What will be the outcome for the 4 people who take the one way trip to mars?

Wingo
reply to post by boohoo

 

The very likely, 6-12 months of accelerated "prep training" that these people are going to get won't cut it

The quote above is incorrect:
Crew training starts 2015
Departure crew 1: 2024
This allows 9 years of training...quite a bit can be learned in 9 yeas of applied education.

FANTASTIC THREAD !

Well after 9 years of UK schooling I still know f@#k all. Hope they have good teachers at their space camp.

The pessimism in some people is astounding.

Didn't someone once say "we don't do things because they're easy, but because they are hard"

We actually got into the air years ago.
We've also gotten into space.
Decades ago, the Voyager was launched into space.
Plus, there's all the programs that have been kept secret. Science is way ahead of what we know.

doorhandle


Well after 9 years of UK schooling I still know f@#k all. Hope they have good teachers at their space camp.

Seeing as they are willing volenteer there cause they want to be there and not kids stuck there by force I cant see it a issue.

Plus I doubt they will let any idiot in.

if i was one of the four, i would land on mars, declear myself king of mars and rebel. Of course the other 3 that come with me will have to be woman. I would then have to start the Haunting task of populating Mars. Making one woman happy is hard enough

snowspirit
Decades ago, the Voyager was launched into space.
Plus, there's all the programs that have been kept secret. Science is way ahead of what we know.

Did you read ANY of my posts? Voyager was run by some of the smartest people in the country at the time, if had they used volunteers chosen by their individual popularity level on a TV show, NOTHING would have launched. Put it all into perspective, the Voyager program cost $900 million in 1972 money. These Mars One guys can't even get $250,000 to pay for the study they contracted Lockheed to do for them, with rehashed tech. Its one thing to be a pioneer, WITH A WORKING PLAN, its a whole other thing to trust your life to someone with no budget to realistically have a successful interplanetary project.

Its like me saying that my $50 makeshift parachute made out of bedsheets and rope, will work as well as a real one that cost $5,000.

camaro68ss
if i was one of the four, i would land on mars, declear myself king of mars and rebel. Of course the other 3 that come with me will have to be woman. I would then have to start the Haunting task of populating Mars. Making one woman happy is hard enough

edit on 24-1-2014 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)

Yeah.....slight problem with as earth will just cut supplys off Wait a decade or two when the coloney becomes self sustaining.

reply to post by boohoo


I would think that they're not going to pick names out of a hat. They've said they'll be picking the best and the brightest, of the healthiest that have the right skill set.

If they can't find the right people, or enough funding, it'll have to be postponed.
This has to be done eventually unless we just put a stop to the space program, and any idea of getting humans off this rock.
That would be sad....

snowspirit
reply to post by boohoo

 

I would think that they're not going to pick names out of a hat. They've said they'll be picking the best and the brightest, of the healthiest that have the right skill set.

Its based on Facebook voting popularity. They said it not me.

doorhandle


Beautiful man, beautiful. Though she dreamt it all up didn't she? Lol

"Contact" was the name of the movie...weren't there 30+ hours of static on the camera that suggested it may have been more than just a "dream"

i don't think they're going there to populate mars- 4 people would be a very poor gene pool.

boohoo

snowspirit
Decades ago, the Voyager was launched into space.
Plus, there's all the programs that have been kept secret. Science is way ahead of what we know.

Did you read ANY of my posts? Voyager was run by some of the smartest people in the country at the time, if had they used volunteers chosen by their individual popularity level on a TV show, NOTHING would have launched. Put it all into perspective, the Voyager program cost $900 million in 1972 money. These Mars One guys can't even get $250,000 to pay for the study they contracted Lockheed to do for them, with rehashed tech. Its one thing to be a pioneer, WITH A WORKING PLAN, its a whole other thing to trust your life to someone with no budget to realistically have a successful interplanetary project.

Its like me saying that my $50 makeshift parachute made out of bedsheets and rope, will work as well as a real one that cost $5,000.

Hey its not as if The King or prince of Netherlands is backing this project.
Try to get over it, Mars one is a Scam, but I don't know about this Tito dude

reply to post by boohoo


Wow...congratulations to you on blowing my mind with this lengthy diatribe.
Your point starts with assumptions and continues with assumptions and ends with assumptions...I was merely offering a solid piece of information.

Want examples ?
Assumption #1

...false belief that these people will somehow get high quality training that will keep them alive for more than a few days or weeks after launch from Earth.

Need I comment ?

Assumption #2

Who in the world that can fix a nuclear reactor with no proper spare parts AND has prior experience, is also going to volunteer AND then be chosen

They will not send nuclear reactors to Mars...at least not on the first mission. The site stipulates clearly that " solar panels is the best choice for Mars One as it takes away the requirement to develop and launch a nuclear reactor, thereby saving time and money while avoiding the risks and concerns for use of a nuclear power source. - See more at: www.mars-one.com... "

Assumption #3

They will need someone along the lines of a modern nuclear submarine engineer, combined with the machinist's mate skill set and be able to comprehend software programming relevant to the systems on the spaceship

Errm...no they don't. All they have to do is explain and run scenarios on the existing equipment required for survival. Again (I quote): "Every effort was made to design the mission with as little complexity as possible. - See more at: www.mars-one.com... "

Assumption #4

how many of those 9 years training do you think will be devoted to STRICTLY maintaining, repairing and machining parts for the equipment needed to keep them alive on Mars?

oh...I don't know...ALL OF THEM ?! If they take only 6-12 months to teach the crews the "mechanical" stuff, what do you suppose they'll do for the rest of the 8 years ? Push-ups ?

Assumption #5

Mark my words the first person(s) killed on the Mars One project, on Earth or Mars, will be stem from one of the selected Civilian Astronauts making a technical error using or repairing equipment, not an accidental one like slip, fall, or medical condition.

Holy smokes...give this guy the "fortune teller of the year" award. What you just described is a "probability" not certainty. It may happen exactly like you describe it or it may not.

It really gets boring doing the quoting thing...so here is the conclusion:
- Will it go smoothly ? Most likely not. But with adequate training and proper knowledge, difficulties can be overcome.
- Are they dependent on equipment ? On understanding how it works and what can go wrong ? Most definitely. But if one person cannot master the equipment after 9 years of training, they have no business being part of the crew.
- Will they have the necessary funds to turn this into a definite possibility ? I'm with you, in the skeptics' camp, on this one.

This is surely a momentous turn in the history of mankind and if there weren't any "naysayers" it wouldn't be normal. Of course it's a outlandish idea, yet, as so many posters before me mentioned, none of the advancements we enjoy today, would be possible without people taking risks and turning insanity into normality. I think there has been a long stretch of time in which we haven't seen anything this momentous, that we forgot what it's like to make a "giant leap for mankind"...assuming that this turns into reality after all.

reply to post by crazyewok


Ok, let's leave the issue of the sheer idiocy of a mission with no return leg, and no possibility of return at that, alone for the moment.

Space travel is about moving forward, putting in place the tools and technology which will allow the human race to expand its horizons, and distribute its existence across more than one world in the future. To fail to take the opportunity of a manned mission to Mars, to excuse the research and development spending necessary to vastly improve propulsion technology, to totally leave behind the idea of rockets, to step beyond the very idea of traditional methods, is, in my view, a gargantuan error.

If this mission goes ahead using technology which has not evolved beyond that which was used to land man on the Moon, then there will be a slow down in R&D, and further, unwarranted delays in mankind gaining the ability to send people outside its own solar system, which ought to have been the main drive for the last ten years, and has not been. In short, this is, in my opinion, a mission of compromise, and where the subject of mans travels in the solar system, and the wider universe is concerned, there should be no compromises of any sort, for any reason.

the same it is for everyone......death.

imagine if NASA had a budget equal to that of the military spending.

probably have warp drives by now lol

What intrigue me are the questions of "WHY?" and "WHY NOW ?". Why was the timing chosen for 2012 to 2025 ? Why not earlier or (even better) later ? What piece of knowledge/ discovery/ "ace up their sleeve" gives them the idea that this can be feasible or that it has to be attempted ?

I am asking this, because to undertake the responsibility of investing 6 billion in this type of project, to involve people who can afford to (potentially) finance this gargantuan undertaking, to burden one's soul with the moral and legal implications of sending people into unknown (some say "certain death") needs VERY SERIOUS consideration.

The process of selecting candidates has begun.
Under a logical train of thought and from the perusal of the FAQ on their website, it is relatively safe to assume that they ran a case study to determine the feasibility of the project, the potential for financing in the long run, the legal and moral implications of the entire concept, the issues and difficulties that can be reasonably forecasted and so on...Seems legit (so to speak).

Assuming for a moment that IT IS a legitimate effort to colonize Mars....it begs to ask these 2 questions: "WHY?" and "WHY NOW ?"

I mean we have plenty of stuff to explore right here on earth (oceans would come to mind as primary example)...why send people to what appears to be certain death ? I really don't buy the "extraordinary adventure", "giant leap for mankind" and the "human curiosity" crap....not when 6 billion is in play (maybe I'm just jaded). I just think it's a big chunk to swallow in the name of "adventure" and "horizon expansion"...
Don't get me wrong, I am certain that, as a collateral, us, peons on earth, may benefit marginally form the scientific advancements that stem from this kind of endeavor, but....there has to be a higher purpose or ulterior motive.

Let's review:
1. Resources ? (what have Curiosity and Opportunity uncovered ?)
2. Need for a new habitat in the near future (50-100 years)? (SciFi, I know, but given the state of the world these days, no catastrophe appears out of the realm of probability).
3. Need for a testing ground for some technology that really needs to remain secret ? (I realize one might ask "why send volunteers if that's the case, but again, we're talking about an extreme game of chess...pawns are cheaper than "second row" pieces, so that makes sense in a cruel kind of way...plus there will be more crews sent every two years).
4. Again the question of what have Curiosity and Opportunity uncovered that needs further study ? My first thought would be remnants of an ancient civilization with "tech" left intact and operational !? An actual civilization (if we can make it there, who's to say others cannot ?)

Any thoughts ?

TrueBrit


If this mission goes ahead using technology which has not evolved beyond that which was used to land man on the Moon, then there will be a slow down in R&D, and further, unwarranted delays in mankind gaining the ability to send people outside its own solar system, which ought to have been the main drive for the last ten years, and has not been. In short, this is, in my opinion, a mission of compromise, and where the subject of mans travels in the solar system, and the wider universe is concerned, there should be no compromises of any sort, for any reason.

It a private compnay doing this!

Why shouldnt a private compnay be free to waste its money on what it likes. And if people are willing to sign up let them. What right does anyone else have to stop them!

STOP TRYING TO CONTROL EVERTHING! This is why the UK is such a damed nanny stated. Let the private sector do what it likes as long as you or me are not effected

If it was goverment spending you would have a point. But its not. It a private venture. If they fail we are not effected.

taoistguy
i don't think they're going there to populate mars- 4 people would be a very poor gene pool.

4 people will be joined by 4 new people every 2-3 years or so by their plan.

Eventually you'll have something the size of a small town on Mars. That's probably a good enough size for a viable gene pool if the crews are diverse in nature.

crazyewok

TrueBrit


If this mission goes ahead using technology which has not evolved beyond that which was used to land man on the Moon, then there will be a slow down in R&D, and further, unwarranted delays in mankind gaining the ability to send people outside its own solar system, which ought to have been the main drive for the last ten years, and has not been. In short, this is, in my opinion, a mission of compromise, and where the subject of mans travels in the solar system, and the wider universe is concerned, there should be no compromises of any sort, for any reason.

It a private compnay doing this!

Why shouldnt a private compnay be free to waste its money on what it likes. And if people are willing to sign up let them. What right does anyone else have to stop them!

STOP TRYING TO CONTROL EVERTHING! This is why the UK is such a damed nanny stated. Let the private sector do what it likes as long as you or me are not effected

If it was goverment spending you would have a point. But its not. It a private venture. If they fail we are not effected.

edit on 25-1-2014 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

Don't ask me how I know this but I hear NBC is going to pick up the TV rights to Mars One in the United States. This will be their first massive influx of cash.

A lot will depend on the TV ratings of Richard Branson and family flying into space from Spaceport America in New Mexico later this year (which they are planning a lot of programming around).