Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

SpaceX Elon Musk aims for man on Mars in 10 to 20 years.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Science Donate to DU
 
bananas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 08:09 PM
Original message
SpaceX Elon Musk aims for man on Mars in 10 to 20 years.
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/04/spacex-ceo-elon-musk-aims-to-put-man.html

APRIL 23, 2011

Spacex CEO Elon Musk aims to put a man Mars 2021-2031

Private US company SpaceX hopes to put an astronaut on Mars within 10 to 20 years, the head of the firm said.

"We'll probably put a first man in space in about three years," Elon Musk told the Wall Street Journal Saturday. "We're going all the way to Mars, I think... best case 10 years, worst case 15 to 20 years."

(embedded video that doesn't play for me)

I can't get the video to play, but here's another article:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jElMmDGT9idnh1Nfdcd0frIE66zw?docId=CNG.1162cc65f46ade8c93d4c3d8b3d59307.a11

Private US firm aims to put man on Mars in 10-20 years
(AFP) – 1 day ago

NEW YORK — Private US company SpaceX hopes to put an astronaut on Mars within 10 to 20 years, the head of the firm said.

"We'll probably put a first man in space in about three years," Elon Musk told the Wall Street Journal Saturday. "We're going all the way to Mars, I think... best case 10 years, worst case 15 to 20 years."

<snip>

"Our goal is to facilitate the transfer of people and cargo to other planets, and then it will be up to people if they want to go," said Musk, who also runs the Tesla company which develops electric cars.

<snip>

"A future where humanity is out there exploring stars is an incredibly exciting future, and inspiring, and that's what we're trying to help make happen," Musk added in the interview.

<snip>

Refresh | +5 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-11 08:56 PM
Response to Original message
1. And they laughed at Andy Griffith...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Atypical Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. I loved that show as a kid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
buddysmellgood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. I'd never heard of it. Looks like it aired opposite the Wonderful World of Disney
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RT Atlanta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 09:04 AM
Response to Original message
2. This is truly inspiring stuff here...
I wish them nothing but the best and will use this company, and its audacious goals, as examples for my children. I say this because with hard work, fundamentals in math and the sciences, and the ability to critically think, this type of project is something in which they may be able to participate.

Role models as compared to shit that is rammed down the unconscious public's collective throat through the MSM (i.e. "Idol," anything with "real" in the title, etc.).

Off the soap box now....

Congratulations again to SpaceX for being bold enough to aim for the stars - and just maybe reach another planet along the way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 09:07 AM
Response to Original message
3. There's no chance of his company managing that on its own
It doesn't have anything like the expertise in manned spaceflight to keep people in space and on another planet for 2 or 3 years. He might be able to supply the rockets, but not the spacecraft and astronautical expertise. Only the Russians or NASA could support a manned flight to Mars within the next 20 years - or the Chinese if they went for a Space Race-style 'spend whatever it takes' approach.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. I'd be impressed if they solved the radiation problem within 20 years
We're not even close yet.

Delivering dead astronauts to Mars would be pretty useless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ratty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Of all the problems with such a trip that was my first thought too
Edited on Mon Apr-25-11 11:56 AM by Ratty
Really an announcement like this smacks of luring venture capital.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Phoonzang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-29-11 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #5
17. The radiation problem is insurmountable only if we go on the standard six month trip idea.
With technology like the VASMIR engine, we could get to Mars in a little over a month, minimizing exposure to cosmic rays en route. So...it might not so much a matter of shielding tech as it is getting to your destination as fast as bloody possible!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
originalpckelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
4. But why?
For what reason?

If it's a business there has to be money behind it. A country can just spend money to do it for national pride, but a business is not like that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Atypical Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. Money.
We are talking about an entire planet's worth of real-estate.

It is mind-boggling to me that folks don't see the monetary potential of the rest of our solar system. When explorers came here they did not know what the monetary gain was going to be, either. They thought they'd find a faster trade route. Or that they would find gold. But that's not where the wealth ended up coming from. It came from countless other discoveries and opportunities along the way that the original explorers and colonists could not even fathom.

Space will be the exact same way.

Things will be discovered and exploited that cannot even be imagined right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Multiple minds on this one
1) I think they will be hard pressed to get humans on Mars for any length of time. The latest discussion I saw was the possibility of a one-way trip to Mars for small scale colonization.

2) While initially curious I am less impressed with these x-prizes. In some way there is almost an ideological conflict being generated around this. It is quiet and subtle but it seems to suggest that the government cannot manage things well. Hitting the big symbolic target of space travel seems useful for that mentality.

3) I can see how they might make money off of Mars in a manner similar to how someone makes money off of Second Life (only with real people). It would be entirely financial with nothing resembling an actual product being transitioned anywhere. This could make Mars the equivalent of a 'company town' or something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Atypical Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. My thoughts.
1) I think they will be hard pressed to get humans on Mars for any length of time. The latest discussion I saw was the possibility of a one-way trip to Mars for small scale colonization.

I don't know. I think it could probably be done relatively easily with todays' technology, provided it was funded. Orbital mechanics are well known now, as is how to navigate rockets to match them. It simply becomes a problem of mass, which equals cash.

2) While initially curious I am less impressed with these x-prizes. In some way there is almost an ideological conflict being generated around this. It is quiet and subtle but it seems to suggest that the government cannot manage things well. Hitting the big symbolic target of space travel seems useful for that mentality.

While I am entirely dismayed with our lack of government-sponsored leadership in space exploration, I am ecstatic that a private venture at least is taking up the reigns. I don't think this is a case of either-or, but since the government is dropping the ball, choosing instead to fund tax cuts and wars, at least the work is going on.

3) I can see how they might make money off of Mars in a manner similar to how someone makes money off of Second Life (only with real people). It would be entirely financial with nothing resembling an actual product being transitioned anywhere. This could make Mars the equivalent of a 'company town' or something.

I think it's impossible to say. It is true that no matter what resource the find on, say, Mars, it is going to cost a fortune to push it out of Mars' gravity well to get it back to Earth. But we have no idea what might be found. Assuming people can sustain themselves there, you will find people willing to move just for the freedom of living where there is no government to "oppress" them. There will be people willing to live in the untamed frontier simply because it is untamed. That will have value alone.



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. hmmm
1) Unless the ion drives are perfected it will take entirely too long to get there. Massive amounts of fuel to get there and back. Massive amounts of food to survive the trip there, the stay, and the trip back. Even if it is one way, there would again need to be rather large amounts of food to survive indefinitely.

This does not go into radiation, surface conditions on the planet and a number of other concerns.

The resource requirements are beyond the scope of a private enterprise.


2) I understand your enthusiasm but I will be living on this planet for the forseeable future and I worry about the underlying ideas at play.

3) Two parts:

a) Resources- entirely too expensive to send back and not really worth considering.

b) Freedom- the pioneer thing is absurdly improbable as you would be entirely dependent on the little box-habitat constructed by whatever private or public agency promised to set you up with it. Your food supply would be equally complicated unless there was enough energy to maintain a bio-dome of sorts and then you would be forced into a situation with others or be entirely dependent on outside sources.

On the flip side it might be an excellent way of ridding ourselves of the wealthiest parasites by convincing them that "Galt's Gulch" is somewhere on Mars.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Atypical Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Time will tell.
I have infinite faith in both man's ingenuity and his greed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 06:41 AM
Response to Reply #11
14. It's not an 'untamed' frontier - it's a dead frontier
The 'freedom' of existing in an environment where the very air you breathe is dependent on keeping the machines going, as is the water and food you need to survive, would make you so dependent on a complicated infrastructure that a government, oppressive or not, would be the least of your worries. You'd need to be part of a mass collective effort (complete with extremely restrictive rules), and it'd have to have a better reason for existence than "it's not the same old place everyone else lives in". Apart from scientific curiosity, it'd need to be some kind of resource. The nearest anyone has got to identifying any resource worth extracting in space is helium-3, on the Moon - but the usefulness of that (for a type of fusion reactor) is disputed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Johonny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-11 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. any launch rate that would be require to send people and supplies
on a massive scale to colonize Mars would destroy the Earth Atmosphere. Launching rockets through our atmosphere has a tiny impact because the launch rate today is low. IF the launch rate was high, the effect would be huge and not particularly good. A fact people never talk about when discussing magic fantasies of space colonization. Unless something like the space elevator is able to be created massive scale space mining operations are very unlikely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Gator_Matt Donating Member (186 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-11 11:50 PM
Response to Reply #4
16. Turbinium
Kuato Lives!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 06:56 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Science Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC