Destination: Mars

Mars will become a touristic destination in a matter of 20 years. At what price for a round trip would you consider buying a ticket? What safety concerns would have to be met to sway you over?
Ciro Villa (technologist, application developer, STEM communicator)

First and foremost, whether Mars will become a tourist destination in the next 20 years or not, it’s still to be seen and subject to debate. There are still several critical hurdles to be overcome: financial, technical and societal just to name some of the main ones. As of today, these hurdles make just the prospect of humans traveling, let alone landing and settling on the red planet all but trivial and extremely challenging. Initially when human travel to the Red planet will begin, only trained astronauts will venture and embark in the journey that will no doubt be filled with difficulties and perils.

When and if we will finally be able to achieve tourism to Mars, prices will at the beginning undoubtedly be highly prohibitive and most likely out of reach for a large swat of the human population. I personally would most likely not be able to afford the journey in my lifetime. It is indeed hard to place a fair price tags with so many unknowns still in place.

If we let our fantasy go wild, then I would envision that in another 100 to 150-year technology will have advanced to the point to allow for “affordable” and safe commutes with round trips to Mars. I frankly still don’t know what exactly that price tag might or should be.

In terms of safety, it is also almost impossible to pinpoint what would be an acceptable threshold of risk metrics that would make me comfortable enough to embark in the journey with a relative degree of confidence that my trip would not be the last of my life. As mentioned in the beginning, obstacles to be overcome in terms of human planetary travel survivability still abound and only after several iterations, including discoveries, advancement in science and technology and lesson learned, would I believe that a journey to the Red Planet might be safe and enjoyable.

Fraser Cain (publisher at Universetoday.com, co-host of Astronomy Cast)

I’m probably less adventurous than most people. I really love Earth, and I’ve barely explored this amazing planet and all it offers. I’d want to know that a trip to and from Mars is relatively safe and much much quicker before I was willing to make that journey. I’d do a few months on Mars to see some of the highlights and then I’d like to come home. I would like to experience lower gravity, but that would be even better on the Moon, which is only a few days away.

Paul Carr (Space Systems engineer at NASA, podcaster, blogger, investigator)

I’ve little doubt that the first tourist tickets to Mars will only be affordable by the wealthy or those able to obtain corporate sponsorship. The cheaper option is likely to be one way ticket, but still far beyond the means of all but a few of us. An optimistic price for a one way ticket in the early days is probably $5 million USD, but it’s probably much more than that until Mars travel is far more efficient than it is now. Perhaps I could raise enough for a one way ticket, which I would have to consider if my health holds up long enough. A few million dollars, for the price of wearing corporate logos on my flight suit, might be possible for me.

I don’t expect Mars travel to be as safe as getting on a cruise ship or an airliner for a long time to come. We can probably find efficient ways to address such threats as infectious diseases in a closed space, radiation exposure, or social meltdowns, so that the biggest risks are launch and landing. We shouldn’t get into the same mentality we had in the early days of the Space Shuttle, with a delusional notion of how safe it is. After the Challenger tragedy in 1986, there was no shortage of astronaut candidates. Some people are willing to take risks if the reward is there. Many people have died leaping off of cliffs in a wingsuit, or climbing high peaks – not because they don’t know what the risks are, but because they accept them and proceed nonetheless. We may never lose as many Mars tourists as the 290 people who have died climbing Everest, but it does seem that some will meet their destiny there. Those who fear the risks should stay on Earth, where they will also die when their time comes.

If I could choose, I’d choose to die on another planet.

Nancy Atkinson (Senior Editor for Universe Today, Host of the NASA Lunar Science Institute podcast & a NASA/JPL Solar System Ambassador)

Ah yes, this is what I jokingly call “The Mars Plan,” where getting to Mars is a thing that is always 20 years off into the future, no matter when. Humans on Mars was touted as being 20 years away in the 1970’s and it is still 20 years away today. Are we actually any closer now to accomplishing this great feat than we were in the 1970’s? I’m not very confident that we are. There are still many technical hurdles to leap, like making the trip shorter than 7 months, being able to land large payloads on Mars, and developing habitats and life support systems that are truly foolproof. If someone dies on the first human mission to Mars, that will be the end of it. Also, this is going to cost a lot of money, and there will have to be a payoff in some fashion, whether it is mining, tourism or an Earth-catastrophe management endeavor.

As a journalist, I’m secretly hoping that someone will pay *me* to go to Mars so I can write about it! Otherwise, I don’t think I’ll ever have enough cash to do it on my own.

Episode 1 – Science Outreach

In our first episode I was joined by Mike Simmons and Andrew Rader to talk about science outreach and challenges it faces.

To infinity and beyond!

Elon Musk has sent his cherry Tesla Roadster on a Falcon Heavy maiden flight. If it was up to you, what would you send as a payload on that flight and where would it be going?
Mike Simmons (Founder and CEO of “Astronomers without Borders”)

What would I send as a payload? Me! Driving a Tesla roadster would be good but it seems to offer little protection.

Seriously, the payload wouldn’t have made any difference on the test flight. No one was going to risk a valuable scientific payload on an unproven rocket, especially when the builder says it has only a 50% chance of success. I think the proof of concept for the Falcon Heavy’s ability was quite successful.

At first it seemed more than frivolous to send his car into orbit around the Sun. But after seeing the images sent back from it and looking at the attention it got I really like it. The launch is an incredible feat and this quirky way of doing it was just mind-bending. Something different in an era where rocket launches and satellites are becoming routine.

Nancy Atkinson (Senior Editor for Universe Today, Host of the NASA Lunar Science Institute podcast & a NASA/JPL Solar System Ambassador)

I would have loved for SpaceX to include student experiments or some payload chosen by young people. I think that would have been the most altruistic, educational and scientific choice. But if I understand the story correctly, SpaceX had asked NASA and the US Air Force if they were interested in sending a scientific payload, free of charge on the Falcon Heavy. And while I’m not sure about the timing, but I’m betting there was a delay in a response from NASA and the Air Force, and after the answer was no, that left SpaceX to choose something fairly quickly. There may not have been time to develop something like a competition for student experiments. But the live video feed of the Tesla Roadster in orbit of Earth may have been one of the most exciting, inspirational and just plain cool things that kids have seen lately in regards to space exploration, so perhaps the Tesla was the perfect choice.

Paul Carr (Space Systems engineer at NASA, podcaster, blogger, investigator)

I am amused and disappointed at all the noise over Elon Musk’s choice of a dummy payload – his own car. I thought it was very touching and completely appropriate (full disclosure, I am a Tesla shareholder).

It is impossible to tell payload provider before a demonstration launch that their satellite is not at high risk on an unproven rocket. Throughout the long process leading up to the launch, SpaceX had been managing expectations. They have a history of failing early and learning from it. They felt they had all the known unknowns under control, but in a complex system, it is the unknown unknowns that can easily cause a disaster. I have no doubt that SpaceX approached, or were approached by, a a number of entities about having their payload on the demo flight, but all had to accept the risk. It is easy (and lazy) to say that a scientific payload should have flown, but only in hindsight is this possible, and so the word “should” has to be replaced with “could”. As it is, I think Starman was a master stroke of public relations that no one will forget for a long time. The “Don’t Panic!” sign on the dashboard made it perfect for me. I believe Douglas Adams would have been delighted to see that.

If I had about $20 million sitting around idle, and had been approached by SpaceX, I would have offered an infrared telescope to be positioned at one of the Earth-Moon Lagrange points (probably L1, most of the way to the moon from the Earth) to look for temporary moons. These are small asteroids that are captured into the Earth-Moon system, stay for a few orbits, and then get flung back out into the solar system. At present, we discover them pretty much by luck, if int all. A more systematic survey would provide a more accurate census of these objects, and other Near Earth objects as well. Flying all the way to a Lagrange point before the injection burn might have been a strain on the rocket’s batteries, but will put that in the bucket of solvable engineering problems. The relight of the upper stage after a days long cruise would be an even better demo than what they got.

My ultimate goal would be to have a squadron of probes ready to shoot out after the temporary moons, and intercept and rendezvous with them to ascertain their mineralogy and ore-bearing potential at close distance. This would be more elaborate and expensive, but the first baby step of a telescope to detect the moons might be worth risking on a demo mission.

Antonio Paris (Astronaut Candidate, Astronomy Professor, Planetary Scientist, Space Science Author)

If I had the opportunity to select the payload for the Falcon Heavy test flight, I would have to admit that the rocket would not be powerful enough. The rocket would have been loaded with an assortment of trinkets that represented all of humanity, such as music and photos from diverse cultures. Now do not get me wrong – a Telsa Roadster is pretty cool. However, a sport car does not represent humanity in a nutshell, but rather it only represented Elon Musk and a select class of citizens most of us will never hold membership in.