4 ms·

SpaceX doesn't seem to have done any work on actually living day to day on Mars. Not even colonizing, just living. Where's the airlock that will reliably blow t

SpaceX doesn't seem to have done any work on actually living day to day on Mars. Not even colonizing, just living. Where's the airlock that will reliably blow the perchlorate filled dust off spacesuits? A toilet that will work reliably and not fill a ship with aerosolized feces? Shit how about an actual static demonstrator for a Martian lander version of Starship? A working model methane processor demonstrating that fuel could be generated from Mars' atmosphere and stored for the duration of a launch window. I'm sure they've got some engineering schematics for some of those things or re-warmed NASA papers about those topics floating around. But talking about Martian colonies without talking about the things that would just keep a couple of people alive is just bullshitting. You're serious about an endeavor when you want to talk about the boring aspects of it. Talking up the exciting aspects is just bullshitting.

dotnet00 4y ago
They're still working on the means to get there - which will set the limits on everything else - so it's pretty ridiculous to be arguing that they aren't serious because they haven't gotten to the rest of the work.
- lapcat 4y ago
  > They're still working on the means to get there - which will set the limits on everything else It doesn't. The Martian environment sets the limits on everything else. You could drag the entire Earth over next to Mars, and people still couldn't live there. The irony is that the hypothetical "What if the Earth became uninhabitable?" is effectively the same as "What if the Earth became just like Mars?"
- giantrobot 4y ago
  > so it's pretty ridiculous to be arguing that they aren't serious because they haven't gotten to the rest of the work Not in the slightest. SpaceX's proposed Starship design has known mass and envelope limits. All of the required support systems can be designed with those limits (or subset thereof) as part of the constraints. In fact now is the best time to start designing those because it can inform design criteria or mission profiles for Starship. Having those as handwave-y unknowns while talking about colonies is just absurd. A manned landing on Mars requires they have months worth of reliable support infrastructure available. None of that is just going to appear. It all needs to be built and landed with or before humans. It needs to be repairable with tools on hand. It must power on an be functional on Day 1. You're not serious about landing people on Mars let alone building a colony without talking about the "boring" infrastructure that will keep everyone alive.
  - dotnet00 4y ago
    Even Starship's exact payload capability isn't set in stone just yet (the stated numbers are targets requiring optimization of the design beyond what the current prototypes have), nor is the amount of refueling needed. Even the fuel transfer system hasn't been concretely settled on yet. While they are working on catching, there isn't enough certainty on its reliability (particularly for the ships). Hell, as it stands it isn't even clear if initial vehicles will need auxiliary thrusters to avoid digging up a hole upon landing. Even NASA seems to be uncertain about that one. So yes, it is ridiculous to argue that they aren't serious about setting up a colony based on what they're doing right now. Beyond that though, they're working on the spacesuits (granted, they're so early into that they're nowhere near ones usable on Mars) and they have demonstrated the ability to perform some amount of important maintenance on the Starship vehicles without needing machinery that isn't easy to bring along.
JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> SpaceX doesn't seem to have done any work on actually living day to day on Mars Agreed. Most of the serious work on establishing visits is at NASA. But getting there and back sustainably is a big part of the problem. To borrow another comment’s analogy, we’re not going to establish a permanent presence (whether with a rotating cast of astronauts or permanent population) with the astrophysical equivalent of triremes.
- giantrobot 4y ago
  This is yet another SpaceX, or rather a Musk, problem when it comes to Mars. Even the mission profile of Starship is talking about as-yet unproven claims about sustainability. The current profile for Starship is to launch an unmanned refueler and a trans-Mars ship. They rendezvous in Earth orbit, refuel, and the trans-Mars ship flies off for a Mars injection orbit. Not only is Starship not currently flying but there's been no demonstrations of their in-orbit refueling, not even between two Dragon capsules. There's also been no demonstration of in-orbit engine reignition. No demonstration of multiple engine reignitions. These are all necessary components of any Starship mission. Starship must always have fuel for landing as there's no capability for it to do an unpowered landing. This means without an in-orbit refueling its payload lift is massively compromised. It also doesn't have the fuel to get out of LEO without refueling. Starship is currently making tiny baby steps towards launching while people talk it up like it's doing regularly scheduled launches. There are a lot of major unknowns in the Starship mission profile and there's no guarantee it can or will work as advertised. Even if it technically works the idea there's going to be daily launches is currently a pipe dream.

dotnet00 4y ago

They're still working on the means to get there - which will set the limits on everything else - so it's pretty ridiculous to be arguing that they aren't serious because they haven't gotten to the rest of the work.

lapcat 4y ago
> They're still working on the means to get there - which will set the limits on everything else It doesn't. The Martian environment sets the limits on everything else. You could drag the entire Earth over next to Mars, and people still couldn't live there. The irony is that the hypothetical "What if the Earth became uninhabitable?" is effectively the same as "What if the Earth became just like Mars?"
giantrobot 4y ago
> so it's pretty ridiculous to be arguing that they aren't serious because they haven't gotten to the rest of the work Not in the slightest. SpaceX's proposed Starship design has known mass and envelope limits. All of the required support systems can be designed with those limits (or subset thereof) as part of the constraints. In fact now is the best time to start designing those because it can inform design criteria or mission profiles for Starship. Having those as handwave-y unknowns while talking about colonies is just absurd. A manned landing on Mars requires they have months worth of reliable support infrastructure available. None of that is just going to appear. It all needs to be built and landed with or before humans. It needs to be repairable with tools on hand. It must power on an be functional on Day 1. You're not serious about landing people on Mars let alone building a colony without talking about the "boring" infrastructure that will keep everyone alive.
- dotnet00 4y ago
  Even Starship's exact payload capability isn't set in stone just yet (the stated numbers are targets requiring optimization of the design beyond what the current prototypes have), nor is the amount of refueling needed. Even the fuel transfer system hasn't been concretely settled on yet. While they are working on catching, there isn't enough certainty on its reliability (particularly for the ships). Hell, as it stands it isn't even clear if initial vehicles will need auxiliary thrusters to avoid digging up a hole upon landing. Even NASA seems to be uncertain about that one. So yes, it is ridiculous to argue that they aren't serious about setting up a colony based on what they're doing right now. Beyond that though, they're working on the spacesuits (granted, they're so early into that they're nowhere near ones usable on Mars) and they have demonstrated the ability to perform some amount of important maintenance on the Starship vehicles without needing machinery that isn't easy to bring along.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

> SpaceX doesn't seem to have done any work on actually living day to day on Mars Agreed. Most of the serious work on establishing visits is at NASA. But getting there and back sustainably is a big part of the problem. To borrow another comment’s analogy, we’re not going to establish a permanent presence (whether with a rotating cast of astronauts or permanent population) with the astrophysical equivalent of triremes.

giantrobot 4y ago
This is yet another SpaceX, or rather a Musk, problem when it comes to Mars. Even the mission profile of Starship is talking about as-yet unproven claims about sustainability. The current profile for Starship is to launch an unmanned refueler and a trans-Mars ship. They rendezvous in Earth orbit, refuel, and the trans-Mars ship flies off for a Mars injection orbit. Not only is Starship not currently flying but there's been no demonstrations of their in-orbit refueling, not even between two Dragon capsules. There's also been no demonstration of in-orbit engine reignition. No demonstration of multiple engine reignitions. These are all necessary components of any Starship mission. Starship must always have fuel for landing as there's no capability for it to do an unpowered landing. This means without an in-orbit refueling its payload lift is massively compromised. It also doesn't have the fuel to get out of LEO without refueling. Starship is currently making tiny baby steps towards launching while people talk it up like it's doing regularly scheduled launches. There are a lot of major unknowns in the Starship mission profile and there's no guarantee it can or will work as advertised. Even if it technically works the idea there's going to be daily launches is currently a pipe dream.