News Elon Musk wants to put millions of people on Mars.

[RGClark]

I'll Put Millions of People on Mars, says Elon Musk.
posted Dec 22, 2011 9:10 PM by Michael Stoltz [ updated Dec 22, 2011 9:29 PM ] By Greg Klerkx, New Scientist, 12.22.11
http://www.marssociety.org/home/press/news/illputmillionsofpeopleonmarssayselonmusk

In the article Elon says that if SpaceX succeeds at reusable rockets at the price of $100 to $200 per kg range, then he can get the mission to Mars at $5 billion:

Musk is eventually hoping to build this kind of reusability into SpaceX's newest launch vehicle, the Falcon Heavy. Scheduled for testing in early 2013, Falcon Heavy will be the largest rocket flown since NASA's Saturn V launched astronauts to the moon. Musk says that a reusable version of the rocket could deliver a payload of up to 15 tonnes to Mars at a cost of $100 to $200 per kilogram. That makes his $5 billion humans-to-Mars price tag seem realistic. Even so, the Falcon Heavy would need to be "heavier" still to carry the minimum 50-tonne payload needed for a Mars mission. But Musk, whose title at SpaceX is CEO and chief technology officer, is working on that too.

Elon also reiterates his stance, that I agree with, about the importance of achieving reusability in spaceflight:

At no point in our discussions does he withdraw or alter his 10 to 20 year time-frame for Mars. Even at the far end of that range, Musk would be only 60 when the first Martian expedition launched. Would he consider going on that first trip? "If someone had solved the rapidly reusable launch system problem, then yes, I'd definitely go," he says. "But if it were simply a one-time flight, then no, because I'd need to stay and keep at the challenge with SpaceX. It is too important. This is something that I'm in for the long haul."

Bob Clark

 

[Kyle]

Well.. can't say he doesn't have vision.

 

[Urwumpe]

The problem is just that it is not like we didn't get such promises in the past and still sit around here.

Currently you can't even tell if he will manage to get the launch costs down to the $1000 per kg.

(Ariane 5 is still at $7000 per kg, the Shuttle kept its $5000 per kg promise by tax payer paying most of the bill.)

 

[n72.75]

Sign me up ...

 

[Codz]

This guy is worse than a politician...

 

[Thunder Chicken]

Note to Elon - get some dumb rockets to LEO *before* you start acting on the big dreams. Demonstrate that you can get the launch costs down. If you can do that, then you have license to think big. Until then, stay focused.

Signed,

Concerned Orbiteer

 

[RisingFury]

[Falcon Heavy] Scheduled for testing in early 2013

Ha! Right!

 

[Jarvitä]

I've been cautiously-optimistic about his vision of a fully and rapidly reusable F9, but this is bordering on megalomania. Let's see those RTLS first stages and the Falcon Heavy fly first.

 

[T.Neo]

Well... that's nice, I guess.

I really respect what Elon Musk has done with SpaceX- a very impressive development program that has probably been the greatest achievement in LV design in the last 10 years (though to be fair, the competition is horribly poor), and perhaps longer.

I also respect the fact that he has gone to brilliant lengths to try and make his enthusiasm of spaceflight and space colonisation a reality, instead of sitting on an internet forum repetitively musing to the effect of "We must do it because we must do it. Also I think it's cool."

But seriously, this stuff is just annoying. And it attracts (arguably valid) criticism from some circles. Stop talking and start launching rockets, Elon...

And please show us your market assessment for homes on Mars. :hmm:

 

[Keatah]

Well said! I just lost some respect after hearing this latest pipe dream..

 

[Jarvitä]

I also respect the fact that he has gone to brilliant lengths to try and make his enthusiasm of spaceflight and space colonisation a reality, instead of sitting on an internet forum repetitively musing to the effect of "We must do it because we must do it. Also I think it's cool."

But that's exactly what he's doing, except that he has the money to do it on expensive press conferences instead of internet forums.

Seriously, these "I have a pipe-dream" announcements aren't helping SpaceX, and they aren't helping the industry in general. I'm sure NASA and USSR/Russian engineers have been dreaming about settling Mars since the early 60's, but they didn't go around presenting it as a serious strategic goal, which it wasn't, just like it isn't at SpaceX.

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

I fully respect Elon for having these ambitions, they are exactly what the space program needs, and I truly hope they come to fruition.

The problem, I think, is that there is a growing disparity between their ambitions and reality.

For example, this year, Elon announced Falcon Heavy, an ability for Dragon to land on Mars, and the Stratolaunch Falcon 5. The reality, however, is that SpaceX didn't conduct any launches in 2011, and have still yet to even bring cargo to the ISS.

I have absolutely no doubt that they will eventually reach ISS (probably in early 2012), but if they continue to announce grand plans, yet continue to have delays in accomplishing even "basic" things, then they will start to lose their credibility, IMHO.

 

[mojoey]

oh dear, lets see them get to the ISS first, before mars...

 

[RGClark]

Note to Elon - get some dumb rockets to LEO *before* you start acting on the big dreams. Demonstrate that you can get the launch costs down. If you can do that, then you have license to think big. Until then, stay focused.

Signed,

Concerned Orbiteer

That, he's already done.
Clearly, the key factor on whether the cost for a Mars mission can be as low as this is dependent on whether or not he can get launch costs down to the $100 to $200 per kilo range.
I've given my opinion on this. It's doable and it's not even particularly hard. How to do it can summarized by one sentence. It's in my sig file.


Bob Clark

 

[T.Neo]

But that's exactly what he's doing, except that he has the money to do it on expensive press conferences instead of internet forums.

I don't think so. What he is doing is better, though not by much, and by saying that I'm saying more about the quality of the commentary provided by space enthusiasts on internet forums than that courtesy of Mr Musk.

And the sort of announcements- I guess you could call them semi-technical, are not just fluff. "I want to land millions on Mars' is fluff, "we plan to build a three-core heavy of Falcon 9" is an announcement of a system that may or may not come to fruition.

For example, this year, Elon announced Falcon Heavy, an ability for Dragon to land on Mars, and the Stratolaunch Falcon 5. The reality, however, is that SpaceX didn't conduct any launches in 2011, and have still yet to even bring cargo to the ISS.

Yes, well... that is an understandable outlook, but;

- A lot of these announcements probably aren't that high risk (for SpaceX). Falcon Heavy is not really anything new (a three core heavy variant of F9 has been around for a while) though its growth evolution may be challenging. F5 was being worked on before F9 so there's obviously an experience there that SpaceX already has. Reusability was by far the 'highest risk' objective described by SpaceX, but SpaceX has always been planning for this- though not in the same way, exactly. Of course, things like F9 reusability and FH still cost money...

- SpaceX could turn a profit on the development of things like Stratolaunch, for example. So it isn't Musk being ADD as much as it could be (or at least partially be) a good business decision to bring money into the company.

- SpaceX needs to keep its development people busy, or else they could get bored and leave. So it is also advantageous from that perspective to work on new projects.

- The announcements keep SpaceX in the news. Public outreach is all the more important to SpaceX currently. But it can backfire. There's a pretty clever/nasty (personally I prefer both) advert from ULA satirising the actions of SpaceX.

- Just because SpaceX hasn't launched doesn't mean it can't launch. Apparently production of Falcons isn't really the problem, though processing at the launch site might be. And the delay from November to early 2012 is due to scheduling problems relating to the Soyuz failure and crew rotations- though I suppose to be quite cynical one could say that this has covered for SpaceX's incompetence...

I've given my opinion on this.

RGClark to be brutally honest your opinion counts for nothing here. How about going more in-depth than mathematically marrying the highest performance engines you can find to lightweight rocket stages?

 

[RGClark]

RGClark to be brutally honest your opinion counts for nothing here. How about going more in-depth than mathematically marrying the highest performance engines you can find to lightweight rocket stages?

Numbers speak louder. The underlying basis of space travel is a mathematical equation: the rocket equation.
The same mathematics that says you can get a two stage to orbit vehicle, also says you can get a single stage to orbit vehicle.
All it takes is to believe what the mathematics is telling you.


"Free your mind, the rest will follow."

- En Vogue

 

[Jarvitä]

All it takes is to believe what the mathematics is telling you.

Actual engineering be damned.

 

[RGClark]

Actual engineering be damned.

The engineering comes from the mathematics.
Ignoring that the rocket equation says you can get a SSTO is just as bad as ignoring that the rocket equation says you can get a TSTO.


Bob Clark

 

[Jarvitä]

The engineering comes from the mathematics.

It also involves a lot more mathematics than the rocket equation. For example, just swapping engines on existing stages tends not to work, and neither does manipulating stacks by adding/removing stages at will, even if the rocket equation tells you it should.

 

[Hlynkacg]

To quote my fluid dynamics prof...

"At thier core an engineering is anti intellectual. It distrusts pure reason by demanding tangible results.

This is Called R.A.D reality assisted design."

and a correlary:

"It is far better to have a stupid Idea that produces results than a brilliant one that does not."