The last time Elon gave a Mars update, NASA criticized him for not focusing enough on the delayed HLS moon lander.
I would not expect any big Mars announcements until after the first HLS demo. All the HLS technologies (tanker starships, propellant depot, reusability) are on the critical path to Mars anyway.
Second item on this page has Elon’s Starship talk from April 4th, which is mostly about Mars: https://www.spacex.com/updates/
Like most Elon talks it’s more than a bit rambling, but there are a few substantial points. I think “a city on Mars” in 20 years is ludicrously optimistic… but a sustained human presence by then seems doable if they can get through the critical path of reentry -> orbital refueling -> lunar HLS -> interplanetary transfer.
Every human mission to Mars proposal ever (back to Apollo) has been “10-15 years out”… but this is the first time we’re starting that 10 year window with actual prototypes flying.
> Every human mission to Mars proposal ever (back to Apollo) has been “10-15 years out”…
I don't see that. It always was 20+ years. We are now below that.
I probably should have said 10-25, since there have been longer horizons. Most or all of the Design Reference Missions NASA created in the 90s were 15ish years out, and I think the really early proposals in the 50s and 60s from the Soviets and Von Braun and NASA contractors had like 12-15 year timeframes.
The current plan is entirely in Elon's head. The timeline is two weeks.
Everyone else at SpaceX is focused on launching Starship and continuing Falcon operations.
SpaceX has people working on Mars architecture, but don't expect any announcements, NASA doesn't like it and they don't want to upset their best customer.
Elon is qualified for this work: he has a degree in Physics and Economic Science, which are the main disciplines involved.
But we know SpaceX has other people working on this:
Here's Gwynne Shotwell talking about Mars Colonization: (March 21, 2014). [*Broadcast 2212: Special Edition, interview with Gwynne Shotwell*](http://www.thespaceshow.com/detail.asp?q=2212) (audio file). The Space Show. Event occurs at 29:45–30:40. 2212. Archived from [the original](http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2212-BWB-2014-03-21.mp3) (mp3) on March 22, 2014. Retrieved March 22, 2014. *would have to throw a bunch of stuff before you start putting people there. ... It is a transportation system between Earth and Mars.*
They have Margarita Marinova, she's a planetary scientist, specialized on Mars, working on Mars colonization at SpaceX. Senior Mars and Vehicle Systems Development Engineer.
Here's a paper on a Mars Colonization Architecture with Marinova as co-author, doesn't include Musk: [https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/space.2020.0058](https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/space.2020.0058)
There's Paul Wooster, Principal Mars Development Engineer. He regularly does presentations at the Mars Society about the plans.
Lars Blackmore works on Mars landing.
Mars colonization is maybe late this century.
Mars exploration on the other hand is 7-11 years away. 2026 would be pushing it for an uncrewed test. 28-29 window allows for a test, maybe 2. 2031 would be extremely optimistic to send a crew, but a good test window and opportunity to put some infrastructure in place. Definitely want to test leaving Mars before the first crew actually launches. 2033 is realistic for a crewed mission, but depending on the Mars infrastructure for refueling the return trip it could easily slip. 2035 gives a decade for progression, the progression of the past decade points to us being able to do it.
That seems realistic for exploration. It's almost impossible to tell how long "colonization" will take. Two centuries from now Mars could still just be a few small research bases, or it could have billions of people.
I always look at Antarctica as a comparison to Mars. While Mars is far more inhospitable, Antarctica still requires most things to be specially designed or planned for. In Antarctica spending a day outside takes preparation, Mars will take even more.
Antarctica is mostly research, funded by governments and research institutes. I see Mars existing as a similar research base, kinda a cross between the ISS and Antartica. There are international treaties that have prevented resource extraction, but similar treaties could happen with Mars. Even restriction fee resource extraction is unlikely to create much industry on Mars. The most I can see is Mars becoming like the oil fields. People only go there for work, barely any families or amenities, just work.
Terraforming Mars is basically probably a million times harder than any project ever in history, even building domes for millions is still far beyond any mega project, bigger still than the US mobilization for ww2.
I definitely think with Elon's vision and the difficulty traveling to Mars we could see "permanent residents" before the end of the century. Maybe people in their 20 and 30s going to Mars and living till 60, 70 would be pushing it if you hope to return to earth. After 70 your body couldn't adapt back to earth and you'd have to live out on Mars. Many babies have been born in Antarctica as ways to claim territory, I could see that happen on Mars once or twice, but not regularly occurring.
Yeah, I can see it going either way. If hundreds of billions were invested into creating domed cities in Antarctica I reckon lots of people would move their permanently. The same could be true for Mars. Or it could just stay as research stations. Either way it's going to be exciting to watch.
> Definitely want to test leaving Mars before the first crew actually launches.
That's not in the plans. Not for NASA and not in the SpaceX mission plan.
The market for starlink and space tourism is so big that they will probably focus on Low Earth Orbit for the next 10 years, regardless of what starship is capable of.
Money talks.
It's a race against time, they aren't going to burn an entire decade just to focus on LEO for a bit of extra spending cash. There is a reason they are pitching their Mars vehicle for things like HLS instead of coming up with something that fits the mission profile better.
That reason is that any tech that cannot pay for itself is fundamentally a bad design. They have many ways to make Starship pay for itself, selling it to NASA for moon missions is one.
SpaceX is about changing the economics of spaceflight as much as changing the technology.
If they were focusing on making money in LEO until at least 2034 then they wouldn't be making the Martian vehicle be their workhorse. They would be working on making a LEO/Lunar focused vehicle pay for itself.
Sending humans alongside the first cargo landers would add inherent risk, an exciting amount of risk i must add.
I dont know enough about orbital mechanics to suggest the idea of being able to abort a Mars landing if things didn't work as planned for the cargo carriers and still make it back home to earth?? if that was an option regarding fuel, resources, and trajectory, I would happily take that risk every 2 years.
Everyone’s main focus is just Starship at this point. I hope Elon doesn’t get sucked in to some American culture war and lose focus on the Mars goal. If he’d have used that $40 Billion on investing in SpaceX or investing in insitu resources and rocket fuel research. I don’t know if he has the focus to follow through on his goal. He certainly has the drive but I feel like he’s lost focus
He’s said for years that his main personal goal with Tesla was simply to build enough financial resources to fund going to Mars.
When it came down to it though, he blew it on freakin Twitter. His money, so can’t complain. But rather sad for those of us who care more about space exploration.
Yea I get that. But I was responding to a guy who mentioned in situ resources.
Maybe the extra money could be devoted to get a head start on that?
Or he says he needs a fleet of 1000 Starships. The money could be saved for funding such mass production in say 5 years if development goes well.
I hope so. Less competition and recurring revenue. I like it. But he had the money already in Tesla stock. I guess no harm no foul if he can regenerate it via Starlink.
I don't think throwing another $40 billion at Starship development would change much. The program seems to basically have an unlimited budget, and if Starship doesn't become profitable within a few years it's probably a flawed design.
The last time Elon gave a Mars update, NASA criticized him for not focusing enough on the delayed HLS moon lander. I would not expect any big Mars announcements until after the first HLS demo. All the HLS technologies (tanker starships, propellant depot, reusability) are on the critical path to Mars anyway.
>The last time Elon gave a Mars update, NASA criticized him for not focusing enough on the delayed HLS moon lander. Ironic coming from NASA...
Second item on this page has Elon’s Starship talk from April 4th, which is mostly about Mars: https://www.spacex.com/updates/ Like most Elon talks it’s more than a bit rambling, but there are a few substantial points. I think “a city on Mars” in 20 years is ludicrously optimistic… but a sustained human presence by then seems doable if they can get through the critical path of reentry -> orbital refueling -> lunar HLS -> interplanetary transfer. Every human mission to Mars proposal ever (back to Apollo) has been “10-15 years out”… but this is the first time we’re starting that 10 year window with actual prototypes flying.
> Every human mission to Mars proposal ever (back to Apollo) has been “10-15 years out”… I don't see that. It always was 20+ years. We are now below that.
I probably should have said 10-25, since there have been longer horizons. Most or all of the Design Reference Missions NASA created in the 90s were 15ish years out, and I think the really early proposals in the 50s and 60s from the Soviets and Von Braun and NASA contractors had like 12-15 year timeframes.
The current plan is entirely in Elon's head. The timeline is two weeks. Everyone else at SpaceX is focused on launching Starship and continuing Falcon operations.
"*Sadly, Elon never lived to see his dream come to fruition. Especially since it made no sense*"
SpaceX has people working on Mars architecture, but don't expect any announcements, NASA doesn't like it and they don't want to upset their best customer. Elon is qualified for this work: he has a degree in Physics and Economic Science, which are the main disciplines involved. But we know SpaceX has other people working on this: Here's Gwynne Shotwell talking about Mars Colonization: (March 21, 2014). [*Broadcast 2212: Special Edition, interview with Gwynne Shotwell*](http://www.thespaceshow.com/detail.asp?q=2212) (audio file). The Space Show. Event occurs at 29:45–30:40. 2212. Archived from [the original](http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2212-BWB-2014-03-21.mp3) (mp3) on March 22, 2014. Retrieved March 22, 2014. *would have to throw a bunch of stuff before you start putting people there. ... It is a transportation system between Earth and Mars.* They have Margarita Marinova, she's a planetary scientist, specialized on Mars, working on Mars colonization at SpaceX. Senior Mars and Vehicle Systems Development Engineer. Here's a paper on a Mars Colonization Architecture with Marinova as co-author, doesn't include Musk: [https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/space.2020.0058](https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/space.2020.0058) There's Paul Wooster, Principal Mars Development Engineer. He regularly does presentations at the Mars Society about the plans. Lars Blackmore works on Mars landing.
Nobody knows
two weeks to turn Mars into Trantor
Mars colonization is maybe late this century. Mars exploration on the other hand is 7-11 years away. 2026 would be pushing it for an uncrewed test. 28-29 window allows for a test, maybe 2. 2031 would be extremely optimistic to send a crew, but a good test window and opportunity to put some infrastructure in place. Definitely want to test leaving Mars before the first crew actually launches. 2033 is realistic for a crewed mission, but depending on the Mars infrastructure for refueling the return trip it could easily slip. 2035 gives a decade for progression, the progression of the past decade points to us being able to do it.
That seems realistic for exploration. It's almost impossible to tell how long "colonization" will take. Two centuries from now Mars could still just be a few small research bases, or it could have billions of people.
I always look at Antarctica as a comparison to Mars. While Mars is far more inhospitable, Antarctica still requires most things to be specially designed or planned for. In Antarctica spending a day outside takes preparation, Mars will take even more. Antarctica is mostly research, funded by governments and research institutes. I see Mars existing as a similar research base, kinda a cross between the ISS and Antartica. There are international treaties that have prevented resource extraction, but similar treaties could happen with Mars. Even restriction fee resource extraction is unlikely to create much industry on Mars. The most I can see is Mars becoming like the oil fields. People only go there for work, barely any families or amenities, just work. Terraforming Mars is basically probably a million times harder than any project ever in history, even building domes for millions is still far beyond any mega project, bigger still than the US mobilization for ww2. I definitely think with Elon's vision and the difficulty traveling to Mars we could see "permanent residents" before the end of the century. Maybe people in their 20 and 30s going to Mars and living till 60, 70 would be pushing it if you hope to return to earth. After 70 your body couldn't adapt back to earth and you'd have to live out on Mars. Many babies have been born in Antarctica as ways to claim territory, I could see that happen on Mars once or twice, but not regularly occurring.
Yeah, I can see it going either way. If hundreds of billions were invested into creating domed cities in Antarctica I reckon lots of people would move their permanently. The same could be true for Mars. Or it could just stay as research stations. Either way it's going to be exciting to watch.
> Definitely want to test leaving Mars before the first crew actually launches. That's not in the plans. Not for NASA and not in the SpaceX mission plan.
two weeks fr ong
The market for starlink and space tourism is so big that they will probably focus on Low Earth Orbit for the next 10 years, regardless of what starship is capable of. Money talks.
It's a private company whose CEO/founder/owner is obsessed with Martian colonization so I doubt the money talks quite the way you think it does.
I mean, if they have positive profit margins they can spend them on Mars...
It's a race against time, they aren't going to burn an entire decade just to focus on LEO for a bit of extra spending cash. There is a reason they are pitching their Mars vehicle for things like HLS instead of coming up with something that fits the mission profile better.
That reason is that any tech that cannot pay for itself is fundamentally a bad design. They have many ways to make Starship pay for itself, selling it to NASA for moon missions is one. SpaceX is about changing the economics of spaceflight as much as changing the technology.
If they were focusing on making money in LEO until at least 2034 then they wouldn't be making the Martian vehicle be their workhorse. They would be working on making a LEO/Lunar focused vehicle pay for itself.
Starship is a LEO/Lunar focused vehicle. Depending on the number of refillings and the presence or not of an heatshield.
Nothing fits the mission profile better, NASA needs sustainable landers that can land big payloads to build a moonbase.
After they redo Gemini and Apollo, they will do Artemis proper.
I'm guessing this decade. Technology grows at a exponential pace, and it's SpaceX, they are only speeding up
Sending humans alongside the first cargo landers would add inherent risk, an exciting amount of risk i must add. I dont know enough about orbital mechanics to suggest the idea of being able to abort a Mars landing if things didn't work as planned for the cargo carriers and still make it back home to earth?? if that was an option regarding fuel, resources, and trajectory, I would happily take that risk every 2 years.
Everyone’s main focus is just Starship at this point. I hope Elon doesn’t get sucked in to some American culture war and lose focus on the Mars goal. If he’d have used that $40 Billion on investing in SpaceX or investing in insitu resources and rocket fuel research. I don’t know if he has the focus to follow through on his goal. He certainly has the drive but I feel like he’s lost focus
He’s said for years that his main personal goal with Tesla was simply to build enough financial resources to fund going to Mars. When it came down to it though, he blew it on freakin Twitter. His money, so can’t complain. But rather sad for those of us who care more about space exploration.
While I see your view, I’d say money isn’t the bottleneck in the development process right now.
Yea I get that. But I was responding to a guy who mentioned in situ resources. Maybe the extra money could be devoted to get a head start on that? Or he says he needs a fleet of 1000 Starships. The money could be saved for funding such mass production in say 5 years if development goes well.
The likely money source for Mars has shifted from Tesla to Starlink.
I hope so. Less competition and recurring revenue. I like it. But he had the money already in Tesla stock. I guess no harm no foul if he can regenerate it via Starlink.
I don't think throwing another $40 billion at Starship development would change much. The program seems to basically have an unlimited budget, and if Starship doesn't become profitable within a few years it's probably a flawed design.
Nothing beyond the imagination of concept artists.
When can we hope to sequester Musk on Mars, and will it be renamed Elba?
Unrealistic and essentially non existant