[space] Is Mars-one a scam?

[Mazon Del]

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?first.

The usual out for this is the part of the treaty that specifies (paraphrasing) that the materials gained must be useable by all interested parties has been pretty much always considered to mean that if someone lands somewhere and is using the stuff, they can use it all they want. But if another person/group lands nearby and insists on having half of the materials, then they must be granted such. However, you cannot demand the materials unless you are there. Things shipped back down to Earth get slightly hazy but for the most part are thought to be the property of the person 'holding' them when they land. The hazy part is once someone else establishes an LEO presence, they might be able to make the claim that since your resources are nearby (as they are coming down from HEO or further) they can have an equal share.

[PakledHostage]

I stumbled on a paper titled "An Independent Assessment of the Technical Feasibility of the Mars One Mission Plan" a moment ago and thought I would share it. The paper was written by Sydney Do at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and presented at the 65th International Astronautical Congress in the fall of 2014.

To quote the paper's conclusions:

Conclusion

Our integrated Mars settlement simulation revealed a number of significant insights into architecture decisions for establishing a Martian colony. First, our habitation simulations revealed that crop growth, if large enough to provide 100% of the settlement’s food, will produce unsafe oxygen levels in the habitat. As a result, some form of oxygen removal system is required – a technology that has not yet been developed for spaceflight.

Second, the ISRU system sizing module generated a system mass estimate that was approximately 8% of the mass of the resources it would produce over a two year period, even with a generous margin on the ISRU system mass estimate. That being said, the ISRU technology required to produce nitrogen, oxygen, and water on the surface of Mars is at a relatively low TRL, so such findings are preliminary at best. A spare parts analysis revealed that the mass of spare parts to support the ISRU and ECLS systems increases significantly as the settlement grows - after 130 months on the Martian surface, spare parts compose 62% of the mass transported to the Martian surface.

Finally, the space logistics analysis revealed that for the most optimistic scenario considered, establishing the first crew of a Mars settlement will require approximately 15 Falcon Heavy launches costing $4.5 billion, and these values will grow with additional crews. It is important to note that these numbers are derived considering only the ECLS and ISRU systems with spare parts. Future work will have to integrate other analyses, such as communications and power systems, to capture a more realistic estimate of mission cost.

In general, technology development will have to focus on improving the reliability of ECLS systems, the TRL of ISRU systems, and either the capability of Mars in - situ manufacturing and/or the cost of launch. Improving these factors will help to dramatically reduce the mass and cost of Mars settlement architectures.

[Brotoro]

How hard can it be to remove excess oxygen? We invented fire a long time ago. Also, liquefaction and storage of the excess O₂ should be reliable.

[tater]

Assuming everything they claim is pushed back 2 years, they have 4.75 years to build their robot lander. How's that going for them? Or are they gonna just order it using alibaba 6 months before January, 2020?

[andrewas]

Or you could let waste rot down. This problem arises because the crops are creating additional biomass, which strips carbon out of the system leaving excess O2. Once a cycle is established and the amount of biomass is roughly constant, this problem should vanish.

[nohelmet]

Is Mars-one a scam?

Yes, it is.

[Nibb31]

How hard can it be to remove excess oxygen? We invented fire a long time ago. Also, liquefaction and storage of the excess O₂ should be reliable.

How hard can it be to design a critical low-maintenance system that is essential for crew survival to reliably burn oxygen on Mars, with all redundancy and safety measures, to test and validate the system's use in Mars conditions (atmosphere, radiation, gravity...), and to have it certified for manned spaceflight, in less than 10 years and with only a few thousand dollars?

I'd say pretty hard.

Edited March 24, 2015 by Nibb31

[DavidBowman]

I mean, what's the rush to make a permanent base and no return? Why not spend resources for landing, experimenting, and coming back with a crew of five for example? Isn't that easier and more helpful?

[FishInferno]

I mean, what's the rush to make a permanent base and no return? Why not spend resources for landing, experimenting, and coming back with a crew of five for example? Isn't that easier and more helpful?

Mars One's point is that a one-way mission could be accomplished with out developing a Saturn-V class rocket, but an Earth Return Vehicle would.

[hugix]

the fight continues.

https://medium.com/matter/a-point-by-point-response-to-the-latest-claims-made-by-mars-one-6617841f6c44

[peadar1987]

How hard can it be to design a critical low-maintenance system that is essential for crew survival to reliably burn oxygen on Mars, with all redundancy and safety measures, to test and validate the system's use in Mars conditions (atmosphere, radiation, gravity...), and to have it certified for manned spaceflight, in less than 10 years and with only a few thousand dollars?

I'd say pretty hard.

Mark Watney was able to do it, and he's not even real

[andrewas]

Technically, the guys at future-JPL were able to do it. The ability to extract oxygen from the atmosphere was a standard feature of that equipment, not something Watney hacked it into doing.

Also, the guys at JPL had a bigger budget than Mars One, and were designing equipment for a 31 sol temporary mission. If it fails, they have a day or so of breathable air, and hundreds of hours of CO2 filters for the life support in their suits and rovers. IF they can't fix it in a reasonable time, they abort the mission, pile into the MAV, and fly back to Hermes.

If Mars One's life support fails, they fix it or they all die. If they need spare parts from Earth, it takes months to get them to Mars even if theres a booster standing by for an emergency supply run.

Still, its not an impossible problem, it just means the system has to have more redundancy, a larger stock of spare parts, and the development of local industry should be a priority, or the colony risks failing for the lack of something that, on Earth with all our infrastructure built up over the last few centuries, seems utterly trivial.

[hugix]

How hard can it be to remove excess oxygen? We invented fire a long time ago. Also, liquefaction and storage of the excess O₂ should be reliable.

Whenever you have to add "on Mars" at the end of the sentence... It's pretty hard.

[GreenWolf]

Whenever you have to add "on Mars" at the end of the sentence... It's pretty hard.

It's not like it's rocket science, right?

Oh, wait...

[Bill Phil]

If main equipment lasts about 6 months on average, then the back ups can last for 3 months each but not as efficiently, and the next resupply could replace the main equipment and the backups.

[GreenWolf]

If main equipment lasts about 6 months on average, then the back ups can last for 3 months each but not as efficiently, and the next resupply could replace the main equipment and the backups.

You do know that Earth-Mars transfer windows only open up every two years, right? If your equipment will only last 9 months, total, you will be dead before the next window opens.

[LordFerret]

You do know that Earth-Mars transfer windows only open up every two years, right? If your equipment will only last 9 months, total, you will be dead before the next window opens.

Ahh!... but you're forgetting Quick-Save and Hyper-Edit!

[Kinglet]

You do know that Earth-Mars transfer windows only open up every two years, right? If your equipment will only last 9 months, total, you will be dead before the next window opens.

Only direct transfers.

You might as well build a massive fusion powered cruiser thing and derp around in interplanetary space until you get to Mars, and realize that you can go to alpha centauri.

Of course, that won't happen anytime soon or ever.

[_Augustus_]

So I have seen this article, and I'm amazed. Paragon themselves admits that Mars One can't do it and yet Bus Landthrope over there still says that they can.

Look at this claim:

There is no way that they can launch that many Falcon Heavies for $6 billion, when just the cost of launching the Falcons is 10.26 billion dollars.

Add the Dragons and it's more like 25 billion.

Mars One is ridiculous...

[ChrisSpace]

I don't think the article addresses one of the most obvious points: SpaceX

You see, M1's entire plan revolves around using SpaceX rockets and spacecraft for their mars colony. But in WaitButWhy's SpaceX blog, it specifically stated that 'Elon doesn't believe in Mars One'. Translation: The company that is supposed to be supplying the rockets doesn't even think the project will work. Also remember that SpaceX is working on its own mars colony project, which would make M1's colony obsolete by far. So SpaceX isn't going to help Mars One, leaving them with no other options for suitable launch vehicles that won't cost a bajillion dollars.

Also it forgets the whole 'Mars One's colonists would die after 68 days' thing.

Edited August 24, 2015 by ChrisSpace

[tater]

Has anyone ever taken Mars 1 seriously?

[Findthepin1]

Yes. I have.

Edited August 24, 2015 by Findthepin1

[Motokid600]

Yes. I have.

[Shpaget]

Elon doesn't believe in Mars One'. Translation: The company that is supposed to be supplying the rockets doesn't even think the project will work. Also remember that SpaceX is working on its own mars colony project, which would make M1's colony obsolete by far. So SpaceX isn't going to help Mars One, leaving them with no other options for suitable launch vehicles that won't cost a bajillion dollars.

That doesn't mean Musk will not sell them the rockets.

Launching 14 Falcon Heavies would generate quite a bit of exposure and media attention, not to mention provide a whole bunch of data for the SpaceX to improve the machine.

And if Elon Musk doesn't think Mars One is viable, all the better. It means M1 is not a competitor to his project, so there really is no reason not to sell the rockets.

[tater]

The single most useful thing to come from Mars One is that the MIT paper gives us some good data on the amount of spare parts needed to maintain Life Support---which will be useful for KSP mods. Seriously, that's the most actually useful thing that will come of Mars One.