SpaceX is quietly planning Mars-landing missions...It's about time.

Hello ATS, I want to bring sn article to the attention of ATS. In this article, it decribes how Elon Musk and Space X are holding a secret conference to discuss and iron-out the details of landing on and setting up a colony on Mars. The plan is to send a robotic mission to Mars in 2022 followed by a human mission there by 2024.

SpaceX, the aerospace company founded by Elon Musk, held a hush-hush conference in Colorado this week to formulate a plan for landing people on Mars and building an outpost. The inaugural "Mars Workshop," first reported by Eric Berger at Ars Technica, happened Tuesday and Wednesday in Boulder, Colorado. SpaceX reportedly sent invitations to about 60 scientists and engineers, asking them not to publicize the event or their attendance at the workshop. Leaders of NASA's Mars exploration program reportedly attended, but the agency did not answer Business Insider's questions about who from its staff was there.

Musk launched SpaceX in 2002 in part because he was frustrated that NASA didn't have any actionable plan to land people on Mars.

According to the article, SpaceX sent out invitations to 60 scientists and engineers whom were asked to keep quiet about the meeting. The apparent goal is to discuss what will be needed in order to make the mission(s) happen. Topics include: food/ diet, air, water, and shelter among other things relative to survival..

So, what does ATS think?

www.businessinsider.com...

a reply to: lostbook

Assuming they find a way to provide a steady supply of food and water, it should be interesting. I'd love to go if I could, but not til Mars v2 and with a way back if I wanted lol

Interesting post. Thanks!

Sounds like Mars One. Their plan includes launching a robotic Mars lander as early as 2020 followed by a human crew of four in 2024 to remain on mars.

The funding required is probably more than musks wealth so he would have to sell the operation to interested government parties or try attain public funding. Not a bad plan but problems with tesla might worry investors.

a reply to: lostbook

This is an extremely tough mission. Getting people there and back alive is hard enough. A sustainable colony is borderline science fiction given all the variables.

That said, we need to figure this out and get it done. This is not a waste of resources, this is our species survival and the next step in our evolution at stake. We also need to first be absolutely sure there is no existing life there that we could have a negative impact on. Not likely, but at this point who knows what lurks beneath the surface.

I'd want to do a detailed geographic survey of the planet first. Look for caves, craters with water, tunnels, anywhere that could provide pre-made shelter and material resources.

They have geology maps of different types of minerals:
astropedia.astrogeology.usgs.gov...

Hydroponics is a good way of creating food. But if you have a monoculture of plant species, then you risk some dormant virus activating and killing off that species.

There's at least one crater with a lava tube and debris pile underneath

astrobob.areavoices.com...

astrobob.areavoices.com...

Why was it a secret confrence?

Why was it hush hush?

Why were attendees asked to keep it quiet.

They don't seem to have been very successful at that.

Maybe they think that the public will get all excited believing they have some hidden knowledge or tech that can bring this about.

So, a robot by 22. Hasn't that been done before . Maybe that robot will begin a nano manufacturing factory and set up three d printers to build habitats. Color me skeptical

And a manned missionby 24? One person? More? And then what, leave them there in the nano three d huts or bring them back.
I'll be the whole thing is a secret because they have no idea how to or what to do except talk about it.

lmao. yeah, call me when he is producing not only 500 Model 3's a week, but turns a profit too.

Then maybe by 2050 he will be able to go to Mars.

It is fascinating to hear that plans are forming and ideas are being floated around about going to Mars. I wasn't born to see the Moon landing, so to have this in my lifetime would be amazing beyond words.

I always wonder that with the amount of wealth & knowledge in the world, why can't we as a species can't get together and make it happen? I'm talking about all the space agencies working together. That would be the way forward. Not secret conferences and hush hush meetings.

It was secret because it's still pretty much the stuff of science fiction, and they didn't want to cause the embarassement to the participants if nothing ever came of this idea.

a reply to: lostbook

www.space.com...

One real problem with these privateer companies. They may have lots of money. But. They still need investment backers. The backers want a return/profit on their investment. How will a Mars mission profit the backers?

originally posted by: blackcrowe
a reply to: lostbook

www.space.com...

One real problem with these privateer companies. They may have lots of money. But. They still need investment backers. The backers want a return/profit on their investment. How will a Mars mission profit the backers?

Not all wealth is measured in fleeting fiat currency.
Some things are simply worth more.

a reply to: an325nt

Until and unless all agencies and private players pull together. They're going nowhere.

Space x isn't the only company wanting to do it. The Japanese want to also.

Which should be backed?

originally posted by: blackcrowe
a reply to: lostbook

www.space.com...

One real problem with these privateer companies. They may have lots of money. But. They still need investment backers. The backers want a return/profit on their investment. How will a Mars mission profit the backers?

Can't help but think of Total Recall where the company sold food water and air to the people. In Total Recall they created a slave class that worked for the company. Funny how sometimes movies can end up predicting the future.

On a more serious note trying to maintain a colony on mars would be extremely difficult. And is probably beyond are abilities until we can reliably travel in days instead of months. Supplying more than a couple of astronauts would be impossible.

a reply to: dragonridr

On a more serious note trying to maintain a colony on mars would be extremely difficult. And is probably beyond are abilities until we can reliably travel in days instead of months. Supplying more than a couple of astronauts would be impossible.

There's no way at the moment. And, it would only be possible by regular supplies from Earth.

There are lots of reasons i don't believe this project will ever work. And any mission would end up being a failed pr stunt.

Other people think differently.

Have to consider the fact if they send people out there they're probably not coming back alive. Not unless they make some huge propulsion breakthroughs.

originally posted by: glend
Sounds like Mars One. Their plan includes launching a robotic Mars lander as early as 2020 followed by a human crew of four in 2024 to remain on mars.

The funding required is probably more than musks wealth so he would have to sell the operation to interested government parties or try attain public funding. Not a bad plan but problems with tesla might worry investors.

Mars One? I thought that project ended.

You could crowd fund the money and you could cloud-fund the brains by linking ALL LEARNING INSTITUTIONS ON THE PLANET and allowing them to contribute.....we don't need Elons money....we need his drive and ambition and acumen....but this is much easier than people postulate it to be...so who wants to be the catalyst...it can be anyone willing...hey we can call it Mars One4All......lol.

NASA is probably further along in planning a manned Mars mission than SpaceX.

Here is an article showing one potential type of Mars mission -- using Mars' Moon Phobos as a base of operations because its low gravity would make it easier to send missions to Mars' surface -- that NASA has considered and has done some up-front feasibility planning (they have also done the early planning for other styles of manned missions to Mars).

A Manned Mission to Mars: How NASA Could Do It

Of course, money is a huge issue. NASA would need to increse its budget to something like the massive budget it had during the Apollo era, but that is politically unpopular and such a budget may never pass congress.

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Nasa with the biggest budget of all. Gets between 0.5-0.75% of the tax dollar. Half it's budget is used on ongoing programmes. It's budget is also based on GDP. Which has declined decade on decade since those good old days. Which were only really spurred on because of the cold war with the Russians.

originally posted by: blackcrowe
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Nasa with the biggest budget of all.

Not really. NASA is below average (and below the mean) compared to other federal agency/department budgets.

NASA's budget this year was about $19 Billion. Let's compare that with the Department of Education's $68 Billion, Health and Human Services' $65 Billion, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development's $40 Billion.

NASA's $19 Billion is slightly below the Dept. od Energy's $28 Billion, but is higher than the Dept. of Commerce's $18 Billion and the Dept. of Transportation's $16 Billion. It's also quite a bit higher than the EPA's $5.7 Billion.

I won't even count the Defense Department ($574 Billion), because that would skew the averge/mean.