IAC Today!

[Scotius]

Yes. And it will require a lot of investment, research and development, tweaking and refining of many existing technologies. And creation of completely new ways of doing things. It means progress in many fields - now tell me it will be a bad thing. We have to start moving forward from this little planet, that already is choking on us and our activities. We need space for future generations to live, we need sources of materials that are getting scarce on Earth, we need sources of energy. Right now we have only two choices now - space and ocean depths. These are the only frontiers left for us to expand into. Third choice is to stagnate, and bury ourselves in an endless loop of reutilisation of garbage -  with every loop getting tighter and tighter because of inevitable losses (and we won't have means or energy to spare to resupply from the outside of the system).

[Robotengineer]

1 hour ago, Nibb31 said:

The whole effort is massive, and the transit spaceship might actually be the easiest part of the problem.

That's the point. SpaceX isn't really interested in building a full colony, they are providing a platform on which organizations that can afford to build outposts can. 

[kunok]

12 minutes ago, Scotius said:

Yes. And it will require a lot of investment, research and development, tweaking and refining of many existing technologies. And creation of completely new ways of doing things. It means progress in many fields - now tell me it will be a bad thing. We have to start moving forward from this little planet, that already is choking on us and our activities. We need space for future generations to live, we need sources of materials that are getting scarce on Earth, we need sources of energy. Right now we have only two choices now - space and ocean depths. These are the only frontiers left for us to expand into. Third choice is to stagnate, and bury ourselves in an endless loop of reutilisation of garbage -  with every loop getting tighter and tighter because of inevitable losses (and we won't have means or energy to spare to resupply from the outside of the system).

But spaceX isn't doing anything of that, just a big rocket, I'm with @Nibb31 probably is the easiest part. In your Columbus example spaceX is more like whatever boat maker that make the Columbus boats (the irony is that as a spanish maybe I should know what city did that )

[Robotengineer]

Suggesting SpaceX needs to build the infrastructure for the colonies and outposts is like saying SpaceX needs to build, operate and maintain all of the satellites they launch. They are a launch provider, and ITS/MCT is just another way to get from point A to point B, its up to the governments, super wealthy and corporations to decide what to put on Mars and how to maintain it. To use another historical analogy, ITS/MCT is a large vessel supplanting the Caravel, not the East India company.

[55delta]

And here I thought there'd be more arguing over whether Elon down-played the dangers of interstellar radiation or was low-balling on an estimate of $10 billion. Well, there's plenty of time for that.

Well, I think it's a mistake to depend on SpaceX to provide us with all the answers on the workings of a Mars colony. It's a long time to 2025 or 2050. Still, is it too crazy, or just crazy enough?

[_Augustus_]

This thing has FORTY-TWO RAPTOR ENGINES ON THE FIRST STAGE. WHAT?

1000 ITS ships in orbit at once? I'll be darned if it happens in my lifetime.

[tater]

52 minutes ago, Robotengineer said:

Suggesting SpaceX needs to build the infrastructure for the colonies and outposts is like saying SpaceX needs to build, operate and maintain all of the satellites they launch. They are a launch provider, and ITS/MCT is just another way to get from point A to point B, its up to the governments, super wealthy and corporations to decide what to put on Mars and how to maintain it. To use another historical analogy, ITS/MCT is a large vessel supplanting the Caravel, not the East India company.

I don't think it's remotely analogous to colonizing the Americas. Anyone dropped off with some simple tools could easily live. The New World was so easy that the earlier immigrants (edit: "Native Americans") never had to leave the Stone Age.

Any destination for humans on Mars must be entirely constructed. They can no more bootstrap themselves than they could an O'Neill colony. That's on top of the fact there is no possible RoI at all---it's not a matter of an insufficiently high RoI, but that there is no plausible return at all.

Edited September 27, 2016 by tater

[DerekL1963]

7 minutes ago, tater said:

Any destination for humans on Mars must be entirely constructed. They can no more bootstrap themselves than they could an O'Neill colony. That's on top of the fact there is no possible RoI at all---it's not a matter of an insufficiently high RoI, but that there is no plausible return at all.

That's what a lot of people miss...  Historically, colonies (settlements, outposts, whatever) with few exceptions generally served one of two purposes.  The first was economic, if not to make money for absentee owners then to facilitate trade or provide a market or other commercial services.   The second was (essentially) military/political - to establish a claim on land.  (And generally the latter was intended to eventually become the former.)

If somebody put money into a colony - they expected to get something in return.   That 'something' is the part of the equation that's missing when it comes to space colonization.  Almost nobody commits themselves to a long term money sink 'just because'.

[pyrosheep]

58 minutes ago, 55delta said:

 low-balling on an estimate of $10 billion. 

 

 To put this into context, the Apollo program cost around 150 billion in 2016 dollars.

[Ultimate Steve]

I'd like to avert everyone's pessimism for a bit, if that's okay with you.

Some say that this will make it to Mars. Some say that it won't. Some say that is will - in several decades time.

Nobody can completely accurately predict the future. But I can say - with a high amount of confidence - that whether we make it there with this or not, this is the closest we have ever been to going to Mars.

It got real for me when I saw the Raptor static fire. It got realer when I saw a carbon fiber fuel tank bigger than my house.

 

On a slightly unrelated note, I decided to play "The Final Countdown" at the same time as the ITS video (which was muted). I started the latter six later than the former. I had planned for the liftoff to sync perfectly - but the lyrics also synced perfectly. Such as "And maybe we'll come back to Earth who can tell?" at the same time as the booster returning to Earth, "I'm sure that we'll all miss her so" at the same time as the spaceship departing for Mars, "Cause maybe they've seen us" At the same time at the crew of the spaceship would see the refueler, and "And welcome us all" at the time of the refueler docking to (being welcomed by) the spaceship. Definitely the best coincidence I've seen for some time.

 

Now, I wonder what the first words said on Mars will be. Can't wait for that day!

EDIT: Hey, that was my 500th post!

Edited September 28, 2016 by Ultimate Steve

[tater]

The best money maker would likely be using the spacecraft as a vtvl suborbital passenger liner, like the Pegasus concept from Phil Bono in the 60s.

With no need for recreation areas, and little need for more than max capacity seating for under 1 hour flights, you could probably put north of 200 aboard, easily.

Wonder what the operating cost would be used that way? First class is full at 15 grand or more for trans pacific flights, 40 minutes to Asia would be worth a premium...

[StrandedonEarth]

1 hour ago, DerekL1963 said:

If somebody put money into a colony - they expected to get something in return.   That 'something' is the part of the equation that's missing when it comes to space colonization.  Almost nobody commits themselves to a long term money sink 'just because'.

The return that can be expected is intangible. Difficult conditions breeds innovation and new techs. Unfortunately, intangible as-yet-to-be-determined tech spinoffs aren't something the bean-counters can count.

4 hours ago, tater said:

I first saw this pic on my phone. Now I'm looking at it on my 'puter and can see the people. And it's composite? Sweet jumpin' Jesus!

[tater]

Give me several billion please! Your return might be "intangible." You game?

Edited September 28, 2016 by tater

[SatanX]

This is like watching someone play KSP in real life. I fear for a pilot named Jeb.

[DerekL1963]

 

3 hours ago, StrandedonEarth said:

The return that can be expected is intangible. Difficult conditions breeds innovation and new techs. Unfortunately, intangible as-yet-to-be-determined tech spinoffs aren't something the bean-counters can count.

Nobody, except possibly religious fanatics (which this conversation and discussion thread disturbingly resembles), pours billions of dollars in up front and on going costs without an expectation of a tangible return.  That's the economic reality of colonies no matter how many trite aphorisms you string together.

[hms_warrior]

Forget about mars... that thing is an awesome rocket in itself. Just think about the volume/weight dimensions a modified upper stage can put into leo and think about what this will do to kg-to-LEO costs. You want to know where the money for the mars stuff comes from? I guess it is simply "farmed" in the two years between mars launch windows by totaly dominating the whole space-launch market. And i mean the " massively boomed space market due to zero-g production of nano-tubes, asteroid mining..." thing, not this feeble " send some TV sats now and then" market we have now.

Elons strategy: Make 2 Billions in the two years between windows, put one Billion aside, invest the other into Mars development.

(Just to clarify: He didn't said anything of this^^ this is just my overhyped mind garbage^^)

[StarStreak2109]

3 minutes ago, hms_warrior said:

Forget about mars... that thing is an awesome rocket in itself. Just think about the volume/weight dimensions a modified upper stage can put into leo and think about what this will do to kg-to-LEO costs. You want to know where the money for the mars stuff comes from? I guess it is simply "farmed" in the two years between mars launch windows by totaly dominating the whole space-launch market. And i mean the " massively boomed space market due to zero-g production of nano-tubes, asteroid mining..." thing, not this feeble " send some TV sats now and then" market we have now.

Elons strategy: Make 2 Billions in the two years between windows, put one Billion aside, invest the other into Mars development.

(Just to clarify: He didn't said anything of this^^ this is just my overhyped mind garbage^^)

Well I guess, it does not sound that unrealistic. Look at ULA's CisLunar 1000 plans. Or this outfit from Luxemburg, who want to go mine asteroids.... There is already a lot of effort going on in the area of "doing business in space". And then, when I look at the impending scarcity of rare earth materials, which are needed to build our next smart phone, laptop computer, hair dryer, microwave, car, you name it, I think this kind of business will have some merit and thus future. Not tomorrow, not in ten years, but Soon®. For this transport will be required - and this is I think, where "mass transit" like Elon's ITS might (or might not) fit in.

So what about this whole "Let's go to Mars" thing?! I totally agree with folks that say that it is definitely not alike the wave of discoverers that went ashore in the New World in the 15th and 16th century to make a living in an uncharted territory full of unknown species, illness, potentially hostile natives etc. Mars is a barren place, with what resources we still do not fully know, some form of water for sure, lots of carbondioxide and other stuff we can't breathe, the prospect of living under a dome for the rest of our lives.

So, beyond the obvious scientific motives and some remote business motive (maybe some scarce resource we don't have on earth, though I doubt it...), there seems not much else to draw people there. Or is there? What Elon said, you can go anywhere on this world within 24 hours. If I may take this a step further and state: For mankind, there is little challenge, little focus "on what to do next" remaining. In a word, literally boring. So boring in fact that one feels sometimes, our society is slowly degenerating to the old concept of "panem et circensis" (Latin for "bread and games"), meaning that as long as people are fed and occupied, they won't stir excrements.

Now, one  thing kept me going in Elon's speech. That is the ambition and the inspiration he emanated. Maybe that is one thing that could drive us and inspire future generation to devite them more towards a "higher" goal than just "panem et circensis". Maybe it is also a means to inspire kids in school and college to devote themselves to engineering, physics and the likes and maybe this future economy represents also new opportunities for "the common people" back on the blue marble.

And then I come back to the "fertile grounds motive" of colonization: If corporations like SpaceX, ULA and the others pursue their plans, maybe not exactly a Mars colonization (or maybe exactly this), an orbital, lunar, cislunar, martian or asteroidal industry might emerge, offering jobs for highly qualified engineers. And then crafts like Elon's are required (well, maybe not as flashy, cruiselinerish, but you get the drift).

So, anyway, that is my conclusion after thinking about this for a while. Let's see, how this'll continue. If push comes to shove, it was at least a brilliant PR stunt!

See you on the other side!

Sebastian

[RCgothic]

Also, whoever first gets a foot in the door on Mars is likely to end up being the richest person/company on Mars. That's not nothing, even if the investment doesn't return to Earth or the RoI is small by Earth standards.

Edited September 28, 2016 by RCgothic

[Nibb31]

13 minutes ago, RCgothic said:

Also, whoever first gets a foot in the door on Mars is likely to end up being the richest person/company on Mars. That's not nothing, even if the investment doesn't return to Earth or the RoI is small by Earth standards.

The only people likely to make any money are the Earth-based corporations who will be selling canned air, water, and supplies to the colonists. If Musk does get the price down to $200K (I don't believe that's possible), then actually staying alive on Mars is going to cost a lot more than the ticket to get there. Nobody on Mars is going to get rich.

Think about it:

1. Buy ticket to Mars.
2. Fly to Mars
3. Boots on Martian regolith with your suitcase
4. ?????
5. Profit.

Steps 1 to 3 are actually the easiest part of this colonization thing. Everyone (including Musk) seems to be handwaving step 4 away as if it was a mere detail that we can figure out later. 

Edited September 28, 2016 by Nibb31

[RCgothic]

Sure they will, compared to other Martians. It might not be rich by Earth standards, but that's a pretty irrelevant comparison when the nearest Earthling is an 80 day flight away.

Who wouldn't want to have corporate/political/fiscal power over a significant fraction of a planet? When the colony is established it will have its own economy. Being top dog in that economy would be like being a big fish in a small pool, compared to being an irrelevant fish in an ocean.

 

That's going to be an attractive investment to a certain type of person. It's trading Earth funds for Martian power.

Edited September 28, 2016 by RCgothic

[Nefrums]

How would you find people that what to go?

It is not like if someone suggested a totally unrealistic one way trip to mars, they would instantly get 200.000+ people signing up ....  or would they?    

Edited September 28, 2016 by Nefrums

[lugge]

The last 3 pages are about Mars colonization. Thats not a thing, I guess this plan is not going to happen, not in this century. I'm wondering why this is being discussed here so much. It's just not going to happen.

However, I don't care about these colonization plans. If Musk's dream will get some humans to Mars (before realizing colonization is not working yet), I'm totally fine with it.

Let him put all his money into this. In best case, we will see an awesome rocket and human footprints on Mars. If I could live to see that in my lifetime, I would be totally happy.

 

[n.b.z.]

1 hour ago, lugge said:

The last 3 pages are about Mars colonization. Thats not a thing, I guess this plan is not going to happen, not in this century. I'm wondering why this is being discussed here so much. It's just not going to happen.

It is being discussed here so much because we've just been watching a presentation about a vehicle architecture that's specifically designed for the purpose of enabling Mars colonization, proposed by a company that was founded for the sole purpose of enabling Mars colonization.

A vessel that's ridiculously overdesigned for a mission profile of "have some dudes plant a flag and collect some rocks while taking pictures of footprints."

Many good reasons can be brought forward why this goal may not be reached in this century. But "that's not a thing" and "just not going to happen" are not reasons at all; these are merely claims.

[Workable Goblin]

13 hours ago, DerekL1963 said:

That's what a lot of people miss...  Historically, colonies (settlements, outposts, whatever) with few exceptions generally served one of two purposes.  The first was economic, if not to make money for absentee owners then to facilitate trade or provide a market or other commercial services.   The second was (essentially) military/political - to establish a claim on land.  (And generally the latter was intended to eventually become the former.)

If somebody put money into a colony - they expected to get something in return.   That 'something' is the part of the equation that's missing when it comes to space colonization.  Almost nobody commits themselves to a long term money sink 'just because'.

That's not actually true anymore, sort of. Since about 1950, a third "colonization" model has sprung up--the scientific outpost, a habitat which is inhabited permanently but by rotating crews to conduct some kind of scientific research, like in Antarctica or with space stations. Governments have, collectively, spent billions of dollars on these over a few decades even discounting the ISS (the US alone spends about $300 million per year on Antarctica, and there are a lot of countries with Antarctic bases), so clearly they're willing to dump money into them "just because".

Admittedly, in Antartica there are shades of the second point as well--Australian bases in the AAT, Chilean and Argentinean bases in their claims, and so on--and we know there is stuff there that could be mined. But we know the same thing about Mars, too, and it makes about as much sense to set up a Mars base to do research and establish a seat at the table if something that could make doing stuff on Mars profitable emerges as it does to establish an Antarctic base to do research and establish a seat at the table for Treaty revisions if something that could make doing stuff in Antarctica profitable emerges. At least, if the cost is reasonable, which if Elon can get his cost figures to where he wants would pretty much be the case--the delivery of payload to the Martian surface would have to cost less than about $2,000 per kilogram for a ticket to cost $200,000, which is about the same as what it costs to deliver payload to orbit today, or less. Thus, it would cost about the same or less to operate a Mars base as to operate a space station even with minimal ISRU and, well, there are a couple of groups doing space stations.

Of course, the trouble is that this isn't what most people think of when they say "colonization". Nor is the other probable model of space "colonization," which is oil rig-like asteroid mines (which would also be much more plausible if the ITS works out), because in both cases you just have people traveling out somewhere for a limited time before returning to Earth, and making no attempt to permanently inhabit the area. But it is, nevertheless, a method of colonizing an area, and certainly some kind of a step into space.

[todofwar]

7 hours ago, RCgothic said:

Sure they will, compared to other Martians. It might not be rich by Earth standards, but that's a pretty irrelevant comparison when the nearest Earthling is an 80 day flight away.

Who wouldn't want to have corporate/political/fiscal power over a significant fraction of a planet? When the colony is established it will have its own economy. Being top dog in that economy would be like being a big fish in a small pool, compared to being an irrelevant fish in an ocean.

 

That's going to be an attractive investment to a certain type of person. It's trading Earth funds for Martian power.

The thought of this hinging on the kind of person willing to fly out a couple thousand people to Mars for the benefit of being in total power over them is kind of troubling, sounds like a high tech cult.