E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSSpaceX's millionaire founder, Elon Musk, says his rocket company can get humans to Mars in as little as 10 years. "Worst case, 15 to 20 years," he adds.
The prediction comes toward the end of this video interview with The Wall Street Journal's Alan Murray. Musk spends most of the interview chatting about his Tesla electric-car venture, but starting at the 13-minute mark, he gets into the topic that stirred up so much buzz over the weekend.
Last year, Musk told me that making money on the Internet is so much easier than making money by launching rockets. He's not in the space business for the money. Instead, he's in it to further his personal vision of getting the rest of us off this rock.
"A future where humanity is a spacefaring civilization, out there exploring the stars, is an incredibly exciting future, and inspiring," he told Murray in the video, "and so that's what we're trying to help make happen. I really want SpaceX to help make life multiplanetary. I'd like to see a self-sustaining base on Mars."
But is that practical? When Murray pressed him on the point, Musk said he thought it was. He repeated his forecast that SpaceX could put astronauts into Earth orbit in three years, and then he went on to set the year 2021 as a possible date for a human mission to the Red Planet. The NASA outlook isn't quite so ambitious: Last year, President Barack Obama targeted the mid-2030s as the time frame for manned missions to Mars and its moons.
Musk didn't lay out a detailed plan for his space program, of course — and one of SpaceX's executives, Larry Williams, told me earlier this month that missions beyond Earth orbit would still probably have to be led by governments, with corporations taking a supporting role. (He also said humans could get to Mars by the end of the decade if there was a national imperative to do so.)
Despite the lack of specifics, SpaceX and its founder are definitely thinking about the big picture, and not just about the next test flight. In the video, Musk said his long-term vision is to serve the same function as shipping companies and railroads served in earlier centuries, as opposed to building an operating colonies on other planest.
"Our goal is to facilitate the transfer of people and cargo to other planets," he said, "and then it's going to be up to the people if they want to go."
One guy who wants to go into space is Jeff Greason, chief executive officer and co-founder of XCOR Aerospace. During a videotaped TEDx talk in San Jose, Calif., Greason told his techie audience that he started up XCOR in part so that he could get his own ride into space. That, and something that his son once told him.
Greason became emotional when he recalled his son's question: "Daddy, is it true that they used to fly to the moon when you were a boy?"
"That shook me, and it still does," he said. "That's how a dark age begins. A dark age is not just when you as a civilization have forgotton how to do something. It's when you forget that you ever could. ... Ultimately for me, it's about avoiding a new dark age."
XCOR Aerospace's Jeff Greason explains why he's in the spaceship business.
Like Musk, Greason believes that Mars is in humanity's long-range future.
"While we sit here, debating and quivering with concern over whether we may be we may be raising the temperature of the earth by a fraction of a degree, Mars is sitting there, waiting, begging for us to come and raise its temperature just a few degrees ... and kick it over to a warm wet world where we can live," Greason said. "And it is no more ambitious and no more crazy for us to consider doing that today than it was for our ancestors to consider throwing railroads across the Sierra Nevada, and building huge reservoirs and waterworks to bring water and power to California."
To gain more insights into how Greason thinks commercial space operations could ease our energy woes, or how Musk thinks his real life compares with that of the fictional "Iron Man," take a spin through the full videos.
More on future spaceflight:
- How tycoons will fuel spaceflight
- SpaceX shoots for the 'next big thing'
- Counting down to a Red Planet mission
- Scientists buy suborbital space trips
Connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page or following @b0yle on Twitter. You can also check out "The Case for Pluto," my book about the controversial dwarf planet and the search for new worlds.
Leave a Comment:
No more crazy than '...building a railroad....?" Don't make me laugh. Why don't you clowns just start at the South Pole in Antartica for you hair brained colonization schemes. It's a lot more hospitable than Mars!
True, however I applaud Mr. Musk's drive for this goal. If enough people have this same drive, developing the tech necessary to live somewhat comfortably on Mars would allow us to colonize LOTS of other places. The possibilities are quite exciting :-)
It IS NOT any more crazy.... just more difficult. Jeffrey's attitude is defeatist, Musk's is progressive. Guess who's corner I'm in....
Granted I wasn't around back when it happened, but I am sure the same was said about Christopher Columbus when he said he wanted to go to the Far East by way of trekking West...Don't be so myopic...
Ironically, I am in Jeffrey’s corner, but probably not for reasons that he would imagine. Anyone with access to Google Earth can see that there is something seriously wrong with what we are being shown with Antarctica. Areas are smudged, or totally obscured. What the general public is seeing is something that has been modified – it is bad enough for images of the surface of Mars and the Moon to be tampered with, but a continent on our own planet? What in the world is going on in Antarctica that we are not allowed to see?
Please don’t give me that “oh this is in the interest of national security and we don’t need to know everything” crap – our tax dollars fund what we have going on there. That is my money and your money.
Wili ,the conspiracy activist, Listen just because you think we're out to get you doesn't mean we aren't!!!
Um... it's Antarctica... what exactly are you going to zoom in on, ice? You want some hi-rez sat photos of ice? Ok... well enough people could care less that Google has obviously decided to not waste money getting hi-rez photos of a big white sheet. About the only thing I would find interesting is a ground-penetrating radar image of the mountains underneath the ice...
Also, if the government REALLY wanted to convince you that nothing was down there (assuming something was) I'm quite sure you wouldn't even notice anything unusual.
Jeffrey - When railroads were new, building one over mountains or across a continent was a titanic effort that cost thousands of lives. I guess you are so spoiled with the conveniences of today that you have forgotten we didn't always have iPads and iPhones.
So : IF he gets to Mars within his time scale & the government is 15 to 20 years behind him. Does he have the right to say: mine the planet, extract minerals & anything else that may be valuable without any taxation or government begging?
Will he have the right to declare the planet independent of earth?
Could he claim ownership?
Legally this could be a nightmare, 'cos you can bet your bottom dollar the earths governments will want their cut of any profit. (but not pay their share of any expenses)
We could try what is crazy and experiment high tailing out of here while conditions permit or simply die on this rock like other species did after time has run out.
Wilieturner, Google is having problems with their cars in Antarctica, so the street views are a bit messed up. I think they almost have the problem solved, though.
It used to be considered a HUGE gamble and nearly impossible dream to connect the East Coast to the West Coast with rail, millions of 19th century dollars and thousands of lives (largely Chinese, Black and Mexican) were spent to make it so. By comparison going to Mars and colonizing is no more outlandish nor expensive in today's dollars nor is it likely to be as death filled as the rail was. We are much more safety minded today and actually have better technology than the general public is being let to know. Sure, deaths will happen in the Space field, they already have and more will happen. This is true of nearly ANY human endeavor, but the benefits outweigh the costs and risks by far.
And besides, there ARE colonies in Antarctica, not self sustaining, but even the US is not a self-sustaining entity at this point.
B. Honest: Actually the entire earth is not self sustaining. It depends on the gravitational effects of the moon, and I shudder to think the miserable death we would all die if it weren't for the sun. As mob_barley and some others have said or implied, we need to be exploring all avenues in order to perpetuate the species, especially if you're atheist. If you're Christian it probably wouldn't influence your interest in space of the future, although Ive been caught up in it. Hubble has sparked my interest in deep space and I'd love to know what is out there. We'll have to send someone to actually find out. BTW, my comment "especially if you're atheist" is only meant to seperate the views of believers and non-believers; I don't know what mob_barley or anyone else believes and don't mean to imply that I do.
It's a good discussion. Reading the article I was thinking about those old rail projects and massive canal projects and the like. Those are very difficult projects, even today. Imagine building the Panama Canal with robots. It should be noted that robots will likely do the heavy lifting in our space endeavors, at least until we have the ability or technology to alter a planetary environment to make it so people can do work as freely on another planet as we can here. People can work in harsh conditions but I think until we can breathe easily and not have to wear space suits we'll only see robots in the Martian dirt. But huge projects like these are a LONG way off, even in my VERY optimistic view. The reason being mainly logistics.
It'll be difficult to get building material and equipment to and from Mars. Even building the equipment in space or on Mars is something we have VERY little or no experience doing (in the case of building things on another planet).
As far as colonies go, we will inevitably start small and work up to the "self-sustaining" point. And on the topic I'd agree that we as Americans are not self-sustaining. But the trick is that smaller groups are better equipped to sustain themselves, given the right circumstances and environmental conditions. For example certain pockets of native American cultures were probably some of the most "self-sustaining" the planet has ever seen (as a quick opinion). But the conditions that facilitated that are not going to be found on Mars, or the Moon, or any other planet really. We'll need to create the things that can sustain small groups of people, I'm thinking like the size of a small town today.
We will start small and the bigger any colony gets it will be more difficult to sustain it away from the conditions on Earth. The Earth provides a lot for us, and we'll need to come up with ways to reproduce those provisions on Mars. Colonies there will not be easy, and in the beginning they will certainly be dependent on Earth, and IF they ever become self-sufficient they will be walking a fine line between self sufficiency and over population.
As for the religious aspects of colonization, we are all going to have our own opinions about that, and in my opinion it can easily take away from the overall conversation about colonization, but I do think there is a point in talking about it. People are spiritual and when we colonize other planets we will inevitably be bringing our spiritual beliefs and ideas with us. I don't think that is a problem. The problem is extremism, in whatever form that takes. When people can't let go of an idea disagreements happen and in a closed-environment colony on Mars, that could mean the death or end of that colony. So, no matter what one believes a sense of open-mindedness or even just a willingness to disagree and let it be HAS to accompany us on our trek thru the stars. Above all we NEED to leave religious tensions behind us, even here on Earth. Getting up in people's face about their beliefs is by definition un-sustainable.
Interesting reading mob_barley...
Thank you Rakesh.
Don't forget the Irish!
Can't forget the Irish. I am Irish. Irish/German.
mmm... Beeeer.
Yes, but how do we get minority peoples to traverse space so that we can have cheap labor on Mars? Otherwise, how will we get anything done? We won't be able to build railroads on Mars, or new Canals, or grow crops, ....
Also, don't forget America was colonized by religious extremists (Puritans, et.al.) We will probably have a Martian Taliban Colony, Martian Catholic Colony, maybe even a Martian Jewish Colony. Can you imagine? War or cooperation? Also, do you think the natives will show up with Turkey and Dressing and Corn for a nice dinner?
I sort of hate to see another monopolizer push all the little guys aside in yet another egotistical episodic meglamaniacal scheme to dominate the galaxey.....I still use google but it has been less and less and less, they were great as a search engine and are still ok, BUT..soon it was this, then that, and as the money coffers got unreal so did the ambitions, now google can really suck....like at personal info...take the latest snafu as an example..sure no different than a lot of BIG ACME conglomaretes....which is my point exactly. To hell with musk...he shoulda been taken down a number of pegs by the ftc back when he started the click fraud fiasco and bullied advertisers into his way or the highway..I know some of you don't see it that way, but google was a good idea that made a lot of money that took the whole story down that all too familiar path, now we gotta another rich kid that may just be able to do what whole planets have not....singlehandedly, form one checkbook...doesn't anyone else find that a bit odd?....why does he not want moonbases first?...after all THAT IS LOGICAL!!....point being that if someone else gets to mars BEFORE him...then it's going to be something else even more audacious...don't suggest to these guys that venus may be a viable destination, cause their liable to get in fixed in their head that the meaning of life is for THEM to get their first and NO ONE ELSE....all the other reasons are just excuses...I would like to vist the moon, I have a penchant for enceladeous and think two of jupitors moons may have life...BUT...I am certain that a moonbase is a PREREQUISITE...don't ask about the logic, just think about it, really. I know the saturn five was MEANT to lift a manned mission to saturn, by design, but even back then the logic was step 1, then step 2 etc.....not gotta have it all or I will take my toys and just go home.....like I see in these rich to quick guys.....it is not for humanity, it is for selfishness. Not to argue with profits but peoples lives would be at stake, right?
The TRUE key to getting space exploration truely going and more than a novelty is to find a profit in it! Look at history and you'll find that, although alteristic explorations have happened in history, the true motivator is profits! Once profits were discovered in "the new world" expansion and exploration took off. Settlement of the American West took place with profits as an essential component.
I'm a science geek type guy. but, I know that the reality is we need to find a profit in space, on the moon, on mars, etc. That will give monetary gain as a reason to pursue it, then IT WILL HAPPEN! Until then, it will be little but novelty despite the best of intentions!
Exactly, which is why Musk has his sites set on Mars. He knows that he will get support from the government if he comes up with a viable plan. And once he has the tech to get humans to Mars and sustain them there, the asteroid belt isn't far away. I think the next logical step after that would be to find a cheaper way to achieve orbit. Rockets, no matter how much competition drives prices down, are STILL going to be monumentally expensive.
Exactly right Six, and Brokinarrow. Musk is setting himself up to be the next Rockefeller or Rothschild. He is poising his company to play a part in what is basically similar to the switch from horse and oxen pulled freight to rail freight. SpaceX (which will probably branch out once this happens) will be a huge name in the space freight game. If I had money to invest I'd do whatever I could to get a nice sized stake in that company.
There is plenty of money to be made. It's clear as day. The trouble at this point is getting to it and mining it in an economical way. SpaceX and others are going to continue to drive these prices down and at the same time they are going to be making money hand over fist.
I couldn't agree with you guys more. If there is money to be made, people will find a way. I've read that ceratin asteroids contain more precious metals than are found in the earth's crust. Once it becomes economical to go, there is huge profit potential. Mob, once SpaceX makes it IPO, I for one will be buying some stock for sure. On a side note, one thing that I think will happen one day and needs to happen for us to truly be a space faring race, is the ability to genetically modify ourselves. Find some mechanism for increasing radiation resistance, reducing bone and muscle loss etc. Once that happens, the costs of travel will drop even lower due to not having to spend as much on such robust life support systems. I really enjoy the flow of ideas that come from thinking about stuff like this.
Most of the mined material from Mars is going to be used on Mars. It will be quite a while before more than samples are brought back to Earth.
I have an idea: Let's send up three 'rest stations' between the Earth and Mars. Each will be equipped with resources needed by astronauts to make the long journey to Mars - water, supplies, entertainment, etc. The average distance between the two planets is roughly 78 million KMs, so we drop a rest station about every 26 million KMs or so. As we soar through space toward Mars, the astronauts could stop periodically at the orbiting rest stations - retune, if you will, pick up supplies, dump off waste, etc and continue on the journey to Mars. And follow the same protocol on the way back.
prohibitve cost, probably more than a trip out to mars. who's going to pay for that? Don't even get me started on the dangers......
FFBG, the biggest problem with your idea is that the trip to Mars is not just a straight line run, The Earth and Mars both orbit the sun, at different rates and your proposed rest stations would be orbiting the sun as well, at still more different rates. On top of that, it costs a LOT to get such materials up to orbit of just the Earth, and the fuel costs to get them to deep space and then just drop them off, along with the fact that they won't be where you need them for the next trip anyways, makes this idea a total non-starter.
Stephen.
Thank Goodness Columbus didn't say "Don't even get me started on the dangers......"
Along with B.Honest's analysis of the orbital problems with this idea, there is also the issue of what happens to pretty much anything when you leave it in space to long. Without proper protection all the supplies will be in less than pristine condition when the crew eventually picks them up. And proper protection is hard to come by, even on the ISS. Radiation shielding will be necessary for protecting those supplies and that would likely mean a power source, and considering the amount of power we are talking about I'm thinking solar is out unless we develop super efficient or super sized solar panels.
All in all, it's just more efficient for crews to make an Earth to Mars journey without any pit stops. We will send supplies and materials ahead and crews will take what they need for the trip.
got me there phil...:)
Not to mention, how do you resupply the rest stations?
Makes more sense to carry all you need.
I am of two minds on this topic. Given the the financial hole we have dug ourselves into in the US the only way we'll get to the stars will be through the efforts of private companies. Yes, they will be ego and profit driven and that will almost certainly set the stage for greater tragedies on distant worlds.
I know, I harp on this quite often, but you need to look at our behavior as explorers here on earth. The motivations and the consequences of our exploration and exploitation of virgin, aboriginal lands here on earth.
The search for the fabled seven cities of gold and the destruction of the Aztec civilization. The 18th and 19th century explorers and what happened to the indigenous people of Polynesian, New Zealand, Australian and the Native Americans across this country. These are horrible examples of what our "explorations" have done right here on earth. We have enslaved and exploited indigenous people all over the globe. Do we think we will behave any differently when we finally travel to distant stars?
Those patterns will be repeated in the stars. We will rape and pillage and exploit each new world we find and colonize. Indigenous life forms will be pushed aside, or destroyed through war, disease and exposure to our "culture". That is the true and awful history of mankind and I do not believe we will see any change in our behavior when we finally become a star-faring civilization.
Based on our past history, WE are the Klingons.
Perhaps, just perhaps, we should learn to live with each other on Earth, to properly manage our resources and help with the advancement of those people struggling in the Third World before we turn our efforts to reaching other worlds.
I would love to know more about Mars. I yearn to know if there was or is life on the red planet. But I think we need to take a long hard look at ourselves and what and where we have been before we begin the scramble to colonize and exploit other worlds.
Our record of exploration is not that great and we've still got a lot of work to do here on this planet.
All true words, Skip-
But should that stop us from reaching for new goals? You said it yourself- ego and profit driven- THAT is what's going to get us off this mudball and venture to the next. So let Elon bask in the glow of his current splendor; He's just going to Mars (if he's lucky at that)- it's not like he is going to take over the world...In reaching for Mars, EVERYONE will learn how to make life better here on Earth. You can't make things better here on Earth by squashing one's dreams, can you? Over the span of the past 50 years, the people dictated to Congress on how much to spend and where. Politics and Budget crushed man's dreams of colonizing the moon and beyond since we first landed there. It's happening again with the death of Constellation and retirement of the Space Shuttle. So if we can't get their on the government's dime per se, why not let a private entity give it a shot? It's no worse than a government failing to achieve its goals.
Probably the one thing NASA has done was to inspire. In doing so, you have your Musks, your Bigelows, and your Bransons. I do believe there should be a healthy mix of government and private entrepreneurs just as much as I believe in a healthy mix of humans and robots in space. But to squash an idea based on the lifestyles, attitudes, and behaviors of our past is NOT going to make this place any better; it will just perpetuate the perceived dark ages of space travel.
[0.0]
Thanks for the response, but as I said, I am of two minds about this. I WANT us to reach for the stars. I WANT to know about life on Mars and Titan.
But, that said, I think it is imperative that we take a HARD look at our record of exploration, exploitation and destruction before we repeat the sins of our grandfathers on new worlds.
I hate to keep using STAR TREK analogies but we need something like the Prime Directive (and follow it more religiously than James T. Kirk ever did).
I just want us to stop, take a look in the mirror and realize honestly WHO we are and once were and try not to repeat those mistakes in space. That's all.
Agreed. Considering just the fact that the ISS jettisons it's trash in an unmanned cargo vessel only to be burned up in our atmosphere makes me think we have a long long way to go in terms of cleaning up our act. We need to be better stewards of the environment, no matter what that environment is or what planet we are on. We can't just burn our trash, we can't just bury our spent nuclear fuel, we need better solutions. These are things I haven't spent the prerequisite time thinking about solutions for but it is painfully clear that we will take our bugs and virus' with us wherever we go and we should realize this and protect against it as best we can.
btw, Hiya skip!
Hiya Mob, good to hear from you.
And I agree but it goes deeper than bugs, viruses and trash.
We need to respect the indigenous sentient creatures, if any, and the customs and their property. Yeah we may be on the hunt for planets to colonize or strip of their mineral wealth. But we need to examine those motives and make sure we do no harm.
Human history nothing but chapter after chapter of "me first" exploitation of other cultures. I'd hate to see us export that to the stars.
I agree very much. Although, I do think we should mine resources from places that have been heavily researched and are decidedly dead planets and moons. If there is no life on the planet I think a moderate amount of mining or colonization is acceptable. But there are limits to that. Over-mining must be avoided. In the same way that we should not cut of the mountain tops here on Earth we should not ruin the places where we extract resources.
But what I am talking about is clearly going to be walking a fine line between honorable stewardship of the natural resources and complete strip mining small moons to the point where the moon collapses or some other catastrophic event occurs.
Our motives must be pure and I think we can have purely good positive motives while still making our lives better. But I think the problem arises that not everyone shares our good will and sentiment. There are greedy SOBs out there who want to destroy and pillage and take and burn and etc.. I'd hate to see people like that lead us out to the stars and lead by example.
Good thoughts all.
Best to you and yours.
No pure motives. I have stated before that the mere exploration of Mars is going to pollute it with our bacteria, etc. We may or may not know if the life we discover there is truly Martian or not. We may have already contaminated Mars. We have bacteria living on a Lunar probe.
Motives will never be pure. They will be profit motivated, ego motivated or some other motivation. Exploration for exploration's sake will be a small part of it. Where's the gold and titanium? Where can I set up a colony so that I can sell products to them? We found alien life, so how can we sell it in a pet store?
I would have thought that radiation would have killed off any bacteria on a space probe during its' long flight across the void. Humans, however, will contaminate the environment I would have thought and could also bring back new viruses/bacterium to Earth... our immune systems are of this Earth and we deal fairly well with those bugs (except the common cold??). Another planet would have its' own bugs - nothing that we would have encountered before, surely. We are still a long way into understanding, seemingly, what we are really dealing with here.
Teresa, although I'm not a biologist, I highly doubt that mars has any microbial life that could/will be detrimental to us. Besides we'd be wearing suits designed to protect us from the environment. As for our germs living/polluting mars, what is out there to hurt? Mars is a sandy desert. w/no life found there yet. We ARE a long way from understanding EVERY thing, But that shouldn't stop us.
I thought that I had heard at some point that there could well be some kind of bacterial life beneath the surface of Mars - that there could even be water deep down. Albeit this is a theory at this stage - at what point will we know for sure - when we start deep-mining?? Another thought - how are we going to do deep-mining in spacesuits... I believe that Mission Control were extremely worried that the astronauts on the Moon might fall over and damage their suits... can't see deep-mining logistics being very user-friendly towards spacesuits... Anyone know what the gravity is on Mars/air pressures?
Here's a link, Teresa.
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/1998/ast01sep98_1/
I would think that mining would occur in a dome. Let's say a dome is built to live in, then the floor is mined, digging tunnels and such for or, probably with automation or robotics. Once the cavern is cleared of minerals/ores, then the tunnes would be made useful for habitation. Don't forget, the ground is a great radiation shield.
Mars atmosphere has mean pressure of 600 pascals, where Earth's average is around 100 kilopascals. Mt. Everest is about a third, at 33.7 kilopascals. Surface gravity is about 38% Earth's.
So with that kind of mean pressure of which you post, what does that mean for a dome? Gravity is a problem - the mean pressure also makes objects much heavier, does it not? I have also posted on this vine that our rockets are not logistically built to carry the sort of heavy materilals needed - they are also not going to be fast enough... Are we not looking at a time when we can build fuel-less spaceships that can carry the weight, people and get there and back several times at a cost that is still feasible. Surely, if the cost is more than the materials on Mars are worth - is it going to be a no-brainer?
Thanks for the link, Tony. Will have a look.
I think the way to get to Mars and back (and the Moon for that matter) is to have a way to transport people to orbit (SpaceX and Virgin ideas, amoung others) and then load the people onto an orbital transport that does not land, it just goes from one orbit to the next. Basically, a shuttle takes them up and back and a planetary vehicle does the rest.
Supply ships can deliver the cargo and other needed supplies to the interplanetary vehicle. It should be cheaper, too, since you don't have to land you main ship.
I would venture a guess on Musk's motives. If he can come close to Mars in ten to twenty years, then he can sell his services not only to the US but to any country who has the cash. That's the initial cash flow from his foray into space. Think China or Saudia Arabia. You can think of him as the ferryman. My money is still on the Moon for now. The cash cow on the Moon would be the Helium-3 for fusion reactors. Helium-3 fusion generates far less neutrons than Hydrogen fusion. Which could make make it the next great energy reserve. Who do you want to control that? The Chinese, Russia, Iran. The US complains about energy independence now, what if we are not a major player in the next energy boom?
I just need to hop on my personal soap box about the Chinese space program for a second. They are making investments in their space program. They are training people. They are making strides in terms of their capabilities. But they should not be feared as much as people (especially in America) fear them. They may have said they are aiming to put boots on the Moon in this decade but if I'm not mistaken those plans have in fact changed. Things are progressing slower than they are predicting. China should barely even be mentioned in the same sentence with Mars. The only reason they are in that discussion is because they are working with the Russians on Phobos Grunt (sending their Yinghuo 1 orbiter to measure the ionosphere).
China is an up and coming player in the space industry, and I really want the whole of humanity to work together in all things space. So, China's military involvement in their space program causes me some amount of pause. But I do not think the amount of respect/fear they garner is earned or justified. America is still the leader in space with the Russians close behind and China following way back in the rear. It's not the cold war space race anymore, and we should be working together to explore space.
When it comes to SpaceX, I also see them playing the role of "ferryman". But I don't see them doing anything that would put China or Russia into a strategic advantage. I think before that happens you'll see a certain amount of American legislation and some kind of restriction on what business' can do in terms of supporting other nations. I do think SpaceX will play ferryman to everyone, I just don't think they'll help China or Russia gain energy dominance when American dominance would be better for their bottom lines.
The man is correct in stating that 'this is just the beginning', which is obvious. But he is talking only about his own mortality when he sez that NOW is the only moment, the most critical moment, to move on into the Hi Frontier. Mars and The Moon and all of the rest of the solar system will still be there 100 years from now, 1000 years from now, when technology, engineering, and finance may combine to bring about the imagined transport, colonies and commerce that will sustain the effort. (Fortunately there are no indiginous living creatures on The Moon or Mars to conquer or destroy.) Each of those 2 orbs are huge mineral troves and every element needed to build and sustain a viable human colony is already there. We already know how to manufacture 'things' from raw materials. It will take 100 years of exploration and development before any self sustaining colony can become reality. Initially, any human endeavor on The Moon or Mars will be a science project, a remote outpost that will have to be completely supported from Earth. In time, factories and etc can be constructed to supply breathable air, potable water and agriculture to supply food. The Moon has no carbon (yet discovered) no nitrogen, both essential to plant life....yet Mars has an abundance of both. The atmosphere is 3% nitrogen, 95% carbon dioxide. It will become far more cost effective to transport certain essentials in trade between Moon and Mars than lifting 'it all' out of the Earth's gravity well. Adventurers in the future will go into space and STAY THERE. Live there, die there and that will be considered normal. We have the ISS effort now and one of the big problems is getting people out to it who truly want to come back! All current astronauts are still rooted in the 'Green Hills of Earth'!
[0.o] wrote: "Granted I wasn't around back when it happened, but I am sure the same was said about Christopher Columbus when he said he wanted to go to the Far East by way of trekking West...Don't be so myopic..."
Please note that Columbus never got to the Far East. Please don't be so myopic! And don't buy the sensationalism we all learned about Columbus. Everyone educated in Europe from the year 100 on knew the world was round. But Columbus claimed the length of one degree going West (or East) was only 2/3 what it really was. As a consequence, adding in the known world from Europe to "the Japans", he thought he'd only have to go a few thousand miles west. But Queen Isabella's scientists, knowing the true circumference of the earth is 25,000 miles (as determined by Eratosthenes over a millenium earlier), said Columbus would have to go over 10,000 miles. Of course, they were right: if the Americas weren't here, Columbus would have to sail across the Atlantic, the area actually occupied by the Americas, plus the Pacific Ocean and he'd have never made it.
But I wouldn't shoot down this attempt at Mars. The lesson we learn from Columbus is that even when you don't reach your goal, you learn something in the attempt.
Other than everyone calling everyone myopic I think this is an excellent comment. Lots of good info in there. Extra bonus points for the mention of Eratosthenes!
Mick-
My statement about trekking West was that he attempted it where others thoughthe was crazy for attempting it. I never said he made it to the Far East, but that WAS his intention. His serendipitous findings of the Western hemisphere (debated between him and Amerigo Vespucci) opened new markets in the 'undiscovered country' and the rest is history...What I was getting at was by shooting down a man's dream to reach for the stars and opening up a fledgling space economy would be like someone shooting down Columbus' notion of heading West to get to the Far East...Who knows what Musk will accomplish? We won't know unless we let him attempt it.
ray smith
From strictly a step by step perspective, a lunar base is the next logical step before going
to mars. It is not however, required. A mission or missions to mars can be accomplished without
going to the moon first.
The Saturn-V was never designed with sending men to Saturn in mind. It was designed to send
men to the moon. The Saturn-V would not even be adequate to send men to Mars, much less Saturn.
The next logical step in the 1960s would have been an earth orbital station, then the moon. We
chose the moon because we were in a competition with the former Soviet Union to reach the moon
before they did. They never did send humans to the moon. The U.S. began working on space
stations (Skylab) only after landing man on the moon.
Also, we have some wonderful information about Venus thanks to the former Soviets.
Reach for the Moon, then spacestation. Sometimes you have to reach a bit further than you should just to get where you should be. Reach for Mars, settle the Moon. Reach for the stars, settle Mars. Just don't quit reaching like we did in the 70s
It would be nice if Musk were to somehow be able to get humans to mars within his
timeframe. Reality will probably get in his way and at the least, slow progress up
a bit. Money, or what I call the cost barrier, is the main obstacle to his goal of
getting to mars.
Surely, before we can seriously consider sending man and building materials to colonise Mars, we will need to develop fuel-less spaceships so we can build them large enough for the job of the massive logistics involved? Can you really see 100, 200... rockets going back and forth carrying all the stuff needed for such a project? A handful of rockets just 'aint going to hack it. Our current rockets are severely space-limited and really not anywhere near fast enough to carry out such a difficult job, The cost of even building and fueling loads of old-technology rockets for the job would be prohibitive - surely we need BIG and FAST - nothing like we have at present.... and the development of those kind of spaceships is probably 50-100 years away before we even start....
The new VASIMR engines (designed by a company run by a former astronaut) hold a lot of promise in that regard. There will be a prototype engine getting installed on the ISS, estimates are the engine will cut the cost of keeping the station in orbit in half. Also, speed estimates for the engine say that the trip to Mars will be cut down to a matter of DAYS instead of months.
The VASIMR would work best couple with a nuclear power source, we've got fairly small nuclear reactors these days so it wouldn't be a stretch to be able to launch a few of these up with a fairly large bank of VASMIR engines attached. Then you just make it modular so that it can attach to whatever freight containers we need it to and VOILA - our first interplanetary space freighter :-)
I think the only other thing we would need to figure out after that is a cheaper way to get into space, thus enabling us to get a LOT more material into orbit (say enough to create a shipyard so that we can efficiently build things in low grav environments?)
Ah, thank you for the sanity there Teresa, agree that it will take BIG, FAST stuff to make a colony on mars. BUT, we don't need that just to get there. And That is what Musk is proposing.
Look up VASIMR engines. Very promising.
Yes. I had heard of them but not read much. Nice design and quite promising.
Just took your advice, looks VERY promising!!! YAY!! I often envision a time when mankind is able to manuever about the solar system, fast enough to utilize the resources that are floating about out there. THEN we'll be in business!!!!
The other thing I like about them... the glow from the engine at full burn reminds me a lot of the glow of the engines on ships from Star Wars (yes, geeking out at bit there!) :-D
It is indeed humorous that NASA and the USA abandoned chemical rockets as the primary propulsion system. For manned spaceflight in the mid 1970's and, here we are in 2011 returning to it. Sorta makes one wonder, how NASA would have been doing with it (chem. propulsion) nearly 40 years later......
Out of the mouth of babes, Musk's child, then Musk's extrapolation..........."Dark Ages of space flight" I don't care who you are. . . . . . But's that's funny stuff there.
@Big - All rockets are chemical, including the space shuttle. Nobody has developed a nonchemical boosters. VASIMR is an experimental ion engine to be used space, but will be launched by a chemical booster
And still uses a fuel.
It's STILL a chemical rocket, Just a more efficient one.
This is fascinating. Thanks for the article and all the comments.
My bumper sticker on my Tesla will read "Elon Musk for President, even if he is really born in South Africa!"
Brokinarrow - that's what I am thinking - developing spacefreighters which can get from A to B in days not months - then we're in business, sure..
Until then, Big Daddy - "Dark Ages of Space Flight" has gotta go - because we're not going to do anything serious with our current space transportation. Compare our current mobiles phones with the first great big cumbersum metal boxes that had about 2 hours of juice in the early days...(giggle!!)
Stephen - yea, I appreciate that Musk was just talking about the Getting There - sure, we can do that with what we have got and we still need to learn a lot - communications for one thing - it's not there yet - takes too long to respond at those distances, I understand. Then there is man's ability to withstand long periods out of Earth's environ - the Effects - especially the question of What Are We Going To Eat for months on end. It's all a learning curve at this point in time. I, personally, don't see "communities" or even workers en masse living on Mars though - not this century anyhow. We need robotics of a kind we hav'nt even envisaged but, I am sure, may be on the drawing board at least today. Robots are what we will need to rely on more than mankind - they can take the radiation hit, and the long distances involved to move further out than we can stand - build stuff in places we can't - either in space or on Mars - and are not affected by long periods in air pressures and gravities. Surely,....