Could (and should) SpaceX sell the rights to be first to set foot on Mars?

[eric z]

 Just to play Devil's Advocate, do all you guys have a crystal ball? Are you willing to bet your mortgage on it being SpaceX? I know most of the readership will say "Hell Yes!". OK. Can you predict the exact nature of a NASA/SpaceX relationship by then?
 It ha taken me years on this site to go from being neutral/skeptical on SpaceX to being an admirer; not quite at the amazing people stage I guess. Don't think for a minute going to Mars wasn't NASA's "quest" all along too. There simply was no political will to get it done. That is not the fault of the men and women staffing the Agency, though I suppose you could say at times top-level leadership rarely fought the battle, in public at least.
 Maybe something totally unexpected will emerge to alter the course of human events--who knows?

[savantu]

Yeah but to NASA's credit, they didn't wait until SpaceX lands on the Moon to be convinced, they picked SpaceX years before the latter is capable of landing on the Moon. So I'm super bullish about NASA/SpaceX cooperation over Mars missions.

That was with a different set of leaders. Current administration pushed those aside. Steve Jurczyk and Kathy Lueders lost their influence ( they were the main supporters of Spx ).

Regarding the topic thread, Spx will not sell rights for bragging. They will sell freight services to/from asteroid belt & Mars. Wait until they land on the 1st solid gold asteroid. There are some companies in Luxembourg  preparing for this.

[Hyperborealis]

How about something more prosaic? If Starship jumpstarts a commercial LEO economy that's self-sustaining and high-growth, NASA's role--as funder, as repository of relevant technology and knowledge--will diminish accordingly. At some point, NASA fades into becoming a regulatory body. Since Musk is in a hurry, and NASA is still relevant, no doubt Mars will be a joint mission. Might be the agency's last hurrah, though.

[FishInferno]

How about something more prosaic? If Starship jumpstarts a commercial LEO economy that's self-sustaining and high-growth, NASA's role--as funder, as repository of relevant technology and knowledge--will diminish accordingly. At some point, NASA fades into becoming a regulatory body. Since Musk is in a hurry, and NASA is still relevant, no doubt Mars will be a joint mission. Might be the agency's last hurrah, though.

I don't see NASA becoming a regulatory agency, but rather shifting to be purely focused on scientific research. A new space-focused agency will likely split from the FAA, which currently does most regulating of launches.

NASA will rent space on commercial space stations and contract companies to launch their probes and transport their astronauts. I wouldn't be surprised if they stop hiring "pilot" astronauts altogether. A Starship flight, for example, would include a couple SpaceX pilots as part of the transport service. So in short, I think NASA astronauts will be present on the first Mars landing, but only mission specialists. Command of the spacecraft itself will fall solely to SpaceX.

[whitelancer64]

NASA is not, and never has been, a regulatory body. It is and has always been primarily focused on enabling research, both in Aeronautics (the first A in NASA, which is sadly forgotten by most) and Space.

[su27k]

Yeah but to NASA's credit, they didn't wait until SpaceX lands on the Moon to be convinced, they picked SpaceX years before the latter is capable of landing on the Moon. So I'm super bullish about NASA/SpaceX cooperation over Mars missions.

That was with a different set of leaders. Current administration pushed those aside. Steve Jurczyk and Kathy Lueders lost their influence ( they were the main supporters of Spx ).

SpaceX just needs to convince Nelson and Jim Free then, not a big problem, it's what SpaceX has been doing since their founding: Convincing skeptics that they can do what they say they can do. I reckon launching a dozen SHLVs twice the size of Saturn V, plus a demonstration of orbital refueling and a simulation of Mars reentry in Earth's upper atmosphere should be sufficient.

[Slarty1080]

NASA will almost certainly be involved, and it is well possible, I think even probable, that NASA astronauts could comprise the entire first crew to Mars.

I'm not sure if Elon Musk (and SpaceX as a whole) would welcome the NASA overhead that comes with NASA flights.

And the amount of risk that needs to be assumed is LARGE for the first human flight to Mars, and well outside of what NASA currently considers "safe", so unless SpaceX sold the mission "As Is", with no guarantees of success, I can't see how NASA could be the first customer to fly to Mars.

SpaceX would certainly welcome the income. NASA would be providing equipment and experiments at the very least, they'd be utterly foolish not to do so. And since they are already doing that, when SpaceX is ready to send people, then there's no real reason to not send astronauts as well.

Perhaps NASA might find sufficient money from somewhere to finance a few experiments and more, but remember NASA has to do what it's told and is funded by Congress. NASA can't just unilaterally decide to spend vast sums of money on a new initiative.

The really interesting part will be what happens behind closed doors once Starship is operational. With luck Congress might come round to support some sort of Mars program. It has been talked about for years and if the price is right they just might. If not and its just SpaceX then NASA will have lost something IMO. It would be beyond sad to see NASA being given another x billion dollars for SLS development as SpaceX astronauts step foot onto Mars. Not only that but some people might ask questions that other people don't want asked.

[savantu]

How about something more prosaic? If Starship jumpstarts a commercial LEO economy that's self-sustaining and high-growth, NASA's role--as funder, as repository of relevant technology and knowledge--will diminish accordingly. At some point, NASA fades into becoming a regulatory body. Since Musk is in a hurry, and NASA is still relevant, no doubt Mars will be a joint mission. Might be the agency's last hurrah, though.

Some are already preparing for this.

https://space.mines.edu/

https://space.mines.edu/courses/

[Coastal Ron]

It ha taken me years on this site to go from being neutral/skeptical on SpaceX to being an admirer; not quite at the amazing people stage I guess.

I am a SpaceX supporter, but I own no SpaceX swag, so not sure if I qualify as a SpaceX amazing people. And I don't agree with many of Elon Musk's views, on a number of topics, but regarding SpaceX Elon Musk has shown that he can understand a problem and build a solution using far less resources than anyone else. So he has earned my support.

And because of what Elon Musk and SpaceX have done so far, I think they have a CHANCE at landing humans on Mars this decade. Not 100% sure, but they have some reasonable chance.

Don't think for a minute going to Mars wasn't NASA's "quest" all along too.

I'm one of the people that keeps reminding everyone that NASA's primary focus after the Apollo program has been Mars, not our Moon. Just look at how many robotic explorers we have sent to Mars verses the Moon during the last 5 decades and it is clear that NASA as a science organization wants to go to Mars next, NOT the Moon.

There simply was no political will to get it done.

We the people don't really support sending humans to either Mars or our Moon, so it isn't just that the people we send to Congress are not excited about doing it. And for good reason so far when you consider how much the SLS and Orion are going to cost - politics makes human space exploration too expensive using normal government funding approaches.

That is not the fault of the men and women staffing the Agency, though I suppose you could say at times top-level leadership rarely fought the battle, in public at least.

NASA is one of the many agencies and departments of the U.S. Government that work for whoever is President at the time, so NASA itself never gets a vote as to what the 17,000 employees want NASA to focus on. Same for the employees of the DoD, FDA, USDA, DHS, Forest Service, NPS, etc. Employees don't get a vote anywhere else in our government, so why do we assume that NASA is any different?

If the U.S. Government (i.e. the then President and Congress) think it is in the best interests of our nation to be on that first human mission to Mars, then I have no doubt that the President and Congress will find a way to ask for volunteers. And I think it will have to be volunteers, since this would not be a NASA mission with NASA safety, but a private mission that the U.S. Government is going along on as a passenger - and accepting the risks "As Is".

And I think it would be pretty likely that the U.S. Government would authorize such a volunteer effort, while paying for one or more seats on the trip.

My $0.02

[spacenut]

If in the long run NASA is to stay relevant, they could concentrate on developing nuclear in space propulsion.  Due to being a government agency they would have more oversight into nuclear power, engines or such, especially beyond Mars, or in space spacecraft flying quickly between earth and Mars or further.  SLS is the last hurrah for NASA building rockets.  They should concentrate on in space activities and more public-private funding for in space equipment.

[jpo234]

Maybe a payment in kind: a rover, habitation, green house, power plant,...

Something a space agency might have in the drawer.

[Zed_Noir]

Maybe a payment in kind: a rover, habitation, green house, power plant,...

Something a space agency might have in the drawer.

The only thing that SpaceX might take as payment in kind is either a batch of Kilopower reactors or a small light water fission reactor. IMO.


SpaceX have it's sister company to come up with some sort of Martian rover/drone. And for most of the stuff needed for staying on Mars with people could be developed in house or by a sister company. Ir is unlikely that SpaceX will tolerate the typical slow development that is the norm within the aerospace industry.


The SX CTO have a deadline of sorts for his Martian endeavor, he have to able to pass the medical physical for his retirement trip to Arcadia Planitia.

[savantu]

The only thing that SpaceX might take as payment in kind is either a batch of Kilopower reactors or a small light water fission reactor. IMO.


SpaceX have it's sister company to come up with some sort of Martian rover/drone. And for most of the stuff needed for staying on Mars with people could be developed in house or by a sister company. Ir is unlikely that SpaceX will tolerate the typical slow development that is the norm within the aerospace industry.


The SX CTO have a deadline of sorts for his Martian endeavor, he have to able to pass the medical physical for his retirement trip to Arcadia Planitia.

Exactly. The only big unknown and most massive hurdle to pass for Spx is power generation on Mars : they need nuclear reactors and states have full monopoly on this.
Everything else they can do by themselves 1/3 time and 1/10 the cost vs. Nasa.

[Twark_Main]

"And as I take this last step — this first step of a new world — I think of eight billion well-wishing souls on a distant, precious, and fragile planet. Amongst this desolation, to those Good People of the Good Earth, we beseech you...

we've been trying to reach you about your car's extended warranty."

[EeeVee3]

The first boots on mars will be a professional SPX-NASA person and i doubt would be up for bidding. However the rights to the live worldwide broadcasts and documentaries... oh yeah..   

[Jim]

The first boots on mars will be a professional SPX-NASA person and i doubt would be up for bidding. However the rights to the live worldwide broadcasts and documentaries... oh yeah..   

NO, if NASA is involved, there is no selling of rights.

[KilroySmith]

There's only one correct answer to the question.  The first person to step foot on Mars needs to be....
Elon Musk. 
Who else will have put more time, more money, or more effort into getting there?  Who is most responsible for getting there?  Who deserves the honor more?
I have no issue at all with collecting a few billion USD from a couple of passengers to be among the first crew on Mars.  After all, how many people do you believe are going to be on the first flight?  Three?  Five?  A dozen?  I'm leaning more towards the latter, and they certainly won't need to all be "steely-eyed missile men".   

[Zed_Noir]

There's only one correct answer to the question.  The first person to step foot on Mars needs to be....
Elon Musk. 
Who else will have put more time, more money, or more effort into getting there?  Who is most responsible for getting there?  Who deserves the honor more?
I have no issue at all with collecting a few billion USD from a couple of passengers to be among the first crew on Mars.  After all, how many people do you believe are going to be on the first flight?  Three?  Five?  A dozen?  I'm leaning more towards the latter, and they certainly won't need to all be "steely-eyed missile men".

Wrong answer. Musk should not be on the first manned Mars surface mission. He got too many companies to run. He will only retire to a well established settlement at Arcadia Planitia after stepping down from leadership positions with his many companies.

It have not been determine how many Starships with crew will on the initial wave with people to the Martian surface.

[DanClemmensen]

There's only one correct answer to the question.  The first person to step foot on Mars needs to be....
Elon Musk. 
Who else will have put more time, more money, or more effort into getting there?  Who is most responsible for getting there?  Who deserves the honor more?
I have no issue at all with collecting a few billion USD from a couple of passengers to be among the first crew on Mars.  After all, how many people do you believe are going to be on the first flight?  Three?  Five?  A dozen?  I'm leaning more towards the latter, and they certainly won't need to all be "steely-eyed missile men".

Wrong answer. Musk should not be on the first manned Mars surface mission. He got too many companies to run. He will only retire to a well established settlement at Arcadia Planitia after stepping down from leadership positions with his many companies.

It have not been determine how many Starships with crew will on the initial wave with people to the Martian surface.

You all really need to re-read "The Man who Sold the Moon".
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Who_Sold_the_Moon

[su27k]

The first boots on mars will be a professional SPX-NASA person and i doubt would be up for bidding. However the rights to the live worldwide broadcasts and documentaries... oh yeah..   

NO, if NASA is involved, there is no selling of rights.

That would depend on the contract between NASA and SpaceX, no? I can see NASA wanting the live broadcast to be available to everyone, but I could see right for documentaries goes to SpaceX. I think Netflix did the documentary about DM-2, not sure if they paid for it or not.