Mars One Picks 100 to Compete for One-Way Red Planet Trips

MarsOne, the DUtch based company which aims to send people on one way trips to Mars starting as early as 2024 says it has gotten its list of potential candidates down to 100; 50 women and 50 men. As some of you may remember, there was an open call for Mars colonists back in 2013 requiring at least 200,000 sign up for the task of being the first to live on Mars........FOREVER..................1

The Dutch-based Mars One venture says it's winnowed down its list of applicants to 50 men and 50 women who will compete for the chance to take a one-way trip to Mars. Yes, that's the reward — not the punishment. The Mars One project plans to put on a reality-TV competition to select 24 prospective crew members for missions to Mars, starting as early as 2024. Winners would be expected to start up a permanent colony on the Red Planet.

It's an ambitious goal indeed and a goal that I feel is worthy of ATS discussion. So, anyone excited at this news? The MarsOne project is still on despite questions over money to fund the project and despite warnings from MIT that colonists on MARS would begin to die on MARS after not more than 68 days due to over Oxygen-ation from greenhouse plants. I wrote about that in an earlier thread here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

MarsOne is still oon! It may be a failed mission but I applaud the effort. There are ways around the problems as stated by other ATS members in the other thread. I'd go.....What says ATS?

www.nbcnews.com...

a reply to: lostbook

Congratulations to the 100, ah, winners?

a reply to: lostbook

I cant understand why so many people have volunteered for the one way trip to mars.

In fact I cant understand why its even lawful to invite people to exile them self with out hope of return.

why isnt there an out cry  .. Whats the difference in putting idiots in a steel container with food and water and dropping them into the Mariana trench..
Crazy

With a tight enough contract, people can agree to do just about whatever they want.

Let them go to Mars and be pioneers, there's no where else to escape to these days.

a reply to: Borisbanger

I'd go but...It wouldn't take long before they truck along all the "rules" you will have to live by. Taxation without representation,seems to be a human trend.a reply to: lostbook

Well will the live filming of the pre-launch phases begin?

originally posted by: RP2SticksOfDynamite
Well will the live filming of the pre-launch phases begin?

Yes, hhowever, I'm not exactly sure when. One of the ways they plan to pay for it is through a reality show and advertising.

originally posted by: Borisbanger
a reply to: lostbook

I cant understand why so many people have volunteered for the one way trip to mars.

I mean, does it really need to be explained? It's about the advancement of humanity.

originally posted by: Borisbanger
a reply to: lostbook

I cant understand why so many people have volunteered for the one way trip to mars.

In fact I cant understand why its even lawful to invite people to exile them self with out hope of return.

why isnt there an out cry  .. Whats the difference in putting idiots in a steel container with food and water and dropping them into the Mariana trench..
Crazy

I'd go, but not as one of the original 100. Once things are up and running, I'd bet there will be an Earth-Mars transportation system. I doubt the one-way trip thing will be a permanent set up.

originally posted by: Borisbanger
a reply to: lostbook

I cant understand why so many people have volunteered for the one way trip to mars.

In fact I cant understand why its even lawful to invite people to exile them self with out hope of return.

I rather have continued efforts to colonize mars than continued efforts to escalate the Ukraine conflict and see it on the news, keep seeing ISIS on the news, etc etc.

This actually makes us want to move forward as a species. It allows us to grow, make new discoveries, and actually innovate and promote space travel.

But one thing I'm confused by is why you think this should be illegal. If people want to be exiled, let them! If someone or something wants a plan that could be one of the greatest achievements of mankind with potential of helping us grow even further as a specie's, let em! Those brave few who get sent to Mars will also be a future motivating example to children and many many other people.


I personally want to go, but sadly my age (17) isn't accepted

I think it's necessary, even though we know the unknowns they face are life threatening. Our astronauts in those beginning decades faced the same hardships. Now we have a space station people live on for months.

We need to explore our solar system. We need to start getting our resources from somewhere else. Earth is breaking under the strain of us. It's imperative that we prepare to expand, if we are to continue without great loses of life, or irreparable ecological damage to our biosphere.

We're explorers. We look to the stars and dream. We want to walk the martian terrain, gallop across Europa and create stations further and further out so that we can continue to explore. I hope I get to see those beginning explorations and explorers in my life time.



CdT

The reason ppl want to go is to forever be remembered in history! That's a huge thing ya know? And maybe Elon Musk will make it there with his reusable rockets so u can hitch a ride back years later.

originally posted by: Atsbhct
With a tight enough contract, people can agree to do just about whatever they want.

Let them go to Mars and be pioneers, there's no where else to escape to these days.

a reply to: Borisbanger

I dont know the law where you live, but here you can NOT consent to bodily harm....

Oh wait, the Earth laws dont apply to mars...

ignore this post.

a reply to: Kuroodo


Why should I think its illegal?

because its wrong to allow people to put them selves in a hopeless situation with out good cause or reason.

As far as I can see at the moment this is for entertainment.
If it was a serious endevour heaven and hell would be moved to ensure the voyagers safe return.

Sending voyagers one way means they are expendable

originally posted by: Borisbanger
In fact I cant understand why its even lawful to invite people to exile them self with out hope of return.
why isnt there an out cry  .. Whats the difference in putting idiots in a steel container with food and water and dropping them into the Mariana trench
Crazy

I said much of the same earlier, but was countered by many believing the "fantasy". So, we're counting on corporations, whom can't even keep people alive, reliably, in shoe factories, on Earth, to SOMEHOW fully plan ahead, with spare parts and ground support, for a mission that SHOULD be MANY times bigger than the government funded Apollo missions AND still have the goal of turning a profit. Its VERY SAFE to say, they will cut corners when ANY opportunity presents itself. The less experienced the 4 man crew is with space travel, science, medical, engineering, etc, the more likely they won't notice these shortcomings when they are briefed and prepped on their roles for the actual mission.

I'd bet they don't EVER actually attempt to send anyone into space because its a Reality TV show, based on Ad revenue, ala American Idol. The ad money and TV viewer numbers ride almost entirely on showing these people "getting ready" for space travel and colonization, NOT the actual space flight and colonization. There is simply no way to support these people, long term, with supplies and MAKE A PROFIT, should the colonizers successfully survive, day to day, on Mars. Can these Civilian Astronauts be sufficiently interesting in their day-to-day activities to generate enough from "TV viewers", to keep them resupplied, as well as doing what they need to survive? I personally don't think its possible, to be BOTH entertaining enough to draw viewers AND be successful at surviving the Martian wilderness long term. The minute the ads don't pull in the revenue to justify their resupply, is the minute these first Mars explorers dies of some cause related to not being resupplied.

So, if they did die for some reason, I'd bet the viewing public would never see it on the live TV feed, showing exactly how the mission failed due to suicide, accidental death, murder, disease, etc. No matter how you slice it, we the viewer will be getting a "Price, Whitman & Haddad", Running Man endgame, with them "basking under the Maui Sun" on broadcast TV, but in actuality are just rotting/mummified corpses, sitting around an inflatable Mars base. Heck its reality TV, they might try to give them "forced daily tasks" to get their food, water, etc, from a locked resupply crate. I highly doubt they'll be allowed to just sit around all day. That would be a boring "no go" for people buying advertising in the time slot.

Also I still don't get the selection process, wouldn't an experienced medical doctor, engineer, pilot/navigator and biologist be the BARE minimum part of the crew? Also does every "approved" applicant so far, have these academic backgrounds or combinations of? I've always been under the impression that Astronaut/Cosmonaut selection is difficult because you need to find people who are BOTH smart enough to be a doctor/MD/engineer/biologist AND also at the same time, be mentally tough enough to comfortably live like a prisoner, constantly in solitary confinement, with no stimulation outside of the confined area. Add in a "popularity" contest via Facebook and "proper/safe selection" of candidates becomes absolutely impossible.

Considering the above, whom among these 100 can fix the proposed power supply/life-support sytem, without proper spare parts, nor prior hands-on experience, whom is also going to volunteer for this spectacle AND then on top of that, be chosen for the actual mission via Facebook voting?

The very likely, 6-12 months of accelerated "prep training" that these people are going to get simply won't cut it. The first REAL mechanical or system failure will ALMOST CERTAINLY result in death of the whole crew. They will need someone along the lines of a modern nuclear submarine engineer, combined with the machinist's mate skill set and be able to comprehend software programming relevant to the systems on the spaceship. Does that even exist, let alone, add something like solar panel engineering knowledge and then make sure you can get it all cross-trained into just 4 people total? In fact, I'd argue the whole crew of the first 4 people will need to be comprised ENTIRELY of experienced submariners who have served on nuclear vessels for at least a decade. There is no way to get that kind of astronaut crew via volunteers, vetted by Facebook voting.

Are we to assume that the selection board and flight director can do the impossible and condense this kind of knowledge and training materials/methods into a very short period AND will also somehow give the initial 4 man crew, competent people in these roles at the end of 9 years, whom will have the equivalent of many years experience, repairing high tech power sources? Please think HARD about this, how many of those 9 years training do you think will be devoted to STRICTLY maintaining, repairing and machining parts for the equipment needed to keep them alive on Mars? It won't be enough and is one of the many reasons they will most likely die of an accident/mistake, not old age, not over exposure, radiation, etc. Mark my words the first person(s) killed on the Mars One project, on Earth or Mars, will be stem from one of the selected "Civilian Astronauts" making a technical error using or repairing equipment, not an accidental like slip, fall, or medical condition.

Lets also examine this scenario in regards to the eventual marketable skill sets/training that the candidates will receive. If someone is young and gets an equivalent 9 years of the REQUIRED training, whats to stop them from taking this "free training" and walking away from the whole project? I mean if they are really getting good, realistic, applicable training, they will have very good career options available to themselves, on earth, not to mention the benefits of the short term celebrity factor. To compare, it costs the US military around $500,000 to train an infantryman through basic and AIT. How much would it cost to train a "Civilian Astronaut" over the course of 9 YEARS to gain the skills of a pilot, submarine mechanic, machinist mate, martian survivalist and surgeon? Much more than $500,000. To put it further into perspective, would any of these people have earned $500,000 in salary in 9 years time? I don't think many will have, so when you truly consider the staggering cost of training these people PROPERLY over 9 years, they have every reason to take the free training and jump ship and refuse to go at the end of it all, because in the grand scheme of the universe, they would have never gotten that kind of expensive training otherwise, nor would they have earned enough money to buy equivalent training on the open market.

REAL "pioneers" showing competence in the requisite skill sets don't make good reality TV personalities, nor are they going to be blindly cooperative, corporate, leeches. Basically anyone that could actually pull this off would NEVER be considered for selection by the corporate suits OR their appointed gate keepers. Why? Because they would have questions about the equipment, safety/reliability, staff support, etc, that no corporate suit or gate keeper could answer, nor would have any intention of trying to answer.

MarsOne should be the next subject for discussion on NLBS. The record for staying in space is 437 days.

The human body can't survive out there and we are nowhere near figuring out the problems we need to solve to get off this rock.

MarsOne: Interplanetary Corpse Wagon.

It's a joke, and a cruel one.

a reply to: boohoo

Good post - I had no idea of the above

It certainly is an ambitious project, but I think this is the most important couple of sentences in the Mars One overview,

"No new technology developments are required to establish a human settlement on Mars. Mars One has visited major aerospace companies around the world to discuss the requirements, budget and timelines with their engineers and business developers."

Can anyone refute the above, bearing in mind the above means all technology, including the equipment needed to survive?


They also go on to say that the project as it stands was based on the feedback from all those companies, and the thing is, it doesn't say anywhere that any of those companies have refused to build all the equipment needed. So there seems to be no moral dilemma involved.

originally posted by: Bybyots
The human body can't survive out there and we are nowhere near figuring out the problems we need to solve to get off this rock.

See my above comment, that's the LEAST of their problems.

There is NO WAY this trip going to happen under this format or business plan. Has anyone read how Bas Lansdorp plans to pay for the projects estimated $6 Billion cost? Sure he will be able to pay HIS salary and living expenses DURING the whole process of creating this sham, but that doesn't mean anyone is actually leaving for Mars at the end of the day. They will NEVER have enough money to do this, even if the project design and plans are sound (which they won't be).

On top of all that, I think there are some pretty serious issues here that can't be solved by a private corporation seeking "profits" through advertisement fees generated by a "reality TV" business model, discounting the obvious unknown issues like radiation, water supply, breathable air, psychotic episodes, etc. The type of crew THEY NEED is not going to volunteer and/or will not be chosen by the Facebook voting process. So then we have to ask, who is left to go? How long and how competently will they "be trained" under a "for profit" business model? Will they receive sufficient spare parts and resupply over the long haul of the project? Who is on their "earth ground support team" and is going to CONSTANTLY, 24/7, work out technical and engineering problems with mock ups, etc, like they did with Apollo, the Space Shuttle and the current Space Station? Do you believe the private corporations sponsoring this trip will pay this highly technical staff on Earth, salaries, for YEARS, if the mission is somehow successful keeping those 4 people alive for longer than a few months?

I personally think, if push came to shove, the Corporate suits would pull the plug on the these people the minute they started losing money and then we would hear the fabricated "sad news" of their "accidental" demise. Also since they are in space, is it legal for the company to maroon then with no support due to dwindling finances? Would anyone go to jail on earth for their abandonment, manslaughter/murder, due to lack of support/resupply?

I'd certainly bet the viewing public would never see them die on the live TV feed, showing EXACTLY how the mission failed due to suicide, accidental death, murder, disease, equipment failure, etc. It the kind of thing that would get "leaked" years later, long after the company leading all this has folded, filed for bankruptcy and sold off patents/IP to the highest bidder.

originally posted by: smurfy
"No new technology developments are required to establish a human settlement on Mars. Mars One has visited major aerospace companies around the world to discuss the requirements, budget and timelines with their engineers and business developers."

Here are some numbers for you to ponder:

-The space shuttle cost $1.5 billion per flight, including government bloat, etc.

-American Idol at its peak brought in $6.5 million per episode, with 40+ episodes per season.

-To make the film Avatar, productions costs were $425 million, just to GROSS $2 billion in revenue.

-The Red Bull Stratos Jump, DONE ONE TIME, WITH ONE GUY, cost between $10-30 million to train for & complete, advertise, pay salaries, etc, to then show on youtube.

The Red Bull Stratos Jump project, started in 2005 and was concluded in 2012. Basically it took 7 years and $10 to $30 million to recreate and adapt, a TESTED and PROVEN, 1970's era military technology, for ONE GUY. So, what do you think a private sector Apollo mission would cost today, trying to recreate and adapt from proven 1960's era technology?

To put things into perspective, if my above numbers are correct, it would take American Idol 333 episodes to bring in just the $2 billion gross revenue that the Avatar film brought in. Remember the space shuttle cost $1 billion dollars "per mission", whether you agree or not, that's a not a bad starting point for estimating the cost of getting something off earth and into space. This project needs an estimated $6 billion.

To clarify further, the Mars reality show would need to be more popular than American Idol had been, at its peak, to draw in more then $6.5 million per episode. To date, no reality TV show has brought in more gross revenue than the film Avatar did, at $2 billion. Also will anyone give this company $425 million dollars up front for an untested TV entertainment concept/production AND space mission? Sure James Cameron can get $425 million to make a movie, but who is going to give these guys this much up front? We all know it takes money to make money on the "high tech" side of show business. So with that >$6.5 million per episode and >$2 billion gross and >$425 million seed money from backers/producers/studios to start EVERYTHING with. How much is then left to: train the crew, train/hire their LONG TERM support staff, pay for advertising, pay TV executive bonuses, pay TV crews/production staff, space equipment R&D, ship design, space agency permits, legal fees, etc, etc, etc? There is NO WAY this Mars Reality TV show, is going to generate enough Ad money to send these guys into space, under reliable conditions.

Even if they did, somehow, at some point get them into space, the equipment would be sub-par/bar-minimum, due to budget constraints due to the REQUIREMENT to make "profit" from the endeavor. Remember this is not a publicity stunt to be "written off", like the Red Bull Stratos Jump or a sports team sponsorship. They are, in fact, trying to make money the way the Kardashians and American Idol make money. That means, rock bottom, low production costs and sky high cost to advertisers buying airtime, in exchange for maximum viewer numbers.

I don't see any Jeff Bezos types "volunteering" a billion dollars seed money for this project either. I would be more likely to believe in the project if they were the case.

Last, "volunteers" are in "space", are not bound by earth law, regulations, etc. Is it legal for the company to maroon them with no support, due to dwindling finances? Would anyone go to jail on earth for their abandonment, manslaughter/murder, of the Civilian Astronauts, due to lack of support/resupply?