SpaceX Crewed Dragon Circumlunar Mission

[dror]

I'm honestly very surprised at the level of risk-aversion and negativity to this idea.

I have no problem with the risk, worst case scenario we lose a couple of nonessential billionaires. SpaceX would most likely weather the storm.  Negativity is relative, more like dismay at turning a tool in to a toy.

Matthew

worst case scenario SpaceX does not weather the storm.

The question "Does it worth the risk?" does not relate to the nonessential billionaires.
So, does it worth the risk?

[Kansan52]

It all boils down to how you weigh the positives against the negatives.

For me, it is breaking the shackles that started with Apollo, we can't do something because of the risk. This is about the risk is worth the reward. The reward is going forward; blazing the trail.

If it fails, there will be plenty of people that say 'Told you so'. Success will means we have broken the shackles.

[AC in NC]

I have no problem with the risk, worst case scenario we lose a couple of nonessential billionaires. SpaceX would most likely weather the storm.  Negativity is relative, more like dismay at turning a tool in to a toy.

Worst case scenario SpaceX does not weather the storm.  The question "[Is] it worth the risk?" does not relate to the nonessential billionaires.  So, [is] it worth the risk?

SpaceX entire reason for being requires successfully overcoming risks far greater than this one.  And loss of life is I believe expected by everyone.  The greatest risk (launch) already has the abort mitigation which is believed to have been able to successfully handle AMOS6.  When ready to do so, they've got bigger problems if they can't throw some billionaires around the moon without something worse than a successful abort during ascent.

It's a very reasonable shakeout test and paid for to boot at the sole cost of the delta bad-publicity risk from losing civilians or going earlier than they otherwise would.

[AncientU]

Interplanetary spacecraft and scientific exploration.

Not tourism and colonization.

The problem is that only governments and very affluent companies can fund true science without a commercial return. 

Right.  I'm disappointed that the government is not funding this.

Can you clarify what "this" is?

The next steps - all the steps that are between what we are doing now, and colonization of another planet.  There's probably a century or more of that - if we try.  And we aren't.  And neither is SpaceX.

I believe that this (private/public partnership model) is the only ride that NASA will ever be able to afford if it wants to do real exploration (such as a surface search for life on every potential body in the solar system) and colonization.  It doesn't have to take a century, either.  NASA has had the technical capability to go to Mars, for instance, or build a permanently-inhabited Moon base for a half century -- problem is that the government-only model has proven to NOT WORK.  Russia has had the same capability and a dictatorial form of government -- again, doesn't work.  ESA, same... China, same, though they are now headed that way.

What this adventure does, is demystify the 'space-is-hard, only governments can do it' aura that vested interests have promoted for self-enrichment/power; it shows that not only test pilots and a handful of other hand-selected individuals who 'have the right stuff' can go into space.  Now we can finally (yeah!!!) stop hearing about the World's most powerful rocket, going further into the depths of space than mankind has ever gone before.  Going to the Moon is child's play on the scale of what there is to do in space, just as going 3,600 'miles' beyond low Earth orbit is an embarrassing stunt if you've spent $Billions to get there.

You have no basis for saying SpaceX isn't taking those steps... and won't.  You (and I) know several other nations who certainly aren't -- that is who you (and I) should rail against.

[Danderman]

What this adventure does, is demystify the 'space-is-hard, only governments can do it' aura that vested interests have promoted for self-enrichment/power; it shows that not only test pilots and a handful of other hand-selected individuals who 'have the right stuff' can go into space. 

first off, space is hard.

Secondly, SpaceX has plenty of potential to send tourists around the Moon, but it is just plain stupid to expect them to do it  in 2018. Let's see Dragon 2 fly to LEO a few times, and see FH fly a few payloads before risking the company on a stunt.

[Lee Jay]

You have no basis for saying SpaceX isn't taking those steps... and won't.

Then why do none of their announcements or promotional materials talk about them?

[AncientU]

What this adventure does, is demystify the 'space-is-hard, only governments can do it' aura that vested interests have promoted for self-enrichment/power; it shows that not only test pilots and a handful of other hand-selected individuals who 'have the right stuff' can go into space. 

first off, space is hard.

Secondly, SpaceX has plenty of potential to send tourists around the Moon, but it is just plain stupid to expect them to do it  in 2018. Let's see Dragon 2 fly to LEO a few times, and see FH fly a few payloads before risking the company on a stunt.

Apparently, it's not as hard as NASA and its controllers make it out to be.

[Space Ghost 1962]

You have no basis for saying SpaceX isn't taking those steps... and won't.

Then why do none of their announcements or promotional materials talk about them?

Good luck in trying to prove a negative.

[QuantumG]

SpaceX has been pretty explicit that they're not doing any of the "other stuff" for colonization. They figure if you can get people there the rest will follow.

Also, anyone mention Space Adventures on this thread yet? I saw some public information on Twitter that fits with what I've heard from them privately for years, so I guess their involvement is official now? Or still not quite?

[AncientU]

You have no basis for saying SpaceX isn't taking those steps... and won't.

Then why do none of their announcements or promotional materials talk about them?

The September reveal was this and only this... recall a big-ass carbon composite tank, for instance, or a methlox engine firing, or a mission called Red Dragon?

Steps. (That is what they look like, unlike #JourneytoMars Public Affairs propaganda.)
Privately funded.

[AncientU]

SpaceX has been pretty explicit that they're not doing any of the "other stuff" for colonization. They figure if you can get people there the rest will follow.

Also, anyone mention Space Adventures on this thread yet? I saw some public information on Twitter that fits with what I've heard from them privately for years, so I guess their involvement is official now? Or still not quite?

It would make lots of sense for a commercial space tourism company to be the coordinator of such services, just as other companies are consolidating cubesats and small spacecraft for purchased launches.  Likewise, Bigelow or someone hired by his company becomes the broker for crew and logistics to his stations. 

Model might be optimum, come to think of it...

(Getting people -- and 100+ tonne payloads -- to the surface, that is.)

[Lee Jay]

SpaceX has been pretty explicit that they're not doing any of the "other stuff" for colonization. They figure if you can get people there the rest will follow.

Really?  How do they plan to verify that Mars is likely devoid of existing life *after* they've already colonized it, and what would they do about NOT going there in the first place if indigenous life is found there later?

[AncientU]

SpaceX has been pretty explicit that they're not doing any of the "other stuff" for colonization. They figure if you can get people there the rest will follow.

Really?  How do they plan to verify that Mars is likely devoid of existing life *after* they've already colonized it, and what would they do about NOT going there in the first place if indigenous life is found there later?

This sounds exactly like the discussions that go on in reviews for certain USG projects that I've done... people continually pointing out why things cannot be done (and sending the people actually doing work off on inane scavenger hunts) instead of working to figure out how to pool talents assembled to overcome the obstacles.

[Lee Jay]

SpaceX has been pretty explicit that they're not doing any of the "other stuff" for colonization. They figure if you can get people there the rest will follow.

Really?  How do they plan to verify that Mars is likely devoid of existing life *after* they've already colonized it, and what would they do about NOT going there in the first place if indigenous life is found there later?

This sounds exactly like the discussions that go on in reviews for certain USG projects that I've done... people continually pointing out why things cannot be done (and sending the people actually doing work off on inane scavenger hunts) instead of working to figure out how to pool talents assembled to overcome the obstacles.

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

"Planetary protection is a guiding principle in the design of an interplanetary mission, aiming to prevent biological contamination of both the target celestial body and the Earth in the case of sample-return missions. Planetary protection reflects both the unknown nature of the space environment and the desire of the scientific community to preserve the pristine nature of celestial bodies until they can be studied in detail."

So, when is this detailed studying going to be done sufficiently to lift planetary protection guidelines for Mars, who is going to do that studying, how will they do it, and how will we know that what they've done is sufficient?

[AncientU]

SpaceX has been pretty explicit that they're not doing any of the "other stuff" for colonization. They figure if you can get people there the rest will follow.

Really?  How do they plan to verify that Mars is likely devoid of existing life *after* they've already colonized it, and what would they do about NOT going there in the first place if indigenous life is found there later?

This sounds exactly like the discussions that go on in reviews for certain USG projects that I've done... people continually pointing out why things cannot be done (and sending the people actually doing work off on inane scavenger hunts) instead of working to figure out how to pool talents assembled to overcome the obstacles.

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

"Planetary protection is a guiding principle in the design of an interplanetary mission, aiming to prevent biological contamination of both the target celestial body and the Earth in the case of sample-return missions. Planetary protection reflects both the unknown nature of the space environment and the desire of the scientific community to preserve the pristine nature of celestial bodies until they can be studied in detail."

So, when is this detailed studying going to be done sufficiently to lift planetary protection guidelines for Mars, who is going to do that studying, how will they do it, and how will we know that what they've done is sufficient?

The same way we'll know before Europa lander heads to that Jovian Moon.

(I don't hear NASA stopping Culbertson from funding that mission because of planetary protection*.)
* I personally think that p-p is one of those inane scavenger hunts...

[CuddlyRocket]

How do [SpaceX] plan to verify that Mars is likely devoid of existing life *after* they've already colonized it, and what would they do about NOT going there in the first place if indigenous life is found there later?

SpaceX would go to Mars whether or not indigenous life was found there. Quite rightly in my view.

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

"Planetary protection is a guiding principle in the design of an interplanetary mission, aiming to prevent biological contamination of both the target celestial body and the Earth in the case of sample-return missions. Planetary protection reflects both the unknown nature of the space environment and the desire of the scientific community to preserve the pristine nature of celestial bodies until they can be studied in detail."

So, when is this detailed studying going to be done sufficiently to lift planetary protection guidelines for Mars, who is going to do that studying, how will they do it, and how will we know that what they've done is sufficient?

The desires of the scientific community are not the be-all and end-all. Such desires are routinely ignored by the rest of society in all kinds of areas. There are other priorities. NASA's current guidelines (not law, by the way) were developed with only the input of the scientific community. NASA is already aware that the guidelines will need to be changed if manned missions are on the horizon. At such a point other voices will be heard, especially the proponents of such missions. There may well be a row, but my money's on the HSF proponents to come out on top!

[QuantumG]

Really?  How do they plan to verify that Mars is likely devoid of existing life *after* they've already colonized it, and what would they do about NOT going there in the first place if indigenous life is found there later?

I care about people on Mars more than microbes. Marginally.

[Coastal Ron]

So, when is this detailed studying going to be done sufficiently to lift planetary protection guidelines for Mars, who is going to do that studying, how will they do it, and how will we know that what they've done is sufficient?

Definitely a bridge to be crossed, and how we do it will set a precedent.

And we already have analogs here on Earth that tell us when isolated species are contaminated with foreign species there can be unanticipated consequences - and some pretty severe.

Being someone from Earth that is looking for a place to make humanity multi-planetary (for those that come after me of course), I'm not as worried about contaminating Mars since it's highly unlikely that higher forms of life currently exist there.  What I'm more concerned about is potential life on Mars contaminating Earth.

[philw1776]

SpaceX has been pretty explicit that they're not doing any of the "other stuff" for colonization. They figure if you can get people there the rest will follow.

Really?  How do they plan to verify that Mars is likely devoid of existing life *after* they've already colonized it, and what would they do about NOT going there in the first place if indigenous life is found there later?

This sounds exactly like the discussions that go on in reviews for certain USG projects that I've done... people continually pointing out why things cannot be done (and sending the people actually doing work off on inane scavenger hunts) instead of working to figure out how to pool talents assembled to overcome the obstacles.

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

"Planetary protection is a guiding principle in the design of an interplanetary mission, aiming to prevent biological contamination of both the target celestial body and the Earth in the case of sample-return missions. Planetary protection reflects both the unknown nature of the space environment and the desire of the scientific community to preserve the pristine nature of celestial bodies until they can be studied in detail."

So, when is this detailed studying going to be done sufficiently to lift planetary protection guidelines for Mars, who is going to do that studying, how will they do it, and how will we know that what they've done is sufficient?

PP is the greatest threat to human expansion.  It's a last gasp religious incantation designed to firewall human missions should someone overcome the supposed quantum barriers erected by governmentalists.

[Rocket Science]

I started a thread 5 years back on this "So what if we found Evidence of Past or Current Life on Mars"...
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28499.0