Author Topic: Elon Musk at the 15th Annual International Mars Society Convention  (Read 92352 times)

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108


Zubrin's introduction starts at 58m 34s.

Elon's talk starts at 1hr 15m.

The item of news which I noticed in here is that the $500k ticket to Mars price is based on a fully reusable Mars transportation system that Elon has devised.

He starts talking about reusability at 1hr 29m.


Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline thomson

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 108
  • Gdansk, PL
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 49
Very inspirational talk. Let's just hope his calculations are right, because there are people Who would've signed anytime for this.

Offline StephenB

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 282
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 201
Musk spoke of not only the necessity of a reusable system for LEO, but the necessity of a reusable Earth-Mars system as well. He said the second was even more challenging.

Offline dcporter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 881
  • Liked: 266
  • Likes Given: 422
He said [a reusable Earth-Mars system] was even more challenging.

No kidding?? Running in circles in space is harder than crashing back into our thick atmosphere? Tapping the NSF brain trust for thoughts on this one.

Offline DaveH62

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 309
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 55
He said [a reusable Earth-Mars system] was even more challenging.

No kidding?? Running in circles in space is harder than crashing back into our thick atmosphere? Tapping the NSF brain trust for thoughts on this one.
I think he means landing a rocket system on Mars that can launch astronauts back to earth. That sounds much more difficult than a earth RLV.
Or we're you being sarcastic?

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Yeah, I don't know if it needed to be said.. Musk is talking about a fully reusable system for transporting people and cargo from the surface of the Earth to the surface of Mars and back again. Presumably, he's including the means to generate propellant on the surface of Mars.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline spectre9

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2403
  • Australia
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 68
Seems like he means reusable MTVs and MAVs.

That would require some sort of on orbit prop transfer and engines that can be restarted many many times without ever coming back to the surface of the earth.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
There's lots of ways to do it.. I wonder how many years until we find out what Musk's particular variation is..

Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5362
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 2239
  • Likes Given: 3883
I've nearly finished a paper for a magazine outlining how Elon *might* do a Design Reference Mission to Mars - not a 'colonization' just merely getting 3 Astronauts there and then back with 100kg of rocks and regolith. No fancy, schmancy propulsion and Depot technology on the critical path to mission success; just lots of off-the-shelf gear mixed with some nearly-here technology and lots of Falcon Heavy and other EELV launches. What IS on the critical path is funding - slicing billions from the cost means not spending a decade developing VASIMR, advanced nuclear power, large scale ISRU etc.

Whatever Design Reference Mission Elon and his team come up with - it will no doubt differ in some details from my careful, speculative mission design. I've nearly finished writing it - all I need to do now is get some software to convert a large Word file into a PDF! ;)
« Last Edit: 08/12/2012 06:19 am by MATTBLAK »
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline Dalhousie

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2766
  • Liked: 780
  • Likes Given: 1131
Where will you publish it?
Apologies in advance for any lack of civility - it's unintended

Offline ArbitraryConstant

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
  • Liked: 628
  • Likes Given: 311
One thing that occurred to me that would complement a fully reusable launch vehicle would be a departure stage capable of loitering for a good long while, perhaps methane/lox with solar powered regenerative cooling, or hypergolic. One concept could use a lot of the work done for Dragon (avionics, Super Draco). Another possibility would be a methane Kestrel. No real need for high thrust.

Launching on an F9R or even a FHR would make it pretty small, but it could be clustered, or even built up into multi-stage vehicles.

If it's small and simple it could be pretty cheap, and would do stuff like bring robotic missions within reach for major universities. These sorts of institutions are entirely willing to put tens of millions towards what is essentially a guaranteed Nature publication.

It could also serve as a building block for manned exploration missions to the moon and beyond.

Not quite a depot concept (no propellant transfer), but it would be an extremely potent extension of the basic reusability architecture. It would probably also be commercially useful to go from a reusable LEO launch to GTO.

Offline MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5362
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 2239
  • Likes Given: 3883
Where will you publish it?

I'm calling the article *Version 1.0* because the more detailed, full-length version will be 'peer-reviewed' first by a couple NASA engineer friends of mine. I'm not a trained Engineer - just a Science Fiction writer. Many quality Sci-Fi writers: Clarke, Asimov, Baxter, Stanley-Robinson - have science or engineering backgrounds - I do not, so that effectively makes me second-rate. So until I've had it looked over, only a more cut-down version will reach limited eyes.

The final magazine of the soon to be disbanded 'N.Z. Spaceflight Association' will have that rather cut-down version of the article. Some illustrations I've done by hand - the editor may not use them - but they are more like 'place holders' until I can persuade someone who is a professional or semi-professional artist to do them.

If it 'passes muster' I'm happy to then post it somewhere on here so folk can see it. I don't imagine for a minute it will generate the same stir that 'DIRECT' did a few years back.

EDIT: Thumbnails of some of my drawings: 'ganged' Earth Departure propulsion stages (based on Falcon 9 second stage), Command Dragon with 'Long Trunk' Service Module - lots of storable propellants, 10,000lb thrust hypergolic engine, ganged MOI/TEI propulsion stages with 2x hypergolic engines - stages are propellant-only and based on the Long Trunk Dragon Service Module.
« Last Edit: 08/12/2012 09:03 am by MATTBLAK »
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5362
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 2239
  • Likes Given: 3883


Zubrin's introduction starts at 58m 34s.

Elon's talk starts at 1hr 15m.

The item of news which I noticed in here is that the $500k ticket to Mars price is based on a fully reusable Mars transportation system that Elon has devised.

He starts talking about reusability at 1hr 29m.




I wonder who the heck keeps bumping the mike or the camera mike while Elon is talking?!  >:(
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline spectre9

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2403
  • Australia
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 68
The audio is driving me nuts.

I'm know this is volunteer stuff but when the volunteers are people that want to talk about the most advanced technology man will ever build they should know how to work some microphones. 

Offline zt

  • Member
  • Posts: 90
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 19
The poorly lit interlaced low bitrate video of all the talks is pretty unacceptable. It looks like it's taken from VHS by amateurs.

Offline spacetraveler

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 687
  • Atlanta, GA
  • Liked: 165
  • Likes Given: 26
The poorly lit interlaced low bitrate video of all the talks is pretty unacceptable. It looks like it's taken from VHS by amateurs.

Pretty much everyone in the Mars society is amateurs. Listen to the end where the guy mentions that it's all volunteers with minimal funds.

Nothing wrong with that but they obviously don't have the money for expensive professional equipment.
« Last Edit: 08/12/2012 10:05 am by spacetraveler »

Offline Robert Thompson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1177
  • Liked: 101
  • Likes Given: 658
Great content. Shame about the mike. Quantum, what was your problem with the keynote address by Richard Gott? I thought it was a riot. Elon has a detached, wry sense of humor. I got the impression during Zubrin's call for pledges that this was a 'stand up and be counted' moment. Is that standard for Mars Society Conventions?

Offline spectre9

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2403
  • Australia
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 68
Spacevidcast were amateur when streaming shuttle launches live in HD weren't they?

Space geeks should be smarter than normal people. It's expected.

Offline charliem

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 147
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 0
Hearing Elon's speech at the Mars Society reunion I had, once again, this odd, uncomfortable sensation.

He can't be a real person. He has no place in the real world. At most Elon Musk should be a character in a comic book.

And I know it's not just me. He is irritatingly weird for so many.

He is because he shatters everyone's (even mine) preconceptions about what a geek -and not just a geek but a nutty geek- should be.

By his words he should be expending his weekends roaming one scifi convention or other, disguised like an empire trooper or something. He should be boring to death his relatives and coworkers with fantasies about space exploration, and fusion reactors, and new particles found by the LHC, and so on and so forth.

What he, definitely, should not be doing is building anything remotely resembling real, useful, hardware. He should not have founded at least three different companies in three completely different fields, and not gone broke in the first year. Even worse, he should not have become a millionaire, first, and then a billionaire with them.

When my relatives hear me talk about colonizing Mars they know all they have to do is keep calm for a little while and switch the conversation to a more interesting subject as soon as possible, like the last Big Brother development, or how ugly the present political scandal is, or how hot was today, or something.

What they need not is to actually think about what I'm saying.

What for? I'm just one of those futuristic, out of the world, daydreamers.

Problem is they can't do the same with someone like Elon Musk ... although they try. They try hard.

It's evident even here.

The most "feet on the ground" people around here had been saying once and again that he was doomed to fail ... and still are, just with a bit less conviction, but none the less ...

For most outside here I think it's just that they don't want to waste their time with what they think is only fairy tales, or at least something that will never have any measurable impact on their lives.

For us I think it's a mix between fear and jealousy. Fear that in the end he might not deliver. Jealousy that he could do what so many before failed to do.

Yep, an irritating fellow.

Offline MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5362
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 2239
  • Likes Given: 3883
Excellent post!! So its not just me who feels this way?! Elon Musk is like someone who has dropped in from a parallel world - its like somehow; he shouldn't actually be here - its almost as though he should go back to the Ben Bova novel that he sprung from. Elon used to a poor public speaker, but he is now much improved. Will he be a 'Howard Hughes of Space' or will he do better than Hughes? I'm picking he will.

But I don't want him to be a cult figure - cult figures burn out too soon.

Or; "Elon is not the Messiah - he's just a very naughty boy!"

But define 'naughty' or 'bad'. Elon almost defies proper description - but in a good way, I hasten to add.
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline dcporter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 881
  • Liked: 266
  • Likes Given: 422
Or we're you being sarcastic?

Nope, I took stephen's statement to mean that getting on and off rocks was easier than looping between them. Probably I misread. Thanks all

Offline MikeAtkinson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1980
  • Bracknell, England
  • Liked: 784
  • Likes Given: 120
I agree with Elon, reusable spaceships are harder than launchers. I don't know what his reasoning is but mine is simple. For the same number of reuses spaceships have to be operated for a much, much longer duration. During that time they will become outdated and extremely difficult to maintain.

For example compare a reusable launcher which has a mean lifetime of 1000 flights with the equivalent spaceship on the Earth - Mars run, using the same level of technology. The launcher would be operated for maybe 10 years, the spaceship for 2000 years. Even with likely technology advances over the next 100 years a round trip to Mars is likely to take 3 months, so a lifetime of 250 years would be required for the same number of missions.

We don't build hi-tech items to last hundreds of years. Acquiring the ability to do so would mean creating whole new technologies from the ground up.

Put it another way for Elon to meet his goal of $500,000/person colonisation the cost of launch needs to drop by 2 orders of magnitude (maybe a bit more). There is a clear path through reusability to get there, it is hard but it seems doable.

The cost of the spacecraft needs to drop at least 4 orders of magnitude over ISS. There is no clear path to get there. The design, manufacturing and maintenance cost of the spacecraft would be too high per passenger even if it were launched for free, didn't use fuel and had complete recycling.

Offline grythumn

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 243
  • Liked: 167
  • Likes Given: 246
I've nearly finished writing it - all I need to do now is get some software to convert a large Word file into a PDF! ;)

PrimoPDF works well and is free. I'd use a random postscript printer driver, output to file, and convert with ghostscript manually, but I'm weird and like command line utilities. You can also use Libre Office, but it occasionally has trouble importing complexly formatted Word files IME.

-R C

Offline zt

  • Member
  • Posts: 90
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 19
Google Docs imports Word and exports PDF.

Offline FinalFrontier

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
  • Space Watcher
  • Liked: 1332
  • Likes Given: 173
Can't say I agree with him on the need for a ground to LEO FRLV, but I most definitely agree on the need for a fully reusable system going to and from LEO to any other destination.


Still think that ground to LEO RLV's are and always will be cost prohibitive but I will be happy if the RFL project proves me wrong.
3-30-2017: The start of a great future
"Live Long and Prosper"

Offline FinalFrontier

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
  • Space Watcher
  • Liked: 1332
  • Likes Given: 173
Where will you publish it?

I'm calling the article *Version 1.0* because the more detailed, full-length version will be 'peer-reviewed' first by a couple NASA engineer friends of mine. I'm not a trained Engineer - just a Science Fiction writer. Many quality Sci-Fi writers: Clarke, Asimov, Baxter, Stanley-Robinson - have science or engineering backgrounds - I do not, so that effectively makes me second-rate. So until I've had it looked over, only a more cut-down version will reach limited eyes.

The final magazine of the soon to be disbanded 'N.Z. Spaceflight Association' will have that rather cut-down version of the article. Some illustrations I've done by hand - the editor may not use them - but they are more like 'place holders' until I can persuade someone who is a professional or semi-professional artist to do them.

If it 'passes muster' I'm happy to then post it somewhere on here so folk can see it. I don't imagine for a minute it will generate the same stir that 'DIRECT' did a few years back.

EDIT: Thumbnails of some of my drawings: 'ganged' Earth Departure propulsion stages (based on Falcon 9 second stage), Command Dragon with 'Long Trunk' Service Module - lots of storable propellants, 10,000lb thrust hypergolic engine, ganged MOI/TEI propulsion stages with 2x hypergolic engines - stages are propellant-only and based on the Long Trunk Dragon Service Module.



So this implies all chemical propulsion.



I somehow doubt he will do this, he has stated previously an interest in an advanced system of some sort. And with plenty of such systems already around (vasimir, NTR's, SEPstugs,ect) or in development it would be easy to either buy one from someone or build off existing designs to create something far more cost effective then a chemical system.

Plus, how are you going to re-use an all chemical system? The implication is that once each "stage" does its primary burns it does not have enough fuel to return to an LEO parking orbit and it can't re couple or be refurbished easily. The logistics of trying to make that work would be impossible, not to mention cost prohibitive.

I just don't see them using an all chemical system.
3-30-2017: The start of a great future
"Live Long and Prosper"

Offline MikeAtkinson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1980
  • Bracknell, England
  • Liked: 784
  • Likes Given: 120
Can't say I agree with him on the need for a ground to LEO FRLV, but I most definitely agree on the need for a fully reusable system going to and from LEO to any other destination.


Still think that ground to LEO RLV's are and always will be cost prohibitive but I will be happy if the RFL project proves me wrong.

LEO-Mars spacecraft reusability gives at best a factor of 10 reduction in costs, and in my opinion much less.

Balancing no need to launch the spacecraft each time (which only reduces launch costs by 20%) are increased R&D costs, refurbishment cost, any extra fuel needed to put the spacecraft in an orbit where it might be reused, decreased production economies of scale and lower rate of introduction of technological improvements.

If launch costs are 30% of a typical HSF mission at present then changing to a RLV will at best reduce costs by 30%. Add in spacecraft reusability for another 10x reduction then a mission similar to DRM5 but using reusable elements would cost at best 7%.

Musk needs 4 orders of magnitude improvement in cost, just adding reusability to existing mission architectures gives at best 2 orders of magnitude reduction and probably only a bit better than 1 order of magnitude.

His plans/hopes are on a much bigger scale than for DRM5 and economies of scale will give lower unit costs, but I doubt that will be more than an order of magnitude.

What remains are architecture improvements. He seems to be aiming for mainly one way (to Mars) for colonists, return flights are necessary for reuse not having to provide consumerables for many passengers on the return trip leads to efficiencies all through the architecture.

I just can't see how Elon hopes to get prices down to $500,000/person. With reusability and economies of scale and a lot of optimism I could see $5M/person, but that last factor of 10 must be either imaginary or something I've overlooked.

Offline ArbitraryConstant

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
  • Liked: 628
  • Likes Given: 311
Plus, how are you going to re-use an all chemical system?
I don't think it's necessary to re-use everything initially.

Musk might see it as a necessity for mass emigration, but we can do a lot with expendable departure stages.

For a reusable architecture, it seems to me that the optimal rendezvous orbit probably isn't LEO. There's a lot of mass associated with transporting people to Mars that would not benefit from making that whole trip up and down the gravity well each time. It seems like it would make more sense to meet it at a much higher orbit.
« Last Edit: 08/12/2012 08:12 pm by ArbitraryConstant »

Offline charliem

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 147
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 0
all I need to do now is get some software to convert a large Word file into a PDF! ;)

If you are a Windows user PDFcreator is free, and extremely easy to find and to use (http://www.pdfforge.org/download).

If you are a Linux user then you can choose. Cups-PDF is also very easy to install via your package manager.

I don't think you are a Mac user because in OSX this is a standard feature.

Offline IRobot

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1312
  • Portugal & Germany
  • Liked: 310
  • Likes Given: 272
My understanding is that the $500.000 price is from LEO to Mars...

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Quantum, what was your problem with the keynote address by Richard Gott? I thought it was a riot.

Exactly.. Gott's brand of crazy is amusing, and the fact that he's gotten it published in Nature is funny in a sarcastic way, but you don't build credibility by inviting him to your conference.

Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline spacetraveler

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 687
  • Atlanta, GA
  • Liked: 165
  • Likes Given: 26
My understanding is that the $500.000 price is from LEO to Mars...
Who is paying for the launch then?

The example he gives in the video is of someone on earth paying $500k to "move to mars", which necessities launch from earth plus the transport there.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
My understanding is that the $500.000 price is from LEO to Mars...
Who is paying for the launch then?

The example he gives in the video is of someone on earth paying $500k to "move to mars", which necessities launch from earth plus the transport there.

I agree.. I haven't heard Musk ever say otherwise. What he does say is that this would be the price after the infrastructure is in place.. who will pay for the infrastructure? My guess is he thinks government will.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Robert Thompson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1177
  • Liked: 101
  • Likes Given: 658
A string of posts above give the impression of mushin. Encouraging. My quiet mantra is that lunar ice is the glacial lake outburst flood that will make Mars 'happen'.

Quantum, I thought he was a useful inoculation to Zubrin's dour. I would suppose that alarm does not motivate at these large barriers to entry, and that a dash of irony softens the irrelevance of that alarm. I still think there's a utility to having a watchman call the time. That's sorta kinda the role I got out of his talk.

Offline Jason1701

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2232
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 152
Hearing Elon's speech at the Mars Society reunion I had, once again, this odd, uncomfortable sensation.

He can't be a real person. He has no place in the real world. At most Elon Musk should be a character in a comic book.

And I know it's not just me. He is irritatingly weird for so many.

He is because he shatters everyone's (even mine) preconceptions about what a geek -and not just a geek but a nutty geek- should be.

By his words he should be expending his weekends roaming one scifi convention or other, disguised like an empire trooper or something. He should be boring to death his relatives and coworkers with fantasies about space exploration, and fusion reactors, and new particles found by the LHC, and so on and so forth.

What he, definitely, should not be doing is building anything remotely resembling real, useful, hardware. He should not have founded at least three different companies in three completely different fields, and not gone broke in the first year. Even worse, he should not have become a millionaire, first, and then a billionaire with them.

When my relatives hear me talk about colonizing Mars they know all they have to do is keep calm for a little while and switch the conversation to a more interesting subject as soon as possible, like the last Big Brother development, or how ugly the present political scandal is, or how hot was today, or something.

What they need not is to actually think about what I'm saying.

What for? I'm just one of those futuristic, out of the world, daydreamers.

Problem is they can't do the same with someone like Elon Musk ... although they try. They try hard.

It's evident even here.

The most "feet on the ground" people around here had been saying once and again that he was doomed to fail ... and still are, just with a bit less conviction, but none the less ...

For most outside here I think it's just that they don't want to waste their time with what they think is only fairy tales, or at least something that will never have any measurable impact on their lives.

For us I think it's a mix between fear and jealousy. Fear that in the end he might not deliver. Jealousy that he could do what so many before failed to do.

Yep, an irritating fellow.


As Zubrin said, "a man who is in this world but not of it."

Offline ArbitraryConstant

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
  • Liked: 628
  • Likes Given: 311
My guess is he thinks government will.
That or early adopters willing to spend more.

Offline SpacemanInSPACE

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 135
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 72
My guess is he thinks government will.
That or early adopters willing to spend more.

Space seems to attract billionaires, but maybe that's observational bias on my part. However, several different spaceships are being developed at the hands of a few rich investors. Imagine if the Walmart family was willing to throw a few billion into the space industry to advance the settlement of Mars. Well maybe that wouldn't end well... :D
Space is worth it God Damnit!

Offline MikeAtkinson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1980
  • Bracknell, England
  • Liked: 784
  • Likes Given: 120
A string of posts above give the impression of mushin. Encouraging. My quiet mantra is that lunar ice is the glacial lake outburst flood that will make Mars 'happen'.

Cost of launch is only something like 30% of total costs to make Mars 'happen'. So even if lunar derived propellant were sitting for free in LEO it will on its own make only a moderate difference to overall costs.

I'm really sceptical that lunar derived propellant will be cheaper at LEO that that from the Earth. I'm also sceptical that lunar propellant will be significantly cheaper at L1/L2, it could quite well always be more expensive. It seems hard to make the cost of investment in lunar propellant production low enough. There is also likely to be competition from NEO derived propellant, this seems likely to need less up-front investment.

Offline Robert Thompson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1177
  • Liked: 101
  • Likes Given: 658
It would appear that Elon and Zubrin see no use.

Offline Nathan

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 710
  • Sydney
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 3
My understanding is that the $500.000 price is from LEO to Mars...
Who is paying for the launch then?

The example he gives in the video is of someone on earth paying $500k to "move to mars", which necessities launch from earth plus the transport there.
The price probably refers to the fee for sending a person of 100kg to Mars. If he/she wants a house and car on arrival then will need to pay for that separately.
Given finite cash, if we want to go to Mars then we should go to Mars.

Offline majormajor42

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 531
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 230
Using your house and shelter as metaphors for actual material possessions owned while living on Mars gets into details that may be off topic as far as the speech he made, and how he might plan on getting people, "millions!", to Mars. I would certainly like to hear his plans for getting the first few groups of people to Mars. But at some point I would also like to hear about his thoughts on what a small but growing society will be like on Mars. Certainly he has ideas about this too but isn't sharing them just yet (and why should he?).  But so far we have heard "sell the house, sell the car, come to Mars," ... and? So far I think he has only mentioned some sort of idea factory that exports technology back to Earth.
...water is life and it is out there, where we intend to go. I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man or machine on a body such as the Moon and harvest a cup of water for a human to drink or process into fuel for their craft.

Offline IRobot

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1312
  • Portugal & Germany
  • Liked: 310
  • Likes Given: 272
My understanding is that the $500.000 price is from LEO to Mars...
Who is paying for the launch then?

The example he gives in the video is of someone on earth paying $500k to "move to mars", which necessities launch from earth plus the transport there.
It's like hidden cost when you book your holidays. Or he is just viewing it as two different services. SpaceX, Skylon or others could provide LEO transport in a competition environment and SpaceX (and others) could provide LEO-Mars service.
That would partially explain the low cost. Let's say $200.000 to LEO + $500.000 to Mars + $100.000 for LEO 2 weeks stay for zero G adaptation, for example. Plus some $100.000 for flight preparation on earth... maybe it is profitable if you start with a low price but then charge on the extras...
Also I guess staying on Mars would provide extra revenue.

Offline GalacticIntruder

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 512
  • Pet Peeve:I hate the word Downcomer. Ban it.
  • Huntsville, AL
  • Liked: 247
  • Likes Given: 70
That 500k idea is just what Elon thinks it would take to entice the average Joe, whom wants to move to Mars, to actually go. That is in today's Dollars of course.

I am skeptical many humans today, want to settle Mars, outside of space fans, various scientists, explorers. If the first group overcomes all the problems and thrives, and that leads to a modern Mars economy, then you will have a 'gold rush' and 'land rush' like the early US. It is usually the persecuted, desperate, and downtrodden whom leave their birth country in the hope of a better life for them and family. Unless things on Earth get really bad, I don't think the rich or middle class humans would move to Mars. Vacation for sure, though.

A possible Mars ferry; that could be done with say, Red Dragon, Bigelow BA2100 hab module and some sort of nuclear thermal or electric BEO engines.
« Last Edit: 08/13/2012 11:16 pm by GalacticIntruder »
"And now the Sun will fade, All we are is all we made." Breaking Benjamin

Offline majormajor42

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 531
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 230
I've saved half a million dollars so as far as I am concerned this is the land of opportunity, why would I leave?

Now let's say there is a younger person who cannot yet afford to go. Elon needs labor up there. Indentured servitude?

Edit: ha, re-reading makes it sound like I'm talking about myself having saved that much. Uh, no. I was just trying to put myself into the shoes of someone who has and the opinion they might have about the true "land of opportunity"
« Last Edit: 08/14/2012 12:03 am by majormajor42 »
...water is life and it is out there, where we intend to go. I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man or machine on a body such as the Moon and harvest a cup of water for a human to drink or process into fuel for their craft.

Offline ArbitraryConstant

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
  • Liked: 628
  • Likes Given: 311
If the price gets anywhere near that point, governments will necessarily become involved just like they did when it got economical to send people to Antarctica. They have to to prevent any one nation from claiming it for themselves.

Offline corneliussulla

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 249
  • Liked: 88
  • Likes Given: 48
to be honest things would need to be pretty bad to swap our green and blue jewel, teaming with everything we need to move to a red, irradiated, desert. Sure the trip there would be good, but you would need to spend the rest of your life living on it. lEts face it Mars makes the background for most post apocalypse movies look like 5 star resorts.

Some might do it but I think it would be limited number especially when large numbers started to die from damage DNA created horrible health problems.

Offline IRobot

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1312
  • Portugal & Germany
  • Liked: 310
  • Likes Given: 272
to be honest things would need to be pretty bad to swap our green and blue jewel, teaming with everything we need to move to a red, irradiated, desert. Sure the trip there would be good, but you would need to spend the rest of your life living on it. lEts face it Mars makes the background for most post apocalypse movies look like 5 star resorts.

Some might do it but I think it would be limited number especially when large numbers started to die from damage DNA created horrible health problems.
Elderly people who want to enjoy low gravity and isolation.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
to be honest things would need to be pretty bad to swap our green and blue jewel, teaming with everything we need to move to a red, irradiated, desert.

You know there's people in this world who think differently to you right?

Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline bunker9603

  • Member
  • Posts: 83
  • Cincinnati, Ohio
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 447
to be honest things would need to be pretty bad to swap our green and blue jewel, teaming with everything we need to move to a red, irradiated, desert.

You know there's people in this world who think differently to you right?



+1

Offline Idiomatic

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 165
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
At $500,000 there are millions of people that could afford it. If 0.1% of people take the opportunity that is enough for a martian country to form. Reasoning hardly matters much. People will have all sorts of reasons.

There's lots of ways to do it.. I wonder how many years until we find out what Musk's particular variation is..



About a month or 2. Just before the last launch he said maybe 4 months or a bit more til he releases his Mars vision. (It was in the wired interview)

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
to be honest things would need to be pretty bad to swap our green and blue jewel, teaming with everything we need to move to a red, irradiated, desert.

You know there's people in this world who think differently to you right?


And an even smaller portion of them would have money for this

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
At $500,000 there are millions of people that could afford it. If 0.1% of people take the opportunity that is enough for a martian country to form. Reasoning hardly matters much. People will have all sorts of reasons.


No, having and affording are two different things.  And even less who would want to live like pioneers/frontiermen
« Last Edit: 08/14/2012 01:43 am by Jim »

Offline Brian Copp

  • Member
  • Posts: 28
  • TX
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Anyone seriously contemplating a move to Mars should ask themselves one simple question: Is there any place on Earth you wouldn't want to live? If the answer is "yes," then you shouldn't even think of moving to Mars. The absolute worst places on Earth are far more hospitable than Mars. If living in an igloo at the south pole doesn't appeal to you, forget about Mars.

Offline ArbitraryConstant

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
  • Liked: 628
  • Likes Given: 311
Anyone seriously contemplating a move to Mars should ask themselves one simple question: Is there any place on Earth you wouldn't want to live? If the answer is "yes," then you shouldn't even think of moving to Mars. The absolute worst places on Earth are far more hospitable than Mars. If living in an igloo at the south pole doesn't appeal to you, forget about Mars.
There's people that want that. It's a frontier. They'd want it because it's a frontier.

Not so many of them, but conditions improve for subsequent waves.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Is there any place on Earth you wouldn't want to live? If the answer is "yes," then you shouldn't even think of moving to Mars.

What if the answer is yes because of the people who are in that place? Be it quantity or quality...

Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline corneliussulla

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 249
  • Liked: 88
  • Likes Given: 48
People talk about this as if it's analogous to the Europeans populating America. It's not, it would be more analogous to leaving home and moving to the centre of the desert to live in a prison,but much worse. Being transported to Botany Bay would have been 1000 times more pleasant. Just because something is on the verge of possibility doesn't mean that it is a good idea.

Somebody says not everyone will think like this, well they soon will when the pictures start coming back. It would be like buying yourself a one way ticket to Hell

Offline corneliussulla

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 249
  • Liked: 88
  • Likes Given: 48
Anyone seriously contemplating a move to Mars should ask themselves one simple question: Is there any place on Earth you wouldn't want to live? If the answer is "yes," then you shouldn't even think of moving to Mars. The absolute worst places on Earth are far more hospitable than Mars. If living in an igloo at the south pole doesn't appeal to you, forget about Mars.

Couldn't agree more. People who think this is some sort of adventure have no imagination

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
You don't find the idea of going to Mars appealing we get it.

People have different opinions to you. Get over it.

Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline neilh

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2365
  • Pasadena, CA
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 149
You don't find the idea of going to Mars appealing we get it.

People have different opinions to you. Get over it.

+1
Someone is wrong on the Internet.
http://xkcd.com/386/

Offline Andrew_W

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 754
  • Rotorua, New Zealand
    • Profiles of our future in space
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 12
I think the fantasy and the reality of colonizing Mars are worlds apart. Some sort of measure of the cost of the energy and materials available to the actual colonists on the surface needs to be done to introduce the reality to some people.
I confess that in 1901 I said to my brother Orville that man would not fly for fifty years.
Wilbur Wright

Offline tigerade

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 718
  • Low Earth Orbit
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 36
I don't think about Mars colonization much.  I say, let's get at least some astronauts there first, which is still a long way off.  Even one base on Mars is going to be very expensive, and risky.  I'm hoping though that scientific bases on Mars will be as common as bases in the Antarctic, and people won't mind it all.  If we spend time on Mars and really get to know how to live and work on the planet, and then colonization becomes practical, I'd see no reason to hold them back. 

My point is that colonization is neither possible nor practical at the moment.  So I just think the discussion is kind of silly, we are still very far off.
« Last Edit: 08/14/2012 06:38 am by tigerade »

Offline corneliussulla

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 249
  • Liked: 88
  • Likes Given: 48
You don't find the idea of going to Mars appealing we get it.

People have different opinions to you. Get over it.



I am aware that people think differently to me. I suppose my point is that once the reality becomes obvious there wont be enough of these people to make any sort of Mars habitation successful. ELon talks about 500k a seat, but you need to have infrastructure when you get there and it needs to have spare parts because one failure is to many. Huge amounts of material will be required along the settlers. living of the land will not be easy and probably not possible for quite some time

Offline corneliussulla

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 249
  • Liked: 88
  • Likes Given: 48
I don't think about Mars colonization much.  I say, let's get at least some astronauts there first, which is still a long way off.  Even one base on Mars is going to be very expensive, and risky.  I'm hoping though that scientific bases on Mars will be as common as bases in the Antarctic, and people won't mind it all.  If we spend time on Mars and really get to know how to live and work on the planet, and then colonization becomes practical, I'd see no reason to hold them back. 

My point is that colonization is neither possible nor practical at the moment.  So I just think the discussion is kind of silly, we are still very far off.

quite true

Offline ArbitraryConstant

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
  • Liked: 628
  • Likes Given: 311
I am aware that people think differently to me. I suppose my point is that once the reality becomes obvious there wont be enough of these people to make any sort of Mars habitation successful. ELon talks about 500k a seat, but you need to have infrastructure when you get there and it needs to have spare parts because one failure is to many. Huge amounts of material will be required along the settlers.
By the time it reaches that point we're probably already talking about an Antarctica scale presence. You wouldn't reach the point where settlement was happening without many intermediate steps. It's not like anyone expects to start launching Dragons next week without any infrastructure.

Offline billh

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 778
  • Houston
  • Liked: 1098
  • Likes Given: 792
You don't find the idea of going to Mars appealing we get it.

People have different opinions to you. Get over it.



I am aware that people think differently to me. I suppose my point is that once the reality becomes obvious there wont be enough of these people to make any sort of Mars habitation successful. ELon talks about 500k a seat, but you need to have infrastructure when you get there and it needs to have spare parts because one failure is to many. Huge amounts of material will be required along the settlers. living of the land will not be easy and probably not possible for quite some time

I think you are not making sufficient allowance for the different preferences people have. Some people seek mainly their own comfort. But some are attracted by danger, by novelty and by hardship. Many are motivated by the significance of what they are doing. Think! Establishing a beachhead for the human race on another planet!

Personally, I am probably closer to your line of thinking. I am afraid that I like my comfort too much to be a colonist on Mars. But you need to face the possibility that many of these other people have thought about it and they still want to go. Out of a population of billions there must be millons who would. We have a name for those kind of people. They're called pioneers.

Offline catiare

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 122
  • Miami
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 42
@MATTBLAK

I've nearly finished writing it - all I need to do now is get some software to convert a large Word file into a PDF! ;)

Let us know when you're done with your paper. Look forward to reading it.

Offline majormajor42

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 531
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 230
This conversation is reminding me of Charlton Heston's admonishment of his crewmate(s) at the beginning of Planet of the Apes. I can't quote from memory but they were upset about their predicament and Heston is telling them they must have chosen to go on the mission for the wrong reasons, such as "glory". I forget what he says is the right reason for going.

Additionally, considering that the title of this thread includes the Mars Society, I'd like to think that they have thought out some if not all the things being discussed here.

Based on the recorded great endeavours of man, including long term stints in space, or simulated space, or even long term exposure to combat or Shackleton-like adventures, I think the book has already been written on the proper psychological profile of our early Mars pioneers.

I will note though that I think the idea of a one way trip is picking up steam, at least in the community. Seemed a bit nuts just a few years ago. Maybe thanks to Greason and Musk beating the drum of settlement, the idea has caught on. I bet, however, the masses out there would scoff at the idea of even funding a one way trip at this point. They would want their hero back so they can throw parades (and see who's shirts he wears).
...water is life and it is out there, where we intend to go. I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man or machine on a body such as the Moon and harvest a cup of water for a human to drink or process into fuel for their craft.

Offline catiare

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 122
  • Miami
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 42
From Carl Sagan:

"I don't know why you're on Mars. Maybe you're there because we've recognized we have to carefully move small asteroids around to avert the possibility of one impacting the Earth with catastrophic consequences, and, while we're up in near-Earth space, it's only a hop, skip and a jump to Mars. Or, maybe we're on Mars because we recognize that if there are human communities on many worlds, the chances of us being rendered extinct by some catastrophe on one world is much less. Or maybe we're on Mars because of the magnificent science that can be done there - the gates of the wonder world are opening in our time. Maybe we're on Mars because we have to be, because there's a deep nomadic impulse built into us by the evolutionary process, we come after all, from hunter gatherers, and for 99.9% of our tenure on Earth we've been wanderers. And, the next place to wander to, is Mars. But whatever the reason you're on Mars is, I'm glad you're there. And I wish I was with you."

Offline Archer

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 147
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 3
I guess that the first Mars colonists will have to live deep, deep underground, so they don't need to build domes or pressurised habitats. Of course I assume that there are very big caves under the surface of Mars, at least as big as we have here in Earth.

On the first thought I agree that moing to Mars is like moving to hell, but on the second, caves here on Earth are awesome, and if Mars have something more magnificent (and it might have since it's gravity is much lower), one might want to fly there just to look at its natural wonders.
 Caves can be illuminated by the same way as in this proposal: http://www.gizmag.com/new-york-delancey-underground-garden/19962/

It could be a good vacation.

http://www.alastairmorris.com/photo_diary/2009/20090801_adriatic/58-2.JPG
http://www.mulucaves.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/SarawakChamber.jpg
http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/296/cache/crystal-caves-explorer-underground_29615_600x450.jpg
http://thechive.com/2011/02/08/epic-caves-around-the-world-25-photos/


And on the other hand, humans are not dwarfs from the lord of the rings universe, and it is not known can we normally live deep underground even in big caves or not.
« Last Edit: 08/14/2012 05:04 pm by Archer »
The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering. (c) R. A. Heinlein

Offline Idiomatic

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 165
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
dwarfs

Dwarves or dwarrows not dwarfs. Tolkien was very specific on this point.

Honestly guys. I'm not seeing the argument. One group is saying, I would go to Mars for 500k. The other side is saying 'no you wouldn't. Who are you to decide what other people would or wouldn't do?

People live in submarines and the ISS for long time periods willingly. Living on a long term early explorer's ship took ages and wasn't exactly hospitable, but the unknowns and death tolls were far greater in their situation. They still went.

The Mars Society is so excited about living on Mars that they built a mock up tin can like the one they'd put on Mars and stuff people in it. The pay off is extremely minimal in comparison.... in fact, they don't even get paid, they spend money for the chance to be stuck in a tin can here on earth. And they are planning to build another one because the one they have now isn't inhospitable enough.

There are 10,000,000 millionaires on the planet. If 1 in 100,000 chose to go to Mars, you have a booming start to a civilization. It adds 100 people to the dozens or hundreds that various countries will have sent for science or pride. Some people will have their visits paid in part for them as well, doctors ... but also staff. Within those 100 millionaires, 1 is likely to have 100 million, and he can afford to bring staff to live in comfort and rent more living space.

So with 100 private citizens moving to mars, you end up with maybe 200~300 people on Mars as frontiersmen. Where you could manage with 1/3rd of that and still have a growing society.

Keep in mind, the average millionaire is in his 50s and 20% of them are retired. They need not leave their job.

Offline StephenB

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 282
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 201
I'm hoping though that scientific bases on Mars will be as common as bases in the Antarctic [snip]

Is any sort of ISRU (besides air for breathing) used in Antarctica? Is even their water flown in? I suspect that we have a bit of basic research to do in ISRU before it's ready for prime time.

Offline Brian Copp

  • Member
  • Posts: 28
  • TX
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
This notion that humans have to become a "multi-planetary" species sounds so nutty to me. Scientists don't ascribe to apocalytic visions based on bad 1990's Hollywood films. They develop theories on the basis of rational thought and empirical data, things which The Mars Society cult seems to care little about.

Global warming? Even the most pessimistic scenarios don't predict that Earth will become uninhabitable. If you melted all the ice on Earth, there would still be plenty of land for humans to live on.

Asteroid impacts? Extinction level events are incredibly rare. There is no reason to believe that we are on the brink of another major impact. Even if we were, there is no reason to believe that life would be worth living on a planet with no air, no indigenous life, negligible resources, and an awful climate.

It is possible that Musk and Zubrin are bold visionaries who genuinely want to save humanity. It is also possible that they are the latest in a long line of ego-driven fanatics selling their apocalytic vision of the future. Just because they wrap themselves in the veneer of "science" and the "space program" doesn't make their ideas less ridiculous...or dangerous.

Offline Idiomatic

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 165
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Is any sort of ISRU (besides air for breathing) used in Antarctica? Is even their water flown in? I suspect that we have a bit of basic research to do in ISRU before it's ready for prime time.

We should fund this more than we currently do... which is basically 0.

This notion that humans have to become a "multi-planetary" species sounds so nutty to me. Scientists don't ascribe to apocalytic visions based on bad 1990's Hollywood films. They develop theories on the basis of rational thought and empirical data, things which The Mars Society cult seems to care little about.

Global warming? Even the most pessimistic scenarios don't predict that Earth will become uninhabitable. If you melted all the ice on Earth, there would still be plenty of land for humans to live on.

Asteroid impacts? Extinction level events are incredibly rare. There is no reason to believe that we are on the brink of another major impact. Even if we were, there is no reason to believe that life would be worth living on a planet with no air, no indigenous life, negligible resources, and an awful climate.

It is possible that Musk and Zubrin are bold visionaries who genuinely want to save humanity. It is also possible that they are the latest in a long line of ego-driven fanatics selling their apocalytic vision of the future. Just because they wrap themselves in the veneer of "science" and the "space program" doesn't make their ideas less ridiculous...or dangerous.

Maybe scientists won't be the first to go. There aren't many scientist millionaires anyways. In fact, basically no scientists are millionaires. They would mostly have to be sent by various governments.

Of course it is incredibly unlikely that humanity will be wiped out. But if it happens... that's that. The cost is everything. If there is a 0.00000001% chance of something costing you 100TN dollars, it might be worth putting a few bucks into. I don't think anyone thinks any of this is likely at all. Personally, I support Mars because I think it would be cool. And I think humanity can spend the .1% or w/e of GDP into doing cool and novel things. Just because we can.

Going to Mars isn't a dangerous idea. Communism is a dangerous idea, Ayn Randian ideals are dangerous ideas. Going to Mars is a pretty safe idea in the grand scheme of things.

Offline tigerade

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 718
  • Low Earth Orbit
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 36
Is any sort of ISRU (besides air for breathing) used in Antarctica? Is even their water flown in? I suspect that we have a bit of basic research to do in ISRU before it's ready for prime time.

Sample return mission would probably test out ISRU on Mars.

With sample return, is the idea still to make fuel from the Martian atmosphere in order to power the return vehicle?

Offline StephenB

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 282
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 201
Fuel is one thing, but there is also growing food, construction, mining, water, etc.

Offline MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5362
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 2239
  • Likes Given: 3883
@MATTBLAK

I've nearly finished writing it - all I need to do now is get some software to convert a large Word file into a PDF! ;)

Let us know when you're done with your paper. Look forward to reading it.

Well; I'll keep polishing it. But I know there will be criticism when it doesn't have somebodies pet technology - "What?! No propellant depots, no SEP, no large nuclear reactors, no large-scale propellant ISRU, no large six person crews, no 1000km range crew Rovers, no re-usable launchers and Mars Cycler re-usable vehicles? And chemical propulsion only?!"

I also have a feeling that my mass figures are optimistic here and there. Some may also object to the Apollo-style paradigm of throwing away modules and returning to Earth merely with one re-entry capsule, the crew and some rocks & regolith.

But my mission design is merely an extrapolation of upgraded Space X hardware, and using a modular architecture that removes expensive, new technologies from the critical path to funding and thus mission success. Because as we all know - No bucks; no Buck Rogers. And being modular means that new technologies and hardware can be phased in gradually to increase capability and efficiency and also increase crew size.

This and other semi-austere mission designs would never mean to be permanent. After a decade of several long surface sortie missions, a site for a base be settled on and mission modules could no longer be discarded after just one, 18 month use. Crew sizes would increase and more powerful pressurized crew Rovers would be needed.

But start relatively small and Get There.

Last year, Robert Zubrin was criticized for bringing out a mission design that only used two Astronauts and minimum spacecraft and hardware. I've been attempting to bridge the gap between his concept and 'Battlestar Galactica' concepts with nuclear propulsion and large crews. Like Bob Zubrin says; If you want to go to Mars, go to Mars.
« Last Edit: 08/14/2012 09:06 pm by MATTBLAK »
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
  • Liked: 253
  • Likes Given: 457
to be honest things would need to be pretty bad to swap our green and blue jewel, teaming with everything we need to move to a red, irradiated, desert. Sure the trip there would be good, but you would need to spend the rest of your life living on it. lEts face it Mars makes the background for most post apocalypse movies look like 5 star resorts.

Some might do it but I think it would be limited number especially when large numbers started to die from damage DNA created horrible health problems.

Mars would not have the hordes of mutant bandits wanting take your stuff and kill you for sport like the Earth in a typical post apocalyptic movie.

Though personally if I wanted to escape a post apocalyptic Earth the Lunar poles might be a better option it's closer and conditions there are actually fairly mild.
As for invaders I doubt anyone who's gone tribal is going to be able to assemble a spaceship if so I have the high ground so it's nothing a few mass drivers can't handle.
« Last Edit: 08/14/2012 09:21 pm by Patchouli »

Offline Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
  • Liked: 253
  • Likes Given: 457
@MATTBLAK

I've nearly finished writing it - all I need to do now is get some software to convert a large Word file into a PDF! ;)

Let us know when you're done with your paper. Look forward to reading it.

Well; I'll keep polishing it. But I know there will be criticism when it doesn't have somebodies pet technology - "What?! No propellant depots, no SEP, no large nuclear reactors, no large-scale propellant ISRU, no large six person crews, no 1000km range crew Rovers, no re-usable launchers and Mars Cycler re-usable vehicles? And chemical propulsion only?!"

I also have a feeling that my mass figures are optimistic here and there. Some may also object to the Apollo-style paradigm of throwing away modules and returning to Earth merely with one re-entry capsule, the crew and some rocks & regolith.

But my mission design is merely an extrapolation of upgraded Space X hardware, and using a modular architecture that removes expensive, new technologies from the critical path to funding and thus mission success. Because as we all know - No bucks; no Buck Rogers. And being modular means that new technologies and hardware can be phased in gradually to increase capability and efficiency and also increase crew size.

This and other semi-austere mission designs would never mean to be permanent. After a decade of several long surface sortie missions, a site for a base be settled on and mission modules could no longer be discarded after just one, 18 month use. Crew sizes would increase and more powerful pressurized crew Rovers would be needed.

But start relatively small and Get There.

Last year, Robert Zubrin was criticized for bringing out a mission design that only used two Astronauts and minimum spacecraft and hardware. I've been attempting to bridge the gap between his concept and 'Battlestar Galactica' concepts with nuclear propulsion and large crews. Like Bob Zubrin says; If you want to go to Mars, go to Mars.

I still think SEP can be a mission critial part of any Mars missions it's no longer scifi and is thourghly tested technology.
Besides in space electrical power is life the more electrical power you have the better off you are.
Personally I'd never design a mission with no less then 30KW of electrical power.
I'd want a safety factor of 2 for basic life support and climate control.
IE the crew should not have to worry about freezing or having to operate in the dark even if 50% power was lost.

It also should be noted Mars Direct really is only austere for the first few missions.
New habs get added to the old hab slowly building a base.
Any sutained architecture should do this any way.
« Last Edit: 08/14/2012 09:29 pm by Patchouli »

Offline MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5362
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 2239
  • Likes Given: 3883
Oh, I agree about SEP - using it to pre-position supplies and propellant is a big mission enabler. Several companies are vying to get the chance to build a $200 million technology demonstrator. For instance, Ball Aerospace partnered with ATK (flexi-array), Boeing, Lockheed Martin etc. But flight for this is still years away. Elon Musk says he wants to/expects to get people on Mars in the next 12-15 years. I'm just not optimistic that large-scale SEP with a full technology readiness level suitable for a human mission will be ready in time. A lot of hurdles will have to be overcome in the meantime, not to mention a lot of money in funding.
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline friendly3

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 271
  • Liege. BELGIUM.
  • Liked: 306
  • Likes Given: 8567
Communism is a dangerous idea, Ayn Randian ideals are dangerous ideas.

Ayn Rand's ideals or ideas never killed anyone !
Anyway, don't you think that guys like Bernie Madoff would want to leave for Mars just a few weeks or months before they are caught? They should easily have the money and the motivation !
Also, in order to do the hard work we could send some guys who were sentenced to life with this choice: Mars or jail for life ! I think that was done for Australia.
Of course we could eventually end up with a lot of nasty guys up there, although Australia is not that nasty after all...

Offline MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5362
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 2239
  • Likes Given: 3883
...Just stay out of the Northern Territories or Sydney's Kings Cross if they've been on a bender or their 'Footie' team has lost!!
« Last Edit: 08/14/2012 11:17 pm by MATTBLAK »
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline SpacemanInSPACE

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 135
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 72

I think you are not making sufficient allowance for the different preferences people have. Some people seek mainly their own comfort. But some are attracted by danger, by novelty and by hardship. Many are motivated by the significance of what they are doing. Think! Establishing a beachhead for the human race on another planet!

Personally, I am probably closer to your line of thinking. I am afraid that I like my comfort too much to be a colonist on Mars. But you need to face the possibility that many of these other people have thought about it and they still want to go. Out of a population of billions there must be millons who would. We have a name for those kind of people. They're called pioneers.

Well said billh, the word pioneer isn't just to identify a group of people living off the frontier. The word serves as a definition of character; they are people who relish independence. They enjoy placing themselves in unfamiliar territory to challenge themselves to thrive off new environments. They just think differently about what they perceive in the world, as many in this thread have stated before.
Space is worth it God Damnit!

Offline MP99

It is possible that Musk and Zubrin are bold visionaries who genuinely want to save humanity. It is also possible that they are the latest in a long line of ego-driven fanatics selling their apocalytic vision of the future.

They're just excited about going themselves - and nothing wrong with that! Every other justification is secondary.

cheers, Martin

Offline ArbitraryConstant

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
  • Liked: 628
  • Likes Given: 311
It is possible that Musk and Zubrin are bold visionaries who genuinely want to save humanity. It is also possible that they are the latest in a long line of ego-driven fanatics selling their apocalytic vision of the future.
Musk has actually said he thinks our run on Earth is likely to be tens of thousands of years. When he talks about risk mitigation, it's from the consequences being huge, not the probability being high.

Is any sort of ISRU (besides air for breathing) used in Antarctica? Is even their water flown in? I suspect that we have a bit of basic research to do in ISRU before it's ready for prime time.
Sure.

I wouldn't be surprised if we could get a mostly closed system with food within the next ~20 years. Might not be a balanced diet (people would need supplements), but you'd be able to get most of your calories.

I'm not sure I see the problem. Even Musk on his optimistic days isn't suggesting faster than that.
« Last Edit: 08/14/2012 11:35 pm by ArbitraryConstant »

Offline Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
  • Liked: 253
  • Likes Given: 457

Musk has actually said he thinks our run on Earth is likely to be tens of thousands of years. When he talks about risk mitigation, it's from the consequences being huge, not the probability being high.



A self sufficient Mars or lunar colony would be good insurance against a dark age.
The last one was a thousand year setback.


I wouldn't be surprised if we could get a mostly closed system with food within the next ~20 years. Might not be a balanced diet (people would need supplements), but you'd be able to get most of your calories.

I'm not sure I see the problem. Even Musk on his optimistic days isn't suggesting faster than that.

Really would depend on what plants and animals you bring and how much space you got.
Of course nothing resembling full closed loop won't happen until base construction is well under way.
It's not happening on the first few missions.

Plants have this really convenient thing called seeds so even large species of trees would be easy to bring over when there's room for them.

But I think some of the most useful animals to bring early on would be a fish called tilapia,chickens, and rabbits.
Once the colony is larger then bigger live stock can be introduced.
« Last Edit: 08/15/2012 01:27 am by Patchouli »

Offline Warren Platts

I would also recommend a milk cow or two. If you have sheep, you can make your own wool garments as well.

@ MATTBLAK if you need a pdf and you can't just "save as" a pdf, I recommend "do-pdf" from dopdf.com--it's free and it works great.
"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."--Leonardo Da Vinci

Offline neilh

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2365
  • Pasadena, CA
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 149
I would also recommend a milk cow or two. If you have sheep, you can make your own wool garments as well.

@ MATTBLAK if you need a pdf and you can't just "save as" a pdf, I recommend "do-pdf" from dopdf.com--it's free and it works great.

spirulina seems like a likely first step
Someone is wrong on the Internet.
http://xkcd.com/386/

Offline Robert Thompson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1177
  • Liked: 101
  • Likes Given: 658
There are 10,000,000 millionaires on the planet. ... Keep in mind, the average millionaire is in his 50s and 20% of them are retired.

For those who are older and shy of the fitness requirements, yet still interested in this general collective legacy, would some kind of sponsorship model work? Adopt-an-astronaut?

Offline IRobot

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1312
  • Portugal & Germany
  • Liked: 310
  • Likes Given: 272
This notion that humans have to become a "multi-planetary" species sounds so nutty to me. Scientists don't ascribe to apocalytic visions based on bad 1990's Hollywood films. They develop theories on the basis of rational thought and empirical data, things which The Mars Society cult seems to care little about.
Want to talk about science? Fine.

1) In 5 billions years the earth will be swallowed by the sun.
2) There is a massive extinction roughly every 70 million years.
3) Earth's resources will eventually be exhausted, probably in the next 200 years.
4) Overpopulation
5) Economic stagnation due to population saturation and lack of resources

Will any of them occur on your lifetime? Most likely not. You must be very selfish for not thinking about your children's future.

Offline Robert Thompson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1177
  • Liked: 101
  • Likes Given: 658
1) In 5 billions years the earth will be swallowed by the sun.
Ward and Brownlee find 500 million years to ocean 'boil', due to the sun's natural growth in luminosity.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
I would have thought WWII was more than enough reason to not want to be on this world the next time it happens.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Dalhousie

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2766
  • Liked: 780
  • Likes Given: 1131
Well; I'll keep polishing it. But I know there will be criticism when it doesn't have somebodies pet technology - "What?! No propellant depots, no SEP, no large nuclear reactors, no large-scale propellant ISRU, no large six person crews, no 1000km range crew Rovers, no re-usable launchers and Mars Cycler re-usable vehicles? And chemical propulsion only?!"

of course.  But so long as your numbers are evidence based and add up, people can say what they like.  You don't do this stuff to tick everyone's boxes, you do it to make a viable contribution.

If people want to include their pet technology, let them come up with their own study and show that it is useful.

Quote
I also have a feeling that my mass figures are optimistic here and there.

That is why it is always good to have a margin say 20%

Quote
Some may also object to the Apollo-style paradigm of throwing away modules and returning to Earth merely with one re-entry capsule, the crew and some rocks & regolith.

Again, let them.  If they want to have resuable items they can do their own study. 

Quote
But my mission design is merely an extrapolation of upgraded Space X hardware, and using a modular architecture that removes expensive, new technologies from the critical path to funding and thus mission success. Because as we all know - No bucks; no Buck Rogers. And being modular means that new technologies and hardware can be phased in gradually to increase capability and efficiency and also increase crew size.

This and other semi-austere mission designs would never mean to be permanent. After a decade of several long surface sortie missions, a site for a base be settled on and mission modules could no longer be discarded after just one, 18 month use. Crew sizes would increase and more powerful pressurized crew Rovers would be needed.

No argument from me!

You mentioned that the quality of the figures was keeping you down.  I suggest you get a basic graphics package, there are lots out there, and draw your own.  It does not have to be artistic, it just as to be workable and scaled right.

JBIS is one place to publish it, so is The Mars Journal.  There are others.
Apologies in advance for any lack of civility - it's unintended

Offline ArbitraryConstant

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
  • Liked: 628
  • Likes Given: 311
Really would depend on what plants and animals you bring and how much space you got.
I'm thinking start with algae paste and go from there. Start with getting life support as closed as you can with the first few people.

Chickens and sheep won't make the difference for real self sufficiency. That means industrialization, industry that can make everything it needs locally, meaning everything up to computer chips and stuff.

Offline Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
  • Liked: 253
  • Likes Given: 457
I would also recommend a milk cow or two. If you have sheep, you can make your own wool garments as well.

@ MATTBLAK if you need a pdf and you can't just "save as" a pdf, I recommend "do-pdf" from dopdf.com--it's free and it works great.

Bring pygmy goats they're a lot smaller and can eat crop waste.

But the first colonists likely will have to settle for fish,fake meat made from soy and mushrooms, and freeze dried meat and dairy from Earth for most of their protein needs.
Important food plants sweet potatoes,corn,wheat,soy,tomatoes,squash,cucumbers,strawberries,blue berries,various herbs etc.
With these it should be possible to make some varied dishes as food is about more then subsistence.
Eating should not be a task but an enjoyable activity or moral will fall and the colony will fail.
I'd also look into bringing some non food plants such as hemp not the stuff you smoke but the variety you make rope and paper from.

« Last Edit: 08/15/2012 02:47 am by Patchouli »

Offline dcporter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 881
  • Liked: 266
  • Likes Given: 422
This thread has taken a turn for the delightful-but-vaguely-OT with talk of algae paste and pygmy goats.  There's a whole forum for discussing in detail all sorts of advanced concepts.  Let's keep this thread clean for discussion of Elon's specific window?
« Last Edit: 08/15/2012 02:48 am by dcporter »

Offline Idiomatic

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 165
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Sending prisoners ala Australia makes no sense. If you are willing to spend $ to get people to Mars, the number of willing participants will be in the many millions.

Offline spectre9

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2403
  • Australia
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 68
Pressurised domes on Mars would be awesome.

Watch out for the flying chickens though.  8)

The Martian atmosphere only gets better when people go there are start adding to it. It's a dead planet because it's in the dead zone but humans have the ability to add to it by causing natural out gassing and getting a greenhouse effect kick started. Oceans and lakes would form on the surface for the first time in millions perhaps billions of years.

There will be a few other tricks involved like genetically modified forests producing oxygen. I can only imagine how tall trees on Mars would get.

People would eventually wander outside their domes with simple oxygen masks and animals will roam outdoors.

From there a human presence would keep this planet alive. Mars and the human race entwined as one in a loving relationship cradling each other. The once red planet now a beautiful paradise the likes of which would never have been possible without those invaders from outer space.
« Last Edit: 08/15/2012 06:39 am by spectre9 »

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
It's a dead planet because it's in the dead zone

I assume you mean it's not in the habitable zone of our star... and btw, it is actually.

Mars is most likely without a thick nitrogen atmosphere because it doesn't have a strong magnetic field anymore, for whatever reason.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline MATTBLAK

  • Elite Veteran & 'J.A.F.A'
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5362
  • 'Space Cadets' Let us; UNITE!! (crickets chirping)
  • New Zealand
  • Liked: 2239
  • Likes Given: 3883
I would also recommend a milk cow or two. If you have sheep, you can make your own wool garments as well.

@ MATTBLAK if you need a pdf and you can't just "save as" a pdf, I recommend "do-pdf" from dopdf.com--it's free and it works great.

Thanks for the several suggestions for PDF creators, guys. I've taken care of that now.
"Those who can't, Blog".   'Space Cadets' of the World - Let us UNITE!! (crickets chirping)

Offline majormajor42

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 531
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 230
This notion that humans have to become a "multi-planetary" species sounds so nutty to me. Scientists don't ascribe to apocalytic visions based on bad 1990's Hollywood films. They develop theories on the basis of rational thought and empirical data, things which The Mars Society cult seems to care little about.

Global warming?...
Asteroid impacts?...

It is possible that Musk and Zubrin are bold visionaries who genuinely want to save humanity. It is also possible that they are the latest in a long line of ego-driven fanatics selling their apocalytic vision of the future. Just because they wrap themselves in the veneer of "science" and the "space program" doesn't make their ideas less ridiculous...or dangerous.

That's a fairly strong anti-HSF stance for this forum. But I'm sure it represent a large portion of the way people may think out there. I'll counter by saying that Elon also speaks of human evolution, biologically and socially, and the giant leap that becoming multi-planetary would be. Even without the disaster threat, it should remain a goal. And Mars would end up being just a first or second step toward the beyond in the long run, especially if Mars settlement is done in a sustainable fashion with ISRU and fuel depots.

Global warming is a separate issue. Neither Musk or Zubrin are saying that we need to escape Earth because of GW. I feel it is a straw man to say the least. There are many other reasons for going.

The asteroid disaster porn of the 90's did perhaps help the populace get congress to consider this fate. As a result almost all of the 10 mile wide dinosaur killing, major extinction event producing asteroids have been tracked. What remains are smaller city killing wanderers. Once again, I don't think Musk or Zubrin are using this as a primary motivator. I think we are still at least a few hundred years from humanity being able to survive if something devastating were to happen on Earth. But if someone does want to use that as there eventual argument for going, I guess we need to start somewhere.


I think Musk and Zubrin are guys who also saw many of the same movies, and read the same sci-fi books as most of the rest of us here. They want to make these dreams a reality. There is nothing"dangerous" about that.
...water is life and it is out there, where we intend to go. I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man or machine on a body such as the Moon and harvest a cup of water for a human to drink or process into fuel for their craft.

Offline ArbitraryConstant

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
  • Liked: 628
  • Likes Given: 311
That's a fairly strong anti-HSF stance for this forum. But I'm sure it represent a large portion of the way people may think out there.
Speaking only for myself, it's not anti-HSF, it's anti-bad excuses for HSF.

I'm wildly pro-HSF, so I create a high burden for advocating it, lest my bias cause me to rationalize something that doesn't really make sense.

If I were anti-HSF lower costs would be annoying. But I'm not, so I see it as very important progress for something I really want to see.  ;D

Offline Mader Levap

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 976
  • Liked: 447
  • Likes Given: 561
It is possible that Musk and Zubrin are bold visionaries who genuinely want to save humanity. It is also possible that they are the latest in a long line of ego-driven fanatics selling their apocalytic vision of the future. Just because they wrap themselves in the veneer of "science" and the "space program" doesn't make their ideas less ridiculous...or dangerous.
Let say they fail miserably in their trying to make human multiplanetary species. What is exactly dangerous? Are you suggesting something?
Be successful.  Then tell the haters to (BLEEP) off. - deruch
...and if you have failure, tell it anyway.

Offline GalacticIntruder

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 512
  • Pet Peeve:I hate the word Downcomer. Ban it.
  • Huntsville, AL
  • Liked: 247
  • Likes Given: 70
I think the only reason anyone would disapprove of SpaceX HTM plans are if they are taxpayer funded, which most of SpaceX so far, has been. Whenever it is a public or public/private venture you get the usual debates, mostly ideological and not very rational. 

Don't know what their plans are but I can't see SpaceX becoming all private commercial, most large US corporation are not, but I do see them more like Boeing and less like number 1 taxpayer hog, LM. (As in percent of revenues [B2G])
"And now the Sun will fade, All we are is all we made." Breaking Benjamin

Offline aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3629
  • 92129
  • Liked: 1146
  • Likes Given: 360
Another reason for disapproval will be if the plans result in a high probability that most travelers will (sooner or later) die an unnatural death on Mars. I think that social pressure resulting from that situation would be unbearable for our politicians. The government couldn't afford to rescue them so the program would be legally halted.
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
  • Liked: 253
  • Likes Given: 457
Another reason for disapproval will be if the plans result in a high probability that most travelers will (sooner or later) die an unnatural death on Mars. I think that social pressure resulting from that situation would be unbearable for our politicians. The government couldn't afford to rescue them so the program would be legally halted.

If we give up because the first few die then our priorities are very messed up.
Thousands of people die in wars that are often purely political.
« Last Edit: 08/15/2012 09:25 pm by Patchouli »

Offline Robert Thompson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1177
  • Liked: 101
  • Likes Given: 658
Another reason for disapproval will be if the plans result in a high probability that most travelers will (sooner or later) die an unnatural death on Mars. I think that social pressure resulting from that situation would be unbearable for our politicians. The government couldn't afford to rescue them so the program would be legally halted.

This rings like a Berlin Wall, if efforts are private with full disclosure to all participants.

Offline Andrew_W

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 754
  • Rotorua, New Zealand
    • Profiles of our future in space
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 12
Simple organisms can exist in environments in which very small amounts of resources are available, complex organisms require greater resources to be available for them to survive.

This same rule applies to civilizations, primitive societies required little in the way of resources, our civilization, in comparison, requires vast quantities of very concentrated energy, energy that can be produced for a very high EROI.

And that's what there has to be for a colony to be self-sustaining on Mars - or Antarctica.

If the infrastructure required to support each person is too vast, it'll all fall over because each person is physically unable to maintain their share of it.
« Last Edit: 08/16/2012 01:58 am by Andrew_W »
I confess that in 1901 I said to my brother Orville that man would not fly for fifty years.
Wilbur Wright

Offline majormajor42

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 531
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 230
That's a fairly strong anti-HSF stance for this forum. But I'm sure it represent a large portion of the way people may think out there.
Speaking only for myself, it's not anti-HSF, it's anti-bad excuses for HSF.

I'm wildly pro-HSF, so I create a high burden for advocating it, lest my bias cause me to rationalize something that doesn't really make sense.

If I were anti-HSF lower costs would be annoying. But I'm not, so I see it as very important progress for something I really want to see.  ;D

I completely agree that those were bad excuses. I even tried to reject them somewhat too. Perhaps I could have been clearer. But what the prior poster did was use those two reasons, that according to him are the basis for Musk's and Zubrin's argument for Mars, and then he puts them down so therefor we (according to him) should not pursue Mars/multi-planetary settlement. He says it's "nutty". I disagree. You, and I, and Musk and Zubrin (and Greason) have better reasons for pursuing HSF settlement goals that are harder to tear down.
...water is life and it is out there, where we intend to go. I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man or machine on a body such as the Moon and harvest a cup of water for a human to drink or process into fuel for their craft.

Offline gospacex

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3024
  • Liked: 543
  • Likes Given: 604
This notion that humans have to become a "multi-planetary" species sounds so nutty to me.

Nobody will force _you_ to board a Mars-bound rocket.

It is possible that Musk and Zubrin are bold visionaries who genuinely want to save humanity. It is also possible that they are the latest in a long line of ego-driven fanatics selling their apocalytic vision of the future.

They are not selling _apocalyptic_ vision, They are selling a vision where humanity expands to the infinity.

Quote
Just because they wrap themselves in the veneer of "science" and the "space program" doesn't make their ideas less ridiculous...or dangerous.

Going to Mars is dangerous?? Well, it is dangerous for those who are going, but for naysayers like you it's dangerous how exactly? You are in danger of being embarrassed, perhaps, when they succeed and everyone laughs at you.

Offline jnc

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 277
  • Yorktown, Virginia
    • Home page
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Nobody will force _you_ to board a Mars-bound rocket.

Although there are definitely some people I would love to be able to force onto a Mars-bound rocket... :)

Noel
"America Needs - Space to Grow"

(old bumper sticker)

Offline Robert Thompson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1177
  • Liked: 101
  • Likes Given: 658
Reply #99, exemplary courageous restraint.  8)

Offline douglas100

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2177
  • Liked: 227
  • Likes Given: 105
Simple organisms can exist in environments in which very small amounts of resources are available, complex organisms require greater resources to be available for them to survive.

This same rule applies to civilizations, primitive societies required little in the way of resources, our civilization, in comparison, requires vast quantities of very concentrated energy, energy that can be produced for a very high EROI.

And that's what there has to be for a colony to be self-sustaining on Mars - or Antarctica.

If the infrastructure required to support each person is too vast, it'll all fall over because each person is physically unable to maintain their share of it.

The infrastructure question was one I was going to bring up before, but you've expressed it better than I was going to.

Rather than energy, I was wondering about the number of different skills that would be required to make a Mars colony self sufficient. Many different technical skills would be needed: mining, extraction, repair of complex equipment, manufacture from indigenous raw materials, to name a few. And that would mean quite a large population (I've no idea how large) even with extensive multi-skilling and unlimited access to information from Earth.

So I think going from an Antarctic style base, where there is logistical support, to self sufficiency will be a very big step. Given the will and the funding (public or private or a mixture) I think it is quite possible to have humans on Mars this century, but a self sufficient colony--I think that is a lot further away.
Douglas Clark

Offline Dave G

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3231
  • Liked: 2127
  • Likes Given: 2021
This notion that humans have to become a "multi-planetary" species sounds so nutty to me.
Christopher Columbus, the Pilgrims, the pioneers that settled the Western frontier, they were all considered "nutty" in their time, but through the lens of history things look very different.

It is possible that Musk and Zubrin are bold visionaries who genuinely want to save humanity. It is also possible that they are the latest in a long line of ego-driven fanatics selling their apocalytic vision of the future. Just because they wrap themselves in the veneer of "science" and the "space program" doesn't make their ideas less ridiculous...or dangerous.
Musk and Zubrin are both looking to do something historically significant with their lives.  And yes, what they propose is dangerous, but I think that’s a good thing.  Our culture has become far too risk averse.  Great things happen when people are willing to take risks.

Offline charliem

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 147
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 0
Looking rationally at the question? Should we or should we not go to live on Mars?

Try reasoning as much as you want but in the end it won't matter.

As a species, we humans are not rational. ...  ;D

Like always in the past we are going to try simply because Mars is there, and because we can. And if some of us die trying so be it.

It's in our genes. Only thing that could stop us is physical impossibility.

There's kind of a "wanderer gene" in us. It's a recessive gene, so not everyone feels that urge, but some will, and that's all that's necessary to start the movement. A small percentage of us will want to go no matter what. Even if the chances of survival were only 50-50, I'm sure there would be voluntaries.

From all the species of the genus homo we were the ones that colonized our world faster and farther. It seems that Neanderthals, Erectus, and other, where never that adventurous.

And once there we'll see if we can survive and prosper.

Musk and Zubrin have that "gene", and in them it's very active.

P.D. I say "gene" (with quotation marks) because I don't know if this is a trait hidden in our genome or not, but it would not surprise me at all if one day someone discovered that it was.

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6334
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4207
  • Likes Given: 2
>.
Musk and Zubrin have that "gene", and in them it's very active.

P.D. I say "gene" (with quotation marks) because I don't know if this is a trait hidden in our genome or not,
>

Maybe one of the 'curiosity' genes that code for dopamine, and that can effect the dentate gyrus in the hippocampus. One of its tricks is it can make people more likely to seek out new things, places etc.
« Last Edit: 08/16/2012 05:31 pm by docmordrid »
DM

Offline Andrew_W

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 754
  • Rotorua, New Zealand
    • Profiles of our future in space
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 12

The infrastructure question was one I was going to bring up before, but you've expressed it better than I was going to.


Thanks!

It's all a bit like asking the crew of Biosphere 2 to build that huge structure (in a far more hostile environment than Arizona) and then to maintain is indefinitely while still doing all the house work, farming, etc.
I confess that in 1901 I said to my brother Orville that man would not fly for fifty years.
Wilbur Wright

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115

The infrastructure question was one I was going to bring up before, but you've expressed it better than I was going to.


Thanks!

It's all a bit like asking the crew of Biosphere 2 to build that huge structure (in a far more hostile environment than Arizona) and then to maintain is indefinitely while still doing all the house work, farming, etc.
This is why machinery is essential.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Tony Ostinato

  • Member
  • Posts: 64
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
mankind is like a baby stuck in its crib full of dirty diapers.

people explore to find new lands because people are so annoying that it makes you wanna travel to the ends of the earth to avoid them, and now thats not even far enough. nothing will ever be far enough.

and you know you dont need skill, all you need is money.


mars will be colonized, slowly, to a certain point where the martians will complain about paying taxes back to earth and there will be an independence war.

telling the future is as easy as reading the past.

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10974
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1257
  • Likes Given: 724
Quote from: Carl Sagan
Or maybe we're on Mars because of the magnificent science that can be done there - the gates of the wonder world are opening in our time.

Sales of hip boots continue to grow.

Inspirational stuff falls on many a deaf ear in the third world, where the next meal is in question; where the next falling bomb may be on one's house; where the next child kidnapped by rebels is one's child.

There's no shortage of volunteers in theory, but I would say there's a shortage of qualified volunteers.  I'm all for the Mars Society, and I'm glad that Mr. Musk took time out of his schedule to talk to them.

It's time to start making the attempt to colonize off-planet.

Does everybody realize that the ship's library might contain novels by Ayn Rand?
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline StephenB

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 282
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 201

The infrastructure question was one I was going to bring up before, but you've expressed it better than I was going to.


Thanks!

It's all a bit like asking the crew of Biosphere 2 to build that huge structure (in a far more hostile environment than Arizona) and then to maintain is indefinitely while still doing all the house work, farming, etc.
This is why machinery is essential.
I'm hoping that technologies like 3D printing will start making more and more things possible to build on site. Once it starts becoming really mature and capable, the major value added item is programming, and the transport cost of code to Mars is just the cost of transmission.

Offline Andrew_W

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 754
  • Rotorua, New Zealand
    • Profiles of our future in space
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 12

The infrastructure question was one I was going to bring up before, but you've expressed it better than I was going to.


Thanks!

It's all a bit like asking the crew of Biosphere 2 to build that huge structure (in a far more hostile environment than Arizona) and then to maintain is indefinitely while still doing all the house work, farming, etc.
This is why machinery is essential.

Machinery also has to be maintained, fueled, repaired. Every piece of additional infrastructure brings both labor saving, and labor and energy consuming aspects.
How about we just build a big nuclear power station so we'll have plenty of power? Well, power from nuclear energy costs the consumer here on Earth, its cost is going to be far higher on Mars, and the requirements of each person will be far higher. (the dollar measurement is simply a reflection of the inputs to produce a good or service).
I confess that in 1901 I said to my brother Orville that man would not fly for fifty years.
Wilbur Wright

Offline Idiomatic

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 165
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Mars won't be self sustaining for a long time, if ever. But then, neither is New York City. People there complain about travel time too. It'll just be more extreme.

How about this... Mars: Tax Haven.

All the billionaires will move there for the tax dodge.

Realistically, we know how Martians would be treated. Using international waters as a guide. But there has never been a large productive group living in international waters so the dynamics may shift. Especially if a Martian invents something important.

Offline douglas100

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2177
  • Liked: 227
  • Likes Given: 105

I'm hoping that technologies like 3D printing will start making more and more things possible to build on site. Once it starts becoming really mature and capable, the major value added item is programming, and the transport cost of code to Mars is just the cost of transmission.

Yes, I think 3D printing and similar techniques show promise, but what you are describing in your second sentence is some kind of universal constructor. Like feeding some Martian regolith into the machine, running the code and out pops a reactor fuel rod, or anything you want. Such a machine would greatly reduce the skill set needed by the population to maintain the colony. But I think such machines are a long way off (if possible at all). And until then you are going to need a large variety of technical skills to process, manufacture and fix things, just to stay alive.  And that would mean you would need quite a large population to make the colony self sufficient.
Douglas Clark

Offline starsilk

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 686
  • Denver
  • Liked: 268
  • Likes Given: 115
Rather than energy, I was wondering about the number of different skills that would be required to make a Mars colony self sufficient. Many different technical skills would be needed: mining, extraction, repair of complex equipment, manufacture from indigenous raw materials, to name a few. And that would mean quite a large population (I've no idea how large) even with extensive multi-skilling and unlimited access to information from Earth.

there was a reasonably recent study on that - sorry, don't have a reference at the moment. the numbers were far apart - low thousands for sufficient genetic diversity to avoid inbreeding, but a million or more to maintain sufficient specialization (of people's skills) that our current level of technology could be maintained.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Rather than energy, I was wondering about the number of different skills that would be required to make a Mars colony self sufficient. Many different technical skills would be needed: mining, extraction, repair of complex equipment, manufacture from indigenous raw materials, to name a few. And that would mean quite a large population (I've no idea how large) even with extensive multi-skilling and unlimited access to information from Earth.

there was a reasonably recent study on that - sorry, don't have a reference at the moment. the numbers were far apart - low thousands for sufficient genetic diversity to avoid inbreeding, but a million or more to maintain sufficient specialization (of people's skills) that our current level of technology could be maintained.
I really doubt a million is required. We don't need iPhones on Mars. I also think specialization is a little over-rated. We'd all have to be handymen and handywomen on Mars. I know someone who builds rockets, makes lab equipment, integrates and designs computer systems (storage area networks, IP networks, servers, desktops, etc), gardens, smelts metals, designs and builds (solders and wire-wraps) electronic circuits, mows grass, bakes, cooks, does plumbing, cleans, knits, sews, roofs houses, does carpentry, does minor surgery, fixes cars and bikes, harvests and prepares natural rubber, makes stuff out of plastic, programs code to simulate supersonic conditions, builds lasers, and does quantum physics. As Heinlein says, specialization is for insects.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline ArbitraryConstant

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
  • Liked: 628
  • Likes Given: 311
Rather than energy, I was wondering about the number of different skills that would be required to make a Mars colony self sufficient. Many different technical skills would be needed: mining, extraction, repair of complex equipment, manufacture from indigenous raw materials, to name a few. And that would mean quite a large population (I've no idea how large) even with extensive multi-skilling and unlimited access to information from Earth.

there was a reasonably recent study on that - sorry, don't have a reference at the moment. the numbers were far apart - low thousands for sufficient genetic diversity to avoid inbreeding, but a million or more to maintain sufficient specialization (of people's skills) that our current level of technology could be maintained.

I've wondered about that a lot. If you ever dig that up I'd appreciate it if you could post.


I really doubt a million is required. We don't need iPhones on Mars.
But we will need computers.

I think the industrial base to make them in the first place is a bigger deal than assembling them in various ways.
« Last Edit: 08/16/2012 11:22 pm by ArbitraryConstant »

Offline starsilk

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 686
  • Denver
  • Liked: 268
  • Likes Given: 115
Rather than energy, I was wondering about the number of different skills that would be required to make a Mars colony self sufficient. Many different technical skills would be needed: mining, extraction, repair of complex equipment, manufacture from indigenous raw materials, to name a few. And that would mean quite a large population (I've no idea how large) even with extensive multi-skilling and unlimited access to information from Earth.

there was a reasonably recent study on that - sorry, don't have a reference at the moment. the numbers were far apart - low thousands for sufficient genetic diversity to avoid inbreeding, but a million or more to maintain sufficient specialization (of people's skills) that our current level of technology could be maintained.

I've wondered about that a lot. If you ever dig that up I'd appreciate it if you could post.

found this for genetic viability.

http://www.prismnet.com/~thrash/viable.html

this is not exactly a scholarly article, but comes to similar conclusions - about a million people to maintain the technological status quo:

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/stellarcolony.php

I'll keep looking for the actual article I read...

Offline starsilk

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 686
  • Denver
  • Liked: 268
  • Likes Given: 115
Rather than energy, I was wondering about the number of different skills that would be required to make a Mars colony self sufficient. Many different technical skills would be needed: mining, extraction, repair of complex equipment, manufacture from indigenous raw materials, to name a few. And that would mean quite a large population (I've no idea how large) even with extensive multi-skilling and unlimited access to information from Earth.

there was a reasonably recent study on that - sorry, don't have a reference at the moment. the numbers were far apart - low thousands for sufficient genetic diversity to avoid inbreeding, but a million or more to maintain sufficient specialization (of people's skills) that our current level of technology could be maintained.
I really doubt a million is required. We don't need iPhones on Mars. I also think specialization is a little over-rated. We'd all have to be handymen and handywomen on Mars. I know someone who builds rockets, makes lab equipment, integrates and designs computer systems (storage area networks, IP networks, servers, desktops, etc), gardens, smelts metals, designs and builds (solders and wire-wraps) electronic circuits, mows grass, bakes, cooks, does plumbing, cleans, knits, sews, roofs houses, does carpentry, does minor surgery, fixes cars and bikes, harvests and prepares natural rubber, makes stuff out of plastic, programs code to simulate supersonic conditions, builds lasers, and does quantum physics. As Heinlein says, specialization is for insects.

but suppose your renaissance man has an unfortunate accident? the point is not that we can discard this piece of technology, or that piece of arcane knowledge. the point is that without sufficient critical mass of population (and skills, knowledge), it becomes a losing game to maintain the level of technology as natural attrition occurs.

also many skills are not the sort of thing that can be done 'part time'. they need serious training and full time work.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Some computers could be made with significantly less than a million people. Heck, if you can manufacture wires and insulation and sheet metal, you can make relays, with which you can make a crude computer. A vacuum tube triode can be made rather easily with some basic glass-blowing skills (or alternatively, a jar and some epoxy) and some appropriate wire. Even making semiconductor devices isn't out of the question at a small-scale:


I'd put the minimum number at down in the 100,000-200,000 range, with appropriate techniques aimed at lowering the threshold to achieving self-reliance, things like 3d printing and lathes/multi-machines, etc (which are designed to be largely manufactured by copies of themselves). It helps that Mars has tons and tons of scrap iron all over its surface.

Any colony on Mars would be trading in things like computer chips with Earth. There's no question that state of the art computer chips have a very large footprint. For computer chips, it'd probably be cheaper to get them from Earth (per transistor) than from Mars, even after the capability to produce semiconductor devices is developed on Mars (i.e. for power electronics). Think about how many transistors you can fit in a kilogram... (perhaps hundreds of trillions, at current technology... Probably more than a quadrillion by the time this is relevant). That's enough for hundreds of billions of microcontrollers (not counting the power circuitry, etc), which could provide for the needs of a small Mars colony for millions of years. So, just bring a ton of chips with you, and you won't actually ever need to get to the point of building a modern CPU fab. Power electronics, sure, but no need to make CPUs. And vacuum tube technology works for doing power electronics (though not ideal), and semiconductors can be done as well. I even saw a guy who made his own small CRT.

It's not easy, but it can be done.

But it's also not as if it'd only be one person learning how to do this stuff. Many people can--and do--wear lots of hats. And the Internet has made that a lot easier, too.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline beancounter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Perth, Western Australia
  • Liked: 106
  • Likes Given: 172
Yes, I think this whole colonisation thing is being approached from the wrong angle. Really due to the distances and costs involved in getting people and supplies to Mars, you should be concentrating on looking for the most efficient and effective way of building your colony and it's resources.
That doensn't necessarily imply the latest technolgy.  Simpler methods may prove cheaper and more efficient.  One thing about technology is that as it becomes more complex, the underlying supporting structures likewise become more complex with increasingly wide skill sets and so on.
Simpler may in this case be more efficient and effective.
Beancounter from DownUnder

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Some computers could be made with significantly less than a million people. Heck, if you can manufacture wires and insulation and sheet metal, you can make relays, with which you can make a crude computer. A vacuum tube triode can be made rather easily with some basic glass-blowing skills (or alternatively, a jar and some epoxy) and some appropriate wire. Even making semiconductor devices isn't out of the question at a small-scale.

Laser lithography systems can do micron resolution semiconductor development on a desktop.. and they're cheap enough for amateurs to buy.

If you're a DIY purist, see the attached.


Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Andrew_W

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 754
  • Rotorua, New Zealand
    • Profiles of our future in space
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 12
I don't see why a large population - beyond 10,000 would be required for near self sufficiency in skills, information is one thing that technology makes very cheap.

My concern is more with the construction and maintenance of the physical systems and structures a colony would require.

On Earth, earth moving gear can get flogged to the point that a professional operator would replace it after only 3 - 5 years, I suspect that the operational life would be even less on Mars. Plastic greenhouse covers only last 5 years on Earth, no doubt far less in the higher UV environment of Mars, and if each of the colonist needs 3000m^2 of greenhouse to feed themselves, what do you use to allow illumination of the crop?

If doing these things, growing crops, building homes, maintaining machinery, were as easy as some seem to imaging, well, here in the benign environment of Earth, with free air, water, sunlight, and cheap energy from fossil fuels, we'd all be living in mansions and only working a few hours a week.
I confess that in 1901 I said to my brother Orville that man would not fly for fifty years.
Wilbur Wright

Offline KelvinZero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4286
  • Liked: 887
  • Likes Given: 201
I don't see why a large population - beyond 10,000 would be required for near self sufficiency in skills, information is one thing that technology makes very cheap.

My concern is more with the construction and maintenance of the physical systems and structures a colony would require.

On Earth, earth moving gear can get flogged to the point that a professional operator would replace it after only 3 - 5 years, I suspect that the operational life would be even less on Mars. Plastic greenhouse covers only last 5 years on Earth, no doubt far less in the higher UV environment of Mars, and if each of the colonist needs 3000m^2 of greenhouse to feed themselves, what do you use to allow illumination of the crop?

If doing these things, growing crops, building homes, maintaining machinery, were as easy as some seem to imaging, well, here in the benign environment of Earth, with free air, water, sunlight, and cheap energy from fossil fuels, we'd all be living in mansions and only working a few hours a week.

The reason we do not work only a few hours a week probably has more to do with competition. For example, 50 or so years ago only one parent worked for a salary and one looked after the home. Now we often have the situation that both parents get salaries yet still struggle to make ends meet. We wuz screwed! Likewise we probably could survive easily on 3 day working weeks and with cars that only drove 30km/hour if we legislated against anyone from working longer or driving faster. It would be a different lifestyle but I doubt it would force us back to horse and carriage.

We use massive scales of production on earth, often involving multiple nations, or merely requiring multiple markets to justify that infrastructure. This doesn't prove massive scale is necessary to build a car or an iPhone or especially to grow food, just that it is somewhat cheaper. This is enough to kill any alternative on earth.

I would very much like to see someone as successful and inspiring as Elon Musk pushing these self-sufficiency technologies. 90% of what it takes to settle mars could and should be done here on earth by demonstrating communities with very little exchange with the rest of the planet. For example domed little IT communities in some part of alaska previously considered uninhabitable. I think I would actually quite enjoy that lifestyle: Temperature control, a mall and internet inside and all in walking distance.. stark wilderness outside. One good road or rail passing though.

Offline guckyfan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7438
  • Germany
  • Liked: 2332
  • Likes Given: 2891
Yes, I think this whole colonisation thing is being approached from the wrong angle. Really due to the distances and costs involved in getting people and supplies to Mars, you should be concentrating on looking for the most efficient and effective way of building your colony and it's resources.
That doensn't necessarily imply the latest technolgy.  Simpler methods may prove cheaper and more efficient.  One thing about technology is that as it becomes more complex, the underlying supporting structures likewise become more complex with increasingly wide skill sets and so on.
Simpler may in this case be more efficient and effective.

All true. But to maintain a self sufficient technology supported population you need all the work done associated with it. Beginning from mining the mineral ressources to manufacture of all kinds of materials and building the machines that are needed for everything from tools to computers and medicine. The whole infrastructure. It is not only retaining all the skills but actually doing all the work.

Unlike on earth failure of one single step will kill the whole colony. 1 Million people seems at the low end of estimates for me. Fortunately it would not be required to ferry 1 million people to mars as humans are a self reproducing resource.

You cannot count on earth providing anything at all if the colony is to be a failsafe for disaster on earth. In reality I think mankind on earth can survive a nuclear war, a super volcano outburst or a asteroid impact. The same disaster would likely kill the mars colony as contact with earth is lost.

Offline Andrew_W

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 754
  • Rotorua, New Zealand
    • Profiles of our future in space
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 12

The reason we do not work only a few hours a week probably has more to do with competition. For example, 50 or so years ago only one parent worked for a salary and one looked after the home. Now we often have the situation that both parents get salaries yet still struggle to make ends meet. We wuz screwed! Likewise we probably could survive easily on 3 day working weeks and with cars that only drove 30km/hour if we legislated against anyone from working longer or driving faster. It would be a different lifestyle but I doubt it would force us back to horse and carriage.


My own estimation is that we work no harder now than we did 50 years ago, what's changed is that automation within the home has reduced the domestic workload to the point at which, with the exception of having young kids at home, there are typically ~30 hours less work to do at home, shifting people into the paid labor force combined with technology has simply increased the amount of luxury goods typical households own.

Now, if a society is living in a far more hostile environment like Mars, we can probably agree they wouldn't be able to afford to produce and therefore consume, the amount of luxury goods typical in developed countries today, so the question becomes, how much productivity is there likely to be above simply maintaining the existing essential infrastructure? In my opinion on Mars, without considerable improvements in energy producing systems that allow a far lower real energy cost, the level of productivity would be lower than that required to maintain the existing infrastructure.

Quote
I would very much like to see someone as successful and inspiring as Elon Musk pushing these self-sufficiency technologies. 90% of what it takes to settle mars could and should be done here on earth by demonstrating communities with very little exchange with the rest of the planet. For example domed little IT communities in some part of alaska previously considered uninhabitable. I think I would actually quite enjoy that lifestyle: Temperature control, a mall and internet inside and all in walking distance.. stark wilderness outside. One good road or rail passing though.

I agree entirely, before anyone is foolish enough to talk seriously about Mars colonies they MUST demonstrate the survivability of such a colony on Earth in a realistically similar and equally hostile environment.

That means no using wild animals, no using trees, with everything used either brought in or extracted from the inorganic materials in the environment.

 lives really would depend on it.
« Last Edit: 08/17/2012 08:20 am by Andrew_W »
I confess that in 1901 I said to my brother Orville that man would not fly for fifty years.
Wilbur Wright

Offline jnc

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 277
  • Yorktown, Virginia
    • Home page
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
I think mankind on earth can survive a nuclear war, a super volcano outburst or a asteroid impact. The same disaster would likely kill the mars colony as contact with earth is lost.

Kind of like what happened to the Norse settlements in Greenland...

Noel
"America Needs - Space to Grow"

(old bumper sticker)

Offline KelvinZero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4286
  • Liked: 887
  • Likes Given: 201
I think mankind on earth can survive a nuclear war, a super volcano outburst or a asteroid impact. The same disaster would likely kill the mars colony as contact with earth is lost.

Kind of like what happened to the Norse settlements in Greenland...

Noel


Full self sufficiency to protect the species is a dream for the future. I think most of us are just talking about moderate self sufficiency in the short term.

I have quite a list of reason why it is worth investing in right from the beginning (if settlement is your goal) but its probably going quite off topic for this thread.

I think the on-topic point I wanted to make was how (as others have said) having someone like Elon really transforms the world's perception of space settlement away from a daydream of nerds to something that actually can exist in the real world.

IMO There is room for another Elon, not competing for the same slice of credibility but adding a separate slice, if they were pursuing something like what I imagine was the dream behind Biosphere2. How exactly to sell it I dunno, or I would be that person. But the issues are all becoming more topical and as a consequence lots of interesting new technologies are popping up, such as cities recycling their drinking water. I think the time is ripe for such a person and their success would add another whole dimension of credibility to space settlement.



Offline ArbitraryConstant

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
  • Liked: 628
  • Likes Given: 311
Any colony on Mars would be trading in things like computer chips with Earth. There's no question that state of the art computer chips have a very large footprint. For computer chips, it'd probably be cheaper to get them from Earth (per transistor) than from Mars, even after the capability to produce semiconductor devices is developed on Mars (i.e. for power electronics).
Yes, they'd definitely be one of the last things to be switched to local manufacturing.

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7206
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 806
  • Likes Given: 900
In economic terms, I've always seen Mars as being the R&R base for the astroid mining industry.  Whilst that would be staged from HMO (Phobos, like as not) and EML-2 for delivery to Earth and Luna, the Phobos-based crews would need to have a relatively nearby non-freefall rest stop that isn't six months extra cruise away; Mars would be ideal.
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8906
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 223
In economic terms, I've always seen Mars as being the R&R base for the astroid mining industry.  Whilst that would be staged from HMO (Phobos, like as not) and EML-2 for delivery to Earth and Luna, the Phobos-based crews would need to have a relatively nearby non-freefall rest stop that isn't six months extra cruise away; Mars would be ideal.

That will depend on how much the return delta-v from orbit to Mars costs.

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8906
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 223
Any colony on Mars would be trading in things like computer chips with Earth. There's no question that state of the art computer chips have a very large footprint. For computer chips, it'd probably be cheaper to get them from Earth (per transistor) than from Mars, even after the capability to produce semiconductor devices is developed on Mars (i.e. for power electronics).
Yes, they'd definitely be one of the last things to be switched to local manufacturing.

They may need to reduce the number of different chip types by standardisation.  Use the same power electronics in both cars and lifts.  A single type of microprocessor could be used, possible with more than one make.  EEPROMs can be made on Earth but blown on Mars allowing customising of the circuits.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
considering all the different things you can use an arduino (ie essentially an AVR microcontroller development board), it is pretty easy to use the same chip to do a heck of a lot of different things. and modern microcontrollers all use flash.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline jimvela

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1662
  • Liked: 900
  • Likes Given: 71
modern microcontrollers all use flash.

Modern non-flight, non-rad hard, non-temp rated parts (e.g. wrong for the proposed application) all use flash.

Something like an FPGA implemented LEON would be a better candidate for a general purpose brain box.


Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7206
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 806
  • Likes Given: 900
In economic terms, I've always seen Mars as being the R&R base for the astroid mining industry.  Whilst that would be staged from HMO (Phobos, like as not) and EML-2 for delivery to Earth and Luna, the Phobos-based crews would need to have a relatively nearby non-freefall rest stop that isn't six months extra cruise away; Mars would be ideal.

That will depend on how much the return delta-v from orbit to Mars costs.

Remember ISRU.  At least hypothetically Mars-to-Orbit is 'free' dV as the shuttle can be refuelled on the surface.
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline Archer

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 147
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 3
Low-volume manufacture do not need HUGE infrastructure.

This machine can manufacture a lot of different things:


Add laser/plasma cutting CNC machine-tool and 3d printer and welding robot and you can manufacture almost anything, including spare parts to machine-tools you have.

Modern CNC tools that martian colony have initially can produce plenty of parts for other machines before they wear off beyond repair.
Early 20-th century/late 19-th century machine-tools don't need any electronics to work, but they can produce details like gears or springs and still be fully automated.
With 1930-th technology it is possible to make fully automated production lines - using contacts and coils (relays; ladder logic). And it is pretty simple. Back in Russia I've seen machine tools that were manufactured in 1905 and are still in use. Also I've seen fully automated lines that use contacts and relays only, that are also still in use - and are competitive!

Also don't forget that there is a way to produce goods of higher quality than the machines you have can. It is called "selective assembly" (you need high quality sensors that have to be imported though).

Automation of assembly is much harder, although it would be much easier on Mars because of low gravity.


PS. Economy of the colony is much more difficult question. What the Martians can sell to Earth to pay for imports? (drugs & electronics & and anything else that can not be produced locally) Gold? Wolfram?
The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering. (c) R. A. Heinlein

Offline ArbitraryConstant

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
  • Liked: 628
  • Likes Given: 311
Add laser/plasma cutting CNC machine-tool and 3d printer and welding robot and you can manufacture almost anything, including spare parts to machine-tools you have.
I think that's a trend that will help the effort a lot. A lot of things are moving to just in time manufacturing.

PS. Economy of the colony is much more difficult question. What the Martians can sell to Earth to pay for imports? (drugs & electronics & and anything else that can not be produced locally) Gold? Wolfram?
Given the low gravity and complete inventory of elements compared to the moon it might be an attractive place to manufacture stuff to put in space.

Offline catiare

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 122
  • Miami
  • Liked: 61
  • Likes Given: 42
considering all the different things you can use an arduino (ie essentially an AVR microcontroller development board), it is pretty easy to use the same chip to do a heck of a lot of different things. and modern microcontrollers all use flash.

Or a Raspberry Pi, that could also power a desktop/tablet computer.

Offline Archer

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 147
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 3
i8086 would suit for most of the industrial applications. For redundancy the amount of the processors could be quadrupled. Probably Intel would sell that technology and description of manufacturing process for cheap.
« Last Edit: 08/17/2012 09:19 pm by Archer »
The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering. (c) R. A. Heinlein

Offline jnc

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 277
  • Yorktown, Virginia
    • Home page
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
This machine can manufacture a lot of different things:
Add laser/plasma cutting CNC machine-tool and 3d printer and welding robot and you can manufacture almost anything, including spare parts to machine-tools you have.

Only if you have the right materials: there isn't just 'aluminium', there are many different kinds, each with their own particular materials properties. The stockpile of all the different materials you'd need is huge - and the alternative, a plant to produce them all from raw materials, likewise.

Noel
"America Needs - Space to Grow"

(old bumper sticker)

Offline Archer

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 147
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 3
This machine can manufacture a lot of different things:
Add laser/plasma cutting CNC machine-tool and 3d printer and welding robot and you can manufacture almost anything, including spare parts to machine-tools you have.

Only if you have the right materials: there isn't just 'aluminium', there are many different kinds, each with their own particular materials properties. The stockpile of all the different materials you'd need is huge - and the alternative, a plant to produce them all from raw materials, likewise.

Noel

Yes, that's why I suggest returning to early 20-th century machine-tool technology - when available alloys and metallurgy were very inferior compared to modern ones. But still good enough.
The future is better than the past. Despite the crepehangers, romanticists, and anti-intellectuals, the world steadily grows better because the human mind, applying itself to environment, makes it better. With hands...with tools...with horse sense and science and engineering. (c) R. A. Heinlein

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
This machine can manufacture a lot of different things:
Add laser/plasma cutting CNC machine-tool and 3d printer and welding robot and you can manufacture almost anything, including spare parts to machine-tools you have.

Only if you have the right materials: there isn't just 'aluminium', there are many different kinds, each with their own particular materials properties. The stockpile of all the different materials you'd need is huge - and the alternative, a plant to produce them all from raw materials, likewise.

Noel

sure there are a lot of different alloys, but you can produce many different alloys just by using a different proportion of alloying metals and with different heating treatments. If you can produce any specific alloys, you should be able to produce a range if required. Not only that, but if you are restricted to just a few, that's not a huge problem.

but you will definitely need an organic chemistry lab to produce the different lubricants and polymers. but this isn't an insurmountable challenge.


Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
...getting back to the transportation problem (because elon didn't say the first settlement would be religiously self-reliant, and by solving the transportation problem, the self-reliance issue becomes less important)...

Surface to LEO via RLV (used several times per day, even during off-months in order to transport propellant and supplies and non-Mars-related payloads). LEO to high Earth orbit via an electromagnetic tether tug, done quite regularly (people could transfer from LEO to HEO using high-thrust chemical tugs if that's not fast enough). Multiple departures per planetary window using the same departure stage (at least once per day... depending on how high the orbit is... maybe make it just high enough for about three departures per day). If you can then use the same departure stage every day, refueling quickly in between departures, you should get at least 30 uses out of each departure stage per window... and if you survive for 10 planetary departure windows, that is at least 300-1000 uses per stage... and if you can make the stages cheaply, that may only be thousands of dollars of hardware cost per departure burn (not counting propellant in HEO).

The colonists can travel in small Mars transfer vehicles that can serve dual-use as largely-independent (at least for basic life support and water recycling) surface habs, largely solving the problem of how the infrastructure is built. Initial habs would be large enough for high-density housing of the colonists, with any larger structures or housing built primarily via ISRU materials. The Mars lander vehicle, after "catching" the MTV into LMO propulsively, would refuel in LMO via ISRU-produced propellant, and then just land the MTV (transfer vehicle) with the occupants inside to the surface. After landing, the MTV would be removed from the lander via crane and placed on the Mars settlement complex, with its own independent life support systems allowing a degree of autonomy and redundancy. The lander would refuel via ISRU and go back to LMO to refuel and catch the next MTV. (it is also possible that colonists would land in separate landers customized for landing people safely, after transfering from the MTV to a station at the depot).

In this way, the whole system is basically in constant use. Also, the role of the electrodynamic tether could be replaced by departure stage so the departure stage gets more uses. By reusing everything hundreds of times (and having the MTV do dual-purpose as transfer vehicle and basic settlement building block), nothing need be thrown away, which means you can get cost down to a reasonable level... IF you have enough volume! and that means thousands of these trips every window, with tens of thousands of colonists every window, at least. Really, millions will be required to make this work.

Also, there are other options... For reducing propellant usage, suborbital RLVs (perhaps even largely air-breathing) could be used, and caught by a rotating tether in LEO (which has much less stringent specific strength requirements). This is more efficient because the majority of the energy would come from the abundant solar power in space instead of limited fossil fuels. Similarly, at Mars solar-electric propulsion can be used to move propellant and goods around. A tether attached to Phobos could reduce the delta-v to enter the Martian atmosphere AND to reduce the delta-v from the Martian surface to LMO> Also, producing propellant in Mars orbit (either from orbital atmospheric skimming or from Phobos) could reduce energy requirements. And propellant in HEO could also be produced from either the Moon or from NEAs. Lots of options for improving the efficiency of the transportation, once you have the demand for all this.

Another option for Earth-Mars-Earth transport would be enormous, gossamer solar-power sails, generating ridiculous amounts of energy to allow very, very quick transfer times, even possibly allowing the same solar power tug to make multiple trips per synod period! But that is further in the future, requiring specific powers in the tens of kilowatts per kilogram. Not impossible, though.

But a way of reusing the vast majority of the hardware multiple times per synod (or finding alternative uses for it) is essential. And probably will be featured in Musk's plans. Along with mass-production.

EDIT:The above is probably over-thinking the problem a little. Maybe the MTV will be reused as a surface hab, but the rest can probably be replaced by just a refilled upper stage of a TSTO RLV departing from LEO and the SSTO reusable Mars lander/launch-vehicle (which could be very similar to the reusable TSTO upper stage we saw in the Falcon 9 reusability video), with the only additional infrastructure being a depot in LMO and another in LEO and ISRU equipment on the surface of Mars and maybe a crane on Mars.
« Last Edit: 08/17/2012 10:40 pm by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Obviously you can get a more efficient transfer by departing from a Lagrange point and waiting for just the right orbital phasing, but a HEO staging point would be good enough and would allow a whole bunch of opportunities (perhaps up to a hundred?) for launching to Mars every synod period, while still giving you much of the advantages of stock-piling propellant (sent via slow-boat SEP or electrodynamic tether tug, or produced from near-Earth asteroids or the Moon) almost out of the Earth's gravity well. This reduces the size of the required departure burn compared to leaving from LEO, which reduces its cost (which is important since that hardware can only be used for about a month every two years). You would probably also sacrifice some delta-v advantage by having greater gravity losses (or lowered Oberth effect) in order to reduce the dry mass (and thus cost) of the departure stage.

But when you aren't in a big launch campaign during a departure window, you could be slowly stock-piling propellant using highly efficient mechanisms like electrodynamic tethers, or simply by using your departure stages as chemical tugs to lug propellant from LEO to HEO. (alternatively, you could just use the depot's built-in station-keeping electric propulsion thrusters to move themselves full from LEO to HEO over a period of about a year and a half, thereby minimizing the amount of propellant needed to be put in LEO, then move their very lightweight, empty selves in a couple months using the same propulsive system back to LEO to be refilled by RLVs). This way, you can leverage improvements in SEP technology (which will keep improving steadily, as it has for decades while chemical propulsion has been largely stagnant). Or, if you produce propellant at NEAs captured at the Moon or propellant from the Moon itself, the depots could ferry themselves from lunar orbit to HEO, which should take less time and less propellant.
« Last Edit: 08/17/2012 10:28 pm by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Or, more simply, just depart from LEO using a refueled upper stage of your TSTO RLV, which can do a quick turnaround burn to come back to Earth (probably doing multiple aerobraking passes or skip reentry to reduce heatload on the TPS). This reduces complexity significantly and gives the hardware a job to do the rest of the two years in between departure windows, at the expense of less efficiency.

The same situation at Mars for catching the MTV. The difference there is that you have a choice between TSTO and SSTO.
Heck, that's probably what Musk has in mind. Otherwise it'd be too complex with too many hardware development tasks. Refinement and efficiency can come after the basic, fully reusable (but all-chemical) Earth-Mars transportation system is initially set up.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Silmfeanor

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1254
  • Utrecht, The Netherlands
  • Liked: 403
  • Likes Given: 722
Time to move part of this thread, especially the last 4 pages or so to advanced concepts?

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
The whole discussion is about SpaceX's advanced concepts.. there's no reason to choose the advanced concepts part over SpaceX. If mere speculation is the criteria, almost everything thread on the board would be in advanced concepts.
« Last Edit: 08/17/2012 11:34 pm by QuantumG »
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
I dO think that musk is primarily concerning himself with the transport issue, not micromanaging how a settlement can become completely self sufficient. After all, the better and cheaper the transport, the less important initial complete self sufficiency becomes. My view is consistent with what Elon has so far expressed. After all, half a lifetime of calories is just 20 metric tons of calorie dense food. Other than macronutrients ( could be made mechanically with relatively simple machines and straight forward isru) less than a metric ton should be enough for a lifetime of micronutrients. That solves a large part of the self sufficiency equation if you can make moving a ton of material to mars cheap enough.


In other words, self sufficiency might be appropriate for a splinter thread.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline BobCarver

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 274
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 12
In my view of Mars Colony, the people going there will not be dealing with Earth much, if at all (maybe the Martians will watch TV shows over the Internet---and maybe TV shows produced on Mars will be popular back on Earth, too---that may the exception which proves the rule). The economy will be mostly local due to the distance and time involved with the long Mars-Earth transport. Unless Mars has some kind of advantageous product I know nothing about, that is, which is possible. The main reason people will go to Mars will be the same reasons they moved over the Earth. And, on Earth, very few ever returned to their homeland.  So, if the colonists can create a critical mass of an economy, they will be pretty much to themselves, like the early American colonies. They will sell all their Earthly goods to go to Mars. They won't need Earth money and they won't have any need for Earth (if they did, they probably wouldn't have chosen to emigrate in the first place).

As the numbers of colonists grow, there will be a need for industry (manufacturing homes and domes initially) and that should follow a typical developmental path like we've seen on Earth. So, the bottom line is that I don't think we'll see a huge amount of 2-way traffic between Earth and Mars for quite some time. SpaceX will make money transporting emigrants and the emigrants will be working jobs that are locally-oriented, not oriented to exporting goods back to Earth.

Offline MP99

How about this... Mars: Tax Haven.

All the billionaires will move there for the tax dodge.

If the billionaire converts their wealth into dollar bills and carries them on their spacecraft to Mars, about their only use would be to burn them for warmth when they get there.

Money left in bank accounts on Earth will be subject to the taxes of the jurisdiction of that bank.

Those billionaires will also need to pay large "fees" to support the infrastructure that keeps them alive and supplied. Though not truly taxes, they might as well be.

cheers, Martin

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7206
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 806
  • Likes Given: 900
How about this... Mars: Tax Haven.

All the billionaires will move there for the tax dodge.

If the billionaire converts their wealth into dollar bills and carries them on their spacecraft to Mars, about their only use would be to burn them for warmth when they get there.

They don't really have to do any of that; they just need to register as 'Martian' (say, one visit to the surface in their entire lifetime) and move all the data (because that's all money is now) to an appropriately-shielded computer on Mars.

That's more-or-less how Earth-based tax havens work. ;)
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline dcporter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 881
  • Liked: 266
  • Likes Given: 422
Agreed that advanced Mars Colony concepts are off-topic, while advanced concepts which speak to how you get to Mars for $500,000 are on-topic.  Robotbeat, solid thought experiment.

Offline tigerade

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 718
  • Low Earth Orbit
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 36
Agreed that advanced Mars Colony concepts are off-topic, while advanced concepts which speak to how you get to Mars for $500,000 are on-topic.  Robotbeat, solid thought experiment.

I doubt anyone will pay $500k to move to Mars if there isn't a safe, comfortable and practical colony there.  ;)

Offline KelvinZero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4286
  • Liked: 887
  • Likes Given: 201
Agreed that advanced Mars Colony concepts are off-topic, while advanced concepts which speak to how you get to Mars for $500,000 are on-topic.  Robotbeat, solid thought experiment.

I reckon "How you get to mars for $500,000" also deserves it's own heading.

This was a nice fun talk with a number of good lines in it. My two favorite were where Zubrin pointed out Musk could have made money doing anything, even selling electric cars, and when Musk observed how long government projects tend to continue after success ceases to be one of the possible outcomes.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
I reckon "How you get to mars for $500,000" also deserves it's own heading.

Sure. The video provided Elon Musk's answer: a fully reusable Earth-to-Mars transportation system. Presumably with a whole lot of traffic. :)


Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Patchouli

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4490
  • Liked: 253
  • Likes Given: 457
Any colony on Mars would be trading in things like computer chips with Earth. There's no question that state of the art computer chips have a very large footprint. For computer chips, it'd probably be cheaper to get them from Earth (per transistor) than from Mars, even after the capability to produce semiconductor devices is developed on Mars (i.e. for power electronics).
Yes, they'd definitely be one of the last things to be switched to local manufacturing.

They may need to reduce the number of different chip types by standardisation.  Use the same power electronics in both cars and lifts.  A single type of microprocessor could be used, possible with more than one make.  EEPROMs can be made on Earth but blown on Mars allowing customising of the circuits.

FPGAs would be an answer to that.

Also keep in ming not too long ago we built computers from mostly standardized components such as logic chips and even discrete transistors.
If you end up needing to make everything on Mars one could return to older technology.


Some people still do this as a hobby.



As for displays VFDs and CRTs probably could be manufactured from native materials or DLPs chips shipped in from Earth.
You could carry hundreds maybe even thousands of DLP chips for the same mass as one large screen LCD.
« Last Edit: 08/19/2012 06:09 am by Patchouli »

Offline Robert Thompson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1177
  • Liked: 101
  • Likes Given: 658
The video provided Elon Musk's answer: a fully reusable Earth-to-Mars transportation system. Presumably with a whole lot of traffic. :)
What is the best reusable nuclear option?
Is LANTR a reusable option?
Would LANTR trade well if launching from EML2?

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8906
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 223
They may need to reduce the number of different chip types by standardisation.  Use the same power electronics in both cars and lifts.  A single type of microprocessor could be used, possible with more than one make.  EEPROMs can be made on Earth but blown on Mars allowing customising of the circuits.

FPGAs would be an answer to that.

Also keep in ming not too long ago we built computers from mostly standardized components such as logic chips and even discrete transistors.
If you end up needing to make everything on Mars one could return to older technology.
{snip}

As for displays VFDs and CRTs probably could be manufactured from native materials or DLPs chips shipped in from Earth.
You could carry hundreds maybe even thousands of DLP chips for the same mass as one large screen LCD.

These days you can get FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Arrays) with built in microprocessors.  See EETimes Article
"Xilinx puts ARM core into its FPGAs"
Rich Nass
4/27/2010 5:00 PM EDT
http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-products/processors/4115523/Xilinx-puts-ARM-core-into-its-FPGAs


As for displays try saving weight by using laser projectors
http://www.thinkgeek.com/product/eb43

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6334
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4207
  • Likes Given: 2
Not only laser projection, but printed screens made using organic inks or quantum dots.
DM

Offline dcporter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 881
  • Liked: 266
  • Likes Given: 422
Agreed that advanced Mars Colony concepts are off-topic, while advanced concepts which speak to how you get to Mars for $500,000 are on-topic.  Robotbeat, solid thought experiment.

I doubt anyone will pay $500k to move to Mars if there isn't a safe, comfortable and practical colony there.  ;)

Yes, and it's all less likely to happen if humans turn out to not react well to mars-level gravity, so let's discuss that too. ::)

Everything is related yet some things are off topic.

[Edited to swap out "related" example, in response to Dave G completely missing my point.]
« Last Edit: 08/22/2012 08:17 pm by dcporter »

Offline Dave G

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3231
  • Liked: 2127
  • Likes Given: 2021
Yes, and it's all less likely to happen if Chairman Wolf cancels commercial crew, so let's discuss that too. ::)

How would that work, exactly?  Can NASA renegue on thier $440 million contract with SpaceX?  If SpaceX demonstrates commercial crew by 2015, would NASA reject this use Russian rockets instead?

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10974
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1257
  • Likes Given: 724
How about this... Mars: Tax Haven.

All the billionaires will move there for the tax dodge.

If the billionaire converts their wealth into dollar bills and carries them on their spacecraft to Mars, about their only use would be to burn them for warmth when they get there.

Money left in bank accounts on Earth will be subject to the taxes of the jurisdiction of that bank.

Those billionaires will also need to pay large "fees" to support the infrastructure that keeps them alive and supplied. Though not truly taxes, they might as well be.

cheers, Martin

Hard to imagine such practical types as these rich folk wanting to leave it all for the colony.  NSoV, as usual.

The speculation of $500K one way tickets could work, I imagine, if there is two way traffic.  Ya go, ya stay for a couple of years, ya come back.  But the larger issue of growing an economy strikes me as interesting.

So.  You preposition two years of supplies for the first four or six one way candidates, promising them that you'll be back.  Up there it would be a barter economy geared to survival only.  Every two years another four, six, eight, dozen or so people would show up.  I could see a yearly launch rate of low energy robotic supply missions which would start making the long term survivability of the colonly more and more feasible with each successful landing.

Eventually, that one billionaire who wants to get away from it all shows up, since survival rates would have been demonstrated.  What will he pay some of the other colonists to wait on him hand and foot? How would that economy grow from a bartering of services and common ownership of real property and infrastructure?  At what point can there be differentiation of labor, where garden duties can be traded for mining duties, or rover repair duties?  Since there will be some labor specialization already, like the rover repair guy and the gardener gal, how would the labor exchange rate be determined?  At what point do they start xeroxing money and IOU's?
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
There'd likely be some kind of currency, though it may work a little differently. Bartering isn't as efficient. But if you aren't careful managing the money supply, you can have problems with currency as well:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Hill_Babysitting_Co-op#Cooperative_system_and_history

But anyway. Getting a little far afield. Technically, Musk has been focusing more on the transportation problem, not the colony itself. Heck, I believe that originally he meant for the $500k ticket price to be for a round-trip ticket, not a one-way.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline BobCarver

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 274
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 12
No, that was always meant to be for a one-way ticket.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
No, that was always meant to be for a one-way ticket.
Citation needed.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline BobCarver

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 274
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 12
No, that was always meant to be for a one-way ticket.
Citation needed.
The first time Musk mentioned this idea, he said it was specifically a one-way trip. If you have a reference to it being round-trip, the onus is on you to provide a citation, not me.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
No, that was always meant to be for a one-way ticket.
Citation needed.
The first time Musk mentioned this idea, he said it was specifically a one-way trip. If you have a reference to it being round-trip, the onus is on you to provide a citation, not me.
Well, I remember him specifically talking about it being two-way for the 500k figure, and don't remember the one-way trip part except for him talking about his retirement. The onus is on you. ;)

(Or rather, the onus is equally on both of us, since we just have your word vs mine.)
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline dcporter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 881
  • Liked: 266
  • Likes Given: 422
An onus on both your houses

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
An onus on both your houses
LOL.

Ok, ok. Here we are:
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2012/03/elon-musk-says-ticket-to-mars-will-cost-500000/

"“Land on Mars, a round-trip ticket — half a million dollars. It can be done,” he told the BBC."
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
I think he initially was reluctant about return trips but has since changed his mind.. it is a reusable system after all.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
I think he initially was reluctant about return trips but has since changed his mind.. it is a reusable system after all.

Not only that, but the PR is bad. It doesn't matter if it's for settlement or whathaveyou, a one-way trip is interpreted as "suicide mission" by popular media.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline joek

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4869
  • Liked: 2782
  • Likes Given: 1096
Hey, why not, if they're aiming for "airline like" operation...

    As low as $500K!*


* One-way price based on round-trip purchase.  Requires two-year stay and 10-year advance booking.  Non-refundable; change fee of $499K.  Excludes: TMI, TEI, Mars EDL, Earth EDL and cis-Lunar transit fees; fuel surchange; ECLSS surchange; and mass fees.  Oxygen, food and beverages available for purchase on board.  Sleeping accommodations available at additional cost.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Hey, why not, if they're aiming for "airline like" operation...

    As low as $500K!*


* One-way price based on round-trip purchase.  Requires two-year stay and 10-year advance booking.  Non-refundable; change fee of $499K.  Excludes: TMI, TEI, Mars EDL, Earth EDL and cis-Lunar transit fees; fuel surchange; ECLSS surchange; and mass fees.  Oxygen, food and beverages available for purchase on board.  Sleeping accommodations available at additional cost.
Joek, FTW!
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Dave G

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3231
  • Liked: 2127
  • Likes Given: 2021
I think the 1-way thing is a long term vision.  By the time they get seats to Mars for $500K, there will be a lot more stuff on Mars already, so it won't seem like a suicide mission, it will seem like you're moving.

To put it another way, look at our national holidays: These include Columbus Day, Thanksgiving, and July 4th.  There will be similar events in the history of Mars.  First come the explorers, then much later the first settlers, then much later than that comes Martian independence. 

When Musk talks about $500K one-way, he's talking about Thanksgiving already.  We need to worry about Columbus Day first.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
When Musk talks about $500K one-way, he's talking about Thanksgiving already.  We need to worry about Columbus Day first.

He's thinking about that too..

Quote
That moment may be closer than anyone thinks. Musk declared recently that he could put a human on Mars in 10 to 20 years' time. It is a remarkable claim, yet even more astonishingly Musk tells me that he could do it for $5 billion, and possibly as little as $2 billion

from http://www.marssociety.org/home/press/news/illputmillionsofpeopleonmarssayselonmusk
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline BobCarver

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 274
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 12
An onus on both your houses
LOL.

Ok, ok. Here we are:
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2012/03/elon-musk-says-ticket-to-mars-will-cost-500000/

"“Land on Mars, a round-trip ticket — half a million dollars. It can be done,” he told the BBC."

I first heard him talk about it at the National Press Club and would have sworn he said one-way. Well, shame on my memory! It's hard to believe he actually said that.

Offline BobCarver

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 274
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 12
I think he initially was reluctant about return trips but has since changed his mind.. it is a reusable system after all.

Not only that, but the PR is bad. It doesn't matter if it's for settlement or whathaveyou, a one-way trip is interpreted as "suicide mission" by popular media.

Who among the pioneers ever takes the popular media seriously, anyway. When a picture of a bull appears on the front cover of popular media, it's time to sell every stock you ever owned---and others as well.

BTW, if you see a bull on a pop mag cover in November, it's time to sell the market short bigtime.

Offline majormajor42

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 531
  • Liked: 74
  • Likes Given: 230
I think he initially was reluctant about return trips but has since changed his mind.. it is a reusable system after all.

Not only that, but the PR is bad. It doesn't matter if it's for settlement or whathaveyou, a one-way trip is interpreted as "suicide mission" by popular media.

I think it was only a year or two ago that I would have held that same popular belief about a one way mission. Coming around had been an interesting thought exercise. It will be cool to see others minds change about that big idea too. But I also think, in response to popular media now, so what? Them reporting on a crazy "suicide mission" may make for interesting times.

But as to the larger topic at hand, I do wish we had a slightly better idea of when Elon will be revealing his ideas for Mars missions. Do we even know if the mission ideas that he will be revealing later this year are for his ideas for this less expensive first mission to Mars? Or will it just be more information about how he thinks we will be able to go to Mars for half a million dollars at some distant point in the future. I sure hope it is specifics about the early mission, the one he thinks can happen in the 2020's.

Oh, and I think I would still want that first mission to be round trip. I still can't quite get my head around the idea of Mars' Armstrong just staying there (although he/she may go back for good like I think I remember from KSR's Red Mars novel)
...water is life and it is out there, where we intend to go. I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man or machine on a body such as the Moon and harvest a cup of water for a human to drink or process into fuel for their craft.

Offline ArbitraryConstant

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
  • Liked: 628
  • Likes Given: 311
So.  You preposition two years of supplies for the first four or six one way candidates, promising them that you'll be back.  Up there it would be a barter economy geared to survival only.  Every two years another four, six, eight, dozen or so people would show up.  I could see a yearly launch rate of low energy robotic supply missions which would start making the long term survivability of the colonly more and more feasible with each successful landing.
I don't think the scale Musk has in mind is anywhere near that small.

Offline BobCarver

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 274
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 12
So.  You preposition two years of supplies for the first four or six one way candidates, promising them that you'll be back.  Up there it would be a barter economy geared to survival only.  Every two years another four, six, eight, dozen or so people would show up.  I could see a yearly launch rate of low energy robotic supply missions which would start making the long term survivability of the colonly more and more feasible with each successful landing.
I don't think the scale Musk has in mind is anywhere near that small.

The radiation shielding requirements are likely to require that the transport will be a very large vessel built up in orbit which is capable of transporting a lot of people and equipment. A thick water shield will need to be provided, especially if the expedition intends to return to Earth. Total radiation exposure would otherwise be too large. Yes, we need to see Musk's plans because the only way I see it being feasible is to construct a cycling transporter in orbit. The cycler would likely be powered by very large SEP because getting a nuclear fuel source approved is going to be politically impossible in the next few decades. And, chemical fuel is too expensive to resupply from the ground (Earth, Moon or Mars). The cycler needs to be very low maintenance and SEP should fill that bill.

Offline ArbitraryConstant

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
  • Liked: 628
  • Likes Given: 311
The radiation shielding requirements are likely to require that the transport will be a very large vessel built up in orbit which is capable of transporting a lot of people and equipment. A thick water shield will need to be provided, especially if the expedition intends to return to Earth. Total radiation exposure would otherwise be too large. Yes, we need to see Musk's plans because the only way I see it being feasible is to construct a cycling transporter in orbit. The cycler would likely be powered by very large SEP because getting a nuclear fuel source approved is going to be politically impossible in the next few decades. And, chemical fuel is too expensive to resupply from the ground (Earth, Moon or Mars). The cycler needs to be very low maintenance and SEP should fill that bill.
I don't think any of the above can be convincingly rejected at the present time.

SEP is promising. But nuclear fuel isn't dangerous as long as it doesn't go critical until it's in an orbit where you're sure it's not coming back down. And a fully reusable launch vehicle is begging for depots.

If Musk is running the numbers now I think he's probably doing it with chemical propulsion. That's what he knows. That doesn't mean other stuff wouldn't work, just that he thinks at least one thing works.

Offline KelvinZero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4286
  • Liked: 887
  • Likes Given: 201
The cycler would likely be powered by very large SEP because getting a nuclear fuel source approved is going to be politically impossible in the next few decades. And, chemical fuel is too expensive to resupply from the ground (Earth, Moon or Mars). The cycler needs to be very low maintenance and SEP should fill that bill.

Hi, isn't the point of a cycler that it is unpowered?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_cycler
Presumably you match velocities with the cycler using a much smaller vessel. It lets you make the same half year journey in a hotel instead of a tin can.

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10974
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1257
  • Likes Given: 724
There'd likely be some kind of currency, though it may work a little differently. Bartering isn't as efficient. But if you aren't careful managing the money supply, you can have problems with currency as well...

Do you think it's worth a thread?  My question wasn't about the "evolution" of money; it was about the "origin of the species".  At what point, in the martian barter for services economy, would money be introduced?

* One-way price based on round-trip purchase....

Some restrictions apply.

My credit card gives me miles?  Ever heard of those?  According to them, it's on the order of 15,000 miles to get a one way ticket from CHV to SAT.  I'll never get to the Moon, much less Mars, if my credit card has any say.

The radiation shielding requirements are likely to require that the transport will be a very large vessel built up in orbit which is capable of transporting a lot of people and equipment.

I'm not sure what citation to give for the definition of a "lot", but tentatively suggest 100 people and their food and gear.  If ISS could be a rough guide, the basic craft, not counting shielding and more than about thirty days food, would mass in at twenty times ISS.  Multiply that mass by ten, say.  200 times the mass of ISS, assembled in LEO, ready for TMI?

Hopefully, that would give you the shielding as well as the landing vehicles to place all those people, food, and gear on the surface of Mars.  Say it's only 100 times the mass of ISS.  Izzat still reasonable?

I think the approach would more incremental and along the lines I sketched out above:

Quote
You preposition two years of supplies for the first four or six one way candidates, promising them that you'll be back.  yada yada.

But even that, in my mind, presupposes a depot architecture and a lot of capability in the cis-lunar area.

If we start building any mother ships, I think they'll only carry a dozen people or so at first.
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline BobCarver

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 274
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 12

Hi, isn't the point of a cycler that it is unpowered?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_cycler
Presumably you match velocities with the cycler using a much smaller vessel. It lets you make the same half year journey in a hotel instead of a tin can.

An Aldrin cycler would be low in energy consumption, but the system within which it worked would still need lots of delta-v overall. The passengers and cargo would have to be transported to and from the cycler, which would require energy. It's a great idea, but I think a straightforward approach will be best initially. After the kinks of doing cycling are worked out, yes, that would be the time to implement an Aldrin cycler.

Offline CapitalistOppressor

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 132
  • Liked: 147
  • Likes Given: 4
Low-volume manufacture do not need HUGE infrastructure.

This machine can manufacture a lot of different things:


Add laser/plasma cutting CNC machine-tool and 3d printer and welding robot and you can manufacture almost anything, including spare parts to machine-tools you have.

Modern CNC tools that martian colony have initially can produce plenty of parts for other machines before they wear off beyond repair.
Early 20-th century/late 19-th century machine-tools don't need any electronics to work, but they can produce details like gears or springs and still be fully automated.
With 1930-th technology it is possible to make fully automated production lines - using contacts and coils (relays; ladder logic). And it is pretty simple. Back in Russia I've seen machine tools that were manufactured in 1905 and are still in use. Also I've seen fully automated lines that use contacts and relays only, that are also still in use - and are competitive!

Also don't forget that there is a way to produce goods of higher quality than the machines you have can. It is called "selective assembly" (you need high quality sensors that have to be imported though).

Automation of assembly is much harder, although it would be much easier on Mars because of low gravity.


PS. Economy of the colony is much more difficult question. What the Martians can sell to Earth to pay for imports? (drugs & electronics & and anything else that can not be produced locally) Gold? Wolfram?

Late to the thread, but I'd argue that there is nothing material that can be sent to Earth.  You'd have to sell reality TV and other soft goods.  Eventually it's likely that Mars derived technology and techniques could be licensed and sold on Earth.

However, the largest export will become available shortly after the initial colonists arrive.  Mars real estate.  Specifically the shelters, food and materials you will need to survive as a colonist.

The first colonists will carve their own holes in a mountain and install life support and get all the ISRU processes rolling.  Once they get set up, they will carve new holes and sell them to bidders on Earth.

Anyone who thinks that $500,000 will send you and a custom built dome shelter with self contained ISRU and greenhouse farm all the way to Mars is just not thinking straight.

So the $500,000 is enough to get you a one way ticket to Mars and your local homestead.  The profit on that transaction goes to the Martians who use it to pay for needed imports or luxuries.

Probably there would be multiple co-ops you could buy from at different locations, with their own quirky religious beliefs or other cultural ties that bind them together and attract like minded colonists.

Offline go4mars

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3748
  • Earth
  • Liked: 158
  • Likes Given: 3463
I didn't go this year or pay much attention. Did Elon or Kimbal make it out to the Mars Society convention this year?
Elasmotherium; hurlyburly Doggerlandic Jentilak steeds insouciantly gallop in viridescent taiga, eluding deluginal Burckle's abyssal excavation.

Offline beancounter

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Perth, Western Australia
  • Liked: 106
  • Likes Given: 172
I've nearly finished a paper for a magazine outlining how Elon *might* do a Design Reference Mission to Mars - not a 'colonization' just merely getting 3 Astronauts there and then back with 100kg of rocks and regolith. No fancy, schmancy propulsion and Depot technology on the critical path to mission success; just lots of off-the-shelf gear mixed with some nearly-here technology and lots of Falcon Heavy and other EELV launches. What IS on the critical path is funding - slicing billions from the cost means not spending a decade developing VASIMR, advanced nuclear power, large scale ISRU etc.

Whatever Design Reference Mission Elon and his team come up with - it will no doubt differ in some details from my careful, speculative mission design. I've nearly finished writing it - all I need to do now is get some software to convert a large Word file into a PDF! ;)

MSWord does that for you.  Just save as a PDF.
Beancounter from DownUnder

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1