Poll

Will Mars One Succeed in Their Goal of Landing Humans on Mars?

Yes
Yes, but not by 2023
No

Author Topic: Will Mars One Succeed in Their Goal of Landing Humans on Mars?  (Read 24603 times)

Offline ClaytonBirchenough

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 683
  • Liked: 14
  • anything. space. NOW.
  • ~ 1 AU
While I'm rootin' for Mars One, I'm pretty skeptical they will actually succeed. Just wanted to see what everyone else was thinking...
Ask questions, learn!

"The earth is the cradle of humankind, but one cannot live in the cradle forever."
—Konstantin Tsiolkovsky

~AD ASTRA~

Offline Eric Hedman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 397
  • Liked: 19
I think a lot of people over simplify what is involved in many things in aerospace.  I think this is one of them.

Offline Robert Thompson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1096
  • Liked: 79
  • Kitt Peak
Space Adventures leveraged pre-existing federally or nationally-validated LEO capabilities.

Offline manboy

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1978
  • Liked: 74
  • United States
While I'm rootin' for Mars One, I'm pretty skeptical they will actually succeed. Just wanted to see what everyone else was thinking...
They have no chance of success.
« Last Edit: 03/23/2013 04:09 PM by manboy »
"Cheese has been sent into space before. But the same cheese has never been sent into space twice." - StephenB

Offline Robert Thompson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1096
  • Liked: 79
  • Kitt Peak
ClaytonBirchenough, if you have time would you do me the favor of scouring the NSF website and linking threads that deal with other Mars one-way / 'suicide' missions?

Offline ClaytonBirchenough

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 683
  • Liked: 14
  • anything. space. NOW.
  • ~ 1 AU
ClaytonBirchenough, if you have time would you do me the favor of scouring the NSF website and linking threads that deal with other Mars one-way / 'suicide' missions?

Yup, here's some threads of interest:

One-way Mars threads:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=21196.0

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=18647.0

NASA one-way Mars thread:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=23152.0

Mars One thread:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=29053.0


« Last Edit: 03/23/2013 04:38 PM by ClaytonBirchenough »
Ask questions, learn!

"The earth is the cradle of humankind, but one cannot live in the cradle forever."
—Konstantin Tsiolkovsky

~AD ASTRA~

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
  • Liked: 602
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
No. Even the most successful reality tvs (Idols etc) don't generate enough income for credible Mars mission. Large masses connect with singing/dancing etc., not space techno babble. Will be surprised if Mars One manages to air even one episode of anything.
AD·ASTRA·ASTRORVM·GRATIA

Offline Garrett

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1050
  • Liked: 66
  • France
Nope, not a chance they'll succeed.

Dennis Tito's plans for a free return, non landing, mission in 2018 might have a slight chance of succeeding, but even that "simple" mission profile looks tough to pull off, so I just can't even fathom Mars One's plans working out.

It looks like the big winner from both of the above attempts will be Paragon SDC.
- "Nothing shocks me. I'm a scientist." - Indiana Jones

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6410
  • Liked: 1326
  • Australia
No chance, but it'll be nice to see them try. I wonder what will be the final roadblock.. financial or regulatory?
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Offline Robert Thompson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1096
  • Liked: 79
  • Kitt Peak

Thank you. The barriers of entry on this forum usually require new data, or new science on old questions, or occasionally more global surveys of knowledge that inevitably result in contention around fault lines laid down in the cosmos just after the Planck epoch. Which is to say: A possibly more appropriate question is "Will a one-way / suicide Mars architecture succeed, ever?" Don't flinch. The word describes what it is.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6410
  • Liked: 1326
  • Australia
A possibly more appropriate question is "Will a one-way / suicide Mars architecture succeed, ever?" Don't flinch. The word describes what it is.

While I agree with you, there's plenty of people who don't. What's the point of getting into this argument again?

One can always pose questions like: If the chance of success were high, would a one-way mission still be a suicide mission? The conversation that results will be a discussion of words not deeds.
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Offline Robert Thompson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1096
  • Liked: 79
  • Kitt Peak

Straight words.

What are your suggestions on how to make the Mars Society's analog Mars stations more deed-like? Those are the only deeds I see, and they are faint deeds in comparison to the Lansdorp ambition. I think there is a huge range of opportunity between the two. I hereby propose the "Lansdorp metric": How similar is the minute-by-minute occupancy of someone at Utah Mars Desert Research Station to the minute-by-minute occupancy of a Lansdorp astronaut? What is the ratio. Is there any funding model between a Society's dues and Lansdorp's media idea?

Offline Oli

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1190
  • Liked: 139

Maybe investors are willing to finance design studies and the astronaut selection show, but after that...

I wouldn't rule it out completely, there are global shows which generate big revenues (top gear comes to my mind) and with wannabe colonists from countries all over the world it certainly has a shot at reaching a worldwide audience. Still, if nobody wants to see mars colonists on tv the best show won't save them.

Offline ARD

  • Member
  • Posts: 72
  • Liked: 0
A possibly more appropriate question is "Will a one-way / suicide Mars architecture succeed, ever?" Don't flinch. The word describes what it is.

With all due respect, how would a one-way Mars mission, provided confidence in resupply for an indefinite period of time, be a suicide any more than would be the decision to move to another country, or join a monastic community, or any of a number of other major lifestyle changes?  I've seen the terminology used before on this forum and elsewhere, but I haven't actually seen any of the justification for its use. 

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6410
  • Liked: 1326
  • Australia
With all due respect, how would a one-way Mars mission, provided confidence in resupply for an indefinite period of time, be a suicide any more than would be the decision to move to another country, or join a monastic community, or any of a number of other major lifestyle changes?  I've seen the terminology used before on this forum and elsewhere, but I haven't actually seen any of the justification for its use. 

How is it a "mission"? Also, what does "resupply" really mean? Does "Mars" mean the same thing to you as it does to me? What is a "lifestyle" anyway?

Please don't engage in semantic arguments. We all end up sounding like Martha Stewart.
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Offline ClaytonBirchenough

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 683
  • Liked: 14
  • anything. space. NOW.
  • ~ 1 AU
With all due respect, how would a one-way Mars mission, provided confidence in resupply for an indefinite period of time, be a suicide any more than would be the decision to move to another country, or join a monastic community, or any of a number of other major lifestyle changes?  I've seen the terminology used before on this forum and elsewhere, but I haven't actually seen any of the justification for its use. 

How is it a "mission"? Also, what does "resupply" really mean? Does "Mars" mean the same thing to you as it does to me? What is a "lifestyle" anyway?

Please don't engage in semantic arguments. We all end up sounding like Martha Stewart.


It seems to me "semantic arguments" always have negatives and positives. Whether the reasoning is positive or negative, in this case the astronauts and financiers should decide this for themselves.
Ask questions, learn!

"The earth is the cradle of humankind, but one cannot live in the cradle forever."
—Konstantin Tsiolkovsky

~AD ASTRA~

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9090
  • Liked: 554
  • Delta-t is the salient metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
A possibly more appropriate question is "Will a one-way / suicide Mars architecture succeed, ever?" Don't flinch. The word describes what it is.

With all due respect, how would a one-way Mars mission, provided confidence in resupply for an indefinite period of time, be a suicide any more than would be the decision to move to another country, or join a monastic community, or any of a number of other major lifestyle changes?  I've seen the terminology used before on this forum and elsewhere, but I haven't actually seen any of the justification for its use. 

The confidence in resupply cannot be provided, largely because confidence in getting there in the first place, on a shoestring budget can not be provided.  Mars One is a foundation, not a business.  The company exists to provide income for its founders for a number of years.  From the buzz, it seems that part of their strategy might be working.  IDK.

They haven't convinced the majority of us armchair critics that they've even covered the basics.  SLS will fly first.
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6410
  • Liked: 1326
  • Australia
They haven't convinced the majority of us armchair critics that they've even covered the basics.  SLS will fly first.

Nice one. I'm so glad I wasn't drinking coke while reading that or you'd owe me a new keyboard ;)
When someone is wishing for a pony, there's little to be gained by suggesting a unicorn would be ever better.. ya know, unless it's sarcasm.

Offline Robert Thompson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1096
  • Liked: 79
  • Kitt Peak
provided confidence in resupply for an indefinite period of time
Thin margins versus thin funding. Reality tv is to generate revenue for a shareholder. I may be missing a successful show here or there, but I was under the impression that Deadliest Catch and Dirty Jobs were successful adult-oriented reality shows that generated the most profit.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/discovery-communications-second-quarter-profit-218820
"Discovery slightly raised its full-year revenue guidance range from $4.025 billion-$4.125 billion to $4.075 billion-$4.175 billion. It still targets 2011 earnings of $1 billion-$1.075 billion."
Using the cosmological principle, we must assume that the viewing demographic is no different in Lansdorp's envisioned future than in our own normal evening habit. He would have to produce a _lot_ of quality content, on time, every time, for years on end, with scarce story of profit for vicarious gambling, with scarce interpersonal drama of a Jersey Shore luminosity, with more technical jargon than an ordinary couch American would tolerate, with a probable gender gap in viewership, without recourse to a fresh new set of disposable faces and bio. Yeah, you can sign advertisement like Axe and Red Bull but those appeal to an ephemeral flags and footprint format which is de rigueur to the male - you need more family / kids / domestic homesteading capable advertising because this is long haul, or, it's (). You can stretch the content to have good pricey episodes and then economic holding down the fort episodes. Then even the finest quality content is at the mercy of networks, favoritism, time slots. Based on your finding of advertising during reality shows, and possible discretionary dollars after the shareholding groups have taken their slice, do you think Lansdorp has a basis?

Offline RocketmanUS

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1912
  • Liked: 28
  • USA
Did not vote.

Maybe.
If the tech can be made in time.
Launcher, lander, life support , Mars Habs, ect.
If they join with others it could be done.
Mars-One as the media part of a larger team.

There are a lot of big if's.
Mars and beyond, human exploration
The grass is always greener on the other side. When you stand on top of the hill you see both sides!

Tags: