[space] Is Mars-one a scam?

[Dkmdlb]

In eight years NASA developed an EVA suit, a method to dock two spacecrafts and a rocket with the deltaV needed to get to the moon.

Adjusted for inflation, NASA spent more than $250 billion in the 1960s (source: wikipedia). By 1966 the Apollo project was consuming 2/3 of the annual budget of NASA.

And that's to go on a 1 week trip to the Moon.

[Bill Phil]

rocket with the deltaV needed to get to the moon.

This existed. The Saturn IB and even the Atlas-Centaur could send payloads to the Moon. Only the Atlas-Centaur really did, though.

I say this because you used the term "delta-V". You should have said "a rocket capable of sending the Apollo stack to the Moon." Because that's a completely different story.

[tater]

I'd be incredibly surprised if the Mars One people could crowdsource a probe like the one India managed. I'm usually big on conditional statements, but in this case setting their probability at even "non-zero" seems too high.

[Brethern]

Adjusted for inflation, NASA spent more than $250 billion in the 1960s (source: wikipedia). By 1966 the Apollo project was consuming 2/3 of the annual budget of NASA.

And that's to go on a 1 week trip to the Moon.

Most of that money was spent towards developing the equipment needed there's a fair amount of existing tech that could be reused for a mars landing. I'm not saying the date is realistic, but considering just how much of a hail mary the apollo program was it's possible.

This existed. The Saturn IB and even the Atlas-Centaur could send payloads to the Moon. Only the Atlas-Centaur really did, though.

I say this because you used the term "delta-V". You should have said "a rocket capable of sending the Apollo stack to the Moon." Because that's a completely different story.

Yeah I should have, but I didn't.

[sedna16]

I'm troubled with what I read recently,

that they choose their candidates via a 10-min skype interview and not physical tests have been made on the candidates

[Bill Phil]

Yeah I should have, but I didn't.

Just come out of this with more knowledge than before. Unless it was just a slip up... In which case that's okay.

[kStrout]

whoever had the idea for the base on mars one did not think at all about radiation. Mars has no magnetic field and an atmosphere so thin it might well not exist as far as shielding is concerned, just of the top of my head you would need to live at least 2m underground if you didn't want your colonists to get cancer within the first few years.

[Bill Phil]

whoever had the idea for the base on mars one did not think at all about radiation. Mars has no magnetic field and an atmosphere so thin it might well not exist as far as shielding is concerned, just of the top of my head you would need to live at least 2m underground if you didn't want your colonists to get cancer within the first few years.

Actually, the radiation on Mars is about as much as in LEO.

And radiation only increases the CHANCE of cancer, it doesn't give you cancer.

Maybe the second gen colony could have underground habitats with the occasional EVA? Assuming the program lasts that long.

[LordFerret]

I'm not sure I understand what you're referring to.

...

That's because you think you already have all the answers.

With all due respect and compliance to the Mod's request...

Your first sentence there is, I suspect, the issue here. And, no, I don't have all the answers... what I have is nearly 60 years of life experience, watching, following, listening, witnessing. As for what's available from NASA, I'm intimately familiar with the resources - NSSDCA (great place to start) and NAIF for example to name a few I rely on, Simbad and other CDS tools as well... and then, of course, there's Google (etc). Long before there was a KSP, I meddled with Celestia and other such things.

As for Mars One...

I believe it to be on the order of a scam. If not a scam outright, a pipe-dream. Between the players involved, the chosen engine to drive interest (and generate funding) - a reality show, it cannot hold a serious note. I see no serious legitimate science/industry leaders having any interest or part in it, and no apparent backing by any other agency (NASA, ESA, etc). Everyone whom I have discussed it with has pretty much held the same 'sarcastic' opinion of it and its 'contestants'...

(pardon the pun, but it has been the general consensus I've run into)

At best, at this moment, it is very poorly planned; And if its implementation follows suit? The above pun could end up quite right.

Edited March 20, 2015 by LordFerret

[Brethern]

Just come out of this with more knowledge than before. Unless it was just a slip up... In which case that's okay.

What I meant to say was a rocket with the DeltaV to get humans to the moon, I assumed people would realize I meant getting humans there as that was the context of the post.

[FishInferno]

Make of this what you will, the mission has been delayed by 2 years.

And, well I guess I will be honest this time. I like Mars One. I think that they are a legitimate organization with clear goals. I see Bas and how passionate he is about this mission, and I really do think that they have a legitimate plan put together. Now, I am not convinced that they will succeed, so don't beat me up over my opinion. I think that the biggest contender right now is SpaceX, as I have said before.

[Bill Phil]

What I meant to say was a rocket with the DeltaV to get humans to the moon, I assumed people would realize I meant getting humans there as that was the context of the post.

Yeah... I know. I just wanted to point out that it can be an incorrect statement, and someone using that against you in an argument wouldn't be good. Especially if it affects their opinion of you... I know it's not likely. But their are very picky people. Be careful with these things.

[Brethern]

Yeah... I know. I just wanted to point out that it can be an incorrect statement, and someone using that against you in an argument wouldn't be good. Especially if it affects their opinion of you... I know it's not likely. But their are very picky people. Be careful with these things.

I get what you meant thanks for point it out.

[Bill Phil]

I get what you meant thanks for point it out.

Alright then...

On the subject of Mars One...

Mars is a whole new ballgame compared to the Moon. It's farther away, more massive and bigger. This means it's harder to do anything if you get there. The best thing to do for Mars One would be to increase their allocated budget and push back the date. Then it looks more possible.

Not to mention being very strict and rigorous with each and every stage of selecting candidates.

[Columbia]

I think they can do it, but certainly not by 2024. They have no adequate funds and no coordination with a space agency.

I understand that Bans Lansdorp is very dedicated to this mission, but I just think it's too early. At least when we've set a Mars base.

[Moar Boosters]

I dunno how they're going to raise the budget since their methods of financing seems very unlikely to work.

The TV production company they were working with has already cancelled the plans for a reality TV series. If it was to be made, it'd be a fairly boring elimination style reality show. They type of show that was really popular a decade or so ago, but not so much now.

They claim the rest of the money is going to come from sponsors, but I'm not really sure how that's going to work either.

It won't take long before people are bored of a show about delusional mars colonists; and once all the money is in the pot, the best they could hope for is to put a tiny little probe into mars orbit, probably with all the potential colonists names written on it.

[Bill Phil]

Thing is, BASA's whole Mars mission is pretty likely to cost 14 billion dollars or more. How can anyone do it for 6? Let alone colonize it?

[Voyager55]

I dunno how they're going to raise the budget since their methods of financing seems very unlikely to work.

The TV production company they were working with has already cancelled the plans for a reality TV series. If it was to be made, it'd be a fairly boring elimination style reality show. They type of show that was really popular a decade or so ago, but not so much now.

They claim the rest of the money is going to come from sponsors, but I'm not really sure how that's going to work either.

It won't take long before people are bored of a show about delusional mars colonists; and once all the money is in the pot, the best they could hope for is to put a tiny little probe into mars orbit, probably with all the potential colonists names written on it.

Agreed, they want to start the show at the beginning of the training. The training that will supposedly last 8 years, does anyone really want to watch 8 years of people performing mundane tasks in a tiny can? Last year or two maybe, but definitely not eight years.

[LordFerret]

How about instead of a show, they just broadcast non-stop everything that goes on... development, construction, testing, training. Kind of like a NASA TV (or ESA's equivalent), but broader, open and unedited - or the word of the day here in this nation, "transparent". If the world really sees something in that, they'll get the interest and backing. Maybe. There's issues/problems that could develop with that too though.

Then again, there's that whole UN Outer Space Treaty thing-a-ma-jingy ... how will the world handle that? Who gets to claim rights to Mars? Who defines where you'll land and build your colony? And, most importantly, who (what nation) will reap the rewards of the science gained and natural resources found there to have?

As for getting there, we have the technology to sling whatever out there to it, we've done so already with probes and landers/rovers (although a number of them didn't quite make it at first, did they).

I fail to understand why focus wouldn't be on a robotic colony, sent there to build and grow and evaluate first.

[cpast]

How about instead of a show, they just broadcast non-stop everything that goes on... development, construction, testing, training. Kind of like a NASA TV (or ESA's equivalent), but broader, open and unedited - or the word of the day here in this nation, "transparent". If the world really sees something in that, they'll get the interest and backing. Maybe. There's issues/problems that could develop with that too though.

Then again, there's that whole UN Outer Space Treaty thing-a-ma-jingy ... how will the world handle that? Who gets to claim rights to Mars? Who defines where you'll land and build your colony? And, most importantly, who (what nation) will reap the rewards of the science gained and natural resources found there to have?

As for getting there, we have the technology to sling whatever out there to it, we've done so already with probes and landers/rovers (although a number of them didn't quite make it at first, did they).

I fail to understand why focus wouldn't be on a robotic colony, sent there to build and grow and evaluate first.

What do you mean by a robotic colony? Like, full man-rated equipment, but running entirely on automatic? Or like a few robots landed at the same point (e.g. one is a heavy powerplant, one a battery-powered rover that goes there to recharge)?

[SargeRho]

Building a robotic colony first is exactly what MarsOne had planned to do, actually. Robots were to land a few years before the first colonists, setting up basic life support and habitation for the colonists. Most proposals would actually do that to some extent. Mars Direct's architecture would send an Earth Return Vehicle ahead, that would produce fuel for the colonists that arrive 2 years later, similarly, the Mars Ascent Vehicle of the Design Reference Mission 5.0 would land ahead of the colonists to start producing fuel, while the lander would also be sent ahead of the colonists, and remain in orbit of Mars until their arrival.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if Elon Musk's plans didn't involve sending robotic precursors first.

Edited March 21, 2015 by SargeRho

[FishInferno]

I wouldn't be surprised at all if Elon Musk's plans didn't involve sending robotic precursors first.

Elon Musk's plan sounds lie basically an upscaled Mars One base.

On the subject of the TV series: Sure, people don't want 8 years of the TV show. But MO has said that they changed their plan to do a documentary series, which will be more interesting IMO. Also, there IS lots of public interest. They got quite a bit of attention when they got to the final 100 candidates. The fact is, whether or not they succeed, people WANT this to happen. Not necessarily Mars One in particular, but it just so happens that at the moment they are the only people who have announced their plans to the public. And I like their approach: The whole world should know the whole story of the first humans on Mars.

[KerbMav]

For me it comes down to these options:

1. they really thought they could do it and were simply to .. "naive" ..,

2. they just siphon the public for money - equally unsuccesful at that then,

3. it was simply a scheme to discredit manned space flight,

4. we will all be surprised by the first Mars-Earth-War of Secession.

[GreenWolf]

4. we will all be surprised by the first Mars-Earth-War of Secession.

Speak for yourself. Sci-fi has been preparing me for the Great Colonial War of Secession since I was 10.

[tater]

Elon Musk's plan sounds lie basically an upscaled Mars One base.

The primary difference being he can actually launch, well, anything at all. Mars One has zero capability to do, well, anything at all.