SpaceX Starts To Reveal Mars Colonization Plans
Elon Musk provides new details on his ‘mind blowing’ mission to Mars, Washington Post
“Essentially what we’re saying is we’re establishing a cargo route to Mars,” he said. “It’s a regular cargo route. You can count on it. It’s going happen every 26 months. Like a train leaving the station. And if scientists around the world know that they can count on that, and it’s going to be inexpensive, relatively speaking compared to anything in the past, then they will plan accordingly and come up with a lot of great experiments.”
SpaceX’s Elon Musk teases ‘dangerous’ plan to colonize Mars starting in 2024, Geekwire
“Musk said 2022 would mark the first use of the Mars Colonial Transporter, a spaceship that’s big enough to carry scores of people to Mars. The first MCT would be uncrewed. However, it’s plausible to think that the craft could be pre-positioned at Mars to support the crewed mission to come, and the return trip to Earth. That’s the part of the plan that’s still fuzzy.”
– The Real Cost of a Red Dragon Mission to Mars, earlier Post
– SpaceX Will Go To Mars Starting in 2018, earlier Post
Ok. Every 26 months SpaceX is going to launch something to Mars. The first missions are going out on 2018 and 2020. One capsule on the first trip, two capsules on the second. That would be cool to see, “SX style” with several cameras capturing video along the way. Do we get some of that real time or after a short time delay? Hope they can make those dates.
” two capsules on the second”
I think the way the F9 first stage recovery is going by the time 2020 comes around we may be looking at significantly more than Two Dragons making the journey.
I wish September was here now!
Cheers
I think Musk is moving in the right direction and he may very well get us to Mars. Interesting program on CNN tonight about spaceflight, Morgan Spurlock, and they kept making the point that there is plenty of vision and lots of feelings about the space program and its vitality, but if we are going to Mars, or anywhere, it will not be NASA to get us there. NASA is at best slow. NASA has not done anything since they finished building the ISS in 1993-not accurate, but that was the date given-of course NASA people got the date of the first human spaceflight wrong too. Too bad no one checks for accuracy. And the point Spurlock kept making over and over is that no one can afford to fly as long as NASA’s price is so high but with commercial coming soon, maybe even he will have a chance. ISS manager spoke about NASA’s next goal, asteroid recovery, which is apparently defunct even before the program got aired.
Good program. Very pro space. Morgan gave the right reasons for being pro space. I don’t think Orion even made an appearance-interesting in a program all about going on exploration missions. Of course ISS was highlighted for its rinky dink science experiments. No relationship at all cited about ISS and exploration. Someone missed the message. Very much seems to have lost faith in NASA.
This really is exciting, and I hope he succeeds. However just having people on Mars, even having permanent establishments there, is not colonizing. At least not in my definition FWIW. Otherwise we could say that we have begun colonizing LEO just because we have a permanent human presence there. And that’s even assuming that the first human missions to Mars will be the beginning of permanent establishments, which seems unlikely, just like it took many years of exploring LEO before a permanent presence was established. And that’s just 250 miles away.
In history colonization occurred when people traveled from the old world to the new world, not to visit, but to stay. These were one-way trips, as the settlers expected to spend the rest of their lives in the new land. I know there has been talk of one-way trips to Mars, and I’m sure you would find plenty of volunteers if that was offered. It’s certainly not impossible, but I think it is not likely that the first groups going up on Elon’s wagon train will be permanent settlers who will spend the rest of their lives on Mars. And if not, then I think it’s a little early to start referring to it as colonization.
FWIW we do not have a permanent presence anywhere in space or for that matter here on Earth when you really analyse it. Nothing is permanent.
Cheers
Mr. Musk has been very clear on his intention to establish a colony.
When those brave colonists boarded a ship and headed west from England they had plenty of stores, live animals, seeds, and the like.
And it is also true that there was a constant supply line from England (or wherever).
I don’t see this plan as much different, really. The needed supplies are different, sure, but it’s the same concept.
One thing the early Mars and American colonists will have in common? A very very difficult initial period during which people will certainly die, perhaps many people. There will be tragedy, not from Native Americans but from the planet itself.
But there will be glory as well, and that is why people will go.
The big difference, and my point, is that the first humans who go to Mars won’t be staying, they will be there for increments similar to ISS, a bit longer but only because that is unavoidable, but still increments, measured in years, not decades, and certainly not lifetimes. Again I am talking about the first several human missions to Mars, not what may eventually happen in future decades.
Full disclosure I am far from being a SpaceX “denier” I have always had confidence in what they are doing when so many other people were predicting failure. I believe Musk will get humans to Mars, and possibly be the first to do so, which in itself would be an amazing accomplishment, especially if they return safely which Musk admits is not a given.
But I am in total disbelief that anyone going to Mars in the next couple of decades will be staying there permanently. If that makes me a denier so be it.
I would think the whole “returning” thing may not be that simple. Not from a technical perspective (although that is pretty difficult), but from a financial point. If people are sent at low personal financial cost then they may choose to come back, but if they need to sell everything they own to afford a ticket, these people will have nothing to come back to. I believe Musk himself said a long time ago that many people will be able to afford the ticket if they sell everything they own.
Not sure how anything I said applies to the initial travelers though.
Have you seen any indication that he isn’t planning these first missions as one way? Maybe he does plan 2 year rotation returns, but I haven’t seen it. Lets see if he slips out more info.
More to the point, he may not make the decision. There will be return mass to bring people home. My money is on it being up to the individual.
There are no indications one way or another. But he might have trouble getting (sane and competent) people for an initial, one-way trip. The problem is guaranteeing the logistical support for the rest of someone’s lifetime. With one company and new (or relatively new) hardware, that might not be easy.
Nor was it was in the 18th century; many colonies were well-financed and supplied. Huge sums were paid to ferry essential and not so essential goods (Persian rugs for the Lord’s house, for instance; pianos, other luxury goods). And still they failed, mostly due to agricultural mistakes, but they failed.
The problem is that, for almost everything, the first European colonists of North America could either do without things or could reasonably expect to produce them locally. (Forgive me for calling the British “European”…) The luxury imports came later, and after exports were available to pay for them.
The reason I said one-way trips to Mars would be less popular at first, is that people might feel it was too risky, until local production of the basics is established. If things like in situ resource production, chemical plants and hydroponic farms could be set up and demonstrated by those holding a return ticket, then others might feel the risks of a one-way trip were lower. They would be dependent on fewer (and lower mass) imports from Earth.
Fair point. But would you concede that agricultural failures in the New World- largely due to applying farming techniques honed in the Old– would be analogous to, say, the difficulty of farming under glass?
Certainly. But the colonists _believed_ the old world techniques would work, and that affected their assessment of the risks. I think someone going to Mars on a one-way ticket may be more skeptical about hydroponics (which, in fact, could also be an poorly-informed view.)
Here’s an informed view, about hydroponics on Earth anyway: this is a proven and quantified technology to the extent that nutrient and light requirements for common crops are very well understood.
The chief problem with hydroponics here on Earth relates to cost compared to row crops. The technique is useful mostly for out-of-season crops (and even there day length issues remain) and for specialty, very high quality products like tomatoes and strawberries without blemish.
I’ll trust your judgement and experience on the subject. I would like to know about sensitivity to trace elements. Too many or odd ones might be a problem for hydroponics, and therefore drive requirements for the chemical plant.
But my point wasn’t about reality. People deciding to take a one-way trip will, if human nature remains the same, base their decisions on their perception of the risks. What they believe would matter more than the facts. So “has anyone grown food on Mars before, and if not, how can I be sure it will work” could trump all the facts about hydroponics being a known and understood process.
No indication, just second guessing. But a recurring theme that I hear in interviews with ISS crew members is that as much as they enjoy being there, by six months they are quite ready to come home. Scott Kelly said that being up for a year was harder than he thought it would be. He said for sure he could have stayed longer if he had to but it would not have been easy. And that’s on a big roomy facility with almost more places to hide out than you can count, and with fantastic day and night views of the Earth just outside the window, and the fun of weightlessness which astronauts never seem to get tired of, and live phone calls with friends and family. On Mars I guess if they do EVA’s on a regular basis that will help but that’s about all they will have going for them. Sure as time goes on there will be more modules and thus more room, but if a bunch of one-way travelers keep arriving then it just stays crowded.
What I see instead is initially two year increments. Then ideally work up to four year increments, so that for the first two years an arriving crew is mentored by the previous crew, then the next two years they will mentor the next crew. Similar to how they work it on ISS, although with typically three month cycles during a typical six month mission. Two year cycles in a four year mission will be quite a long time, with a lot still to learn about how to make that manageable.
Dunno, Steve, I have a hard time equating life IN ISS and life ON Mars with open says and stunning vistas.
At least Mars will be quiet.
Hopefully it will be quiet. One of the complaints I have heard about about living on ISS is the endless noise of the equipment. Some of which like the circulation fans relates to life support so you can’t just switch it off at night.
As for out the window views, ISS crewmembers get to watch an endless panorama of nearly the entire Earth’s land mass at relatively close range, under constantly changing lighting angles and weather. Hearing them talk about it even after six months they don’t seem to get tired of it. Not sure the same will be true for someone looking at the same mountain range out the window for months on end. Sure the view changes if they travel somewhere, but I don’t know if it’s a given yet that the first several groups of humans on Mars will be able to do much in the way of travelling, or go very far. Hopefully so.
Sunrise and sunset might be okay, although without the variety we have on Earth. Although they might get to see some nice noctilucent clouds before sunrise and after sunset.
Not much in the way of weather to break up the monotony, although I guess they would have dust storms to look forward to.
One enjoyable pastime might be stargazing and astronomy. I get the feeling that on ISS it’s usually not that spectacular because astronauts don’t seem to bring it up unless specifically asked, unlike viewing the Earth which they always seem to bring up unsolicited with great enthusiasm (along with weightlessness). Multiple reasons why stargazing might not be so great on ISS, but hopefully on Mars there will be some good upward facing viewing windows, maybe even something like the Cupola, in a module where they can turn off all the lights. Even thick glass if it’s optical quality should hopefully provide some very nice views of the heavens at night. And a telescope would be nice, of course remote controlled and using CCD but I’m sure that would still be pretty good with a decent telescope. And they would go through seasons so there would be variety.
I realize some people probably think this is all trivial, but I think finding ways to make living in an isolated environment for years on end as enjoyable as is reasonably possible will have a large impact on the the success of these long term missions. And perhaps make people want to stay permanently, which after all is the topic du jour.
It’s not trivial at all. In fact a thread a few weeks ago discussed the nature of ISS; the point being that it’s designed in the end more by engineers than planners with deeper knowledge of how humans live.
In that thread I was pointed to an interesting document summarizing the design process, where I learned that indeed human factors were part of the process. In the end, though, the ISS made so many compromises that, well, it is what it is.
Musk being a smart guy I am thinking he realizes that plunking habitats on Mars will form a settlement eventually blossoming into Bradbury City. Let’s hope some thought is given into living space relationships aside from the engineering details.
I would imaging Musk will try give to all those who go the option of stay or return. I imagine the initial return take up rate will be very high but I guess his hope is that as the years go by and the infrastructure on Mars begins to expand and improve the number that chose the stay option will increase until you have what will undeniably be a “Colony”
Musk: “Hopefully there’s enough people who are like that who are willing to go build the foundation, at great risk, for a Martian city.”
I believe thousands signed up for Mars One knowing it is planned as a one-way mission. There will be no shortage of volunteers.
Agreed;
ifwhen MCT flies, it will probably trigger a massive surge in sign-ups.These people will be odd to know, I think. They’d be very obviously cutting their emotional ties to Earth. Even before their departure, they would start thinking like Martians.
An interesting aspect will be the psychological makeup of this self selecting group. The wealthy are often self obsessed sociopaths, not the type you want when survival margins are thin. At least from Antarctica they can be deposited on the Christchurch tarmac in 6 hrs. I recall a dinner conversation with Robert Zubrin who said apparently seriously that those who didn’t get along would go out the airlock.
Were I younger I’d likely be on the list. On the other hand, as an older person I’d think twice.
Kim Stanley Robinson has perhaps the most deeply thoughtful consideration of how the ‘First Hundred’ might fare (Red Mars, Blue Mars, Green Mars).
K. S. Robinson’s vision has progressed: .In his latest novel Aurora he mentions Mars as being unfit/very difficult for terraforming because of perchlorate salts, lack of nitrogen, fine dust and lack of magnetic field. And the topic of the whole novel is impossibility of even interstellar colonization (basically, a planet is either unfit for any life or it is already occupied by life that evolved there and rejects any non-native biology). Better take care of the only Earth that we have.
I think Mr Spencer was talking about the social and personal interactions described in KSR’s Mars novels.The author of those novels may have changed his mind of technical details but I think his opinions about people have remained fairly constant.
The English-speaking colonists of North America also cut ties when they immigrated. It took well over a century for them to stop thinking of themselves as British.
I for one welcome our new Martian overlords.
2022 is quite an aggressive timeline for having the Mars Colonial Transporter ready. I hope he pulls it off, although it’s going to be hard – remember, Musk was planning on having Falcon Heavy ready earlier too.
Musk is typically 26 months off on his plans (not a bad thing, he just plans aggressively) so things would shift one Martian Opposition to the right, to 2026-27 for the first human landing. I can live with that!
He has a unique combination of wild imagination and realism. He shoots for the stars while admitting there are many unknowns, and he is flexible enough to dial it back a bit if needed, but only after he is convinced that he has to. A type of thinking that is really accelerating the pace of things.
Space-x schedules slip like almost anyone else’s, however Musk sets very tough goals (probably the toughest of anyone in the space business) and the delays are years not decades. Another important thing to note is that even with delays Space-x are constantly tweaking, reassessing and improving the designs meaning that what finally makes it to the launchpad is not 10 year old (or worse) technology but state of the art.
An aggressive time-line is something characteristic of Musk’s past history. Who knows if SpaceX will hit it? In any case, by proposing an aggressive target date (“… before this decade is out…”) it may focus minds and defeat the ‘no sweat, there’s plenty of time’ mindset when confronting problems, which seems to be a fairly major problem in NASA’s organisational group-think.
Well if spacex hits that 2022 timeline and more importantly gives pricing that is dramatically lower than the sls rocket beforehand we might finally be rid of the SLS progam. Though even with a price reduction I think the moon would be a wiser application for the rocket rather than mars.
In some ways the MCT sketches floating around the web– looking like FH but a couple of times bigger, if one can imagine cores in the neighborhood of 40 meters– are a little disappointing. I imagined MCT would be some sort of Aldrin Shuttle.
On the other hand, reusability changes everything. I wonder what the Apollo planners would have done with that kind of throw weight, eliminating lots of tricky docking.
This is what NASA would have done:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wi…
Actually Nova was discarded for a lot of reasons; the one standing out is the decision to abandon the ‘moon direct’ plan in favor of some sort of rendezvous plan (either moon or earth). von Braun initially supported Nova but very quickly favored the use of smaller rockets (Like Saturn 5!).
Purely FWIW, I see the MCT as basically looking like a wingless shuttle orbiter with ‘lifting body’-style outriggers with the main engines and landing gear (vertical landing) sitting on top of a gigantic 10- or 12-metre diameter 9 x Raptor propulsive return booster. I also expect an internal cargo arrangement using modular pods (either labs, workshops, passenger habs or various types of cargo hopper) that can be lowered out of the aft end cargo hatch and then towed to the base.
I’ve posted this before, but SpaceX might get some extra revenue if they also did a version with a Raptor-VAC upper stage for delivering fairing cargo to various destinations. I’m sure NASA would be very interested in having a rapid turn-around cargo launcher to back up SLS.
“I’m sure NASA would be very interested in having a rapid turn-around cargo launcher to back up SLS.”
Funny.
Exciting but there does not seem to be time for enough precursor cargo missions to support the first crewed one. I remember something like 5 cargo launches for each crewed ones. Unless SpaceX starts launching a lot more big rockets.
You do realize that the BFS is suppose to landed about 100 metric tons of cargo on Mars. So a pair of BFS will landed about 200 metric tons of supplies for maybe about a dozen crew in the initial mission. We are not talking about the NASA DRM 5.0 lander with about 20 metric tons cargo capacity.
Musk has said that there is a perhaps 10:1 ratio between equipment mass and meat bag mass, at least initially.
It’s possible that SpaceX’s studies have not come up with the same numbers as the official ones from NASA (which, IIRC, are CxP vintage).
If MCT has the throw weight advertised, then the first mission could land a huge amount of cargo at the initial LZ and the first crewed flight could follow up with only about 1/5 of its normal maximum compliment and carry mostly scientists and engineers to commence work on the first settlement (von Braun’s ‘pouring concrete around the first hab’ to turn it into the foundation of the first base as well as possibly erecting ‘The Martian’-style greenhouses).
We are getting close. SpaceX will, WILL, launch in 2018 to Mars. This does not mean they will land. Let’s not lose our heads here, ok?
The Mars Mission could suffer a catastrophic anomaly on the pad, during assent, cruise, insertion, or landing.
Imagine though, if you will, SpaceX sticking the landing on Mars in 2018/19 (I do not know when the landing would be (I count the dollars not the F=MA)) what does that do to 2020? I do not dare speculate here but there are a lot more people who want to do something who, right now, have their hands tied by some inside Congress and NASA/SMD.
At some point (rather soon) people who want to do a trip, lets say to Venus, who say screw NASA I am going to Elon. I am going to buy a used Dragon and a used core cheap, configure the guts of the Dragon to my mission, and boom!
I had a very dear friend who still works at MSFC who said once standards were set everything would change. Elon is opening up space for all of us. While he does need to make money he is not worried about his job. This cannot be said for other companies and agencies that shall remain nameless.
The train has left the station. If you are on board congratulations – you were on at the beginning. We are now heading to our first stop where those who crapped all over this idea will now be afforded the opportunity to board. When they climb on, welcome them with open arms like they have been here from the beginning.
We all know who was where and when 🙂 Now is the time to build bridges – not fiefdoms.
“We all know who was where and when 🙂 Now is the time to build bridges – not fiefdoms.” What the hell does this even mean? So SpaceX isn’t its own fiefdom – accountable to only one, apparently Godlike man in your estimation that could very well go belly up – or he could die in a car crash.
Don’t think I do not appreciate Musk’s substantial accomplishments but it’s absurd to linearly extrapolate to infinity and beyond and see him as the point solution to conquering the solar system. The Mars mission could suffer failures in any number of places and ways and the money to continue (if he gets it in the first place) could dry up and the effort could die. All the more reason to be pragmatic and incremental – “Colonizing Mars NOW!” is a fools errand.
So what are these Martian colonist going to trade with the home world? To be economically feasible all successful colonies have to produce something of value to sell, much like the early English North American colonies did in the 1600-1700’s.
Any colony on Mars is going to be dependent on Earth for a very long time. To be truly independent (both economically & politically), and to make a profit for their investors back on Earth (i.e the Jameston Colony), they will have to have a product that can be sold/traded back to the home world to be able to sustain and grow? Otherwise they will be a financial drain.
Patents are one product that comes to mind. Any technology developed on Mars by the colonist could have value back on Earth, but there seems little else.
Any ideas out there on how a Mars colony would be able to pay for itself?
No – unless you assume they find some unexpected bounty like tobacco or potatoes, this will make absolutely no economic sense. Of course there are resources on Mars you can use to minimize imports of sustenance – but the same is true for the moon and its a hell of a lot easier to get to and its also got the potential to enable other activity in cislunar space. Mars may be a “horizon destination” as the NRC put it but the moon is far more practical and logical as our first off-planet location – we even know of a resource that isn’t available on Earth or Mars – Helium 3; if we had a fusion reactor, lunar He3 could be the key to a carbonless economy. Mars – not so much.
You’ve nailed it.
The colonies- all of them, all over Earth- succeeded in part because the colonists became self-sufficient in a reasonable time,but that’s only part of the story. They succeeded because they were extracting resources which were sent back to Europe.
Nobody financed a colony so that mankind could see the far horizon; and while there was talk of ‘destiny’, the concept was used to support exploitation, not as a motivation.
Mars will be/ is a money pit. As I’ve posted here ad nauseum, there’s no money at the bottom of a gravity well. Wealth will come from astroid exploration and in situ processing and even then it’s hard to see how it develops.
actually colonists gained land and the resources on them for VERY VERY low costs, Timber, water, sand and stone and grazing lands. The native americans that had died off left literal park lands of orchards and ready to plant fields…
You can not compare the two unless property rights are included.
Granted bur the new world property had intrinsic value as a place to grow crops, harvest wood, etc, Nothing like that exists on Mars and it would cot far more to extract minerals from Mars and bring them to Earth than it would to mine asteroids – gravity wells are tough!
If Mars is a problem in this respect (it is), I can’t see the Moon as being any better. Producing oxygen in situ is fine (although it is mining and dry chemistry.) Hydrogen is possible, if you locate your facilities at the pole, which isn’t a good choice for other purposes. But what about carbon, nitrogen and a few of the other chemicals you’ll need to air and food?
The moon is better in several ways:
1.) The gravity well is less making both landing and taking off easier and less propellant hungry.
2.) There is more solar power available due to closer proximity to Earth and while regolith is dusty, there are no lunar dust storms or breezes to reduce efficiency. With no atmosphere and lots of free energy, you may be able to launch using electromagnetic mass drivers as envisaged by Gerard K O’Neill – no atmosphere makes this much easier.
3. It’s a three day trip from Earth – the amount of launch mass for a mission is much less and you can always get new supplies there more quickly.
4. Again, if we develop fusion reactors, we can mine the moon for He3.
anything coming from Mars the first few years will be rare and unique. From rocks that sparkle to art work. Most everything will be considered a luxury good for the wealthy
There were a number of subsistence colonies, in North America in the seventeenth century and elsewhere in the nineteenth. It’s overstating it, but one of the main points of New South Wales could be described as _not_ sending anyone back. Some of the religious colonies were also supported by rich patrons/donors back home. But Mars is a bit different. There aren’t nearly as many things you can just do without if they are too expensive to import.
It is possible that our future is hobbled by capitalism. And before my right-wing friends jump in, let me explain.
Inhabiting more than one planet provides an undeniable insurance policy for humanity. Capitalism, on the other hand, demands a sort of balance of payments, one side of which–the ethereal argument about the good of the species–can never fund.
Imagine if you will a race of beings organized in ways that value the future of the species above all else; they would simply find a way, just as our European ancestors did in funding the great cathedrals in recognition that there’s a greater purpose at work.
Money was just a convenient was to express the cost. Even if freely donated, an extraterrestrial colony will require some support from Earth. At least at first and probably for a long time. That’s going to be more than the subsistence colonies of 17th century New England.
For sure. The Mars colony is very likely to be a subsistence living for a long time: a brutal and dirty existence.
Good job Elon Musk Mars will send many capsules to help people to live
over 5 years and will send multiple capsules with food and people to form a Mars colony
2 bases to form on Mars and the Mars equator alu dark side to escape the sunlight
It will be a huge moment for humanity
Nicely done.
Now let’s imagine living in a dungeon.
how many living in manhatten live most of their life indoors?
Given the corridors connecting buildings, I think it is technically possible for some MIT students to spend 100% of their time indoors.
Oh dear. Are you actually saying that’s a superior way to live? That we can’t do better? Mars is a clean slate encumbered only by our own legacy thinking.
No, I personally won’t want to stay indoors all the time. But people can, and some people might prefer to. That’s up to them.
Looking at the small sample of friends I know living in Manhattan I’d say very few.
If they sleep, work and eat indoors that is already 16-18 hours per day or 75% of their time. If they go to museums, theater, movies, malls, etc etc etc .. I can not imagine that 80-85% of their day is not spent indoors, which would be most of their life.
no no no
After people will do that base in 2020 will start drilling into the ground probe and begin warming the planet Mars will result in 5 years
Mars will be found in underground gas that can be burned
when the water will thaw the ground and form clouds and will rain on Mars will create lakes and people will try different experiments with plants in water to produce oxygen but these things will be pozibil the equator in shady areas so that They are protected from solar radiation 70%
It will create one system of evaporation of water and using sun began to evaporate water
but first you have to drill wells to find liquid water on Mars
will use solar panels to produce electricity and to heat water with electrodes to evaporate water in the atmosphere of Mars
https://uploads.disquscdn.c…
First off – WHY? That’s a complete waste of perfectly good water that the colonists would rather be drinking, bathing in, and growing food with.
Secondly, pure liquid water can’t exist on Mars’ surface – the air pressure is too low – water will quickly freeze into ice and then sublimate away.