5 ms·

A couple Mars colonies in 30 years doesn't really sound that optimistic to me

by anchpop 7y ago

pjc50 7y ago
How many moon colonies did we have 30 years after the moon landings?
- melling 7y ago
  None, because we didn’t want to spend the money.
  - neuronic 7y ago
    If you look at what APOLLO has cost back in those days maybe then you'd understand why we didn't. Landing a few people and picking up a few rocks and taking a few selfies cost, inflation-adjusted for 2019, a whopping $288.1 billion [1]. This money was spent to "stick it to the communists" because they were winning at the space race (first man in space, etc...). We just happened to get a bunch of benefits along the way. The several more hundred billion that would have followed if we decided to build entire colonies - with a multitude of massive problems still not figured out today - would have been a hard sell over the decades it would have taken to construct. I mean just look at operating cost of MIR and ISS and that's in LEO... [1] http://www.planetary.org/blogs/casey-dreier/2019/reconstructing-the-price-of-apollo.html http://www.planetary.org/blogs/casey-dreier/2019/reconstruct...
    - melling 7y ago
      Sure, I absolutely do understand the cost. You picked the largest estimate? Because there are many different numbers: http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1579/1 http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1579/1 https://www.quora.com/How-much-did-the-Moon-Mission-cost https://www.quora.com/How-much-did-the-Moon-Mission-cost The point is that it’s a matter of cost, and not a technical problem. The Apollo program was a “rush job” done in 10 years. Much of the technology had to be invented. There an interesting BBC podcast called 13 Minutes to the Moon for anyone interested in finding out more about the Apollo program: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w13xttx2 https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w13xttx2
    - smileysteve 7y ago
      > If you look at what APOLLO has cost > inflation-adjusted for 2019, a whopping $288.1 billion When I was reading that, I was expecting a much higher number than the one I ended up reading. That's < the cash Apple has on hand, approximately as much revenue as they make a year. That's 1/2 of the annual U.S. military budget. It's 1/3 of a small portion of the 2008 bailout. === If you annualize that by the 10 years it was spent in, the only discretionary funding significantly less than that is Food and Agriculture.
      - neuronic 7y ago
        This is not the most money a nation has ever spent on any singular object. I am not saying that. I also firmly believe that it was worth it! But the difficulty is in a) allocating this money b) convincing the public that removing this money from, say education, is a good strategy A good chunk of people seriously require heat warnings on their hot coffee to realize that their coffee is hot. I don't hold high hopes in making a voting majority of people understand long-term global benefits.
  - UncleMeat 7y ago
    Is there any evidence that people want to spend the money for mars colonies?
    - D-Coder 7y ago
      <raises hand>
- Infernal 7y ago
  For that matter, how many moon landings did we have 30 years after the moon landings...
lm28469 7y ago
It's insanely optimistic by every single metrics I can come up with. The only way I'd buy it would be to redefine "colonies" and "cities" as "10 guys in a 50 sq meters rigid tent who need constant supplies from earth and are 1 mistake away from death" aka the space station but on the ground. He's very good at PR moves, but sending a rocket to space and getting it back in one piece, which is very impressive, is nothing compared to actually going to mars, which itself is nothing compared to building a city on a planet where everything is opposed to human life. Tesla and Space X have a very high "hype factor", and sure they're probably the best at what they're doing, but he is insanely overselling it. Look at that timeline: https://www.inverse.com/article/51291-spacex-here-s-the-timeline-for-getting-to-mars-and-starting-a-colony https://www.inverse.com/article/51291-spacex-here-s-the-time...

A couple Mars colonies in 30 years doesn't really sound that optimistic to me

pjc50 7y ago

How many moon colonies did we have 30 years after the moon landings?

melling 7y ago
None, because we didn’t want to spend the money.
- neuronic 7y ago
  If you look at what APOLLO has cost back in those days maybe then you'd understand why we didn't. Landing a few people and picking up a few rocks and taking a few selfies cost, inflation-adjusted for 2019, a whopping $288.1 billion [1]. This money was spent to "stick it to the communists" because they were winning at the space race (first man in space, etc...). We just happened to get a bunch of benefits along the way. The several more hundred billion that would have followed if we decided to build entire colonies - with a multitude of massive problems still not figured out today - would have been a hard sell over the decades it would have taken to construct. I mean just look at operating cost of MIR and ISS and that's in LEO... [1] http://www.planetary.org/blogs/casey-dreier/2019/reconstructing-the-price-of-apollo.html http://www.planetary.org/blogs/casey-dreier/2019/reconstruct...
  - melling 7y ago
    Sure, I absolutely do understand the cost. You picked the largest estimate? Because there are many different numbers: http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1579/1 http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1579/1 https://www.quora.com/How-much-did-the-Moon-Mission-cost https://www.quora.com/How-much-did-the-Moon-Mission-cost The point is that it’s a matter of cost, and not a technical problem. The Apollo program was a “rush job” done in 10 years. Much of the technology had to be invented. There an interesting BBC podcast called 13 Minutes to the Moon for anyone interested in finding out more about the Apollo program: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w13xttx2 https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w13xttx2
  - smileysteve 7y ago
    > If you look at what APOLLO has cost > inflation-adjusted for 2019, a whopping $288.1 billion When I was reading that, I was expecting a much higher number than the one I ended up reading. That's < the cash Apple has on hand, approximately as much revenue as they make a year. That's 1/2 of the annual U.S. military budget. It's 1/3 of a small portion of the 2008 bailout. === If you annualize that by the 10 years it was spent in, the only discretionary funding significantly less than that is Food and Agriculture.
    - neuronic 7y ago
      This is not the most money a nation has ever spent on any singular object. I am not saying that. I also firmly believe that it was worth it! But the difficulty is in a) allocating this money b) convincing the public that removing this money from, say education, is a good strategy A good chunk of people seriously require heat warnings on their hot coffee to realize that their coffee is hot. I don't hold high hopes in making a voting majority of people understand long-term global benefits.
- UncleMeat 7y ago
  Is there any evidence that people want to spend the money for mars colonies?
  - D-Coder 7y ago
    <raises hand>
Infernal 7y ago
For that matter, how many moon landings did we have 30 years after the moon landings...

lm28469 7y ago

It's insanely optimistic by every single metrics I can come up with. The only way I'd buy it would be to redefine "colonies" and "cities" as "10 guys in a 50 sq meters rigid tent who need constant supplies from earth and are 1 mistake away from death" aka the space station but on the ground. He's very good at PR moves, but sending a rocket to space and getting it back in one piece, which is very impressive, is nothing compared to actually going to mars, which itself is nothing compared to building a city on a planet where everything is opposed to human life. Tesla and Space X have a very high "hype factor", and sure they're probably the best at what they're doing, but he is insanely overselling it. Look at that timeline: https://www.inverse.com/article/51291-spacex-here-s-the-timeline-for-getting-to-mars-and-starting-a-colony https://www.inverse.com/article/51291-spacex-here-s-the-time...