781–790 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unconventional design. The rocket looks very large and they mention 120 million newtons takeoff thrust so the weight is about 10 million kg, 3 times Saturn V size. The first stage lands back on launch stool, the tanker stage is put on top of it and it launches again. This implies a relatively fast turnaround. Both the second stage and the tanker seem to have complete heat shields and stub wings and ability to re-ente…
Speed to Mars though is really relative speed along whatever orbit (Hohmann transfer or the moral equivalent) that you choose. Only in SF stories do we have fully powered propulsion to Mars. I am very curious what the selected family of orbits is, and even more importantly how long & how much life support for the large passenger number.
There's not much leeway, it's going to be something close to a Hohmann transfer, with the aphelion ahead of and above Mars to get to a hyperbolic capture orbit with the periareion deep in the atmosphere for (almost) direct re-entry.
This kind of orbits can be solved for arbitrary departure date and time of flight using a Lambert's problem solver and numerical optimization. Not a particularly difficult problem by modern standards.
Pure Hohmann transfer to another planet will result in inevitable collision due to relative velocity, but it's useful for lower bound estimates.
Another alternative for recurring Mars intercept is is the "Aldrin cycler" (after Buzz Aldrin) which is a free return trajectory but that is difficult when the goal is to land and take off again.
There are lots of possibilities for lower energy transfers but most of them are out of question when life support is required for humans on board.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A scale model of the engine. It's not full-size yet.
Are you certain of that? It's mentioned in a few places (including Wikipedia), but I've not seen any SpaceX sources saying this was a sub-scale test article. On the contrary, we've heard Elon say that because of the very high chamber pressure, you can get the thrust they're looking for out of an engine about the size of a Merlin. And while it's hard to be 100% sure, from the pictures I've seen the unit tested at the…
1) Funding: Current SpaceX resources are tied up in creating the basic infrastructure that will lead to interplanetary travel. SpaceX is still private leading to Musk prioritizing these awesome ventures but still tied to revenue from contracts and limited funding. Going public will destroy the vision but give him the cash reserves to pull in the timeline.
2) Competition: NASA, other government space organization, and the private sector have or will have plans for interplanetary travel. Healthy competition often leads to more innovation and constant motivation. At the same time, it leads to competition for shared resources such as...
3) Talent: Musk mentioned in the Q&A that he can only hire green cards and up. The international talent pool is and will remain untapped unless something drastic changes. Assuming this talent goes to the competition and capitalizes into the positive effects, then it will be worth it. Unfortunately, we have yet to see another private sector company like SpaceX push the envelope as much so I'm not as hopeful that someone has the ability to utilize talent like Musk has. At the same time, SpaceX is known to drive employees into the ground. 7 days a week, tough hours, and impossible timelines is not sustainable for employees. The allure of SpaceX, similar to gaming, keeps talented individuals in line to get a shot at working for SpaceX. As mentioned due to the limited talent due to immigration issues, SpaceX may run into the talent shortage sooner than later.
4) Non-Transport Issues: Transportation is necessary but not sufficient for interplanetary travel & habitation. We don't have a SpaceX/Musk for the other non-transportation related issues. The political/cultural/international issues will be big and then there's terraforming and everything involved with that. Musk may get ahead of schedule but these other issues may push the timeline further and further out.
5) Public Interest: Space travel is not as sexy as it used to be for the public as compared to the Moon landing with the backdrop of the Cold War and arms race. Yes, this is not using direct public funding (if/until NASA decides to pitch in) but the public needs to make this objective be top of mind for it to become a reality. Musk and the science enthusiasts will not be enough. We need to develop a few "X Prize" equivalents for the non-science community to progress on the non-transport issues and show why it matters for the rest of the world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bootstrapping the local infrastructure. Think of it like a game. You start off with a lathe and a CNC mill and some 3D printers and a bunch of other stuff. You now need to grow crops on Mars. You need to refine Iron ore and produce high quality steel. You need to manufacture plastics, glass, concrete. You need to mine water ice to make water. You need to use electrolysis to make Hydrogen to feed the Sabatier reactor…
> even a poet since there is a ~10 minute delay when accessing the internet, I think any form of entertainers would be quite sought after :)
Some of the comments here make me think of crabs in a pot pulling down the ones who try to climb out. Nobody's making you participate in this venture. If you don't like it, then you're free to go do whatever it is you do like. You might think Musk could better direct his efforts and resources elsewhere, but most other billionaires don't do anything all that interesting, they just invest their money in mundane stuff,…
We need a lot more like Musk, whether you agree with space or not. Investing their resources in crazy ideas of their heart, some might just work. We don't progress the species with digging up more rocks, building more stuff, selling more stuff, or dare I say it, finding a new way to get a cab. A few more vastly wealthy eccentrics building teams to play with space, fusion (carefully I hope), generation, or whatever pi…
Oh but we do. Statistically such things contribute a lot more to humanity overall, it's just less visible because the benefits are widely distributed. What enables projects like this is the huge amounts of human labour that have been saved by less glamorous projects, along with general innovation in manufacturing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You say a south pole colony would be hard enough as though we don't have one. We have a south pole colony [0], and there are a half dozen multi-million dollar experiments there that must be manned year round. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amundsen–Scott_South_Pole_Stat...
I believe under discussion is a self-sustaining colony. The south pole runs on imports.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, Musk himself is very upfront about the risks involved, especially for the first few waves of colonists. And indeed, there would likely be very little personal upside for them, even if they survived the grueling initial period. But you're making a false equivocation: considering the colonists personal risks in leaving against the species shared risk in staying. If there's even a small chance of success in esta…
> If there's even a small chance of success in establishing a self-sustaining colony [...] then any degree of personal risks levied on individual colonists are "worth it" from the species level No, the risk v reward curve has to be better than an equivalent risk v reward curve for a terrestrial species survival project to justify the mission. I would argue that just about any PhD in epidemiology, disaster relief, or…
I think it may take some time - centuries even - for colonizing Mars to "pay off" in terms of reduced extinction risk. But I think in the long term - say 500 years from now - we will indisputably be safer as a species if we started colonizing Mars 500 years ago than if we didn't. And if we don't start now, then when?
This Q&A is painful... it's a combination of people shamelessly plugging their own products (Funny or Die you just lost a viewer with that stunt) and people who sound like they may be (literally) mentally unstable. There are scattered in somewhat normal questions... but not by anyone I would consider qualified to even be asking questions.
I wonder what kind of people accompanied Columbus and other explorers on their ships. If you also noticed there was one woman questioner, who wanted to kiss Elon Musk. Perhaps that's the kind who would take such risks, to be the first crew. So I didn't mind those questions so much. By and large the crowd was very excited - thunderous applause several times.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But why do you care if Musk and SpaceX have a reality-distortion field? Worst case (or best case for you) is that he fails and you get to gloat.
The same reason Apple bothers me. Today, I don't care. His clients know what they're getting involved with, and if they don't care, I don't either. My concern is when he does go to Mars, he'll have hundreds of people signing up not realizing that he's putting lives on a beta rocket.