PeroK said:
It's more an aspiration than a plan.
That is actually a better term to use (Aspiration). I tend to get stuck in these "gray area" boxes that inevitably lead to less than optimum wording. My impression of the Aspiration/Plan was and I guess still remains, it's a good start, with a lot of work to be done. I really would like to see the program developed further, there are possibility's and concepts here that have real promise.
PeroK said:
To have a permanent settlement on Mars you need, among other things, a fully equipped, staffed and functioning hospital. How many hundreds (even thousands) of specialists are involved in building a major hospital?
I see a permanent settlement on mars, along with the supporting infrastructure such as you mention to not become a reality for at least the remainder of the century if not longer. I'm basing this on the reality of the involved logistics, survival learning curve in a toxic environment, development of construction techniques Etc. Plenty of variables (some certainly hidden) to get the hang of, nothing will be easy but it's becoming a redo of "manifest destiny" if you will pardon the anachronism.
That being said, the plan to land multiple cargo loads in advance of the invasion by the Earth aliens... (If Mars has an H.G.Wells, that's how he would view it) and the plan to use starship as a living quarters initially does seem like a doable, if not practical approach.
On the construction of Mars infrastructure, I have spent nearly my entire life in construction (terrestrial for sure) so I do realize the everyday problems that even a smooth running site has on a regular basis, let alone when a problem pops up. I can't find a "Murphy's Law" equivalent for a Martian job site but if there is one I wouldn't want to deal with it. The one upside would be that 62% lower gravity would be a bonus when rigging crane loads and the Hazard pay would be out of this world... ( I jokes).
PeroK said:
The plan is generally predicated on things being no harder to do on Mars than on Earth - because the laws of physics and chemistry are the same.
Jeez... that's stretching things a bit.
PeroK said:
And, that in general, although projects go wrong on Earth, they ask what could possibly go wrong with a construction project on Mars?
Give me a minimum of 6 months and I'll give you a list of what could go wrong. This reminds me of Alfred E. Nuemans catch phrase.
PeroK said:
You might claim that we only need shelter, food, water, oxygen and medical facilities to survive on Mars. That's a permament lockdown. Look at the physical and psychological damage that the COVID lockdowns caused.
I imagine there will be intensive psychological profiling and a large pool of potential applicants to choose the first crews from, not unlike a nuke sub crew. This should mitigate a certain percentage of the Psycho-Social issues, It wouldn't have to be as bad, so to say as "30 days in the hole" (although I like that song).
PeroK said:
Living on a small scientific base for a few years is possible, but to ask people to spend the rest of their lives effectively in a prison is something else entirely.
This is what I see as being the reality for the immediate future. A martian society wouldn't develop to any extent in the short term but given decades or a few century's, It's bound to take off, particularly if terraforming turns out to be viable in any sense of the word. On Prison, in this context, I view Prison as a state of mind, not an imposed sentence. It would be easier to volunteer for "Life" if the Science was your passion. (Yes, I would if it were possible, take the trip with no regrets.)
PeroK said:
PS even a plan for, say, five to ten scientists to travel to Mars, live for a couple of years and return to Earth comes with a very significant risk that none of them makes it back alive. That risk is a major limiting factor for even getting the first human mission to Mars. To have a human being set foot on Mars by 2050 (and come back alive) would be a major achievement. And, likewise, a permanently staffed scientific base (as the ISS) by 2100 would be a huge achievement.
That's where Musk's vision of a city by 2050 (or even by 2100) is as near to impossible as makes no difference.
On the crew mortality rate, I'm always an optimist (although Apollo1 tempered that optimism). I'd wager Martian Crew 1 gets back in one piece, the unmanned supply missions should be good for debugging the details so we wouldn't necessarily be going in blind.
PeroK said:
That's where Musk's vision of a city by 2050 (or even by 2100) is as near to impossible as makes no difference.
It seems likely that in that 50 year timeline 2050-2100 there is a good chance that Mars will be a very busy neighborhood, barring unforeseen complications of course. On Martian "cities" I think the goal post will adjust as needed to define what is a city, that seems to be how the game gets played.
PeroK said:
Here's a thought. If we could build a spacecraft capable of sustained acceleration at ##g \approx 10 \ m/s^2##, then we could get to Mars in at most 4 days (2 days acceleration to the half-way point and 2 days deceleration for the rest of the journey). Even at ##1 \ m/s^2## the journey would take only at most 14 days.
I regret to inform you that I just can't Grok the maths involved. But I do get the acceleration-deceleration part. Do you have an idea what the energy/fuel requirements would be to accelerate-decelerate say 100 metric tons, ( I believe that's the claimed payload on starship but I could be wrong. )
PeroK said:
Musk has just offered $40 billion to buy twitter. If nothing is impossible, why can't he build such a spacecraft with that money?
Why is that not part of his plan?
That is an interesting question... Processing...
PeroK said:
Surely an accelerating spacecraft would be another essential to make the project viable? Getting to Mars at any time of year in days rather than up to a year every 2.5 years must be a prerequisite for major construction on the planet.
It would certainly be an advantage.
We seem to be in general agreement on most points, the divergence appears to be involving the development timeline. That is understandable considering the R&D involved to make it viable. Its also noteworthy that Mr. Musk has a habit of missing his development timelines but he also has a habit of succeeding where it counts.
Just a side question here, do you foresee Earths nations repeating history and laying individual claims to regions and resources on Mars? kind of Colonialism 2.0 .
