How complex and expensive would a realistic Mars mission and colony be?

[SeekerOfTruth007]

Years ago, I actually spent several months gameplanning a Mars mission to try to see how unrealistic it would be to try to actually do it.

I figured out you NEED nuclear propulsion. Doing it with chemical rockets is nigh to impossible. So assuming we reactivate the NERVA rocket program, let's move on to the next problem:

1) Radioactivity from your own nuclear rocket and radioactivity from space.

2) Landing on Mars. We can't even land on Earth half the time due to the weather.

3) Dust and tornadoes on Mars will short-circuit electronic devices (see below).

4) Flash Freeze storms under certain conditions exist on Mars.

5) On Earth, we require triple redundant safety mechanisms on Oil Rigs. Imagine how expensive it would be to create an environment on Mars with Triple Redundant safety on all mechanisms and systems? Since the electronics are not reliable, this means all systems must be passive.

6) Fire suppression.

7) Life support and recycling CO2 to get back Oxygen. Water supplies, temperature control, etc.

8) Solar Power is about half as much on Mars as Earth, which means you'd need hundreds of square miles of panels to support a small colony.

9) Dust getting in your airlock means you will lose your oxygen every time you try to open a door and go outside to do work.

10) You will NEVER be able to take a breath of fresh air for the rest of your life.

11) You will NEVER see green grass or trees again for the rest of your life.

12) You will NEVER see a dog romp and play in the yard again for the rest of your life.

13) You flat out are not designed to live on Mars, and will likely die young from atrophy or heart attack.

Updates

1 mo

I put this under "SOCIETY AND POLITICS" because we are WASTING hundreds of billions of dollars on manned space flight for no damned reason other than a pissing contest with Russia and China. There will NEVER be a payoff from this nonsense. Never.

Updates

1 mo

today on Fox News, a lying former NASA analyst claimed the Helium 3 on the Moon would make it worth going to the Moon and making a moon base. This is BULLSHIT. We have no idea how to do helium 3 fusion and doing Hydrogen 3 fusion requires a reactor the size of a FOOTBALL STADIUM. How the HELL do these buffoons plan on building something like that on the Moon at a price of over $20,000 per pound?

[abc3643]

The radiation in space is the most difficult thing to deal with.

In 1985, I got a BS in Physics and then continued with an MS and toward a PhD in engineering. In 1992, I left school to work for a federally funded space and defense think tank. In late 1993, just before 20% of us were laid-off in January 1994, I was involved in a group that was discussing resurrecting nuclear power and propulsion for space missions. Likely, this was going to be related to the New Horizons mission to Pluto. We discussed NERVA, but many of the people who had worked on that program had since died.

Anyway, I've been rereading a book I purchased just after you were born called "2081: A Hopeful View of the Human Future" by the late, great space physicist Dr. Gerard K. O'Neill. He was a space visionary whose earlier work, "The High Frontier", was a landmark book.

So, about 3 weeks ago, I had a conversation with Google Gemini about this very question regarding interplanetary flight and radiation. It titled the conversation "Magnetic Shielding for Space Travel"

Feel free to read or use. It's a rather involved technical discussion and is a long read, but it may be able to help you.

https://gemini.google.com/share/a9fd578588e3

[abc3643]

I do want to respond to one of your updates.
It is not a waste to invest in this stuff. O'Neill was something of an idealist, but there are certain bottom line issues that drive manned space exploration.

What's the point in going into space, there's nothing there? ↗

Are you following the Artemis II mission and the stunning moon views? ↗

[SeekerOfTruth007]

I'm familiar with the concept of Magnetic Shielding as I've studied it as it relates to space flight and relates to magnetic confinement in fusion reactors.

[abc3643]

Be less concerned about fusion reactors. We are far from that on board a spacecraft. The reason is we still have quite a way to go regarding containment in a stationary environment like a tokamak. In space, in which a spacecraft can undergo significant accelerations, containment will be more difficult. Indeed, laser fusion might be better on board a spacecraft. Besides, you really don't need that amount of energy on board a spacecraft.

Consider purchasing "SMAD", as we call it in the industry:
"Space Mission Analysis and Design" edited by James Wertz. My copy, the 2nd Edition, I purchased in 1992, but I think there has been at least 1 new edition since.

Here you go... a PDF of the 3rd Edition.
www.aerostudents.com/.../...lysisAndDesignBook.pdf

[Jersey2]

Elon is working on it but has now switched to a moon base first. Check out videos on the plans of how to get there and what a Mars base will entail. It is interesting. What isn’t in his plans is a solar sail driven by the sun and earth bound lasers. Someday that could definitely happen. We have already used solar sails and lasers would push us along at a higher speed than just the sun.

Living underground would be a must much if the time until we get some other things figured out. Creating large oxygenated domes is doable with the trapped ice on the poles and elsewhere like at the bottom of craters which will also give us water. Small nuclear plants will provide energy and solar, especially in the moon, will provide a lot of power.

We have much to learn. But 20 years ago Starship was unfathomable with its re-use and capabilities. Today Falcon 9 made re-use and 100+ launches a year a reality. In the next 20 years we will make progress that today is unfathomable. It will be amazing.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

You realize the smallest fusion reactor we have is the size of an entire Football stadium, and it doesn't even entirely work correctly yet?

to build one of those on the Moon or Mars would literally cost unbelievable amounts of money, fuel, and other resources at a price of over $20,000 per pound to do it on the Moon, or even more than that to do it on Mars.

The hand-held fusion reactors and even "small portable building sized" ones in Star Wars and Star Trek are not even "idealized science fiction," they are pure "Science Fantasy" and will NEVER be possible.

The reactors we have are among both the largest man-made structures on Earth and simultaneously top ten most complex machine ever built on Earth. You can't just build that with a crew of 7 people or even 7000 people on Mars. There were over 1000 PhD holders involved in designing and building the Large Hadron Collider, and an actual working fusion reactor with a net gain and a good % of efficiency is likely going to be a more complex project than building the LHC, as we still think it's a good 10 to 30 years away from being done correctly.

[Jersey2]

Relax. You seem very intense on this subject. Who said anything about fusion? Not me. It is fission based.

Here is what will be used:

**NASA’s Artemis lunar base will use compact fission surface power (FSP) microreactors** — small uranium-fueled fission systems, not RTGs.

**Key specs (2026 plans):**

- **Power**: 100 kWe (up from initial 40 kWe target).
- **Fuel**: High-Assay Low-Enriched Uranium (HALEU), often TRISO or similar.
- **Cooling/Conversion**: Closed Brayton cycle (helium-xenon gas) preferred for efficiency and scalability; some concepts use heat pipes + Stirling.
- **Mass**: <15 metric tons total.
- **Lifetime**: 10+ years without refueling; autonomous operation.
- **Deployment**: Remote emplacement ~1 km from habitats; large radiators for space heat rejection.

These enable continuous power during 14-day lunar nights and in shadowed regions. NASA/DOE target a demo by ~2030, with industry teams (Lockheed Martin, Westinghouse, X-Energy) developing concepts. China/Russia aim for similar fission reactors by mid-2030s.

No other reactor types are planned for the initial base.

[NathanDavis]

so... no fresh air, no trees, no grass no yards...

will we able to see a fit girl booty twerk though?

if not... then it ain't worth it...

[NaultD]

Fruitless unless we are able to stabilize earth. Shrinking the flower with water while the soil is bone dry.

[Dargil]

It's actually impossible with humans present. Robots are fine.

[888theGreat]

It will happen. Jesus will comeback or we will kill each other long before that happens. .

[Honeyateleven]

Mars is red and hot! Like hell! Would visit but definitely wouldn't stay!

[abc3643]

Mars is not hot at all.