates under, its accomplishments are dazzling and unparalleled. Space exploration actually is zero sum; resources allocated to one project are taken from another. Personally, I'd much rather see a robotic submarine on Europa, a robotic aerostat on Venus or Titan, or an orbiter at Uranus or Neptune than bootprints on Martian soil.

 

[Artlav]

... And what about the politics ? What freedoms will be allowed ? Who's going to run things ?

Considering the scale involved and this being starting from a blank planet, it would make sense to test out communism. For real this time.

 

[Urwumpe]

Considering the scale involved and this being starting from a blank planet, it would make sense to test out communism. For real this time.

....... You know, once you start introducing communism in the desert, you will suddenly have have a lack of sand.

 

[N_Molson]

You know, once you start introducing communism in the desert, you will suddenly have have a lack of sand.

That one was a bit too easy, I know you can do much better

 

[Hlynkacg]

During NASA's 30 years of thumb twiddling, it somehow managed to...

Right so imagine what we might have been accomplished if we had allocated NASA's resources to an organization that treated space flight as a serious priority.

If anything you're only proving my point.

 

[Donamy]

Considering the scale involved and this being starting from a blank planet, it would make sense to test out communism. For real this time.

It may be a blank planet, but it is the same people.

 

[RGClark]

In his presentation at about the 54 minute mark Musk discusses that the second stage in its tanker form or in its spaceship form will be able to reach orbit when used as a single stage. He states though the tanker will not be able to land, presumably because of insufficient reserve fuel. Then it could be an expendable SSTO.

However, he states it could be used as cargo ship for fast intercontinental deliveries. In this case it would need to land so presumably he means this would be at speeds just below orbital.

[ame="http://youtu.be/H7Uyfqi_TE8?t=3240"]Making Humans a Multiplanetary Species - YouTube[/ame]

Bob Clark