Author Topic: Mars One Discussion Thread  (Read 331466 times)

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28109
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 7920
  • Likes Given: 5273
Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1120 on: 10/05/2016 12:54 AM »
I don't know about y'all, but I'd watch a reality TV show about colonists on Mars.

That is essentially what their plan is.

The "reality" series was supposed to be the Earth bound training, they then "assumed" complete ownership of all media and communications from the 'colonists' once on Mars. That wasn't to produce a "reality" show but to ensure they gained all profits from anything the colonists might do on Mars.
...
So yeah, a reality show on Mars. Look, that's been their plan from the beginning. I remember it.

And if Mars is ever settled, there will be a reality TV show on Mars. And if I'm alive then, I'll watch it.
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

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28109
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 7920
  • Likes Given: 5273
Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1121 on: 10/05/2016 12:56 AM »
Flying back requires setting up fuel ISRU which is a major cost factor at start up. With a limited scope it is still cheaper to fly a few ITS expendable than setting up a large fuel ISRU factory. Assuming Mars One has their own site and no access to fuel ISRU set up by SpaceX.

As I said I expect Mars One to have their own site and not colocate with the SpaceX base.

Or in reality, of course I expect Mars One to do none of these things.
An electric truck carrying stuff to Mars One's camp site is cheaper than an expendable ITS. Or heck, a full ITS could probably do round-trip surface hops big enough to land their payload without having to expend it. Or, more likely, the reality TV show will happen wherever the main settlement is because that'd be cheaper.
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 RanulfC

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4446
  • Heus tu Omnis! Vigilate Hoc!
  • Liked: 802
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1122 on: 10/05/2016 08:51 PM »
Flying back requires setting up fuel ISRU which is a major cost factor at start up. With a limited scope it is still cheaper to fly a few ITS expendable than setting up a large fuel ISRU factory. Assuming Mars One has their own site and no access to fuel ISRU set up by SpaceX.

Not at all, making, building or buying an "expendable" IST will be the expensive option since its designed to be cheaper to reuse. ISRU is a question of power and resources which is cargo not spaceship. Main issue is you can't in fat have a 'limited scope' Mars colony which is exactly what Mars One has always proposed but can't seem to make believable.

Quote
As I said I expect Mars One to have their own site and not colocate with the SpaceX base.

And as I said that make's no sense since you're on Mars. Multiple colony sites early on doesn't make much sense as each would require their own ITS service. It doesn't enhance survivability or redundancy either so it's a waste for Mars One to consider. If they are the only one going, (which was the original plan) they of course set up all the variables but if they are using the ITS then it makes no sense they wouldn't work with SpaceX and/or other colonization efforts.

And that in fact is the main flaw with even attempting to carry on with Mars One in a scenario where ITS is available since Mars One will in fact be a less capable effort compared to other possible colony organizations.

Quote
Or in reality, of course I expect Mars One to do none of these things.

But I thought we were gaming here :)

Randy
From The Amazing Catstronaut on the Black Arrow LV:
British physics, old chap. It's undignified to belch flames and effluvia all over the pad, what. A true gentlemen's orbital conveyance lifts itself into the air unostentatiously, with the minimum of spectacle and a modicum of grace. Not like our American cousins' launch vehicles, eh?

Offline RanulfC

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4446
  • Heus tu Omnis! Vigilate Hoc!
  • Liked: 802
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1123 on: 10/05/2016 08:58 PM »
So yeah, a reality show on Mars. Look, that's been their plan from the beginning. I remember it.

And if Mars is ever settled, there will be a reality TV show on Mars. And if I'm alive then, I'll watch it.

They described the idea as 'reality show like' but in a more limited fashion due to technology and personnel limits on Mars but they focused on the Earth based reality show as the main way of making the initial money to send the colonists in the first place.

There will be media updates and documentaries for a long while before there are reality shows on Mars. (We can hope they actually don't make the trip :) )

I wouldn't watch it for the very reason it won't be anymore reflective of what the colonists lives are like and they challenges and triumphs they face than any Earth based reality show is. It's entertainment media aimed at entertaining an Earth audience not to educate them or enhance the lure of Mars so while I'd have a keen interest and fascination with what is really happening on Mars, a 'reality' show would hold no interest because it provides little of the actual information I want to know.

Randy
From The Amazing Catstronaut on the Black Arrow LV:
British physics, old chap. It's undignified to belch flames and effluvia all over the pad, what. A true gentlemen's orbital conveyance lifts itself into the air unostentatiously, with the minimum of spectacle and a modicum of grace. Not like our American cousins' launch vehicles, eh?

Offline ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3629
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 2215
  • Likes Given: 2808
Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1124 on: 10/06/2016 08:50 PM »
I don't know about y'all, but I'd watch a reality TV show about colonists on Mars.

That is essentially what their plan is.

The "reality" series was supposed to be the Earth bound training, they then "assumed" complete ownership of all media and communications from the 'colonists' once on Mars. That wasn't to produce a "reality" show but to ensure they gained all profits from anything the colonists might do on Mars.
...
So yeah, a reality show on Mars. Look, that's been their plan from the beginning. I remember it.

And if Mars is ever settled, there will be a reality TV show on Mars. And if I'm alive then, I'll watch it.

The question isn't so much whether you'd watch the reality show of the first colony on Mars.  The question is whether you'd watch the reality show of the second colony on Mars 10 years after the first colony.  Because I can't imagine SpaceX will give up any of their early ITS flight opportunities to let Mars One get there first on SpaceX hardware.

Online whitelancer64

Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1125 on: 10/06/2016 09:46 PM »
*snip*
I think ITS will have killed any chance they had of further funding.

Randy

Basically, this.

There used to be some slim hope they'd get a miracle donor, but most likely, this is no longer the case. Mars One may still promote some useful research on living-on-Mars-related activities (what plants are good to grow, etc.), like they're doing now, but as a colonization attempt, I believe them to be finished. Of course, they probably won't say this for some time yet. Or they may eventually turn into an advocacy group, like the L5 Society did.

Interestingly, on the Mars One twitter they did a Q&A session on Sept. 29th, a couple of the answers imply they might just go with SpaceX's ITS.

https://twitter.com/MarsOneProject/status/781428895715295232
https://twitter.com/MarsOneProject/status/781463245987147777
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Online whitelancer64

Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1126 on: 10/06/2016 09:51 PM »
*snip*
They should have at least acknowledged or mentioned the IAC speech by this point, again it seems to indicate a lack of seriousness.
*snip*

They did promote it on Twitter :p and on their Facebook page.

https://twitter.com/MarsOneProject/status/780791973217243137
https://twitter.com/MarsOneProject/status/780869614796476416
« Last Edit: 10/06/2016 10:21 PM by whitelancer64 »
"One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree -- make sure you understand the fundamental principles, ie the trunk and big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to." - Elon Musk
"There are lies, damned lies, and launch schedules." - Larry J

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28109
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 7920
  • Likes Given: 5273
Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1127 on: 10/07/2016 02:55 AM »
I don't know about y'all, but I'd watch a reality TV show about colonists on Mars.

That is essentially what their plan is.

The "reality" series was supposed to be the Earth bound training, they then "assumed" complete ownership of all media and communications from the 'colonists' once on Mars. That wasn't to produce a "reality" show but to ensure they gained all profits from anything the colonists might do on Mars.
...
So yeah, a reality show on Mars. Look, that's been their plan from the beginning. I remember it.

And if Mars is ever settled, there will be a reality TV show on Mars. And if I'm alive then, I'll watch it.

The question isn't so much whether you'd watch the reality show of the first colony on Mars.  The question is whether you'd watch the reality show of the second colony on Mars 10 years after the first colony.  ...
Heck YEAH, I would. Unless I'm actually on Mars, I would watch it. Wouldn't you?

There are a ton of Alaska reality TV shows, and a LOT of people watch them. Alaska has been settled for a really long time, now. Doesn't stop people from watching reality TV shows set there.
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 ChrisWilson68

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3629
  • Sunnyvale, CA
  • Liked: 2215
  • Likes Given: 2808
Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1128 on: 10/07/2016 03:17 AM »
I don't know about y'all, but I'd watch a reality TV show about colonists on Mars.

That is essentially what their plan is.

The "reality" series was supposed to be the Earth bound training, they then "assumed" complete ownership of all media and communications from the 'colonists' once on Mars. That wasn't to produce a "reality" show but to ensure they gained all profits from anything the colonists might do on Mars.
...
So yeah, a reality show on Mars. Look, that's been their plan from the beginning. I remember it.

And if Mars is ever settled, there will be a reality TV show on Mars. And if I'm alive then, I'll watch it.

The question isn't so much whether you'd watch the reality show of the first colony on Mars.  The question is whether you'd watch the reality show of the second colony on Mars 10 years after the first colony.  ...
Heck YEAH, I would. Unless I'm actually on Mars, I would watch it. Wouldn't you?

There are a ton of Alaska reality TV shows, and a LOT of people watch them. Alaska has been settled for a really long time, now. Doesn't stop people from watching reality TV shows set there.

And I'm sure the Discovery Channel makes some money from them, but maybe not enough to settle a different planet.

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28109
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 7920
  • Likes Given: 5273
Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1129 on: 10/07/2016 12:34 PM »
They would be able to easily pay for the tickets and lodging though, if the ITS is even in an order of magnitude within the hoped-for price range.
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 savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5155
  • Liked: 981
  • Likes Given: 343
Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1130 on: 10/08/2017 10:41 PM »
I thought these guys were thoroughly laughed out of the room, but no

https://www.mars-one.com/news/press-releases/new-mars-one-ventures-ag-shares-issued-after-the-companys-valuation-at-us-3

Quote
The Swiss Commercial Register has approved the capital increase based on an independent valuation report by a Swiss auditor, valuing Mars One at US$ 389,300,000

https://www.mars-one.com/news/press-releases/mars-one-releases-revenue-projections-funding-humankinds-mission-to-mars
Quote
Mars One Ventures AG holds the exclusive monetization rights of the mission. It receives revenue from merchandise sales, Mars settler applications, advertisements on video content, broadcasting rights, and marketing-related sponsorships and partnerships. Mars One Ventures AG is forecast to be profitable by Q1 2019. It pays a 5% license fee on gross revenue to the Foundation.

Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28109
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 7920
  • Likes Given: 5273
Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1131 on: 10/09/2017 12:42 AM »
BFR could save them from themselves.
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 high road

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 775
  • Europe
  • Liked: 218
  • Likes Given: 54
Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1132 on: 10/09/2017 11:57 AM »
I thought these guys were thoroughly laughed out of the room, but no

https://www.mars-one.com/news/press-releases/new-mars-one-ventures-ag-shares-issued-after-the-companys-valuation-at-us-3

Quote
The Swiss Commercial Register has approved the capital increase based on an independent valuation report by a Swiss auditor, valuing Mars One at US$ 389,300,000

https://www.mars-one.com/news/press-releases/mars-one-releases-revenue-projections-funding-humankinds-mission-to-mars
Quote
Mars One Ventures AG holds the exclusive monetization rights of the mission. It receives revenue from merchandise sales, Mars settler applications, advertisements on video content, broadcasting rights, and marketing-related sponsorships and partnerships. Mars One Ventures AG is forecast to be profitable by Q1 2019. It pays a 5% license fee on gross revenue to the Foundation.

And for a minimum investment of only $1000 worth of their penny stock, you can participate in their IPO. Don't expect their revenue estimate to pan out however. Most of their estimate for 2018 comes from publicity deals they haven't been able to realize in 6 years, and from videos that apparently don't cost anything to make, but which they somehow haven't gotten around to putting them up to start generating revenue already.

And the $500.000 raised by the IPO will be used to 'meet the conditions required to release the $6 million investment'. Without any further explanation. For an organisation struggling to get some credibility, they sure aren't trying very hard to avoid resembling a lottery scam.

BFR could save them from themselves.

If anything, BFR would make a privately funded, one way space programme more feasible, and would benefit from it: development risk of the transportation system, EDL technology and backup hab for a skeleton crew (until permanent structures are set up by said crew) are nullified. While conversely, a crew that doesn't plan to return can set up whatever infrastructure is required to land BFR safely without damaging anything near the landing site, unload it, refuel it, and launch it again. Without relying on complex, failure prone and tediously slow (anywhere in that choice triangle) autonomous robots, or without governments wanting 120% reliable systems before sending astronauts.

But while I can easily see how such a one way, privately funded mission would be mutually beneficial to BFR, I don't expect MO to follow that route.

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28109
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 7920
  • Likes Given: 5273
Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1133 on: 10/10/2017 03:06 AM »
If Mars One gets to Mars, it will be on a BFR.
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 sanman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4125
  • Liked: 574
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1134 on: 10/12/2017 06:45 AM »
Mars one needs to update/re-make their video, showing BFR delivering them to Mars. That in itself would suddenly make the whole thing look more plausible. Never mind the Dragon2 capsules now - they're old hat - technology has moved on.

Offline 85frankie

  • Member
  • Posts: 1
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1135 on: 03/10/2018 11:53 AM »
Has anyone else heard of this?
http://mars-one.com/
It's a private company that is looking to put humans on mars by 2023 using Falcon Heavy launchers and Dragons for landers. They admit in the FAQ page that they have no funding yet. so for now it's just a dream with some pretty pictures.

Who are actually going to Mars I`m concidering being a part of the trip?

Offline meberbs

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1645
  • Liked: 1507
  • Likes Given: 368
Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1136 on: 03/14/2018 02:59 PM »
Has anyone else heard of this?
http://mars-one.com/
It's a private company that is looking to put humans on mars by 2023 using Falcon Heavy launchers and Dragons for landers. They admit in the FAQ page that they have no funding yet. so for now it's just a dream with some pretty pictures.

Who are actually going to Mars I`m concidering being a part of the trip?
Honestly, probably no one. (You should note that the post you quoted is out of date, and the current dubious plan is to send crew in 2031, an 8 year delay in 6 years.)

SpaceX announced their initial BFR design a year and a half ago, and cancelled Red Dragon to focus on BFR last year. Mars One still hasn't changed their architecture to account for this or acknowledged that the capsules they were planning on using will never be built in a Mars capable form now.

Mars One has narrowed down to 100 finalists for the first crew, and they were supposed to start training last year. I haven't heard any actual details of this happening despite the fact that they wanted to film the training as a reality show to make money.

Speaking of money, even their absurdly optimistic revenue projections are at least an order of magnitude short of being able to pay for work to start on their demo mission they plan to launch in 2022. Given lead times, by next year they will have no choice except to delay their entire plan by another synod (26 month period between transfer windows). Not that the delay would actually change their lack of funding, they have been failing to get sufficient funding for years.

If you actually want to go to Mars, you are better off following SpaceX's progress. They have an actually achievable plan, involving sending people starting in 2024, though that date will likely slip some. There is currently no way to apply to be an astronaut on BFR, in part because SpaceX, unlike Mars One, knows that they need hardware before they can start training crew. (Plus they know that government space agencies will want to pay them to send astronauts once they have proven their technology far enough) Long term, anyone should be able to go with SpaceX since tickets should get down to around $500,000 or less, which either people could get by selling their house, or be sponsored by entrepreneurs who want to do business on Mars.

Offline high road

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 775
  • Europe
  • Liked: 218
  • Likes Given: 54
Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1137 on: 03/14/2018 04:31 PM »
Don't forget you need to pay that amount every synod just to ship in supplies needed to survive on Mars.

Offline meberbs

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1645
  • Liked: 1507
  • Likes Given: 368
Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1138 on: 03/14/2018 04:46 PM »
Don't forget you need to pay that amount every synod just to ship in supplies needed to survive on Mars.
This isn't the thread to discuss SpaceX's plan in detail, but the goal is to make the Mars colony self sufficient. By the time the ticket price comes that low, little should need to be imported for basic survival. Details are TBD, and I doubt necessary supplies would even be billed to the colonists by SpaceX, but even if they were, the cost would be nowhere near a full additional ticket per person.

For Mars One, they do have a problem with recurring costs, because they aren't really designing with a goal of full self-sustaining.

Offline high road

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 775
  • Europe
  • Liked: 218
  • Likes Given: 54
Re: Mars One Discussion Thread
« Reply #1139 on: 03/15/2018 04:44 AM »
"Details" like paying for all the flights required to get all of the infrastructure to be self sustaining and create more of that infrastructure for population growth. And to support an aging part of the population that is no longer productive. But yeah, where is the thread where this small detail is not being handwaved away?

Edit: apparently I've caused some confusion. There are plenty of threads going into the difficulties of creating said selfsufficient colony. None of which include a magic master plan from SpaceX to pay for it all. They themselves have said they only do the transport. Once there, you still need a way to pay for consuming stuff that people who paid to get there make, and using infrastructure that someone paid for to put up there.
« Last Edit: 03/15/2018 02:53 PM by high road »

Tags: