Hey HN. There’s not much reliable / unbiased analysis of SpaceX’s mission statement of making humanity multiplanetary. So, what are the chances? I’ve been following spacex for a while and, ignoring all the elon shenanigans old and new, they do incredible stuff. Docking with the space station, humans on the space station, reusable rockets launching more than weekly… it’s insane. The progress they’ve made in the last 15 years is unheard of, only rivaled by the Apollo program.<p>But a self sustaining civilization on Mars? I’m skeptical. Yes, it’s physically possible. And spacex seems to be heading in the right direction. But the sheer difficulty of the problem I think is sometimes understated.<p>Elon’s rough estimates on what it’ll take to create a self sustaining civilization vary from interview to interview. One quote:<p>“Roughly 800 to 1000 per year. That’s about what’s needed over ten years to create the fleet to build a self-sustaining city on Mars”<p>More than 3 launches per day for 10 years? That’s where the impossibility of it all starts to seep in.<p>Many seemingly unsolvable problems also arise. Where does the money come from? How will we make the Martian surface habitable? Even if getting launch costs down to 2 million as Musk stated once is possible (hard to believe, Falcon 9 is nowhere near that today), the amount of peripheral costs (maintenance, staffing, logistics, training, the list goes on) is extraordinary.<p>I’m pretty sure they’ll get to mars in the next 10 years. And they even have a good shot and doing that multiple times. But based on the sheer amount of payload that needs to get to Mars, it seems like a mission that will exceed the lifetime of SpaceX.
You can find reliable analysis of the SpaceX Mars plans. See the Common Sense Skeptic YouTube videos. Not a fan of Musk, but the skeptic gets into details about the physics, logistics, and physiology problems that Musk glosses over.<p>Mars doesn't have a magnetosphere, for one thing, so radiation is a big problem Musk already dismissed. We already know human bodies lose muscle and bone after just a few weeks in space. The rockets Musk has presented don't have room for the water and food needed for 100+ people. Many other issues. Not to mention terraforming is science fiction right now.
It doesn't matter how many people you send to Mars, you cannot live there. See the videos by Common Sense Skeptic.<p>Mars (and Venus) do not have a magnetosphere to protect you from radiation. The gravity is the wrong amount, so your bones will dissolve. Mars itself is poisonous.<p>Write down every aspect of living someplace that you need: gravity, water, temperature, lack of radiation, etc. and in every way Antarctica is as nice or better than Mars. I don't see people clamoring to live in Antarctica.<p>One nice feature of Antarctica: if you want to go home, you can do so in a normal ship: no space ship required.
Yes they do. But before that a transportation system needs to exist. Starship needs to be easily and quickly reusable and that's a necessary step to becoming multiplanetary or it will simply forever remain too expensive.<p>> Where does the money come from?<p>The goal of SpaceX is to make all of what you describe possible within or slightly above NASA's spaceflight budget as well as within the price range of a pioneer who wants to give up everything on Earth and move to Mars.<p>> How will we make the Martian surface habitable?<p>The surface will not be habitable by anyone within our lifetimes. People will live in structures that are either underground or partially buried.<p>> Even if getting launch costs down to 2 million as Musk stated once is possible (hard to believe, Falcon 9 is nowhere near that today)<p>Falcon 9 throws away carefully engineered and built hardware every single launch. It was never going to get down to those price levels. That's why you need a fully reusable vehicle.
No, if mullosk was serious they should've started with Moon colonization.<p>Worst case: It's a huckster distraction while the public gets robbed.<p>Best case: He's an idiot huckster taking the public and his cultists for a spin.<p>Initially we were excited about the SpaceX plan but now it's revealed to be largely a sham. Human interest is apparently not the end-game.
We'll be quite lucky if we can build a colony on the moon, and that's a far closer goal. We know people don't do well in zero gravity, it remains to be seen how well we hold up in 1/6 gravity. It might be enough to keep the worst of the effects from happening.<p>Anything we do on the moon is going to have to be sub-surface to get away from the radiation and dust problems.<p>I don't see us getting a colony on Mars without non-chemical propulsion.
Multi planetary? No. I do not think so. Musk will run out of money before he comes anywhere close to landing a few thousands tons of cargo on mars.<p>Self sustaining moon base? Possible.<p>Huge autonomous telescope on the moon? Really cool, possible but not a priority.