Jeff Foust has a roundup of the current news.
As I write in the book, I think that this is by far the most likely means that anyone will get to Mars:
Unfortunately, when it comes to space, Congress has been pretty much indifferent to missions, or mission success, or “getting the job done.” Its focus remains on “safety,” and in this regard, price is no object. In fact, if one really believes that the reason for Ares/Orion was safety, and the program was expected to cost several tens of billions, and it would fly (perhaps) a dozen astronauts per year, then rather than the suggested value of fifty million dollars for the life of an astronaut, NASA was implicitly pricing an astronaut’s life to be in the range of a billion dollars.
As another example, if it were really important to get someone to Mars, we’d be considering one-way trips, which cost much less, and for which there would be no shortage of volunteers.18 It wouldn’t have to be a suicide mission—one could take along equipment to grow food, and live off the land. But it would be very high risk, and perhaps as high or higher than the early American settlements, such as Roanoke and Jamestown. But one never hears serious discussion of such issues, at least in the halls of Congress, which is a good indication that we are not serious about exploring, developing, or settling space, and any pretense at seriousness ends once the sole-source cost-plus contracts have been awarded to the favored contractors of the big rockets.
For these reasons, I personally think it unlikely that the federal government will be sending humans anywhere beyond LEO any time soon. But I do think that there is a reasonable prospect for private actors to do so — Elon Musk has stated multiple times that this is the goal of SpaceX, and why he founded the company. In fact, he recently announced his plans to send 80,000 people to Mars to establish a settlement, within a couple decades, at a cost of half a million per ticket.
And I think that would be the best way to do it. Given that there is no political pressure for sustainable operations or settlement, it would be a mistake to count on the government doing it — it would just be a Mars version of Apollo, with little to show for it ultimately.
Actually the risk would probably be higher than either of those missions because even oxygen is a problem. ISRU technology would have to improve significantly before a viable Mars colony could be attempted.
To use the technical term, poppycock. Oxygen is everywhere. Hydrogen is the most abundant. H2O is known to have it’s uses as well.
I’ve accepted the term ISRU technology as a shorthand to get a point across, but let’s not let it fool us. ISRU is what we do every day, right here on earth.
the Apollo legacy suggests that public interest would drop off rapidly after the initial landing, jeopardizing the media rights and thus the revenue needed to maintain a lifeline for those people who are living on Mars.
Which is why four colonists is not enough. A dozen should be the goal for a ‘big brother’ reality show. In this case you can’t vote them off once you send them. Not to mention, more hands means more survivability at a lower cost per person.
Mars One isn’t interested in a “Big Brother” or “Survivor” style tv show. In fact, Bas says he’s never even seen those shows.
Never watched. I’m not a fan of either. It’s just than good editing for drama will be required. Which means they need more interactions. 4 people gives you 6 one on one connections. 12 gives you 66 I believe (or very close to that.) Add three or more way interactions and the difference goes up even more.
The vast majority of “reality” shows have zero drama in them. That’s what made Big Brother and Survivor so different. Ice Road Truckers doesn’t have any of the kind of “drama” you’re talking about (in fact, 99% of the time there’s only one person on camera) and it’s the most watched reality tv show of all time. Just about every fishing show doesn’t have any of the “drama” you speak of, and they’re all incredibly popular.
Fishing and golf shows aren’t marketed to a general audience.
Drama (conflicts and emotions) isn’t just about interaction with people but more interaction means more potential for it (and more the editors can pick for there audience and not just the dramatic scenes.)
Ice Road Truckers certainly does have drama (extrapolated from the limited times I’ve watched.) Ice, being the give away.
I’m not sure anything qualifies as having zero drama? Certainly not, no drama Obama.
BTW, it’s not just the content that has drama. It’s the audience. When a truck is sliding on an icy road toward a cliff, it’s the audience emotions that have potential drama.
My mother couldn’t take herself away from the Jodi Arias trial because she became emotionally attached to it. Taking it away would have been like trying to take a bone away from a junk yard dog.
The purpose of drama is to get the audience emotionally attached. That’s the goal.
Big Brother only makes good TV because the participants are selected for their eccentricities.
Not even then.
Of course, Bob Zubrin has enough eccentricities for a dozen people. 🙂
At one point during the La Jolla Starship Conference, the moderators asked for a show of hands concerning whether Government or private enterprise was the best hope for getting us into space and to other stars. It was about 90/10 in favor of believing private enterprise would do it. Mind you, the location and nature of the event pretty much guaranteed that. I wonder what the response would look like at a big NASA sponsored event.
I don’t know about NASA, but I can tell you how the DARPA-sponsored 100-Year Starship Conference went.
There was a lot of star-eyed talk about how we had to completely transform society before we started building the first starship. One fellow suggested that we needed to get rid of war, poverty, nation states, religion, and money. Another called for a single unified government, currency, and culture. Star Trek was frequently cites as a model.
Another speaker suggested, more modestly, that the 100 Year Starship organization should grow to become the largest, most powerful corporation on Earth.
All of these proposals were taken seriously. As if the DARPA mandate of creating the technology base to build a starship was not hard enough, by itself.
Obviously it isn’t hard enough by itself. Being achievable, it couldn’t be. Achievable mandates mean the agency might eventually no longer be needed, and all those jobs go away.
I also notice that Icarus Interstellar, which was a big player in last year’s 100 Year Starship Symposium, is planning to hold its own conference in Dallas this summer.
Three competing starship conferences in one year? Two of them in Texas, about one month apart? Interesting.
How seriously do people take the Inspiration Mars mission?
I think that’s at least how serious we should take Mars One, right now, and if they actually start pulling in more money, even more seriously.
Like Inspiration Mars, Mars One has a contract with Paragon for life support systems.
Even if all Mars One raises is the current “few million” that they’ve already gotten from investors, that’s at least some money going to closed-loop life support systems. Other than Dennis Tito, who else can say that?
It makes you wonder if they couldn’t combine a 2018 mission? That would be the second Mars One mission with their first rover. It might allow a bit more space and redundancy for the Inspiration Mars couple?
I guess all this talk from Inspiration Mars that they might not be going with SpaceX will evaporate as soon as Mars One starts paying SpaceX to develop the lander, launch vehicle interface, etc. There will probably be more crossover too. That’s the great thing about doing it privately, no-one thinks the master plan they came up with is going to last for the 5 or 10 years it takes to complete the project.. you’d have to be some sort of government bureaucrat to think that’s how the world works.
I’m impressed by the people, money and timelines involved. I could actually live long enough to see some of it happen. 40+ years (1969-now) is a long wait.