Slashdot Mirror
SpaceX Disappointed In Lack of NASA Mars Funding; Starts Looking For Landing Sites For Its Own Mars Missions
frank249 writes: Elon Musk says that the new NASA authorization legislation "changes almost nothing about what NASA is doing. Existing programs stay in place and there is no added funding for Mars." From a report via Ars Technica: "Musk is absolutely correct on two counts. First, an 'authorization' bill does not provide funding. That comes from appropriations committees. Secondly, while Congress has been interested in building rockets and spacecraft, it is far less interested in investing in the kinds of technology and research that would actually enable a full-fledged Mars exploration program."
In other news, SpaceNews reports that "SpaceX has been working with NASA to identify potential landing sites on Mars for both its Red Dragon spacecraft (starting in 2020) and future human missions." From the report: "Paul Wooster of SpaceX said the company, working with scientists at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and elsewhere, had identified several potential landing sites, including one that looks particularly promising -- Arcadia Planitia. Those landing sites are of particular interest, he said, for SpaceX's long-term vision of establishing a human settlement on Mars, but he said the company wouldn't rule out sending Red Dragon spacecraft elsewhere on the planet to serve other customers. 'We're quite open to making use of this platform to take various payloads to other locations as well,' he said. 'We're really looking to turn this into a steady cadence, where we're sending Dragons to Mars on basically every opportunity.' The Red Dragon spacecraft, he said, could carry about one ton of useful payload to Mars, with options for those payloads to remain in the capsule after landing or be deployed on the surface. 'SpaceX is a transportation company,' he said. 'We transport cargo to the space station, we deliver payloads to orbit, so we're very happy to deliver payloads to Mars.'" Fans of the book/movie "The Martian" would be happy if SpaceX does select Arcadia Planitia for their first landing site as that was the landing site of the Ares 3.
Is that it ain't the kinda place to raise your kids. In fact, it's cold as hell. And there's no one there to raise them if you did.
go up young humans... claim your spot in the cosmos now... billions of opportunistic locations to choose from...if we clean up our act here we might even be welcome in space? leaving 1/3 of our members (mostly kids) starving.. rockets red glare, babys bursting in air not an attractive reference? cease fire stand down,, look up... thanks again..
. . . .about a private Mars Mission being, you know, PRIVATE ??
NASA has always been corporate welfare so that is why he is increasing funding.
Every 'fan' knows that...
His enterprises has only ever made money by drawing a government paycheck. Defund SpaceX now!
Is that it has no immediate practical military applications.
Whereas : ...landing a team of human on the moon (the things brought out of Earth low orbit, capsule+landing module etc = 25 tons) ...landing a very small probe on mars ...launching a huge communication satellite into earth orbit.
-
-
-
All require a big rocket powerful enough to lift 25ton into orbit. ...it is strong enough to put a big spy satellite (the classified cousins of Hubble telescope) in low orbit. ...it is strong enough to launch the biggest nuclear warhead ever (see Tsar bomba) and reach any point on the globe.
A rocket with very practical military application :
-
-
So government is sure to throw a lot of money into it. Both sides of the iron curtain did it during the cold war.
The race to space / to the moon, wasn't as much a race to reach space as a covert way to show off "I can nuke any point of the globe".
In the meantime, being able to launch a human-carrying capsule all the way to Mars needs a much more powerful rocket (heavier mass to launch than a probe / or further to launch than to the moon), which doesn't make any sense from a military point of view : you're not going to pack several Tsar-bomba-class nukes to the same destination.
Alternatives are using several normal launchers to slowly build step by step an interplanetary vehicle in Earth orbit and use that to shuttle people around to/from Mars.
That's the thing which makes the most sense in a civilian point of view (re-use existing proven launcher technology, and tons of further scientific discoveries and potential applications of developing an "orbital shipyard / construction site" capability).
But again no concrete immediate advantage for the military (what's the point of having a huge space borne platform ? dropping rods from space ? When you can already simply nuke any point on earth ?)
So you can't easily get government money for that.
So the NASA, SpaceX, and co will need a way to finance these kind of "for Science !" projects privately.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
With Teslas and hookers. Ah, screw going to Mars.
recently rediscovered, more of a big bald rock with no stable orbit than what we're used to here... with a couple megaloads of biofeign(bm) it'll look like nyc from across the river in no time.. bet early & often, don't get stuck here..?
Spacex plans to build a ship refueling depot on mars... A gas station that will probably have a repair station next to it... Anything that could be remotely called a shipyard on utopia planita is going to make star trek fans very happy...
Really there probably are no wrong choices here for making people happy.
SpaceX's business model is to get companies and governments to pay to launch stuff, but rather than just pocket the profits they use it to further develop their vehicles. The PUBLIC money is used to fulfil the contract, leaving the PRIVATE profit, with which they want to eventually to launch PRIVATE Mars missions.
The US keeps announcing these grand mission statements, but never following through on them with funding... if you've ever had a client who keeps talking to you about a big project that never gets funded, year after year, but still keeps wasting your time with it, then you will understand Musk's frustration. From this POV, the US gov is just another customer - albeit a big one.
Or simply put: anyone who works a government contract is taking PUBLIC money, but what they do with the profit on the contract is PRIVATE. If the public-money contracts dry up, the private profits do too.
Mars has not turned up any useful reasons to go there. We are going there simply because of some mystique about Mars and its about the furthest planet we have technology to actually reach. For once NASA has more practical goals that amount to more for humans than achieving a Mars mission. Of course the other conspiracy fear is NASA is afraid of what we will find on Mars about our own history and evolution that may change humans forever. Frankly, I don't think Musk has the money to ever go to the Moon let alone Mars.
Stop making fun of the Glorious Leader!
Of course he's disappointed, there's no wave of subsidies to ride.
Most of SpaceX's launches are for private companies. And their real profit plan is satellite internet; these random couple dozen launches per year for the government and private companies is nothing compared to the value of being able to provide cheap high speed internet access everywhere on Earth without having to lay wires. But that requires thousands of satellites to be launched.
Interestingly enough, this also appears to be Blue Origin's profit plan, via their work with OneWeb.
Aeris Died For Your Sins.
None of the 'landings' they have on video are real. Why is there on 4K footage of ANY of the landings? Why does the video cut out on almost all of the landings, just as the spacecraft is allegedly touching down? How convenient...
Maybe you're missing the part where it would be a waste if some planetary scientists, such as those at NASA, didn't include some instruments in the mission payload? I mean, surely science enthusiasts at SpaceX will come up with some basic experiments of their own, but the idea is that NASA's planetary scientists have better ideas as to what to look for and there's some empty space available that would otherwise cost a few hundred million dollars with traditional launch providers.
Ezekiel 23:20
(in the future)
"SpaceX landed humans on mars."
Me: AWESOME!
"Yeah, but they USED GOVERNMENT FUNDING TO DO IT! They were supposed to use PRIVATE FUNDING!"
Me: Sorry, couldn't hear your boring blather about boring money sources, too busy thinking about how awesome it was that we landed on mars!
"Well see, taxes-"
Me: BLAH BLAH BLAH MARS BLAH BLAH BLAH MARS!!!
Elon talks a lot with Trump and spends time with him....
Elon now wants to fast track getting to mars.....
I think he saw the monster up close and wants to get off world as soon as he can.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
No, that would be Acidalia Planitia, not Arcadia Planitia. Completely different location.
Hmm -- I wonder if Musk was promised more Mars funding from the toddler-in-chief in exchange for him staying on the advisors' group even in the face of all the tech world's outrage? I didn't blame him at the time -- you gotta eat -- but it looks like he found out like many have before, that our current fearless leader isn't the most trustworthy man around.
It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
Seriously. Launch payloads of fuel, food and water into practical long term orbits. Fund it with stocks/bonds that people can publicly invest in such that they own a portion of that material in space. They can sell their stock openly.
And learn to maximize payload efficiency by taking up more supplies with every launch.
Then have drones that can ferry materials around in orbit. Refueling satellite thrusters and atomic cells on demand before they run out of fuel and burn up.
Is it creepy to anyone else that they're referred to as customers?
Since the government isn't funding any of this stuff, it looks like corporations will already be holding those going to Mars hostage and the future of interplanetary travel is capitalist in nature... thoughts?
-
Hey, that's IBM's business model also. They get even more money from NASA than spacex.
here we go again... both Musk and NASA are doomed to keep a single course to Mars.
(borrowing a few sentences from Tom Matula on NASAwatch): I blame most of the destination argument on the creation of the Mars underground in the 1980's. Prior to that NASA was focused on using the Shuttle for industrialization in LEO with projects like demonstrating the repair and return of satellites, building structural items in orbit, tethers, etc., all logical starting points for building a Cislunar industrial capability that would have given us the Solar System. NASA didn't even have plans to send robots to Mars. By advocating that we needed to skip the Moon and go rushing off to Mars they started this entire useless destination debate that has paralyzed space policy ever since.
mfwright@batnet.com
Breaking!
Company states sadness that the Federal Government is not paying more of their bills. Decides to use it own money to do things and make a profit.
Sad day for the country.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
I'd rather see paying rich customers instead of a parade of politically correct and connected ethnics being handed the honor.
Fans of the book/movie "The Martian" would be happy if SpaceX does select Arcadia Planitia for their first landing site as that was the landing site of the Ares 3.
Since SpaceX is so in favor of reuse, I'm sure they wouldn't mind reusing the sound stage. Unlike those throwaway moon sound stages.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
This ridiculous item was posted to Slashdot with a headline falsely asserting the opposite.
Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
While the GOP continue to waste money on the SLS/Orion debacle, they are also continuing funding for new space, though it was left open.
If money is spent on multiple private space stations, along with sending us to the moon VIA NEW SPACE, then it will allow for the infrastructure to be put in place and the price for launches, space operations, etc to drop. And a once a month launch of the BFR to the moon/space would help him far more than direct cash will.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Ever. Because I say so, Space Nutters! And I MASTURBATE!!! Sob sob why didn't she give me a chance?