Dennis Tito To Announce Private Human Mars Mission (Update)
The Planets are Aligning for a Once-in-a-Generation Space Journey
“The Inspiration Mars Foundation, a newly formed nonprofit organization led by American space traveler and entrepreneur Dennis Tito, invites you to attend a press conference detailing its plans to take advantage of a unique window of opportunity to launch an historic journey to Mars and back in 501 days, starting in January 2018. This “Mission for America” will generate new knowledge, experience and momentum for the next great era of space exploration. It is intended to encourage all Americans to believe again, in doing the hard things that make our nation great, while inspiring youth through Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) education and motivation.”
– How a millionaire spaceflier intends to send astronauts past Mars in 2018, MSNBC
– New insights on that private (crewed?) Mars mission, NewSpace Journal
Feasibility Analysis for a Manned Mars Free-Return Mission in 2018, Dennis Tito et al, 2013 IEEE Aerospace Conference
“In 1998 Patel et al searched for Earth-Mars free-return trajectories that leave Earth, fly by Mars, and return to Earth without any deterministic maneuvers after Trans-Mars Injection. They found fast trajectory opportunities occurring two times every 15 years with a 1.4-year duration, significantly less than most Mars free return trajectories, which take up to 3.5 years. This paper investigates these fast trajectories. It also determines the launch and life support feasibility of flying such a mission using hardware expected to be available in time for an optimized fast trajectory opportunity in January, 2018. … We used a mission duration of 500 days (d) in a SpaceX Dragon class of vehicle. Crew size is a primary driver so we compared crew sizes from one to four people, and determined that two crew is optimal given mass and volume constraints.”
Keith’s update: The mission outlined in this paper uses SpaceX hardware for analysis purposes. As outlined, this conceptual mission would depart Earth on 5 Jan 2018, reach Mars on 20 August 2018, and return to Earth on 21 May 2019. This paper will be presented at the 2013 IEEE Aerospace Conference on 3 March 2013 at 9:50 pm. This paper has been widely circulated for several weeks by the authors and their associates within government, legislative, industry, and advocacy communities, and has been referenced online – in great detail – for more than a week. I cannot post this paper due to IEEE copyright policies. The press event will be webcast live tomorrow at 1:00pm EST. You can sign up at the Inspiration Mars website. There is a Twitter account at @InspirationMars that will become active soon.
Keith’s update: Update: this paper is now online at Inspiration Mars Foundation..
Will be interesting to see which government entities suddenly jump in and try to prevent this.
No need for gov or anyone else to “prevent this”—technically, economically and politically AND HUMANLY impossible! Nuff said!
Can you cite references to prove that this is impossible?
NOT impossible!! Just very difficult. There are enough flat-Earth, negative naysayers in this world already, ken-stuck-in-1g. THINK BOLD!!
Also, think of 2x Dragons docked to a central ‘Node’ module that has a life support system, at least 1000 cubic feet of habitable volume, internal ‘walls’ lined with water tanks and high-density polyethylene, lots of spare parts for the life support system, lots of rehydratable and canned goods… The back end of one or both Dragons is attached to a storable-fueled propulsion module with extra solar panels. Keep the crew down to two Astronauts and launch the stack of modules out of low Earth orbit with a ‘ganged’ set of LOX/kerosene propulsion stages.
The above list of hardware would be good enough for a flyby Mars mission – perhaps quite close to the surface during at least a partial daylight pass to relay back high-definition television pictures and commentary from the crew. When the module stack nears Earth, the crew casts off for a high=speed Earth re-entry with the rest of the hardware discarded into solar orbit…
Such a mission could be perceived as a stunt, yes. But it would also be a very bold and exciting mission, at least the historical equal of Apollo 8. To Mr Tito and his partners – GO!! Give this a shot. If it fails at least it will be a MAGNIFICENT failure.
If they do not need government help then that may be hard for the government to do….
This changes everything. IF Tito or a consortium with Tito as the lead funds this, this is what separates the men from the boys in the Beyond Earth Orbit private space field….
Yes it does. I did not see this coming at all.
I generally tend to take a skeptical look at announcements such as Mars One, but for whatever reason, this one has a taste of credibility to it.
So without further ado, i will immediately set forth and start waiting for the press conference.
But just to be clear, since I’m generally pro-mars exploration and pro manned missions.
If this is a fly-by, which is what I think it is, then there’s no objective justification for putting a person inside. There’s maybe inspirational one (hence the name) but there are enough Mars-inspired people around even without this. The downside of an unsuccessful mission is too large.
I’d rather they send a craft full of instruments, maybe do some atmospheric sample return, but otherwise just test as much technology as possible for a follow-up manned ground mission, including testing life support, and testing the heat-shield after a year and a half in transit.
If this is not a fly-by however, and they actually intend to land, then my mind is even more blown. 🙂
It is a fly by to keep it simple and takes advantage of a rare orbital alignment that has the full round trip duration of 1yr 4m, only new variable is deep space radiation. People have survived in space now for about the same duration, requires a lot of maintenance, but what else are they going to do. I hope the designers pack a lot of spare hardware, workbenches, and tools – if anything goes wrong or a system goes down, it doesn’t sound like they will be able to send up replacements like ISS.
I hope they pack a lot of spare hardware, tools, and send mechanics, people have survived on ISS for long durations, but they had the luxury of bringing up spares when the system fails. I also love Mars, and have become disheartened by all the claims from private industry as well as NASA.
The problems I’m seeing now is the frequency of grandios promises that end not in a catastrophic launch, but the inability to even get to a launch pad has made me lose faith in our get things done capability. I hope that they can raise the money so that those that have complained that money is the only obstacle will be forced to get it done or shut up!
“people have survived on ISS for long durations, but they had the luxury of bringing up spares when the system fails”
That’s a good point, but the ISS is far larger and more complex than a ship to do a fly-by of Mars would need to be. And none of the hardware failures on the ISS have been so critical that the crew would have died if they hadn’t been able to fix them for a couple of years. As long as you have dissimilar backups, you can survive having a lot of things fail.
Another potentially important difference is that on the ISS you can always look out the window and see Earth. On a Mars trip the impact of not seeing “home” except as a distant light may have an emotional impact.
I think both you and Chriswilson68 are on the money. “people have survived on ISS for long durations, but they had the luxury of bringing up spares when the system fails …. the
ISS is far larger and more complex than a ship to do a fly-by of Mars would need to be.”
Yep, all true. Although, when you think about it, for a 501-day (~1.4 year) journey, even for just two people (or maybe… ESPECIALLY for two people… with no third to keep the peace), a Dragon/Bigelow combo may still become over time too cramp for them…, especially given the fact that they will have to share their internal space with all life-support and food/water (even assuming they can recycle 90++% water) for the entire journey. But if they are going to go with Bigelow, maybe they ought to consider a slightly larger craft along the lines of a small Nautilus-X, (and with lots-n-lots of solar panels, given where it’s headed).
On duration, yes people have certainly survived long tours on the ISS & Mir, but to paraphrase your statement, those people had the luxury of being able to get whatever was necessary from Earth-side (or to send anyone back in medical situations). This journey is going to be much longer than anyone has done so on either station (and with no help from home). To date, only three guys (all Russians) have broken the 1-year duration (Valeri Polyakov wins the prize, at 438 days on Mir); and the US won’t be joining that club until about 2015. The two astronauts for this particular trip will be topping Polyakov by 2+ months. This length of time will be a big challenge for them both physically and psychologically.
Personally, I would hope that Tito & Co. will be able to work out the transportation kinks to be able to do this fantastic voyage in much less than 501 days (acknowledging that a 2018 launch date is frightfully close, enough to limit new-tech shortcuts).
I agree with most of what you’re saying. However, you say, “I would hope that Tito & Co. will be able to work out the transportation kinks to be able to do this fantastic voyage in much less than 501 days.” From what other people here are saying, it sounds like that 501 days is dictated by the fact that there is a free-return trajectory that takes 501 days from a 2018 launch. To get a faster trip you’d need a very different architecture because you’d need a whole lot more propellant.
Someday, we’ll do faster trips to Mars. But if we want to attempt this mission in 2018 we’re going to need to just accept the 501 day trip.
Sorry, this was an inadvertant duplicate of my above comment – but couldn’t remove it… so I just “edited” it out of existance.
Inspiration is definitely the name of the game here (both positive and negative when it comes to politicians controlling purse-strings). From what I’ve read so far about this concept, nothing other than the most minimal in-flight science would be possible.
But but but… we need humans on board ready to fix the life support systems when they fail!
Ah, yes; Humor. It is a difficult concept.
Lieutenant Saavik, USS Enterprise
While I don’t think it’s very likely to succeed, the fact that people are making announcements like this and are expecting to be taken seriously says something about where we are right now.
To be considered a well-meaning dreamer or believable conman, no longer can you just announce that you’ll build a brand new low-cost private launcher, nor a private mini-shuttle, nor a private space-station, nor robot missions to the moon, nor private space-telescopes.
No, when it comes to unbelievable claims, that’s so last century. Today, you have to promise frickin’ Mars before anyone wonders if you’re maybe pushing things a bit far.
Well they definitely do not have time to develop anything from scratch. 5 years to launch? They’d better be planning on using something that’s already designed, largely built, and ready to start testing.
I wouldn’t do a fly around with a person before I had a dummy module survive outside the Van Allen belts for 2 years and then perform successful re-entry.
But the point is – a fly around in 5 years is a lot more realistic (and a LOT less useful) than boots on the ground in 10.
The difference is that Mr. Tito does have a considerable fortune and from what I know, he is pretty determined once he sets his mind to something. One thing that is interesting is that if he does put his money behind this, money attracts money.
This one has several zeros worth of bank account and credibility behind it.
Also, keep in mind that Tito made his fortune *as a money manager*! He’s an expert at finance. He, more than nearly anyone else, knows what the realities of financing are.
Also, as a money manager he has personal contacts with many extremely wealthy people whose money he has managed. That can’t hurt.
There’s really nobody else in the world with more credibility about raising private money for a mission to Mars than Dennis Tito.
Imagine if Dennis Tito and Paul Allen got together…… or Dennis Tito and Bill Gates. If you look around at what Gates has been doing with his money, there are some interesting possibilities.
One thing that I learned when we were doing things with a billionaire, money attracts money. Never doubt that.
I think I found one justification for a Mars fly around missions.
Someone wants to see Mars, first hand, before he dies.
It’s his dollar.
I don’t think Tito is going to take this ride….
I know nothing beyond what they said either.
But it’s a possibility.
“Space Nut Billionaire wants to see Mars before he dies and trailblaze the path to the Solar System”
You know, you made a lot of money, you’re old, you want to leave a legacy….
We’ll find out next week. It’s just a possibility as I said.
Ridiculous! Frauds of this magnitude guised as inspiring America’s youth should not be allowed to publicize! Humans to Mars and back in less than 6 years from now–dream on! gpurcell (below) is right but being too kind! If they aim for 2028–they might have a chance–nahhhh!
Rant much?
Ken1g; It is people like you that would have us (Humanity) still cowering in caves afraid of shadows on the wall. Everyone “knew” the Earth was flat. Everyone “knew” Earth was the center of the universe. Everyone “knew” it was folly to attempt to fly to the Moon as we couldn’t survive the harsh environs of space. (i.e. Astronauts eyes would melt) See a pattern here? You and your “Can’t do” attitude make you a perfect NASA Adminstrator.
Now, go away and let the adults get some work done. BTW; I and people where I work are working to develop the water/wastewater treatment systems that will allow manned missions to Mars, a Moon colony and yes, hopefully even missions some day to the Gas giants. Some like SpaceX & Bigelow are working on the launch/crew hardware and some of us are working on the systems to make the missions do able once launched. What are you doing?
Even if they had a guaranteed, significant source of funding for this, I’m highly skeptical that they can go from proof-of-concept to launch in under six years. Where’s the money?
You do know that Mr. Tito is a very, very wealthy individual, yes?
Oh, so Mr. Tito has about $100B lying around? Chump change to what it would take if it were technically possible! What is his real purpose other than publicity?
Who said that this mission will cost $100B? Got a reference?
ken1g;
Always what “can’t” be done with you. Are you interviewing for the chance to be NASA administrator? Seriously. What “can” be done in your view?
He’s not that wealthy. Tito isn’t even a billionaire.
Mr. Tito may not (Most likely doesn’t) have “all the money” required himself but he is rich, and rich people have rich friends. His wealth/experience is sufficient to attract the attention of others with deep enough pockets that together they could fund this. Always: “The Glass is half empty” with the naysayer crowd. Call me naive but isn’t part of what makes manned space flight so great is the “dreaming” aspect of where we might go and what we might do once there some day?
Who could possibly be *that* wealthy? With a much better fiscal picture than the one today it took NASA longer to get to the moon, and that’s only a little over a quarter million miles away!
Yeah, it took NASA a huge amount of money to get to the moon. But that was 40 years ago. Things change. Technology moves on.
SpaceX has already sent its Dragon capsule to the ISS and returned it safely to Earth twice. Each time, if people had been on board, they would have been able to visit the ISS and return to Earth safely. All for well under $200 million per flight. SpaceX is planning to make Dragon even safer before sending people aboard it, mainly by adding powerful engines to allow for aborts during launch.
There’s an old saying that if you get to orbit, you’re halfway to anywhere. That’s because the energy needed to get from the surface to orbit is half what you need to escape Earth’s gravity entirely. And, actually, once you’re in orbit things are easier in a lot of ways. You can use slower-burning engines because you don’t have to worry about atmospheric and gravity losses. You can wait for a fuelling tanker to be launched and refuel your ship.
If you can get to the Moon, it’s really not much harder to get anywhere in the solar system. It just takes time. So getting to Mars orbit, and even back from there to Earth orbit, isn’t really a huge leap. It’s mainly a matter of being able to keep people alive for a couple of years in space.
Even landing on Mars isn’t all that hard. Once Dragon’s LAS engines are installed, Dragon should be able to land people safely on Mars, without any further changes.
The one part that really is hard is getting people from the surface of Mars to Mars orbit. There are proposals for ways to do it, but it involves some significant new technological development.
When the U.S went to the Moon, we had never flown in space. Didn’t even know for sure if we could. Certainly a huge amount of money went into makin that happen but as said, when doing anything the first time out it costs much more in time & $$$$ to do it vs. after a hundred + times. (Well unless NASA is the one doing it, so maybe my point is mute)
Who said they’re going “from proof-of-concept to launch in under six years”? The non-profit organization is new, but they could have been working on this for years already. Lots of people on the planet have been working on this. Do you know who they have working with them?
Dennis Tito has most likely been working on this since he flew abourd ISS 12 years ago. So to say they can’t do this in 5-6 years is a false and misleading/understanding comment. Certainly if he had just flown to ISS within the past year then yes, I can see your point. Plus I’m sure he and his team have studied the vast array of available data for the merriad missions flown by NASA-JPL to Mars; let alone other missions throughout the Solar system.
Just because ATK/Boeing/LockMart aren’t the ones doing this doesn’t mean it can;t be done. Certianly it can be done if one has the resources and will. THe above mentioned companies have the resources; they just have no will. Three decades of wasteful cost plus do nothing contracts have them bloated like a cod fish left to rott in the sun.
Do you have data to support your rant or are you just trying to get people to respond?
Does Tito have data to support his dream or is he just trying to get people to respond?
The latter no doubt—and just ask your self this–in five years will a US company even be sending crew to the ISS? Wanna bet?
I will take that bet for $10,000.
I’ll take that bet too. Seriously. Just give me your real name and contact information. I’ll put my money behind my judgement that a US company will be sending crew to the ISS in five years.
The lack of data doesn’t stop 2/3 of the posts here. Unfortunately I don’t have the data to back that up…
I could see a wide variety. In the US alone…
FAA, DoE (doubt that he would be able to pull off a flags and footprints without some sort of nuclear power), NASA…
Then we start with State (you think the Chinese and Russians are going to stand by and let something like this happen) then DoD…the UN (“Mars is NOT for sale!”), the environmentalists (a’la Red Martians)….
I WANT it to succeed but I only see that happening in a area with a carefree attitude towards government intrusion and an equatorial launch window.
First of all, how could the Chinese, the Russians, or the U.N. stop such a mission? There’s no way at all that they could.
As to the equitorial launch window: launching from the equator gives you a small advantage, but no more than for any other launch. Plenty of launches have been done from non-equitorial sites and been perfectly successful.
DoE is only an issue, as you say, if they plan to use nuclear power. I’d guess that they don’t. And I don’t see any evidence to suggest that DoE would automatically block a commercial Mars mission that wanted to use nuclear power. There would probably be a political fight with environmental groups about it, but that has been true of all recent NASA unmanned missions that have used RTGs, and the environmental groups have lost their attempts to block those missions. I see no reason they would be more successful against a private mission to Mars, which would be likely to garner a lot of popular support.
As to the FAA or DoD — what reason is there to think they would block it? It doesn’t threaten them. The only government groups likely to feel threatened by a private Mars mission launched from the U.S. are parts of NASA (MSFC and JSC in particular), and they wouldn’t have any direct say in the matter.
Overall, I see no reason to believe any government will block this. The only things that will keep this mission from happening will be a lack of money or technical mistakes.
Really? You don’t think government entities could stop a private enterprise from doing anything it really wanted to?
I think the possibilities of this happening are lower since it’s being proposed as a fly-by mission, plant a flag or start talking land/mineral rights and I bet you see a number of countries to start brushing up on OST (and yes, private actors are a different class but you really think the groups I mentioned wouldn’t try to find a loophole for something?)
I still think there is a possibility of someone filing a complaint once this gets close to fruition, but since it’s just a fly-by the land issues probably become unlikely.
” You don’t think government entities could stop a private enterprise from doing anything it really wanted to?”
What I think is that there are very few government entities that could stop this mission. Those government entities that would most likely want to stop it wouldn’t be able to.
There’s zero chance that any government entity outside the U.S. federal government could stop it, no matter how much they wanted to, short of an act of war.
Private enterprises do things all the time that government entities hate and would love to stop but can’t.
I think we have the vehicles already in development in the private sector. It’s now a matter of planning, coordination, and making it work.
What if Mr. Tito Aims for 2018 and slips 2 or 4 years behind. Lolol
That would just be terrible lololol
The can’t do comments here are amazing.
If they miss the window I suspect they won’t do the mission.
Does anyone know what is special about the 2018 launch window? Is it just a tad better than normal Mars transfer windows, or is there something profoundly different that is possible in 2018?
There seems to be an optimal trajectory that is not that common.
I believe, though I can’t find the information to confirm it at the moment, that 2018 allows for a free-return trajectory (namely once you are there, gravity ensures you come right back to earth without further propulsion). Apollo 8, 10, and 11 all initially used a free-return to ensure they would get back to earth in the event of a propulsion failure in the SM. After the Apollo 13 failure, it was also put into a free-return, though later pushed along to shorten the return time. Obviously an inter-planetary free return is a bit different, but same basic principle. I’m not certain how “close” to earth a free return from Mars puts you.
“I’m not certain how “close” to earth a free return from Mars puts you.”
It depends only on how accurate your data is. If you had perfect information, you’d never have to fire an engine again after leaving Earth’s vicinity. But small uncertainties about the initial conditions, effects of the solar wind, etc. lead to large errors in final position, so practical speaking you’d need to do some small burns along the way to correct your course. These course correction burns don’t have to use much fuel. NASA has a lot of experience flying probes around the solar system, so they can probably do the modelling quite accurately, minimizing the amount of correction needed.
This is very interesting. Let’s consider just who would be interested in this voyage.
Well firstly Mr Tito with enormous personal wealth and able to network with other very wealthy individuals.
Then we have Mr Musk who possesses a launch infrastructure and launch vehicles and who is developing both the Falcon Heavy and a crew capsule based around his existing flight-proven Dragon Cargo.
Then we have Mr Bigelow who is flying 2 prototype space habitats and is well into designing a larger version the BA330.
Seems to me like the private sector stars are aligning.
Cheers.
It’s about time. I’m willing to quit my job and make this happen. There are too many naysayers at the agency to the point that there is no govt owned manned launch vehicle let alone active plans (SLS) that are not prone to cancellation and failure.
It’s really not that difficult to plan for a Mars mission at this point, provided the agency does not get in the way.
The launch vehicle could consist of3 Falcon Heavy flights 3x $130 mil as a start.
Far cheaper than anything else on the table
I wish these folks all the luck in the world, but a mission to Mars with today’s technology is a suicide mission. It has not been demonstrated that humans can survive microgravity for that long. The on-orbit record is a little over 400 days and I”m pretty sure he didn’t walk away under his own power, though he did make a full recovery with no apparent long-term affects. Radiation would be another issue. One significant CME and the crew could die without protection. It is a long shot that it could be done, but to not build up to a full mission to Mars like we did with Apollo when we went to the Moon would be risky.
With that said, their chances of pulling this off are infinitely greater than NASA’s. If we ever reach Mars, NASA will not be involved.
“It has not been demonstrated that humans can survive microgravity for that long.”
It also hasn’t been demonstrated that they can’t survive that long. Decades of experience with the ISS and other stations suggests microgravity for a couple of years would be hard on people, but that they would survive, and recover pretty well afterwards.
Anyway, a lot of Mars mission designs include artificial gravity so the crew won’t be in microgravity for long. It’s pretty easy. Just take two vehicles, put a tether between them, and rotate them about their common axis.
“Radiation would be another issue. One significant CME and the crew could die without protection.”
It’s true that radiation is a health issue, but the evidence suggests it’s most likely to lead only to a moderate increase in cancer risk. The other risks of being the first human crew to visit Mars are likely far, far greater than the small increased cancer risk from radiation.
Most Mars mission designs include some sort of emergency “storm shelter” in case of a CME. This is an area of the ship with extra radiation shielding on one side where the crew can hide for a few days during the storm. Since they need to carry a lot of water for the trip anyway, the storm shelter can just mean putting all your water between you and the sun.
If the mission flies in the 2018 timeframe it will be Cycle 24/25 solar minimum.
“Since they need to carry a lot of water for the trip anyway, the storm shelter can just mean putting all your water between you and the sun.”
Can’t say I’ve ever really got the logic of this, make your radiation shield out of something that you will be consuming?
What logic made you think all of it would have to be consumed to the point of no efficacy?
Even if not the case, the Sun will be in Solar minimum anyway with little to no chance of CME and SPE.
As far as the GCR goes, cancer risk years into the future is accepted for many types of people from smokers to industrial workers.
Let’s not forget that solar minimum is a statistical tendency only, not a guarantee of anything.
That’s a fair point, but you probably want pretty fat margins on your consumables. I’d hate to go on a two year trip in space with only just barely enough water to survive that long! So I get lots of shielding in the earlier part of the trip, and still a fair amount on the way back, though not as much.
Microgravity will not be an issue. The record is 437 days. Radiation can be handled with shielding. All Apollo missions had glaring lack of redundancies. People went. We cheered. People took greater risks to settle Oklahoma. Next.
Micro-g is only an assumption. Tethering two spacecraft spinning around their mutual CoG is low tech, but it works.
Oops! Chris already said this. Sorry.
I wonder about ‘it works’. Has there been an in-space demonstration?
How is such a contraption guided? What about course corrections? And separating two vehicles that are mutually spinning so that one could orbit? Probably simple to the smart people here.
Most of the way to Mars you’re probably coasting. You fire the Earth Departure stage for at most a couple of weeks on the way out. Then you spend many months with the engines off. Even if you had to stop the rotation before doing a mid-course correction burn, it wouldn’t be a big deal.
The first experiment that I know of was on Gemini 11, which was temporarily connected to an Agena target vehicle by a 100-foot tether. They were spun around their mutual CoG to produce artificial gravity. It was not a full 1g, just a smaller value, but it worked as expected and was easy enough to cancel.
The late Dr. Robert Forward worked out all of the theory and the math for AG and several other techniques using tethers, and no one in the Physics and aerospace worlds is likely to dispute Dr. Forward’s work.
One of Dr. Forward’s associates designed a multi-braid tether system that retains its tensile strength should parts of it be damaged by an asteroid collision.
Tethering is real.
Thanks, Steve.
Another critical issue will be crew mental health. Suddenly the recent Mars 500 experiment becomes very relevant. The long term isolation will be much harder for a smaller crew (Mars 500 had a crew of 6). The Mars 500 folks had the benefit of knowing that rescue was immediately possible. A much smaller living space will also put a signigicant strain on the crew. On the other hand, the fact that they were only participating in an experiment rather than a real life mission left the Mars 500 crew more at risk of asking “why am I doing this?” I talked several times with one of the Mars 500 crew members and the isolation challenges were very real. Can they be overcome? Probably – but this mission certainly cannot be open to just any volunteer.
Very good points. And you’d better be able to get along really well with your crew mate if there are only two of you locked in a Dragon for 500 days.
It would be bigger than just a dragon.
I’ve been thinking about the ideal crew makeup. I’ve decided – without a psychology background, of course! – that there are two types of crew that would likely be able to handle this:
1) Married couple together for 30+ years. Have lived through all the ups and downs; know how to be together for long periods of time; likely have no dependents to worry about; can argue and make up.
2) “Big brother” cast members who are guranteed to fight the entire time (as long as TV is watching!) but that they’ll do anything for ratings and potential fame.
I know a number of studies have looked at exactly this issue, (crew makeup, personalities, all male, all female, age, military, odd vs even number, etc). But I’m not certain if anyone has studied the challenge of a very small crew.
Reading the announcement as carefully as possible, it isn’t explicitly said that this would be a manned mission (eg. it could be an unmanned biological mission similar to the one Elon wanted to do before he started SpaceX). Is there any other information that makes it explicit that this would be a manned mission?
It’s true, this announcement doesn’t explicitly say it will be a human mission.
But keep in mind that this isn’t the announcement of the mission — this is an announcement that there will be a press conference to make the announcement. If you explicitly say everything in the announcement about the press conference, there’s no news left for the actual press conference.
If you look at all the people listed as being involved in this mission, everything points to a human mission. The wording of the announcement also suggests a human mission. If Wednesday comes around and they announce a robotic mission, it will be very anti-climatic. They’d have to have pretty lousy PR people to set expectations high a week before the press conference and then not meet those expectations.
“They’d have to have pretty lousy PR people to set expectations high a week before the press conference and then not meet those expectations.”
Heh. Must work in the space industry.
It’s not clear to me from the wording of this announcement if they intend to land on Mars or just go into Mars orbit and back.
If they’re intending to land a human on Mars then get that person back to Earth, all in 501 days starting in January 2018, I’d say they’re overly-ambitious. There’s just too much technology development to do to get a person back from the surface of Mars to Mars orbit.
However, if they’re talking sending people to orbit Mars and then come back to Earth, that is entirely doable in that time frame.
The question then becomes one of money. It won’t cost anywhere near $100 billion, as some posters here are claiming. That’s what it would cost if NASA were doing it. With private industry, the cost is probably on the order of $1 billion. That’s still an awful lot of money. I really hope they announce they’ve secured full financing. Otherwise, it’s just another dream.
Even if they are planning to send humans to orbit Mars, not land, this is still an incredibly exciting mission, and it pushes the boundaries of human exploration by a huge amount. It also paves the way for a future human landing by demonstrating that getting to and from Mars orbit is doable, so we can focus on the landing and return from the Martian surface to orbit.
Assuming they actually have, or will get, funding. The fact that Tito is involved lends a lot of credibility to this organization, but it doesn’t guarantee they’ll actually get the money.
Sounds like a fly-by to me ALA the Apollo Applications Program.
Think riding Skylab to Mars and back. I suspect it will be BA 330 based. I hope it has a hella robust life support system cause spare parts are going to be hard to come by. Quick, somebody develop a fully 3D printable Life Support system for a BA-330!
A Skylab-sized dedicated hab module would really only be needed for a large crew (3 to 4, like Apollo) in a way that they are able to carry out science and other duties throughout the flight. If you shrink the crew down, you can use a much smaller vehicle. If you are willing to endure discomfort and a serious lack of amenities, you can make it even smaller (and cheaper). Reducing the science mission to health monitoring and photography during the fly-by then you can push it down even further.
It really depends on just how small, Spartan and cheap you are willing to go.
I’d volunteer to go no matter how small the living space. Just give me a laptop and I can keep myself entertained for a couple of years to and from Mars.
Are you assuming internet connectivity for those couple of years?
Not normal internet connectivity, but I’d hope for a delayed-connectivity system. I’d like to be able to send and receive e-mail and to be able to type a URL into a browser, do something else for a while and eventually come back to it when the page has loaded. And I don’t see any reason I shouldn’t be able to download movies and TV shows and watch them. I’m a software developer, so I’d have plenty of uninterrupted time to create software, and it would be nice if I could upload it.
Assuming that we’re going to succeed in expanding our manned space activities past ISS, I think setting up this sort of “internet” connection (maybe we can call it supernet or spacenet or something different) would be a very worthwhile project in itself. Not only would it be a functional asset, it would help greatly in addressing the psychological concerns about long-duration activities. It should be set up as a generic system for anybody in space rather than a mission-specific or spacecraft-specific system. I mention that because we know how NASA thinks (or sometimes doesn’t).
Even with no data connectivity at all, I could load up the laptop with reading material before leaving and then spend my time reading and writing software.
True enough, but then you run the risk of becoming out of date, day-for-day, with your subject matter. You could spend 6 months creating something that someone else captured the market for when you were half finished. If you’re doing contract work you’d want private communication with your “customer.” My feeling is that once we’ve become accustomed to “instant connectivity” it’s very painful to go back to being without it. I think HSF BEO flights are going to need something akin to an internet connection.
Steve, I agree about setting up some kind of space internet.
The IP layer of the internet would actually work very well for the space internet, so the space internet could just be a part of the internet. You would have to tweak some of the timeouts in most existing implementations, but the basic protocol is fine.
However, the TCP layer on top of the IP layer isn’t very suitable for very-long-latency communications. Establishing a socket involves a three-step handshake and closing the connection involves four steps. We’d want to come up with an STCP (Space Transmission Control Protocol) for the space internet that allows the client to send all the data for a session without waiting for a response, then allows the server to send all the data for the response.
Then there’s the application layer. Some application-level protocols, such as HTTP, would be fine for the space internet as long as they’re on STCP/IP instead of TCP/IP. But others, like SMTP, would be terrible, because they involve a lot of back and forth. We’d want to come up with alternatives for these. For anything built on SSL we’d want to replace the SSL layer with a layer built on some kind of longer-lasting shared private key rather than just a session key because the handshaking to establish a session key would take so long in a long-latency environment. Once a client and server had established a shared private key, you’d want them to be able to use it for future connections for several days rather than just the length of a single socket connection.
Chris,
Agreed. Instead of normal packets on multiple routes, I think you’d probably end up wanting something like dedicated “channels” for TCP (and a replacement for SMTP) off planet.
Since you’re looking at a very small set of communications (by comparison) going off planet, and long delays, you could have a basic internet/intranet boundary between Earth and space and treat space like an intranet with its own protocols. This would give you all of space on a small number of IP addresses which would make the spooks and bigots happy.
Of course, we’d ideally want it to be an open source implementation for future considerations, so don’t let NASA do it in house. Just my top of the head thoughts.
Potential data points on cost (up to the reader to determine applicability). $130M quoted by someone for Falcon Heavy. Approximately $600M for the Ames-proposed “Red Dragon” Discovery mission to deliver an unmanned Dragon lander to the surface of Mars. So assuming that 1) you need 2-3 Falcon Heavies, 2) You don’t have to land on Mars, but do need crew support for 500 days, 3) You do have to bring people back to earth, 4) Falcon costs don’t go up significantly, like many feel they may — $1 to 1.5B seems possible. As @chriswilson68 stated the question is can they get that funding from private sources? Unlike the asteroid mining ventures – here there really is no likely return on investment in the first 10-20 years. So you’d have to look for donors rather than investors.
Funny thing: I am the only person seems to use their real name when I do ….
It’s your own blog… it’d look pretty silly if you sockpuppeted it.
Not that others haven’t done it…
If you don’t like Keith’s site, nobody is holding a gun to your head forcing you to post here now are they?
Replying to myself since I can’t seem to reply to you.
I’m wondering how the hell you got “don’t like Keith’s site” from a statement that it would be pretty silly for someone to sockpuppet their own site?
Arguments countering my statements are welcome, but arguments countering a position I never took…
… well, they aren’t exactly unwelcome, but they are pretty silly.
Keith;
I do use my real name and not sure how I was ranting accordin to you? Please elaborate. I simply was pointing out how Ken was using less than arguable statements against this project.
I was not referring to you. I was replying to “Ken1g”.
I would like to volunteer for this mission
Me too!
Me too!
Kinda upset this leaked – jerks on parade now for a week having diahreha of the mouth who know nothing but big government programs.
“Leaked”? Check your facts. Where do you think this came from? Tito’s people released it. Get a grip.
What convicts are they going to sentence to this mission?
They’re going to have no trouble finding volunteers. There are still people who are willing to take big risks to go where nobody has gone before.
There are even plenty of NASA astronauts who have said in interviews that they would go, despite the known risks, even the women.
That’s a myth. Convicts weren’t required for colonisation, colonisation was required to get rid of the convicts. There were free settlers from the very beginning. And the only limit on the number of would-be explorers was funding (now why does that ring a bell.)
That’s just five years from now.
I launched a plan to clean the basement five years ago.
There have been several technical and personnel-related delays and that mission has been put on hiatus.
Tito put his money down and bought a ticket. He got in the rocket and flew the mission. Your basement is (I guess) still a mess. My money is on Tito.
We have a lot assumption and very little actual fact so far, from what I can see. So, let’s play “what if.”
What if this isn’t new and Tito has actually been working towards it since coming back from his ISS visit? The ISS certainly must have been an “Inspiration” for him.
Tito went to the ISS in April 2001, so he and whoever is working with him would already have had almost a dozen years to make progress, without any outside interference or PR to contend with. If they’re launching in 2018, 5 years from now, that’s 17 years for this program, which doesn’t sound near as unreasonable as simply launching 5 years from now. But that’s just a made-up what-if; I have read nothing to suggest it’s true.
The big questions are:
• How big is the spacecraft?
• What will be on the spacecraft?
• Will there be any people on the spacecraft?
• Will there be anything live at all on the spacecraft?
• Will anything/anyone from the spacecraft go to the surface of Mars?
• Will anything/anyone from the surface of Mars go to the spacecraft?
• Will anything/anyone from Mars be returned to Earth?
These and similar questions need to be answered before we can decide whether we really think this flight is possible or not.
On the legal side:
• If there are to be humans on board (it’s not impossible), are they simply accepting health risks involved?
• What country will they be launching from? Launching from outside the US may be how they get around any legal/regulatory objections.
Given that this program’s purpose is to, “generate new knowledge, experience and momentum for the next great era of space exploration,” they simply have to show that they can send a spacecraft to Mars and get it back (within 501 days) intact. Anything else is icing on the cake.
” What country will they be launching from? Launching from outside the US
may be how they get around any legal/regulatory objections.”
I’d bet they’re launching from the U.S. The advantages of being able to use Dragon and Falcon Heavy far outweigh the regulatory risks. SpaceX doesn’t have any non-U.S. launch sites and anyway ITAR is almost surely going to prevent them from taking any of their hardware outside the U.S.
The announcement also describes it as a “Mission for America” — not a phrase one would likely use if they were planning to launch outside the U.S.
Darn right. Go Dennis. Just do what’s needed to placate regulators from ground to space/orbit and then from there, any regulator objections would be subject to tar and feathering from the public and press.
My gut feeling is that we’ll see a one- or two-crew mission flying a Crewed Dragon mated with a Dragonlab as a consumables store/extra leg room. There will be an extended LSS in one of the trunks and an SEP sustainer for course corrections in the other. Initial escape impulse will be carried out with series-stacked Falcon Heavy upper stages (possibly the methane-fuelled higher-impulse version).
The mission profile will be a minimum-duration free-return flight around Mars and back; possibly also with a Venus flyby on the outbound or inbound leg, depending on consumables margin. There will be no stopping and very little in the way of sensors for science – it will be mostly a human endurance thing.It would be VERY high-risk mission, especially due to the limited internal space and the lack of abort options once you are past escape velocity. However, it might also succeed where it really counts – inspiring many people to follow in his footsteps. It might also shame Congress into actually funding a human deep space program rather than just a “Jobs for the favoured districts” rocket-development program.
That sounds like a pretty reasonable mission profile — and a very exciting and inspiring mission. It sure would put a lot of pressure on Congress and NASA to shake up the way NASA human spaceflight is done!
I agree completely. The only thing I’d change on Ben’s description is the “sensors for science” part. I’d find a way to include every sensor I could, even if they’re just record-only. It’s too good an opportunity to pass up.
I wonder how long we’ll have to wait before we see the first Tito-Mars Hoax web site.
It might also shame Congress into actually funding a human deep space program rather than just a “Jobs for the favoured districts” rocket-development program.
You can’t shame the shameless.
NASA is used for spreading the space budget pork to the proper voter districts. Any useful hardware or scientific results that come out of this distorted process are interesting artifacts but not the primary purpose.
I agree that the only way for this to make sense is if they’ve been working at it for a while now.
SpaceX seems to be the logical partner, but how come there’s no rep for SpaceX at the presser?
I guess we’ll find out next week.
I recall suggesting many times that you fly a full size unmanned mission to mars.
A mission that puts astronauts in orbit around mars and then lands and attempts to reorbit a robot probe would be very cool too. That would make it very doable and show the world that a future landing is possible should the robot lander succeed.
The smarter chicken aproach lololol
The mars sample return missing with human Assist, and don’t worry about the sample, it’s not for science just proving that the hardware could work.
Any regulatory body that objects to an ambitious risky completely
private mission like this (other than just for ground safety reasons)
deserves a kick in the pants.
I suspect some of the naysayers are likely big SLS and Orion supporters. Likely Civil Servants and contract managers just pushing the bills as usual without any ambition.
I talked to some Mercury program engineers today and they were just saddened about how unambitious NASA management has become. One of them told me they are so risk adverse, you´d think they wouldn´t bother to share air with other people.
In case anyone forgot, we all die eventually. For some of you, minimizing travel and avoiding the most dangerous activities is what you do to maximize your life. For others it can include bunjee jumping or becoming a test pilot. We used to have the test pilot mentality at NASA and it seemed to work out well for the most part. You know why? because NASA gave it the best effort they could.
Today NASA is led by the risk adverse and it is becoming a disgrace with these types. Every new agenda item that comes up they discuss it as a crippling problem, it´s becoming a continuing discussion with no cajones, no ambition and most importantly no smarts that come of it. Whatever happened to making the best of the situation? What happened to making the best educated guess?
The Russians flew crew members for long duration on Mir and now we Have ISS doing much of the same. NASA and contractor management still pulls straw man arguments about the lack of knowledge of what is needed for long duration spaceflight. It´s all a scheme to get more money, follow through on personal favors and in the end nothing ever gets done. We know enough at this point.
Falcon Heavy is about ready to go.
Dragon with abort and landing capability almost ready.
Bigelow habitats could provide some crew space.
Throw in a overly redundant amount fuel and water/food for radiation shieldingand some gravitational simulation to keep the crew fit and it can happen.
The bottom line is that NASA management wants somebody else to do it for them, they can´t gather enough motive to convince others let alone themselves. So, I guess it´s going to have to pan out that way.
SpaceX has accomplished a lot, where many thought they would fail. However, I would not put Falcon Heavy in the “just about ready to go” category. It took Falcon 9 what -almost 2 years from being “Almost ready” to launch? And then the flight rate has only been one every 8 months or so. This is NOT a criticism – just an observation that even for Elon getting rockets to work is hard! Getting to an escape trajectory Falcon Heavy in 5 years will be a challenge. And if the window is missed, the whole mission concept (based on the free return) collapses.
SpaceX has said Falcon Heavy will launch in 2013, so we’ll find out soon enough. The delta from Falcon 1 to Falcon 9 was quite a lot larger than the delta from Falcon 9 to Falcon Heavy, so I wouldn’t expect FH to slip by too much — certainly not to anywhere near 2018.
Falcon Heavy doesn’t need any modifications to become “escape trajectory Falcon Heavy”. The less payload you put at the top, the farther Falcon Heavy will take it. SpaceX quotes 26,000 lbs to GTO, and it’s not that much more delta-v from GTO to a Mars trajectory. Falcon Heavy’s second stage would probably send more than 15,000 lbs on its way to Mars by itself — about the mass of a reasonably-loaded Dragon capsule.
I don’t think it’s entirely coincidental that Falcon Heavy is just about the right size to send Dragon to Mars. It’s no secret that everything Musk does is based on eventual Mars settlement.
You know, this might be just what we need to get the collective thumb out.
sticks thumb out*
If five astronauts go, and two make it back alive, is it a failure? All we can say about explorers is based on the ones that came back, and the first one back is not always the first one there. One billion people risk deadly disease with every sip of water, is it unreasonable to bet one’s life on an adventure. It isn’t justifiable in any other way. Its a grand adventure. Robotic probes are the only way to actually do any science. We don’t send people into nuclear reactors as much anymore either, but some folks still make a living cleaning out the intake tubes.
Definition of success depends a lot on objectives. Also, I’ve seen lots of sci-fi with successful one-way trips 🙂 though it probably doesn’t apply.
“Dennis Tito To Announce Private Human Mars Mission”
I must be reading this differently from other commenters. I can’t imagine “Human” means nothing more than humans will be launching the mission.
It sounds exactly like a mission of humans to Mars.
The quote you are using is not from Tito’s press release. The text of his release strongly suggests a human mission, and many news sites are reporting it as a human mission, but the text of Tito’s release doesn’t actually use that term.
I see. Thanx.
Five years till launch, wow, they must really be up on the curve for vehicle manufacturing, integration, crew training, etc. I’m feeling a big big tongue in cheek moment here.
Tito is presenting a paper at the IEEE Aerospace Conference: “Feasibility Analysis for a Manned Mars Free Return Mission in 2018”.
Jeff Foust has more: http://www.newspacejournal….
I wish Mr. Tito and his partners all the best. My yongest son (9 yo) and I have been discussing space flight and the possibilities that will be available to us in both of our lifetimes. I have told him that humans would not go to Mars (and safely back) for at least another 20 to 30 years IF NASA or ESA were the primary drivers.
However, I’ve always believed that if and when private space companies and individuals (investors) got behind the effort, that it would be much sooner, maybe within 10 years (by 2020.)
We are both very excited by this news and it has given my youngest son some added encouragement to study math and applied sciences in hopes, he gets to be one of the brave who will shepard in the next wave of human exploration. Who knows, perhaps in his lifetime, a manned mission to Europa for some scuba diving?? (j/k)
Great essay. I have a 6 year old and am 55 years old. Many of those years have been spent watching how actual progress toward BEO missions has been in stark contrast to the SciFi of my youth, I am overjoyed to see the startups lead the way to what may, in my lifetime, be a realization of the dreams I’ve harbored all these years.
Our children will witness amazing things.
If you travel to and from Mars on a Hohmann orbit (minimum energy), the physics shows that total trip time would be ~ 970 days [~ 260days out, ~454 days on surface, and another ~ 260 days back]. These numbers came from assuming circular orbits for Mars and Earth, and co-planner orbits. Fair assumptions for a first order look at the situation. Whether you plan to land on the surface or just orbit, you need to hang out near Mars for ~ 454 days before the celestial alignments work for a hohmann orbit back. The PR release talks of a 501 day total mission time: indicates to me – whether landing, orbiting, or flyby – that their launch architecture will allow for a relatively short transit time to and from Mars.
If you travel to and from Mars on a Hohmann orbit (minimum
energy), the physics shows that total trip time would be ~ 970 days [~ 260days
out, ~454 days on surface, and another ~ 260 days back]. These numbers came
from assuming circular orbits for Mars and Earth, and co-planner orbits. Fair
assumptions for a first order look at the situation. Whether you plan to land
on the surface or just orbit, you need to hang out near Mars for ~ 454 days
before the celestial alignments work for a hohmann orbit back. The PR release
talks of a 501 day total mission time: indicates to me – whether landing,
orbiting, or flyby – that their launch architecture will allow for a relatively
short transit time to and from Mars.
The paper says 1 Dragon. 2 people. Just enough to survive. A flyby. The shortest time has been 180 days to Mars. So 250 days. Leave early. How about slingshot back? Would stopping at Earth be a problem? The Dragon heat shield material has been used to come back from deep space. SpaceX is charging NASA $130 m. for COTS with a new capsule. Extend the trunk. Got to carry a lot fuel. Trans Mars injection,Mars and Earth braking. So it might be used for rad. shielding.Might be able to cut a hatch through the heatshield or cut the trunk loose and dock nose first. Plenty of room. With the lifting capacity,55 tons, $100m for Heavy. Should be a cheap way to Mars and back. I hope it happens. Who knows, Elon might become a partner.
Gemini did test tether.Could see a pencil move. Not 1 g. Some information though. Water is reused. Some is consumed. Not a whole lot of water is carried to ISS now. Probably would come back with the back up water. Machinery might work all the way.
Folks!
Goodness! Hey, what you’re arguing about here is the only thing that’s unquantifiable!
Look, all the hardware needed for this mission it built or well into development: Habitats (Bigelow), Propulsion (Centaur (why not?)), landing and return capsules (take your pick). Launch vehicles. Falcon 9/Heavy (only because they want to do it anyway).
Money? Lots and more being (very speculatively) invested on all sorts of space ventures lately.
So, what’s missing? Will, faith, perseverance, initiative! …and those are values that can’t be quantified or argued. Unfortunately, it is what’s going to be needed to get anywhere though.
tinker
Maybe not a lot of fuel. The second stage would do the TMI. Getting the right distance from Mars would bend the trajectory back to Earth. The heat shield is good for 25,000 mph(Stardust,I think). It might be slow enough without engine braking. Elon has said material costs for a rocket is only 1%.He might get volunteers to do the work. The life support and electronics will cost. Got to have enough room for exercise. This is doable.
“How can anyone take seriously a claim that a private corporation can manage from nothing to launch in under five years?”
If they were claiming they were starting from scratch and building all new hardware, you would have a good point.
But the fact is that today most of the hardware that would be needed already exists and has been flight-proven or will be flight-proven in the next year or two, most notably Falcon Heavy and Dragon Rider. So they don’t have to go from nothing to launch in five years. They can just take existing pieces, with a lot of flight heritage and go from there. See Ben Russell-Gough’s post below for a plausible architecture based mainly on SpaceX hardware from the Falcon and Dragon programs.
Wow, this has come out of the blue. Dennis has the money, connections and the will power to pull this off. Fantastic.
I was initially apprehensive about the privitation of space exploration, but I’ve come to realize, with the current state of NASA, the private sector might be our only hope of seeing further manned exploration of the solar system.
I guess what I find most interesting about this speculative debate is the concern about cost. Cost isn’t a factor. Crazy thought, isn’t it?
Think: this is a PRIVATE expedition to Mars, correct? That means the investors also retain the intellectual and other rights to anything they experience or discover.
So, let’s take it to the next step; which one of you networks or cable operations on *each* continent or country want to buy the rights to the video, photos, and interviews with the Admiral Byrds on this voyage? The last “free” opportunity to see, hear, and talk to the crew goes away — right after launch.
It seems to me that our friends at the International Olympic Committee have provided a pretty good financial model for such a venture. You want to cover this exclusively, NBCCBSFOXUNIVISIONRUSSIATODAY? Sign here on the dotted line.
You want the exclusive print/web rights to the first photos from Mars, Washington Post, Time, Reuters, HuffPo? Sign right here, and here, too.
A few hundred million here, a few there, and all of a sudden, we’re talking about real money, and Dennis Tito, et al, are going to face much less financial risk than the relative pittance Elon will charge them for multiple spacecraft and FH launches. I suspect they have already had these discussions with all the right people, or they wouldn’t have announced this very large bet at the casino.
Note to Mr. Tito: if you need a media rep, cheap, I’m available to fly the mission along with Steve, Keith and Dennis Wingo. Axe must be included as a sponsor – Keith smells TERRIBLE!
“The National Geographic Society is in talks with Inspiration Mars
Foundation about a potential partnership around the 2018 mission.”
http://news.nationalgeograp…
That is such an obvious connection and partnership. It’s how Africa was explored, in the earliest days, and the poles as well.
Privately financed space missions of any kind will be a game changer. A mission to Mars would be great. Do we really think they can pull it off in 5 years?
It’s iffy; a lot depends on the amount of money they can raise and how quickly.
However, if the money is either there or quickly available, I can’t see why not. All elements of the spacecraft are either extant or in advanced development and I find it difficult to imagine them not being ready by 2016, let alone 2018.
Even if, by chance, they don’t pull it off, I can see where they’re going to get enough other people, in several countries, starting to think/work seriously on a similar mission that they can consider their efforts a success. If this private flight succeeds, it’s quite likely to be somewhat of an embarrassment to the various national space agencies which possess similar or even better capabilities, but have done nothing comparable.
Suddenly a mission to Mars is within the reach of a wealthy oil Prince. Or a small upwardly ambitious young country in Sth America or Africa.
And as capabilities expand, and our understanding of BEO (such as radiation) improves, more and more goals fall within reach of the same scale of adventurers. Would someone be willing to risk five years for a flyby of Jupiter? Or to be the first boot-print on Phobos? Or even a non-return mission to the surface of Mars, for nation, for flag, for glory.
May start to get embarrassing to work for a major national space agency.
Never underestimate the convictions of a true believer.
On the other hand, never underestimate the power of a boss or a bureaucrat to say no.
But everything considered, my guess is it’s just a matter of time before someone does something really wacky, for reasons we’ll probably never understand. All we can do is cheer them on, I guess.
Steve
As I said if want people to get interested in space again, you just have to show them!!! Lololol
‘
Yes, sir, George. You had it right all along. Hopefully the naysayers will be in the minority and we can watch the majority of people line up to cheer this project on. I’m curious to see how the non-technical media responds to this. Hopefully they’ll feel the excitement and be on our side.
2018? What he huffs? I want it. We cannot return back to moon in this timeframe and he want us to go to Mars? Good grief.
The flight to Mars that Mr Tito is apparently proposing is somewhat easier to achieve than NASA’s return to the Moon.
For one thing, the LV proposed for this mission is going to fly next year at the latest whilst NASA’s LV won’t fly until 2017 at best. Additionally, the very same LV could be used to fly the same spacecraft to the Moon in a mirror of NASA’s EM-1 mission, only years earlier. Finally, the spacecraft itself is already operational and will fly in its crewed form in around 2016 for the first time whilst NASA’s Orion won’t fly in its fully-complete state until 2017 and won’t fly in its crewed form until 2021
This is one of the advantages you get for using available/shortly available technology rather than building everything from scratch, as NASA is attempting to do.
Sasquatch is real! Prove me wrong.
501 days? I wonder what countermeasures they plan to implement for preventing the (potentially irreversible) loss of bone density that would be experienced by the crew of this mission.
I have a funny feeling that the answer is “none”.
Perhaps. But even if the answer is none, there’s value in that since we’ll have the first opportunity to actually measure and quantify the extent of the problem. If someone is willing to take that risk in order to provide the world with hard data, then I consider that admirable dedication to a cause that he/she believes in. It’s the sort of thing they give medals for.
Good opportunity to try out a 3D printer for replacing parts.
Good opportunity to try out a 3D printer for replacement parts.
Steve, tinker
Wouldn’t this mars mission space vehicle need to be tested out before the mars flyby?? Wouldn’t that mean that they are planning a moon apollo 13 free return mission in 2017??
What does it take to do a moon Apollo 13 orbit and save the bigelow habitat for another mission??
“
Could this mars “spaceship” be designed where much of it can be use over and over.
If so could a spin off of this, be a moon flyby tourist business?????
First off, if you’re thinking of doing an Apollo 13 free return, you might as well do an Apollo 8 and orbit the Moon multiple times instead of just once. It’s an opportunity to turn the spacecraft test flight into a lunar science mission as well for very little extra cost.
I can easily imagine private “space clippers” taking us to other worlds. I can also imagine a jealous statist and regressive administration like the one we have now putting the kibosh on it.
I have a feeling this is going nowhere, it just doesn’t pass the common sense test. Can they come out with a plan to send humans around Mars in less than five years from today? Almost certainly not. Plus it’s a 501 day trip, does this pass the common sense test? No, just NO.
I would absolutely love to be wrong, I do think some of these visionary folks can do some amazing things in space. Heck, I think a trip around the moon and back on a free return would do wonders in the inspiration and awe categories..and it’s so much more doable.
If they’re going to send anything to Mars in 2018 it’ll be unmanned. If somebody can REALISTICALLY convince me that they’ll send humans to Mars 59 months from today by all means, convince away. Finally, whenever I see “nonprofit organization” my suspicion radar perks up immediately.
The planning bit is long-since done (they have even written an academic paper on the subject). The real issue is turning the plan into reality. Five-hundred days is really a matter of professionalism and a bit of forethought on the mission planning.
All of it can be done. The issue here is whether Mr Tito really can turn it into a reality.
I’m sure it could be done but you have not convinced me one iota that it will be done. Planning and papers are all well and good but you need a lot of industry leaders on board, you need lots and lots of money, not just some “non-profit” foundation trying to get a few bucks.
Look, I’m not trying to give you or anyone else a hard time. I just ask you does this pass the smell test? If it really does, then say yes. I’m counting on the good folks on this board to use sound judgement and reasoning otherwise these guys like Tito are going to walk over a lot of people.
What’s next? are people going to announce they’re going to mine asteroids for $$$???!!!
The company you’re looking for is called “Planetary Resources”.
We’re saying it’s possible. Technically, technologically, and financially.
The hardware either exists or is damn close, and is available (or will be) commercially. And the price they are taking orders at gives us a reasonable idea of the sort of development costs Tito is facing. And it is within reach of his level of wealth, given a few big sponsors or many small ones.
Beyond that, whether he can organise it, whether he can get the backers, whether all the pieces come together on time… I have no frickin’ clue. But it’s possible.
WSJ indicates that SpaceX has dropped out (or never was in) of the mission and Tito is now talking with Boeing, LM, and NASA. The price tag being thrown around is $1B, which matches what some on this board guesstimated – with “sources” claiming Tito may invest up to $100M of his own money. We’ll await to see what is said at the press conference, but I’m not holding my breath on any earth-shattering news, much less the likelihood of this mission going forward. Remember, no bucks, no Buck Rogers.
Folks:
If you want to watch the news conference at the National Press club without bothering with that pesky registration page, click here!
They didn’t set the bar very high here, merely a roadblock. My bad! 🙂
tinker
Great!
Dennis Tito, the first space
tourist funded his own trip into space in 2001. A former scientist and engineer
at NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Tito applied the statistical tools of
aerospace to the analysis of market risks. He established Wilshire Associates
in Santa Monica in 1972. With that financial success and wealth, Tito turned
back to his love of aerospace engineering and space flight. Sometime prior to February Tito and a group of
insiders formed the Inspiration Mars Foundation. (I’m looking for the details.)
The website names Jonathan Clark chief medical officer, Taber MacCallum chief
technical and Jane Poynter in charge of life support.
On
February 27, 2013, the Inspiration Mars Foundation held a press conference in
the National Press Club to announce the plan of the foundation to launch a
mission to Mars in 2018. Philanthropist Dennis Tito is going to totally fund
the foundation ($100 million) initially. Tito voiced his intention to send a flight to Mars on January
5, 2018 when Mars moves close to Earth in favorable alignment. Stating that the
technology is already in place and that the issues that need to be overcome are
only the requirements of a 72 week trip. He acknowledges the psychological and
physical challenges for the humans involved, but with perhaps an
underestimation of the radiation issue.
Technology may not be the number
one obstacle to a safe flight to Mars. The cosmic radiation along the way may
exceed the level of human tolerance. Looking beyond Mars and our Solar System,
the deleterious challenges of radiation and the limitations of shielding will
be even greater. Avoiding the radiation, shielding or engineering humans to
withstand radiation offer the only alternatives. The first choice of avoiding
the radiation may prove the only safe one.
A version of “Avatar” the movie, may offer the only
presently feasible way for humans to
live in the cosmos beyond. Aside from the movie, we are making rapid strides
along these lines with Drones and other robotic applications. Soon we may
launch unmanned fighter planes. Think of experiencing a visit to a distant
planet or solar system in virtual reality while controlling the vision, hearing
and movement of a life like robot. Lag-time will be an obstacle. Quantum
entanglement and the quantum computer may resolve that issue. The traveler
might live in a lifelike replica of the space vehicle and operate a control
module not unlike the Da Vinci surgical robot. Can we build a true human Avatar?
More easily, I think, than meeting the challenge of shielding or adapting to
the radiation. Are we ready to invite a couple to donate their DNA to science?
We will probably get volunteers, but they should know the risks — and the certain
cost.
This is an aviation
venture; that pioneering spirit is in our DNA, but before we get to hyper-drive
and genetically modified humans, avatars might be a more efficient way to go.