Will a Starship go to Mars in the 2026 launch window?

[gaballard]

If anyone was serious about sending people to Mars in 4 years, there would already be testing of the psychological side of the trip. Lock a crew in a Starship-sized space for 6-9 months without any resupply would be an obvious place to start. Having a crew live in Antarctica for two years without any new supplies and a communication delay would be the next step.

Musk seems to think the problem of Mars colonization is simply one of transportation, when it’s just a much a sociological issue as a technological one.

[meekGee]

If anyone was serious about sending people to Mars in 4 years, there would already be testing of the psychological side of the trip. Lock a crew in a Starship-sized space for 6-9 months without any resupply would be an obvious place to start. Having a crew live in Antarctica for two years without any new supplies and a communication delay would be the next step.

Musk seems to think the problem of Mars colonization is simply one of transportation, when it’s just a much a sociological issue as a technological one.

That's another false obstacle.

Lock 20 people in a room for a couple years and they'll kill each other.

Put them on a planet with a clear goal of preparing a first forward base and the two years will just fly by.

The more you navel gaze, the more lint you'll find...  There are a million reasons not to go, and only a few to do so.  Good thing it's not a counting game.

[testguy]

Are we comfortable with sending people to Mars before Starship demonstrates a safe return and landing on Earth after landing on Mars?

[friendly3]

Are we comfortable with sending people to Mars before Starship demonstrates a safe return and landing on Earth after landing on Mars?

Yes we are. We won't wait until 2100 for robots to become sophisticated enough to install the equipment needed to produce LOX and liquid methane, and to refuel a Starship.
It's frustrating to see that every time a date for a Mars journey is announced dozens of people show up with countless reasons not to do it.

[dglow]

If anyone was serious about sending people to Mars in 4 years, there would already be testing of the psychological side of the trip.

Mars Arctic Research Station

[Twark_Main]

The list of Mars analog experiments is long.

No, people don't kill each-other.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mars_analogs

[DanClemmensen]

Are we comfortable with sending people to Mars before Starship demonstrates a safe return and landing on Earth after landing on Mars?

Who is "we"? There are people who believe that humanity on Earth is under several near-term existential threats. These people want to establish a self-sustaining colony on Mars as a long-shot insurance policy to maintain humanity. I doubt that they are "comfortable" with risking lives to shorten the time needed, but they may be less comfortable with not doing so.

[sstli2]

Regulatory cadence needs to change to make this happen. Or start a new company in another country.

Regulatory agencies have long been a convenient scapegoat for the fact that space is hard and progress will be slow, and people do not want to admit that fact.

It's frustrating to see that every time a date for a Mars journey is announced dozens of people show up with countless reasons not to do it.

I can think of countless reasons to do it. I can also think of countless reasons why it is unrealistic, impractical, dangerous, reckless, foolhardy, etc.

Ultimately, I think a lot of the drive to do it - on behalf of entities both private and public - is not the altruistic "saving civilization" or "advancing humanity" endeavor it's marketed as. It's just vanity and ego. Sometimes it's a single man's ego, sometimes it's a country's ego.

[meekGee]

Are we comfortable with sending people to Mars before Starship demonstrates a safe return and landing on Earth after landing on Mars?

"we" the people are uncomfortable with lots of things, though ironically sending people to their possible death is not one of them.

The people you should be asking is the people that want to go.  If a crew is able and willing (and "able" includes "informed") then yes.

Once they land, they can keep getting supplied. They'll set up ISRU, and at some point return flights will become possible.

[KilroySmith]

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again.

I’m a 60 year old Engineer, and if asked i I’d get on a ship tomorrow and just plan on dieing on Mars sometime in the next 20 years.  What a fabulous challenge and way to finish off my life, working on bringing humanity to another planet-far better than learning to play paddle ball and doing water aerobics apt the pool on Thursdays. 

A ship full of 50-60 year olds would force human society to recognize that people are going to die in space, and it’s not always going to be a reason for a national day of mourning.

[SpeakertoAnimals]

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again.

I’m a 60 year old Engineer, and if asked i I’d get on a ship tomorrow and just plan on dieing on Mars sometime in the next 20 years.  What a fabulous challenge and way to finish off my life, working on bringing humanity to another planet-far better than learning to play paddle ball and doing water aerobics apt the pool on Thursdays. 

A ship full of 50-60 year olds would force human society to recognize that people are going to die in space, and it’s not always going to be a reason for a national day of mourning.

64 here, healthy, strong, intelligent and handy. Third grandchild graduates from high school this year. I could last 20 more years. This would be a good way to go.
Ask for volunteers. You will get them.

[Barley]

I think that there is every chance that a Starship is sent ‘to’ Mars in the near future. Not to land, but as a flyby demonstration of LEO refuelling and reignition and full duration engine burn into Mars transfer orbit. I wouldn’t expect that it would be particularly close to Mars (say 100,000km).

You could demonstrate almost all of this without getting within 350,000,000 km of Mars.  There is no need to wait for a launch window.  You could iterate Earth departure and deep space operations several times between 2024 and 2026.

[mikegi]

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again.

I’m a 60 year old Engineer, and if asked i I’d get on a ship tomorrow and just plan on dieing on Mars sometime in the next 20 years.  What a fabulous challenge and way to finish off my life, working on bringing humanity to another planet-far better than learning to play paddle ball and doing water aerobics apt the pool on Thursdays. 

A ship full of 50-60 year olds would force human society to recognize that people are going to die in space, and it’s not always going to be a reason for a national day of mourning.

You could have a thousand signed contracts/waivers saying you agree to the enormous risks involved but ... it wouldn't matter. If there are Americans dying in space or on Mars, it would require dozens of younger people to risk their life to save you.

PS. I write this as one of the, ehem, older people who would sign such documents. The problem is that I'm possibly condemning young people who would attempt to rescue me to a very risky mission. I won't do that.

[M.E.T.]

Worth noting that for humans to land in 2031, Elon probably has to set a target of 2028.

Of course, once the first man takes his historic step out of a Starship onto Martian soil in 2031, the usual suspects will immediately proceed to castigate Musk as a fraud and a liar for missing his stated goal of 2028.

[Twark_Main]

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again.

I’m a 60 year old Engineer, and if asked i I’d get on a ship tomorrow and just plan on dieing on Mars sometime in the next 20 years.  What a fabulous challenge and way to finish off my life, working on bringing humanity to another planet-far better than learning to play paddle ball and doing water aerobics apt the pool on Thursdays. 

A ship full of 50-60 year olds would force human society to recognize that people are going to die in space, and it's not always going to be a reason for a national day of mourning.

You could have a thousand signed contracts/waivers saying you agree to the enormous risks involved but ... it wouldn't matter. If there are Americans dying in space or on Mars, it would require dozens of younger people to risk their life to save you.

PS. I write this as one of the, ehem, older people who would sign such documents. The problem is that I'm possibly condemning young people who would attempt to rescue me to a very risky mission. I won't do that.

How magnanimous (and how awful of anyone on the other side), but you've overlooked one thing....

Just send geezers to save you. 


Seriously though, I think the whole premise is flawed. What situation would "require" (or even be helped by) sending more crew to Mars months later, let alone sending crew from an entirely separate population of astronauts that aren't on the normal crew roster?  Seems like a contrived scenario back-engineered (back-moralized?) from a preexisting aversion to landing on Mars.

[steveleach]

Are we comfortable with sending people to Mars before Starship demonstrates a safe return and landing on Earth after landing on Mars?

This really deserves its own thread, if we haven't already had one.

For this thread, I think we should work with what we already know about SpaceX's plans, which is that they will send people to Mars as soon as they have demonstrated they can land them on Mars, but before demonstrating that they can return them to Earth.

[Bizgec]

I'm sooo disappointed in this thread (but not surprised). The ratio of asshole vs. normal posts is way outside the average for NSF. [sad panda emoji]

[rfdesigner]

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again.

I’m a 60 year old Engineer, and if asked i I’d get on a ship tomorrow and just plan on dieing on Mars sometime in the next 20 years.  What a fabulous challenge and way to finish off my life, working on bringing humanity to another planet-far better than learning to play paddle ball and doing water aerobics apt the pool on Thursdays. 

A ship full of 50-60 year olds would force human society to recognize that people are going to die in space, and it's not always going to be a reason for a national day of mourning.

You could have a thousand signed contracts/waivers saying you agree to the enormous risks involved but ... it wouldn't matter. If there are Americans dying in space or on Mars, it would require dozens of younger people to risk their life to save you.

PS. I write this as one of the, ehem, older people who would sign such documents. The problem is that I'm possibly condemning young people who would attempt to rescue me to a very risky mission. I won't do that.

How magnanimous (and how awful of anyone on the other side), but you've overlooked one thing....

Just send geezers to save you. 


Seriously though, I think the whole premise is flawed. What situation would "require" (or even be helped by) sending more crew to Mars months later, let alone sending crew from an entirely separate population of astronauts that aren't on the normal crew roster?  Seems like a contrived scenario back-engineered (back-moralized?) from a preexisting aversion to landing on Mars.

agreed.

I recall a post/article some time back where the possibilites of rescue were reviewed.

If an accident happens after the mars intercept burn, even if thats just 1 second after the burn completion when Earth is still really big in the spacecraft window, then you have to wait a long long time, anywhere from 9 months to 2 years.

If the Mars transfer window is still open you can launch with another Mars bound rescue mission, but you probably can't catch up, you'd probably have to wait for the mars orbit.

If the failure happens at mars then it's the next earth-mars window. (2 years away)

If the failure happens on the way back from mars, then you "just" meet them in orbit or as they pass earth (assuming they can't decelerate sufficiently to make orbit due to the accident).

The actual solution is multiple ships with sufficient facilities plus space-only shuttles to transfer people between ships or ability to allow ships to dock and transfer crew in space, With enough people in one convoy most eventualities can be covered.  There is a greater chance of problems but a massively greater chance of the crews being able to deal with those problems at the time.

[IRobot]

What about a Starship Mars Orbiter with an useful payload (say, high bandwidth comms) for the 2026 timeframe? This should avoid all the regulatory problems.

Sure, that would be the safe and simple path, but from my perspective the most important would be an attempt to land, or at least to survive until close to the ground, to understand if the simulations of Mars entry are correct.

[woods170]

Regarding the question in the thread title...
My informed opinion is: No Starship will go to Mars in the 2026 launch window. As always, Elon is being waaaaaay too optimistic again.

Reasoning: SpaceX has retired a lot of risk with regards to SuperHeavy and Starship, but not enough risk is retired IMO to make a 2026 attempt realistic.

The biggest risks still to be retired, will IMO take several more years, shifting any attempt to fly an uncrewed Starship to Mars to the 2028 window. In a random order these risks are:

- Tower catch of SuperHeavy. This will IMO take several attempts to get it working routinely. First catch attempt is by definition going to fail and will result in yet another lengthy delay for the next SH/SS launch due to the FAA needing to sign of on the investigation, as well as SpaceX needing time to repair Stage 0. Guestimate by my SpaceX sources is chances of first attempt tower catch failure is greater than 75%. If they're lucky the SH OBC discovers trouble early and diverts to water landing. If they're unlucky the booster gets into trouble over the OLM/OLT and causes a lot of damage. Prediction of that happening is guestimated by them as around 50%.

- Orbital refueling: This is by definition going to present some unique issues, most of which cannot be discovered until it is actually tried out in-orbit. The guestimate of my trusted SpaceX sources is that SpaceX will need at least two years, from the very flight test, to get it working routinely and safely. That by definition rules out 2026.

- Starship rapid reuse: Much as some unexpected issues were discovered on the first generations of recovered Falcon 9 boosters, it is a given that the first recovered Starships will have some nasty surprises that need mitigation. The heat shield is also not a fixed problem yet. Not by a long shot. The current "fix" (a back-up ablative layer sitting underneath the tiles) is actually just a temporary solution with nasty turn-around implications in case it is actually needed.

- Regulatory side of things: eventually someone in US Congress and/or in the US government is gonna wake-up to the fact that landing an uncrewed Starship is going to have some severe Planetary Protection issues. And that is IMO going to delay things further until the regulatory hurdles are cleared.

- Lack of enough launch infrastructure: Right now a second launch pad is being constructed at Boca, but this won't be operational until NET late Q1 2025. Regulatory approval to launch more than ten times out of Boca annually is at least a year away, due to al the legal hurdles being thrown up by environmental groups and activists. The launch pad at LC-39A is even further out from becoming operational and it also currently has a limited number of launch opportunities annually. To get Starship to Mars, SpaceX is going to need at least four operational SS/SH launch pads, per my SpaceX sources. That situation will not happen until late 2026, at the very earliest, per their estimates. So, that's not ready for a 2026 attempt either.

So, what do my sources make of Elon's most recent "predictions"? Their assessment is that it is completely unrealistic. First uncrewed launch to Mars is 2028, at the earliest. Their prediction of first crewed flights to Mars is the 2033 launch window, at the very earliest, with 2035 being more realistic. Again, this is due to regulatory issues, and the need to fix issues discovered during two runs of uncrewed Starship missions, as well as getting ISRU to be reliable enough for human flights to Mars. And a host of other issues that need to be solved.