People On Mars in 2023?

Doc Ruby

Pushtrak wrote: »

Not going to copy all the post, just will say thanks, it was informative.

Its doable, just not by these guys.

shizz

Doc Ruby wrote: »

Its doable, just not by these guys.

Definitely not by these. The mention of reality tv just sounds like a gimmick.

Pushtrak

Doc Ruby wrote: »

Its doable, just not by these guys.

Honestly, yeah, I've been thinking something similar for a while. I'm thinking about the subject in a more general sense of human colonization of other planets, and feasibility of that. Course, I don't have much basis for assumptions on that one so, yeah... Not that this gives me pause. I really don't expect human colonization on other planets in the 20XX time frame. Based on quantum superentanglement fields of computational absolutely nothing.

squod

The Shenzhou missions are paving the way for a manned flight to the moon after 2020. The Chinese plan to build a lunar base that may serve as a jump-off point for the most ambitious of their plans, sending men - and women - to Mars.

Chinese are gonna use wimmin drivers lol. Also, all the popular spots for moon landings are now no-fly zones.

nyarlothothep

Pushtrak wrote: »

This is planned in the short term as a one way trip. There would be a group of 4 sent up, with another 4 being sent up periodically. There are no plans that have been revealed about any return plans for any of them. Of course, there would have to be a system in place to bring people there and back at some point, but that isn't even under discussion... At least publically that I've seen.

Not going to copy all the post, just will say thanks, it was informative.

The enterprise has problems, obviously. I really don't see this as one of them. The personal motivations of people isn't a problem. At least, certainly not in a situation like this. A discussion on the feasibility is worth having. The people who would be undertaking this mission would be highly trained and have likely dedicated their lives to becoming an astronaut.

See? Worthy questions, all.

Well if they want to sacrifice their lives willingly and are super human enought to do it then meh, who am I to stop them, but I still demand that humanity get its ass in gear in terms of building real spaceships that can at least get to mars in 3 months back and forth, otherwise it's all pointless. We're just a pseudo space faring culture until then.

admiralofthefleet

when are they planning on going to the moon for the first time?

shizz

admiralofthefleet wrote: »

when are they planning on going to the moon for the first time?

AWWWWWWWWWHHHHH HERE IT GOES!!!!

Doc Ruby

Pushtrak wrote: »

I really don't expect human colonization on other planets in the 20XX time frame. Based on quantum superentanglement fields of computational absolutely nothing.

The thing is, other planets really don't offer a whole lot to human colonisers. Ironically these Mars project guys go out of their way to talk down Venus, but according to the papers I have available here, Venus actually presents a better prospect for colonisation. At cloud top level, gravity, pressure, and radiation are earth-normal. Its not that hard to build flying colonies if you really wanted to.

The asteroids are the real jewel in the crown however. These can be used to construct viable stations in space, very very large ones, capable of supporting tens of millions, with useful gravity and atmospheres as well as being self sustaining. Using developed asteroid resources, themselves easy to collect due to the abundant nature of solar energy in space, these will be the real stepping stones for humanity to reach the stars.

Don't give up hope just yet is all I'm saying. :cool:

nyarlothothep wrote: »

but I still demand that humanity get its ass in gear in terms of building real spaceships that can at least get to mars in 3 months back and forth, otherwise it's all pointless. We're just a pseudo space faring culture until then.

Antimatter is the only way forward there, Mars and back in few days, and interestingly NASA has laid out plans for the mass production of this substance. Not in quantities worth much to spaceships, but its a big step forward, an engineering problem rather than a physical problem.

Then all we have to do is deal with the issue of megatons of spaceship howling around the solar system at perceptible percentages of the speed of light accidentally sideswiping the earth.

Tigger

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

Let's be honest - we're not ever going to colonize Mars. It's completely uninhabitable. And where else are we supposed to colonise? We're not going to get to the nearest galaxy even with the best technology. Plus, I'm ignoring all that hocus pocus of wormholes, sounds like bull to me when I read it.

this

Capt'n Midnight

shizz wrote: »

But the point is it is far easier and less risky to make the fuel on Mars. There is ample resources to provide the propellant needed to escape Mars and put on to a earth return trajectory.

There is no doubt that there is advantages in what you are proposing, but it is way down the line on any potential Mars mission.

To make fuel on Mars you have to land a factory
For most fuels considered you have to land an insulated tank full of hydrogen unless you land near the polar ice caps, you know the ones that expand and contract.
You need a nuclear reactor or acres of solar cells, or maybe even wind power

Lots of points of failure.
Stuff like wind borne dust


Space is a harsh but predictable environment.
The surface of Mars is easier on people but harsher to mechanisms.


A space elevator is much easier to build from the top down. The L1 point is only 2.5Km above the surface of Phobos. The gravity there is less than 1/1000th that on earth so it's like building a tower 2.5m hight and then downhill the rest of the way.

stylie

Pushtrak wrote: »

Do you not think there is any knowledge to be gained from in depth analysis of Mars? I'd have thought that it would be obvious that we'd want to know as much about other planets as possible. Also, would be great to establish telescope arrays on Mars given time. Again, something that seems obvious to me.

Why put telescope arrays on a dusty planet ? Dark side of the moon or in the gravitational sweet spot between planets is the place to put them

goose2005

hardCopy wrote: »

I'm a bit confused as to why people would go. People usually explore for some sort of gain, e.g. Columbus seeking new spice routes, pilgrims seeking new lands free from persecution in America, prospectors seeking gold in the American West.

If there is no way to live outside a bubble then the first residents will have a worse quality of life than at home, and if they can't return then they can't export, and even if they could export they'd have nothing to spend their money on.

I don't see land being scarce enough for people to want to move there rather than try to reclaim desert or sea here on Earth.

I wonder if Steorn will be involved in fuelling the ships.

I could see the case for it if we found unobtanium there and had a way to retrieve it or if Earth was completely overcrowded.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ore_resources_on_Mars

It's possible that, in maybe 100 years, it'll be cheaper to send a mining rig to mars for certain elements than to mine them on earth.

goose2005

Pushtrak wrote: »

Do you not think there is any knowledge to be gained from in depth analysis of Mars? I'd have thought that it would be obvious that we'd want to know as much about other planets as possible. Also, would be great to establish telescope arrays on Mars given time. Again, something that seems obvious to me.

It is true, though, that you could probably send unmanned probes to every planet, minor planet, moon and major asteroid in the solar system for the price of one manned Mars mission.

Capt'n Midnight

hmm Phobos mass is 1.072×10^16 kg

mass of Martian atmosphere is ~2.5 x 10^16 kg

Nevermind... not enough volatiles there



http://www.nss.org/settlement/mars/2003-SpaceColonizationUsingSpaceElevatorsFromPhobos.pdf
Figure 3 shows the cable mass for a 3500Kg load
Carbon nanotubes have a GPa of 50, and if you reduce the safety factor below 3 you could easily get a mass of just 100 tonnes.

If you drop the mass weight you are talking about a space elevator that could be launched to Mars on a single Saturn V

It would be able to transfer 4 modules at a time on a two day trip - so two modules per day, every day without using propellant

No we don't have the nanotubes in quantity yet, but the point is that a full cable with a decent payload is feasible

Eggy Baby!

Wow the Dutch will do it first? I always thought it would be the Russians/Chinese but hey...

cloptrop

This would be awesome if it happened . To think a few hundred years ago austrailia was the same , why dont they send a few crims there first and see how they get on .
Id say itd be really stuffy to live in a space suit .
In all fairness though Id say itd take hundreds of years to make mars hospitable to the general public but I hope Im alive to see the start of that .
We shall become the space invaders.

nokia69

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

Wow the Dutch will do it first? I always thought it would be the Russians/Chinese but hey...

no, if anyone does it, it will be the US

read up about SpaceX and elon musk, they have the lowest launch costs and in a year or 2 they will have the largest rocket

if they can make their falcon 9 reuseable then they will send people to mars

people think the US are falling behind in the space race because they ended the shuttle program, but in fact they are now leading it

in 3 or 4 years thing will be very interesting

Pj!

Definitely wouldn't be for me. I like my freedom. I'd presume we'd be able to watch via cameras how they adapt with living together in the new surroundings.

Wait a minute. Is this just another go at Big Brother??

saladin

Pushtrak wrote: »

http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/mars-one-plans-human-colonization-of-mars-by-april-2023/

While we dream about living or visiting a Martian planet, Mars One is executing the most ambitious privately funded space mission yet. The company has set a deadline for April 2023, the month that a human being will first set foot onto Mars.


With NASA’s budget cut, privatized space travel has become the next frontier for wealthy businessmen with dreams of becoming the real-life Tony Stark. Among the dreamers, there are some that are acting out on loftier ambitions. Forget the moon; the team from the Mars One project is setting out to make the colonization of Mars a reality.

The private Dutch company Mars One has set an ambitious deadline for the first permanent Mars colony: April 2023. For those who opt to settle on Mars, there will be no turning back. Their residence on the dusty planet would be permanent, although every two years, the established colony would welcome new residents, thereby slowly growing the Mars-based community.

Mars One initially plans to send over four astronauts in a journey that will take a mind-numbing seven months. Come 2033, the program hopes to have over 20 astronauts living on Mars.

If you’re skeptical about Mars One’s plans, you should be, but the project has the backing of the 1999 Physics Nobel Prize winner, Professor Dr. Gerard T Hooft, and the interest of several major privately operated commercial space corporations and suppliers that are capable of building the equipment and gear necessary to make the mission a success.

“This is going to be private enterprise, only private firms are going to contribute. No political mumbo-jumbo, no tax-payer’s money will be involved,” Dr. Hooft said in a statement.

The plan will begin only four years from now in 2016, when a communications satellite and a supply mission will be sent to Mars. Come 2018, a rover will be transported to Mars with the purpose of seeking an ideal location and best living condition to prepare for the permanent human settlement on the red planet. On 2020, the living capsules, supplies, life support unit and a rover tasked with reassembling the settlement components will be sent to Mars, preparing the colony for habitation. The first four astronauts will begin their journey on September 2022, landing on the planet on April of 2023.

Mars One plans on funding the continuous mission through a media spectacle that will allow anyone to stream and monitor the progress. In other words, such a widely publicized event would be prime real estate for advertisers and sponsors.

The aspiration is lofty, but private exploration is taking off — literally. Just last month, the privately built and launched Space X Dragon capsule was able to link with the International Space Station. Private corporations like Virgin Galactic, Space X and even Red Bull are racing to become the next household name that children will be talking about for generations to come.

Check out Mars One’s video below and let us know in the comments below if you’d be willing to leave the comforts of Earth to spend the rest of your life on a Martian planet.

More @ http://mars-one.com/

So, they're planning on 4 in 2023, and to have 20 up there in 2033. I'm not going to speak on the likelihood of them making the 2023 date, but the point I will make is it seems 10 years on, maybe they ought to be hoping for more than that to be up on Mars?

Being on another planet would be quite an experience, but being one of the early adopters, so to speak, one of those astronauts.. It'd be quite something to adapt to. Going on a one way journey somewhere, well, the precise 4 that would go up would have to be chosen. They will only have each other to "entertain" each other.[/Quote

Sounds a bit like Steorn the Irish free energy company. Ask for money and investment in something u pretend to build or know that will never work and get lots of gullible investors. Maybe they sell plots of moon and mars land too.
Anybody wiitg half a bits decent knowledge of rocket and planetary science knows this is bull.

Capt'n Midnight

goose2005 wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ore_resources_on_Mars

It's possible that, in maybe 100 years, it'll be cheaper to send a mining rig to mars for certain elements than to mine them on earth.

The limiting factor for most minerals is the cost of the energy required to extract them from low quality ores.

in 100 years we'll probably be recycling more, and mining todays land fill and new materials like graphene and carbon nanotubes and biologicals will replace metals in the same way that plastics have replaced non structural metals like gunmetal and zinc and animal products like ivory and cow horn and bone

if you have enough energy you can extract Gold and uranium from seawater, though no point in extracting uranium if you have enough energy to do it.

conor.hogan.2

I hope they do it, but considering SpaceX is the only one with tangible results I see them or planetary resources doing it before them.

Well it looks like they are looking to farm out the stuff to SpaceX, but they still need funding.

The more the merrier, competition is good.

mutley18

A quote from that video: "This is going to be a media spectacle, Big Brother will pale in comparison"


Surely he can't be serious? This is going to top that time Nasty Nick was found out and Craig confronted him? Strap your seatbelts tight folks, we are in for one hell of a ride.

stylie

Has anyone talked about what effects the solar radiation will have on the astronauts junk by the time they get to Mars ?? I don't think overcrowding will be a problem

shizz

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

To make fuel on Mars you have to land a factory
For most fuels considered you have to land an insulated tank full of hydrogen unless you land near the polar ice caps, you know the ones that expand and contract.
You need a nuclear reactor or acres of solar cells, or maybe even wind power

Lots of points of failure.
Stuff like wind borne dust

You have to land a factory? For the 4 person crew were taking here all that needs to be created propellant wise is 24 tons of Methane and 48 tons of Oxygen by using only 6 tons of Hydrogen, initially over a time of a year or so I can't remember.

Yes the fact that we have to bring hydrogen has it's problems, but because it isn't being used as a fuel, it can be gelled with another gas to prevent boil off. Also, any boil off from it while on mars goes straight into the propellant production.

I grant you that landing this large payload is with it's problems, but they are problems that can be solved with today's technology. The fact that it doesn't require much new technology, like what you are suggesting, brings down the mission risk and cost.

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Space is a harsh but predictable environment.
The surface of Mars is easier on people but harsher to mechanisms.


A space elevator is much easier to build from the top down. The L1 point is only 2.5Km above the surface of Phobos. The gravity there is less than 1/1000th that on earth so it's like building a tower 2.5m hight and then downhill the rest of the way.

On the first part, the lack of any sort of gravity during propellant production would be a huge problem on the mechanisms involved. You would need pumps everywhere, which again brings up points of failure.

Secondly, you talk about it as if the only problem was building from the ground up? We are no where near the ability of construction in space.

All of this is irrelevant anyway as I suspect I am arguing on how it can be done soon where as you are talking about the optimal situation, which lets face it is nowhere near our capabilities now. You are talking about implementing many technologies that haven't been created or demonstrated to work on that level.

Plazaman

Hey, I've bought a couple of acres of Land on Mars.

They better not put their fancy what-cha-ma-call-its and thing-a-ma-jiggys on my Land.

Ma, fetch me my lasergun !!!!!

shizz

stylie wrote: »

Has anyone talked about what effects the solar radiation will have on the astronauts junk by the time they get to Mars ?? I don't think overcrowding will be a problem

Solar radiation isn't the problem. Cosmic rays are. Solar rays can be predicted and shielded for where as cosmic are constant. Also, it is fine. A crew on a round trip will get an increase of less than 1% to the chance of getting cancer.

Breasts

Not sure if I would go to Mars.

Anyone ever see Total Recall.

I wouldn't want to piss off Quato either.

Capt'n Midnight

Plazaman wrote: »

Hey, I've bought a couple of acres of Land on Mars.

They better not put their fancy what-cha-ma-call-its and thing-a-ma-jiggys on my Land.

Ma, fetch me my lasergun !!!!!

If you want some land on earth I can meet you on Dollymount strand at low tide.

Just remember it's going to be difficult to serve notice on squatters.

Capt'n Midnight

mutley18 wrote: »

A quote from that video: "This is going to be a media spectacle, Big Brother will pale in comparison"

"Nick you have been eliminated, please make your way to the airlock"

Capt'n Midnight

shizz wrote: »

You have to land a factory? For the 4 person crew were taking here all that needs to be created propellant wise is 24 tons of Methane and 48 tons of Oxygen by using only 6 tons of Hydrogen, initially over a time of a year or so I can't remember.

http://www.astronautix.com/craft/marirect.htm

The point is that using materials that exist a tether could be build for a similar mass to several nuclear powered Mars based fuel factories.

On the first part, the lack of any sort of gravity during propellant production would be a huge problem on the mechanisms involved. You would need pumps everywhere, which again brings up points of failure.

even a tiny bit of gravity is enough. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ullage_motor

Secondly, you talk about it as if the only problem was building from the ground up? We are no where near the ability of construction in space.

production of super tough fibres is more a chemistry problem than a construction problem, but low gravity will help.

Hunchback

they'll make rakes o' cash as the new owners of mars. i wonder how much rent for a 3- bed semi-D with unobstructed panoramic views of the olympus mons?

i've long wondered about ownership of space colonies

shizz

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

http://www.astronautix.com/craft/marirect.htm

The point is that using materials that exist a tether could be build for a similar mass to several nuclear powered Mars based fuel factories.

Sorry I don't really understand this sentence. What I have been referring to all this time is Mars Direct.

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

even a tiny bit of gravity is enough. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ullage_motor

Not for the currently developed propellant production plants.

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

production of super tough fibres is more a chemistry problem than a construction problem, but low gravity will help.

It is still a problem. Construction in space itself is a problem which hasn't been even attempted yet on a low level. Integrating sections yes, construction no.